How do Catholic schools deal with same-sex "married" parents?

[VanitasVanitatum]

I’ve thought the same thing — but at least divorced/remarried can, possibly, have their situation remedied, but a homosexual “marriage” can never be made valid or holy.

That possibility is negligible and chances are the majority will not follow through considering the number of lapsed Catholics. It’s a bad excuse to justify them.

 

[JimG]

If a gay couple is willing to send their kid to a Catholic school, they know this will be taught but they probably don’t let it bother them. At home, they teach the child what ever they want. Typically that the Church doesn’t have a monopoly on morality, and that it has it wrong on this issue.

Then their child will be telling his classmates at recess that the Church is wrong on this issue, creating undue dissension.

 

[PHXsunsAZ]

They will let them enroll in school probably, also in the same breath they could also deny an unwed mother employment.

 

[JMMJ]

Then their child will be telling his classmates at recess that the Church is wrong on this issue, creating undue dissension.

Not necessarily. Depends on the kid and the maturity level of the kid. But even if this is what happens, then the other kids learn that not everyone believes what the Church teaches. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It is a good catalyst for conversation with and guidance from parents and teachers.

We had a Jewish child in my elementary school. I think he was the only non-Catholic in the entire school. We learned all kinds of things from him about his family and his faith that didn’t match up with Catholic teaching. I remember great discussions in 5th grade religion class with Sr. David Marie about reconciling the two beliefs (or not) in the world in which we live. It didn’t compromise our religious education at all. To the contrary, it enriched it.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Would admitting the child constitute implicit acceptance of the parents’ homosexual behavior?

It shouldn’t, no more than admitting children of divorced and invalidly “remarried” parents means acceptance of that lifestyle, or getting away from matters of sexuality, if the parents were reputed to be shady business people or involved with organized crime? (Did Meadow and AJ Soprano go to Catholic school? Any Sopranos storyline experts here?) Or if a parent were an OB/GYN who prescribes contraceptives for non-therapeutic reasons (or worse)? A shady used-car dealer who sells flood cars?

If they are doing it “for the children” then why are they a same-sex couple in the first place?

Maybe because they don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, and they want a Catholic education for their children in spite of what the Church teaches about their relationship?

I’ve thought the same thing — but at least divorced/remarried can, possibly, have their situation remedied, but a homosexual “marriage” can never be made valid or holy.

If someone has not already been through the tribunal process and been turned down, it is very likely that they could have their marriage regularized. Happens all the time.

Then their child will be telling his classmates at recess that the Church is wrong on this issue, creating undue dissension.

They need to have a rule at the school saying that no student will promote ideas to others that are contrary to the Catholic Faith. IOW, believe what you will, but don’t try to undermine Church teaching. Make it grounds for expulsion.

They will let them enroll in school probably, also in the same breath they could also deny an unwed mother employment.

And in today’s world, that is wrong, not because morality has changed, but because it is necessary to be supportive of expectant mothers, whatever their circumstances. These days, I just find myself happy that a woman chooses not to abort. What if she did and kept her pregnancy a secret? A far worse sin, but nobody would be scandalized, because no one would know. What if she were having sex outside of marriage and didn’t get pregnant? Same sin, just not evident. It could be a teachable moment — yes, she sinned (as though you never have?) and look what happened, but at least she didn’t abort. (You would not come right out and say that — “what happened” would be obvious.)

 

[Domer90]

Yes. It happened in Colorado and the child would not be able to absorb the full catechism of the Church.

 

[Socrates92]

They need to have a rule at the school saying that no student will promote ideas to others that are contrary to the Catholic Faith. IOW, believe what you will, but don’t try to undermine Church teaching. Make it grounds for expulsion

This is probably not a good approach. Dissenters will still talk, just not on school grounds if they are smart. Meanwhile this will still undermine the Church’s/school’s credibility with the friend of any expelled students.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

They’re not married.

 

[TC3033]

I couldn’t find it. If you can direct us to it, and post the link, that would be great.

I took a few minutes before posting to look, couldn’t find it, so that’s why I asked.

Like was said above, the thread was a can of worms that I don’t know we want to open again.

Only one I could find was from 2010.

Boston Catholic schools will enroll children of same-sex parents Catholic News

The Archdiocese of Boston does not prohibit children of same sex parents from attending Catholic schools, and officials there have offered to help a child refused admittance to an elementary school because his parents are lesbian to enroll in another archdiocesan school, according to a statement released late this afternoon. “We believe that every parent who wishes to send their child to a Catholic school should have the opportunity to pursue that dream,” said Mary Grassa O’Neill, secretary fo…

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I couldn’t find it. If you can direct us to it, and post the link, that would be great.

I respectfully disagree. In their misguided wisdom, the Supreme Court has declared it legal, and for people who want to do it, that’s all the justification they need. They are going to marry. One way or another, they are going to become parents. Their children, like all children, will need to be educated. Some of them will choose Catholic schools, for the same reasons anyone else chooses Catholic schools. It’s a situation that will need to be addressed time and again, and until and unless our country returns to traditional Judeo-Christian morality and enshrines this in all laws, it will continue to be such a situation. If that is “opening a can of worms”, so be it.

I want to be very clear that I oppose “gay marriage” whether it is religious or secular, and gay sex is an abomination that cries to heaven for vengeance. This said, the children can’t help the kind of family they were born into, and there are other sins in the world besides sodomy, sins that many parents who send their children to Catholic schools indulge in regularly and joyfully with no intention of stopping.

And even though it wasn’t terribly common, in times past, women especially would live in “Boston marriages”, lesbian and pseudo-lesbian cohabitation that may or may not have included sexual activity. I have known of a couple of cases — a lady doctor and her nurse/midwife, a neighbor who had a live-in “maid” with no obvious need for one. Nobody gave it a second thought — may have been lesbians, may not have been, things “just didn’t look quite right” but there was no gossip. These things just weren’t talked about back in those days.

It’s not outlandish to think that some of these women could have had children — widowed or out of wedlock — who would have been sent to Catholic schools. And it’s entirely possible that two women (or two men) could find one another’s company so fulfilling that they would just want to live together and have a home that could include children from previous relationships. (Think of the TV show Kate and Allie.) There are some people for whom sex is just not part of their lives — I have read that one percent of all people are asexual (normal anatomy but no desire). A lot of times, these people just never marry anyone, and that is their own business. John XXIII said that he had never committed a sin of impurity, and I have wondered if he might have been asexual. OK if he was, OK if he wasn’t.

 

[JimG]

The primary reason for sending a child to Catholic school is or ought to be, to ensure the child learns the tenets of the Catholic faith and develops a Catholic sacramental spiritual life.

 

[goout]

Yeah, this can of worms doesn’t need to be revisited again.

Yea but inflammatory hypotheticals make for such productive conversation.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Are we then going to refuse to enroll children where the parents are in an invalid marriage? What about a single parent, does admitting their child constitute implicit acceptance of sex outside of marriage? Then there are the kids who were conceived via IVF, we cannot look as if we accept that horror, right?

How many generations of a “pure pedigree” must a child have, do we investigate grandparents, 5 generations back?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The primary reason for sending a child to Catholic school is or ought to be, to ensure the child learns the tenets of the Catholic faith and develops a Catholic sacramental spiritual life.

I agree. It would be the rare Catholic school that would exclude students who weren’t Catholic — I have to wonder if this would violate civil rights laws — but anyone sending their children to a Catholic school should be aware that certain things are going to be taught, and an atmosphere is going to be cultivated that is conducive to the salvation of souls. Any Catholic school worthy of the name should be a place where the non-Catholic student, or the student who comes from a home where irregular and sinful lifestyles are being nurtured, will at the very least stop and question their circumstances and beliefs and, God willing, possibly even convert — in so many words, “this is what we believe, and you should too”. I really don’t think that, for instance, Baptist schools have a subtext of “if you’re not a saved, Bible-believing Christian, oh, that’s fine, you’re good the way you are, and as for the beliefs we have here at this school, you can either take them or leave them, be at peace”. No, that’s not how they roll (no pun intended). Not hardly.

Yeah, this can of worms doesn’t need to be revisited again.

It’s not a hypothetical. Gay and lesbian people are getting married left and right these days. We have a presidential candidate who is legally married to another man. They’re talking about having kids. This is not something that is going to become less common in the coming years. And if it’s “inflammatory”, so be it.

Are we then going to refuse to enroll children where the parents are in an invalid marriage? What about a single parent, does admitting their child constitute implicit acceptance of sex outside of marriage? Then there are the kids who were conceived via IVF, we cannot look as if we accept that horror, right?

Points well made, bravo!

 

[Anicette]

The two situation are not comparables. It is relativism.

First, not all the children who come to Catholic school are from catholic families.
And of course, the school don’t ask parents for a catholic weeding certificate when they enrolled the children.

And some schools have choose to not enrolled some children when the stae of life of their guardians is in too much coçntradiction with the Church’s views like this situation.

 

[1cthlctrth]

It is the opposite of charitable to act as if sin is ok.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Grave sin is grave sin, nothing relative about it.

Shunning children because of parental sin is not a Catholic practice.

 

[Anicette]

On a natural level not all situations are equas, and the Church’ recognized that. that’s what I argue with you.

But you mostly battle against the schools who choosed to not enrolled children with parents in a same sex “marriage”.

Remember, as you know, there is 1 billion Catholics in the world, and not all and everywhere would agree with your views.

And what with the incoherence of wanting to raised children in a school of a confession that reprove what their parents had done? What the children would feel? Maybe they want a “better” educucation for their children, but it is not the only criteria to discern.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

And of course, the school don’t ask parents for a catholic wedding certificate when they enrolled the children.

You know, I really wouldn’t have a problem with that, nor with requiring copies of declarations of nullity. When we enrolled our son, we had to submit a copy of our divorce decree with custody details.

Whatever they require or don’t require, at an age-appropriate point in the curriculum, the Church’s teaching on marriage, in its entirety — including the illicitness of contraception, the invalidity of marriage after divorce without benefit of annulment, and the sinfulness of “gay marriage” — needs to be clearly taught and explained. My son is in grade 7 and we have already covered all of these things, including his mother’s irregular “remarriage”, about which he has had many questions that finally forced me to explain.

When I was in Catholic high school — and that was over 40 years ago — those students who had parents in invalid marriages, were fiercely defensive of the situation and would not accept the Church’s teaching on these matters.

 

[Anicette]

You know, I really wouldn’t have a problem with that, nor with requiring copies of declarations of nullity.

It would be a very american point of view.

When we enrolled our son, we had to submit a copy of our divorce decree with custody details.

Seems it had more with the custody details than the divorce ruling, because it is not the business of the school.

Whatever they require or don’t require, at an age-appropriate point in the curriculum, the Church’s teaching on marriage, in its entirety — including the illicitness of contraception, the invalidity of marriage after divorce without benefit of annulment, and the sinfulness of “gay marriage” — needs to be clearly taught and explained.

I think it is usually NOT explained in school, unless for the children who choose to follow patoral service/ cathechism. And I really doubt of this for many schools. I have done two years of pastoral activity inside our catholic school for children aged 11 to 18 years old, and not one of these topics have been treated. I would never try, but would try to not lie on these topics if I had been asked. It is also difficult because we are inside the school, with others secular activities with the children, and they are not always (very) Catholics, or Catholic at all.

Maybe less annoying in a parochial context.

My son is in grade 7 and we have already covered all of these things, including his mother’s irregular “remarriage”,

That’s different. Your child (as mine) is homeschooled, so we are more free as parents to speak of what we want. That’s the advantage of homeschooling.

I don’t think your situation is easy toward this personal topic!