Indianapolis archbishop revokes Jesuit prep school's Catholic identity

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What would Jesus do?

I can’t imagine him kicking out people of their place of work simply because they happen to be in an unideal living situation.

I’m sure if Jesus were here, he’d do what he always does and surprise us by turning things around on we — the true sinners — and say something like “This gay man and his couple do more good and care for each other more than any you brood of vipers!”
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Moreover, there is a huge question of obedience here. The rule is that the Bishop makes the rules; the Jesuits have decided to not go along simply because they don’t have any economic reason to bother doing so, they have their own superior, and they want to march to their own drummer. Do you not see this as a danger to the Church? When the Bishop says do something, it doesn’t matter if you think it is wrong; unless it’s heresy or completely contradicts Church teaching, which this certainly doesn’t, then you obey. If this goes to Rome, it is going to be very odd if the Vatican decides to uphold the Jesuits over the diocesan bishop who is supposed to have the authority.
Click to expand...
Yes I do see it as a danger. A very large danger. Thing is, we’ve kind of allowed this to happen. People have let so much slide for so long. We never should have had this fight on our hands. Now the best we can do is pray.
 
Yeah well I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to call these gay men “unrepentant sinners.”

Lord, have mercy.
 
Posted this on another thread but here is more fitting.

I see four main issues here:

(1) These things are always an issue of * subjective * pastoral application. Sure, we can know objective church teaching. But when do we decide which actions are worth singling out — and, not only that, what do we decide as the appropriate action to take (and how?) One bishop could say that Trump’s policies are so un-Christian that any Trump supporter should not be allowed to be employed by the diocese. Absurd? Sure. But as long as you can pick out an objective church teaching, you can also subjectively choose how to enforce it in specific applications.

(2) Inconsistency. Why stop at LGBT folk? What about all the other Catholic employees who live in consistent states contrary to Catholic faith? I’m willing to bet the vast majority of Catholic school teachers cohabitate, use contraception, or are divorced and remarried. And that’s just sexual sins: What about the more important ones, like acts of hatred and pride and anger?

Seems to be singling out gay people to me! Of course: focus on 2-5% of the population. Make them the scapegoats. Forget about cleaning up your own house first!

(3) I’m not even sure if the diocese WAS consistent, that it would be the right thing to do, in the first place! It most definitely does not fit with the Holy Father’s pastoral vision for the church. Christ and his Church must accompany, not exclude. Catholicism has always upheld the best – what is good – in people, instead of highlighting their failures.

(4) a BIG assumption on the part of the diocese that what the gay individuals were doing was, in fact, sinful. Point of fact is, unless the diocese had cameras in the couples’ bedrooms, they simply DO NOT know if their relationship is sinful. Contrary to what some Catholics believe, simply entering a same-sex union is not an objective sin. It * could * simply mean “We care for each other enough to spend our lives together” — Oh the horror!!!
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that this dispute over the teacher’s employment, which has been going on between the Archdiocese and Brebeuf for 2 years, was somehow completely unknown to this teacher the entire time. I am willing to bet he knew he might get some flak from the moment he publicized his gay marriage on social media a couple years back, which is apparently how it became known according to an article.

My guess is that the Jesuits probably told him it was no problem.

Also, as far as this school “not being Catholic”, they are calling themselves “Brebeuf JESUIT Preparatory School”. They’re still holding themselves out as Catholic…just affiliated with the Catholic order that has apparently decided to publicly buck the Magisterium on gay marriage.

When they want to remove the saint’s name and “Jesuit” from their branding, I’ll buy this “they’re not really Catholic” business. Sure they’re still “Catholic”, they’re going to be having Masses and Jesuit priests on campus. They’ve just decided to have a big conflict with the Bishop, because they can. I fail to see how that is going to do anybody any good.
 
Last edited:
People have not necessarily “let it slide”. As someone else explained, the previous bishop was likely gay-friendly based on his actions in the diocese where he has been transferred. If anyone “let it slide”, it was that bishop, not “people”. The current bishop took over about the same time this gay teacher publicized his marriage. The current bishop has made requests of all the schools in the diocese to remove their employees who are in gay marriages, according to one of the articles. Two other schools, which apparently have more economic motivation to obey the Archdiocese, have done so.

It’s perfectly okay for a parent to expect the bishop to be policing the Catholic schools to make sure the teachers are properly qualified, including morally qualified, to teach there. A parent shouldn’t have to interview all the teachers to make sure it’s all right to send their child to a Catholic school. Also, it’s highly likely that the bishop received complaints about gay married teachers from some source, otherwise why would he be prioritizing looking into it?
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
My guess is that the Jesuits probably told him it was no problem.
Click to expand...
This is my guess as well. How can a teacher be held accountable for something his bosses told him is no big deal? He was not fired. All signs point to this as being accurate. No teacher should be held to a code violation His bosses didn’t make him aware, or if he is told that its all good.

The bishop is right, but the teacher is not wrong. It seems like it’s the school that is at fault for losing the “right” to call themselves Catholic.

I mostly taught public schools. I can honestly say it is heading towards similar in some districts for Christians. I am sure there are other religious groups also affected in those districts. It makes sense for us to be cautious about safe guarding a teachers right to privacy. This very issue is what has made me decide I will no longer be in a classroom. Too many things threaten job security.
 
Not only have there been countless Catholic and public school teachers fired for reasons having nothing to do with same sex marriage, but countless schools and other institutions have been dropped from diocesan directories for other reasons too.
 
You bet they do. You asked whether I have had experience in Catholic schools. Not in elementary, middle, or high schools; but I do teach at a Catholic university, albeit a rather liberal one, and there is a Mission statement in our contract which every faculty (and I suppose staff) member must sign to be hired. In some schools the morals clause may be more detailed and more strict than in others, but it is there. I have also taught in Jewish schools (yeshivas), and in many of these institutions the requirements are stricter than in Catholic schools, so that an openly gay teacher, even chaste, would probably never be hired in the first place, and if found out, would be fired on the spot. I’m not saying this is necessarily a good thing, but I have seen it happen without any due process. BTW, I was a middle and high school student in the 1960s in public schools (but very good ones!) in New York City, so most likely that accounts for the differences in our experiences.
 
Last edited:
I am guessing that most of the Catholic schools will be trying very hard not to hire any more gay teachers going forward, especially since some of the recently terminated ones appear to be suing.

As discussed in the thread already, there’s a lot of “safe environment” stuff in place now that wasn’t in place when I was in school, but even with that in place, it would strike me odd to pay a lot of tuition to a Catholic school and have my child be taught by teachers who did not manifest some interest, friendliness or caring about the kids beyond just the classroom teaching and that’s it. I am not saying teachers have to socialize with kids or that teachers can’t go home to their own families at the end of the day, or even that every kid wants to socialize with every teacher, but I cherish some memories of a few teachers who treated me more like a young adult than a kid or an annoyance, or who encouraged me or guided me in some activity, or who were just good people to be around for extracurricular activities or advice.

I remember in particular two female teachers who, as an extracurricular activity, ran the student music ministry group, and another who supervised the yearbook. I really enjoyed working with and getting to know these teachers, even though I didn’t stay in touch (one of them quit teaching at the end of my school year and pursued a better career in software). I knew several other girls, including a friend of mine, who were very reliant on the guidance counselor, a no-nonsense woman who also counseled juvenile delinquents, because they were having some serious problems at home. I would hope these kinds of contacts with students continue to be part of the Catholic school experience. When you’re paying tuition, the last thing you want are teachers who actively can’t wait to get away from your kid - you can get that at the public school for free.
 
We agree on most issues, but I’m afraid not on this one. No teacher I have ever known, whether public or private school, is anxious to “actively get away” from their students. They do the best they can for every student, and even when they go home, they are thinking about their students, planning lessons for the next class, grading exams and providing comments, wondering why a particular lesson did not motivate the class, concerned about why a particular student doesn’t seem to have any friends and is keeping to themselves or another student is seeking attention by disrupting the class, and on and on. 99% of teachers take their job seriously, very seriously. Insofar as extracurricular activities in school, these are often expected of teachers in private school and even public school. The average high school teacher instructs about four or five classes, and each class consists of 30 to 40 students. You can do the math. In college, although discipline problems are rare, there are often even more students to teach and exams and papers to grade. I teach on average five classes, and a couple of them have more than 100 students in them. I am also expected to do committee work, participate in faculty meetings, and do research. However, having done both, I consider high school teaching harder, because teachers have to be concerned not only with students but with parents (and sometimes the latter can be a handful); but, most of all, they have very little time to plan because they meet their classes every day, five days a week. Nonetheless, most teachers are truly interested in each and every student in their multiple roles as teacher, counselor, police officer, class performer in giving good lessons, and bureaucrat due to the paper work and record keeping which are a necessary part of the profession.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
No teacher I have ever known, whether public or private school, is anxious to “actively get away” from their students.
Click to expand...
I’ve known quite a few who had just exactly that attitude. Some of them expressed it out loud. For others, actions spoke louder than words.

I am leaving the thread now as I believe that the presence of teachers posting on this thread is inducing a pretty big bias and making it hard to discuss this whole subject, and related subjects, objectively.

In closing I will say that I am sorry to see that Cathedral is getting blasted by its alumni for being obedient to the bishop largely for economic reasons (even going so far as to hurl pedophila slurs), while Brebeuf’s alums can’t congratulate the place enough. I guess that’s what one can expect from social media, but it is very sad nonetheless.
 
Well, it certainly is a sad situation when a bishop and an Archdiocese cross swords with the administration of a Catholic school, any way one looks at it.
 
Last edited:
The bumper sticker slogan misses the point. It is not that some sinners are treated differently. If that was the case, no one could teach. The question is one of scandal.
 
13pollitos said:
I don’t believe stories about in vitro or contraception use leading to being fired would be ignored by the media though. That would be used to perfectly vilify the church as anti woman and reproductive rights enemy #1.
Click to expand...
You are 100% right on that one. The story about the firing of a teacher making public her demand that school insurance pay for the in-vitro fertilization was national news. Most of the headlines were something like, “Teacher fired for wanting a baby.” There was a big legal battle about sex discrimination because two male teachers were only suspended for visiting and getting kicked out of a strip club after drinking too much. There was a long thread about it on the old Catholic Answers forums. The case was eventually settled by the diocese, but the teacher was not allowed to return.
 
Public schools have parallel policies, even if they differ in substance. Some schools might fire a teacher for possessing drugs, driving intoxicated, or shoplifting, depending on various local policy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top