Mass. Catholic School Won't Admit Lesbians' Son

[Tantum_ergo]

I ask you, if God is simply a neutral observer into mans sinfully creating babies via IVF. If not by God, how then does man will a soul into existence through IVF?

Secondly, I wasn’t aware that the Church taught that IVF was a process that goes against Gods will.

Odd then that it IVF works in bringing souls into existence.

Wow, you have a lot of misunderstanding of God’s role in our lives AND of Church teaching.

First, God is not a neutral observer BUT that does not mean that the fact that a child ‘comes into existence’ via IVF (though the method is sinful) would mean that God APPROVES of that method. Do you think God approves of RAPE? Yet children are conceived through rape. God has established parameters of science and if we choose to misuse them (and yes, rape is a misuse of the normal process of men and women wishing to ‘join’ in the sexual union as it ‘forces’ the act on an unwilling participant). . . that is our free will, not God’s will. Rape ‘works’ in bringing souls into existence too. . .

Second, yes, the Church does teach that IVF is morally wrong. Allow me. This is from the USCCB site regarding first that some technological ‘aids’ may be licit, but then specifically examining–and condemning, IVF. See here:

One reproductive technology which the Church has clearly and unequivocally judged to be immoral is in vitro fertilization or IVF. Unfortunately, most Catholics are not aware of the Church’s teaching, do not know that IVF is immoral, and some have used it in attempting to have children. If a couple is unaware that the procedure is immoral, they are not subjectively guilty of sin. Children conceived through this procedure are children of God and are loved by their parents, as they should be. Like all children, regardless of the circumstances of their conception and birth, they should be loved, cherished and cared for.
The immorality of conceiving children through IVF can be difficult to understand and accept because the man and woman involved are usually married and trying to overcome a “medical” problem (infertility) in their marriage. Yet the procedure does violence to human dignity and to the marriage act and should be avoided. But why, exactly, is IVF immoral?
In vitro fertilization brings about new life in a petri dish. Children engendered through IVF are sometimes known as “test tube babies.” Several eggs are aspirated from the woman’s ovary after she has taken a fertility drug which causes a number of eggs to mature at the same time. Semen is collected from the man, usually through masturbation. The egg and sperm are ultimately joined in a glass dish, where conception takes place and the new life is allowed to develop for several days. In the simplest case, embryos are then transferred to the mother’s womb in the hope that one will survive to term. Obviously, IVF eliminates the marriage act as the means of achieving pregnancy, instead of helping it achieve this natural end.

 

[Zatzat]

Wow, you have a lot of misunderstanding of God’s role in our lives AND of Church teaching.

First, God is not a neutral observer BUT that does not mean that the fact that a child ‘comes into existence’ via IVF (though the method is sinful) would mean that God APPROVES of that method. Do you think God approves of RAPE? Yet children are conceived through rape. God has established parameters of science and if we choose to misuse them (and yes, rape is a misuse of the normal process of men and women wishing to ‘join’ in the sexual union as it ‘forces’ the act on an unwilling participant). . . that is our free will, not God’s will. Rape ‘works’ in bringing souls into existence too. . .

Second, yes, the Church does teach that IVF is morally wrong. Allow me. This is from the USCCB site regarding first that some technological ‘aids’ may be licit, but then specifically examining–and condemning, IVF. See here:

Thanks for the explanation. Although I’ll have to admit, I’m shocked that God chooses to bring life into existence via rape and even through science that he doesn’t approve of.

After all, regardless of the actions of men, souls come only from God.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Thanks for the explanation. Although I’ll have to admit, I’m shocked that God chooses to bring life into existence via rape and even through science that he doesn’t approve of.

After all, regardless of the actions of men, souls come only from God.

God also allows the rain to fall on the just and unjust, you know.

After all, as Ezekiel reminds us, a man (or woman) can do an evil thing, repent the evil, and thus ‘live’ and not die for the evil thing. Certainly rape (and other immoral acts) may result in the conception of a child, but the child is not an ‘evil’, the child himself/herself is always a good.

Many acts can result in a mix of evil and good. The man who robs another man does an evil act. . .yet the man robbed may go on to work tirelessly for others who were robbed (a good), and even the robber may repent his sin, return the money, and go on to live a good life. At every moment of our lives we always have an opportunity to repent any and all evils we have done and to do good.

 

[Zatzat]

Certainly rape (and other immoral acts) may result in the conception of a child, but the child is not an ‘evil’, the child himself/herself is always a good.

If the child is good, why deny the child a Catholic education for the sins of her parents?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

If the child is good, why deny the child a Catholic education for the sins of her parents?

It’s going to be up to the bishops on this one.

As a mother myself, I can view the matter from both sides.

Now, suppose I’m a Catholic mother living in sin with my boyfriend. I say, “I want a Catholic education for my child” and I can say this from a number of reasons, often mixed together. I might be a cultural Catholic who wants the ‘smells and bells.’ I might want the ‘networking’ of being involved in my ‘parish school.’ I might like the idea of Catholic schools as being ‘better’ academically. I might want to make the Church ‘obey ME’ because I feel entitled. I might want LOTS of things.

But okay, the school enrolls my child and now, whoops, it’s 3rd grade religion time and my child hears that fornication and adultery are mortal sins which, if unrepented, will lead to damnation.

So, my 8 year old comes home, "Mom! You’re living in mortal sin! I don’t want you to go to hell!’ (weeping).

Now what do I do? I don’t want to stop having sex with my boyfriend.

So I tell my kid, "Ah, that’s just baloney. You don’t have to listen to your teacher. God understands my situation. This is all just scare stuff but the adults know the truth. You just parrot what the teacher says but don’t worry about me.’

Some Catholic education I’m getting my kid, right? I want him to go, and then I tell him to disregard what he’s taught!

But I get on my high horse and I go off to lambaste the teachers and priests.

“My kid came home in TEARS because YOU BIGOTS told him I was going to hell. How DARE you??? Stop teaching him this BS or I will sue the pants off you. I wanted a CATHOLIC EDUCATION and you’re feeding him this stuff? This isn’t the Catholic education that I want! Tell him what I want him to hear or else!!!”

It isn’t as if this hasn’t already happened in other situations, but fornication and adultery are still seen as being sinful (although less so). . .gay people, however, have gone now to being seen as holy martyrs living lives of perfect purity, and have been so ‘mistreated’ throughout history that we have to bend over backwards to give them everything they ask and even THEN we won’t have done nearly enough to mitigate our former ‘guilt’. At least in a Catholic Church today most parents are still (if they stand up and loudly proclaim that they’re living in sin with the opposite sex) told that they need to go to confession. I mean, the priest isn’t a mindreader. If you don’t tell him you’re sinning, he is going to be charitable and assume you are trying to be in a state of grace. But if you are in a homosexual relationship and acting on it, and you come right out and tell him, and you AREN’T going to stop and confess and repent. . .you’re in constant sin and you’re shoving it in everybody’s face, like, “Yeah, I’m sinning and you HAVE TO ACCEPT ME COMING and doing WHAT I WANT and unlike you I DON"T HAVE TO CONFESS OR DO ANYTHING I DON’T WANNA, NYAH NYAH YOU BIGOTS.”

 

[lynx]

There are no such people as “gay parents with children”. Any two homosexual partners who have children living with them have obtained them by theft.

I’m pretty sure you pay adoption fees when adopting a child. Or, whilst still being homosexual, one can have heterosexual experiences leading to a child. I feel your use of the word theft is ill advised.

If you decide to reject the natural union of man and woman procreating a family, then you shouldn’t pretend to play the family game. Otherwise, what I think they’re doing is called theft. To use an extremely mild word for it.

You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means But seriously, a family unit can exist with same sex couples, it is certainly a different dynamic, but it can work.

i’m not insulting you, i’m just stating the obvious

In your humble opinion.

that it seems you don’t know about the history of the Church and homosexuality in the first century. i am not saying you are ignorant as a person, i’m just saying there’s ignorance on the subject discussed

History is determined by the lecturer In this instance I only know what I have been taught and can support. If it disagrees with what you believe then we are having a disagreement. Ignorance on the subject is not the issue.

of course. homosexuality exists in the Roman Empire. Christians were able to teach the truth about the sin of homosexuality and it became accepted among the converts. eventually it became banned in the law of Rome. while i wouldn’t say it eradicated the practice, there was recognition of it as sin and it became less prominent in society

While true around 350AD, i’m not sure it was the case pre 350AD. The act of homosexual sex was a mixed bag. It always had a negative stigma floating around it but people were accepting of the practice. Later, still pre 350AD, the act was used on slaves only.

in the 1st century, it was pretty much accepted. but when Christianity spread out, people realize the error in their ways. the Apostles taught the sin of homosexuality. of course only converts at the beginning follow this message, which eventually brought changes in the 300s until the 500s

That’s tough to tell. The reason we know homosexuality was even accepted was because of the artwork left behind from the time period. While it is impossible to deny that Christianity played a role, to what extent did they affect government? From what I know, very little at the time, pre 350AD.

you can’t be really gay if you don’t act on it.

If you are attracted physically and emotionally to the opposite sex then you are a homosexual, either making you gay or a lesbian. You can be gay without sin as long as you don’t commit the acts.

i’m assuming in the context of the discussion that you are referring to a person of the same gender as i am.

Assume both cases.

how do you say someone is good or not? there are may murderers out there who are kind neighbors. even Hitler is definitely a nice guy to his friends. if you ask them of course they’ll say he’s a nice guy, he probably gave them big mansions and loads of cash. yes, gays may be good upstanding citizens who follow the law, pay their taxes, contribute to charity, etc. but that doesn’t excuse their sin. everyone in the world is a sinner. not just because we do some good means our sins may be excused

What sin have gays committed? Why is it a sin? Is it because a book an important figure say so? If so then what is their meaning in believing gay acts are sinful? Should you think the same way? Being good is exactly that, living your life as best you can to be a productive member of society. Whether you are gay or straight has no bearing on this.

Ah yes, any misguided, liberal, progressive Bishop can make a correct decision on any and all things. Give me a break! The Boston Diocese isn’t well known for its conservatism. I do hope for the sake of the Parish, they do get a Pre nup with these people as was suggested by one poster. As sure as there is still green grass on earth, we will hear,in the near future, about this couple being subjected to “discrimination” when the child comes home asks which woman is the Daddy and which is the Mommy.

Simple answer, both are mommy. Mommy, short for mother, is a title given to the female parent of a child. Whether that parent is biological or adopted that title can still be affixed to them.

Being gay isn’t the sin Lynx. Acting on it is. Get it straight once and for all.

I suggest you re-read my previous posts in order to avoid further miscommunication.

 

[Zatzat]

But okay, the school enrolls my child and now, whoops, it’s 3rd grade religion time and my child hears that fornication and adultery are mortal sins which, if unrepented, will lead to damnation.

So, my 8 year old comes home, "Mom! You’re living in mortal sin! I don’t want you to go to hell!’ (weeping).

Now what do I do? I don’t want to stop having sex with my boyfriend.

So I tell my kid, "Ah, that’s just baloney. You don’t have to listen to your teacher. God understands my situation. This is all just scare stuff but the adults know the truth. You just parrot what the teacher says but don’t worry about me.’

Some Catholic education I’m getting my kid, right? I want him to go, and then I tell him to disregard what he’s taught!

Sounds fine by me, it is just religious class where you have to set your kids straight. You want to know something?

My wifes a Catholic, my kids are in Catholic school. I’ve agreed to grin and bear it when they come home talking about Jesus…but there will come a time, when my kids look to me for the real deal about everything they’ve been told about God.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Sounds fine by me, it is just religious class where you have to set your kids straight.

"Just religous class?"

Oh yeah, it’s ‘just’ the actual Catholic teachings that I have to tell my child to disregard. The whole reason that we have Catholic schools–to pass on authentic Catholic teaching–and THAT is what you want me to have my child disregard?

You don’t see any teeny tiny ‘disconnect’ with the idea that a parent wants her child to ‘get a Catholic education’ and yet to ‘disregard’ the actual part of the education that IS Catholic???

 

[Zatzat]

"Just religous class?"

Oh yeah, it’s ‘just’ the actual Catholic teachings that I have to tell my child to disregard. The whole reason that we have Catholic schools–to pass on authentic Catholic teaching–and THAT is what you want me to have my child disregard?

You don’t see any teeny tiny ‘disconnect’ with the idea that a parent wants her child to ‘get a Catholic education’ and yet to ‘disregard’ the actual part of the education that IS Catholic???

I live in a Province ( Ontario) where the Catholics have their own public school system, funded entirely by tax payers.

Lots of parents, of all religious and non religious stripes, send their kids into the Catholic school system.

I suspect that religion class isn’t an issue for anyone.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

I just want to say that I think it is unfortunate that this Catholic school may have really missed out on an opportunity here. Firstly, I think that they are punishing the child for the actions of the parents. The child should have every right to be educated in a Catholic school, regardless of what the parents’ lifestyle may be.

I wonder if the school officials actually prayed on this matter, and if it occurred to them that this might be an opportunity not only to give this child a spiritual education that he obviously would not get at home and that this might also have the effect of educating the parents in a way.

Maybe God Himself put this child in their paths to teach this family something about the beauty of Catholicism and to teach the school administrators and even the students something about tolerance and acceptance.

This poor child is being punished for the beliefs of his parents, and by a school that professes to be delivering the message of Christ.

Sad, and a missed opportunity in my opinion.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Lots of parents, of all religious and non religious stripes, send their kids into the Catholic school system.

I suspect that religion class isn’t an issue for anyone.

The heart of the matter is not the motivation for enrolling families, but the purposes of Catholic education, which is not up for change or private interpretation by those enrolling, but by the institution granting the education. This is no different from education in any other institution, secular or religious, in the free world: There is this thing called The Mission Statement, which even secular universities have. Typically, a Catholic school Mission Statement is to educate the whole person with specific respect to the values and teachings of the church as they are integrated within all of the academics and all of the school life. In the United States of America, priority is normally given to Catholic families for enrollment. (This is even true of independent Catholic schools which are nominally attached to a diocese and may have a high proportion of non-Catholics enrolled, depending on available Catholic alternatives.) Within that priority, additional ranking is often assigned to those who have participated in the sacramental life of that parish and any assorted needs (such as volunteering for causes within the parish). Depending on the competition for any admission round, those seeking that school partly or largely for its integrated religion content specifically are usually preferred, over those tolerant of content and even admiring of values transmitted, but having no affiliation with Catholicism, nor intent to join.

Therefore, the conjecture about the relative importance of “religion class” to any Catholic or non-Catholic family who applies, is unrelated to the school’s Mission Statement, which is the most important foundation of the school’s admission policy.

Further, as already referenced, to single out “religion class” as a discrete subject in a Catholic school is to fail to understand that Catholic values are woven into all of the curriculum, not limited to a single class.

 

[Polycarp1]

I just want to say that I think it is unfortunate that this Catholic school may have really missed out on an opportunity here. Firstly, I think that they are punishing the child for the actions of the parents. The child should have every right to be educated in a Catholic school, regardless of what the parents’ lifestyle may be.

I wonder if the school officials actually prayed on this matter, and if it occurred to them that this might be an opportunity not only to give this child a spiritual education that he obviously would not get at home and that this might also have the effect of educating the parents in a way.

Maybe God Himself put this child in their paths to teach this family something about the beauty of Catholicism and to teach the school administrators and even the students something about tolerance and acceptance.

This poor child is being punished for the beliefs of his parents, and by a school that professes to be delivering the message of Christ.

Sad, and a missed opportunity in my opinion.

You may be right. I know the Church will ponder the issue deeply and come up with an answer that favors the greatest good, and least harm to all concerned. As Catholics we have a teaching Church that takes these things very seriously and tries to see things through Christ’s eyes. I’m glad that we as individuals don’t have all these things resting on our shoulders alone.

 

[elts1956]

What of the single parent families, are they not normal enough for that teacher?

Just what is wrong with a teacher that goes out of his way to label, marginalize and alienate the students in his class that come from non traditional families?

We are talking about Catholic teaching and belief, Catholic teachers. If they weren’t teaching what they were getting paid for, ie. Catholic beliefs and morals, then they should not be teaching in a Catholic School. They wouldn’t be going out of their way to cause pain, but doing their job. As far as I know, to make a long story short, I don’t know of any Catholic School that has a curriculum on marriage designed for young children. High school is another topic. Someone correct me if I am wrong. It has been a long time since I have had children in Grade School.

 

[elts1956]

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t have a role in deciding who becomes pregnant and who doesn’t become pregnant? Are you suggesting that your God is powerless and has no role in conception? Are you suggesting that God does not personally intervene in allowing women to conceive? Hmmm…are you sure we’re both talking about the Christian God?

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t approve of IVF? Then why does God allow souls to come into existence, via IVF? Surely, if your God didn’t want a soul to exist via IVF, then a soul wouldn’t come into existence via IVF?

Did you not read the quotes from your Holy Bible? Your God is apparently the author of all life.

Are you suggesting that in the eyes of God, IVF is the same as rape? IVF is outside the natural domain of sex. “Male and female He created them”. “Increase and multiply”.

Your post is most puzzling.

Gee, I don’t know. Maybe for the same reason he hasn’t let me win the lottery. Your post shows a complete misunderstanding of human’s having free will.

 

[elts1956]

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t have a role in deciding who becomes pregnant and who doesn’t become pregnant? Are you suggesting that your God is powerless and has no role in conception? Are you suggesting that God does not personally intervene in allowing women to conceive? Hmmm…are you sure we’re both talking about the Christian God?

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t approve of IVF? Then why does God allow souls to come into existence, via IVF? Surely, if your God didn’t want a soul to exist via IVF, then a soul wouldn’t come into existence via IVF?

Did you not read the quotes from your Holy Bible? Your God is apparently the author of all life.

Are you suggesting that in the eyes of God, IVF is the same as rape?

Your post is most puzzling.

Sounds fine by me, it is just religious class where you have to set your kids straight. You want to know something?

My wifes a Catholic, my kids are in Catholic school. I’ve agreed to grin and bear it when they come home talking about Jesus…but there will come a time, when my kids look to me for the real deal about everything they’ve been told about God.

Children, by some instinct, some freak of nature, maybe God? know when a person is not being true to self, or to them. Even if you can’t believe it, this split in dichotomy with your wife will become obvious at some time in your children’s lives.

 

[elts1956]

I ask you, if God is simply a neutral observer into mans sinfully creating babies via IVF. If not by God, how then does man will a soul into existence through IVF?

Secondly, I wasn’t aware that the Church taught that IVF was a process that goes against Gods will.

Odd then that IVF works in bringing souls into existence.

God is not a neutral observer. He tries to increase His Spirit through many obtuse humans. He fights uphill battles all the time.

 

[elts1956]

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t have a role in deciding who becomes pregnant and who doesn’t become pregnant? Are you suggesting that your God is powerless and has no role in conception? Are you suggesting that God does not personally intervene in allowing women to conceive? Hmmm…are you sure we’re both talking about the Christian God?

Are you suggesting that God doesn’t approve of IVF? Then why does God allow souls to come into existence, via IVF? Surely, if your God didn’t want a soul to exist via IVF, then a soul wouldn’t come into existence via IVF?

Did you not read the quotes from your Holy Bible? Your God is apparently the author of all life.

Are you suggesting that in the eyes of God, IVF is the same as rape?

Your post is most puzzling.

If God did not create souls for children created through IVF wouldn’t He be a bit unfair? Visiting the sins of the parents upon the children??? Humans are both spiritual and material beings. Can’t have one without the other. Otherwise we wouldn’t be human.

 

[mandateman]

We cant decide moral issues on the grounds it might make someone cry to hear the truth. The Church has a responsibility to teach the truth not popular social ****.

The main thing I saw and wanted to respond to was the idea that no matter what is done to create a child that God loves the child all equally. That I dont think is true. God cannot feel the same about a legitimate child as He does about an illegitimate child another concern would be a child born from IVF this again God could not feel or treat the same as a legitimate child.

“There are those born of the will of the flesh, Those born of the will of the devil and those born of the will of God.” All legitimate children are born of the will of God. God cannot even will the existance of the other children but he sometimes permits it. When God allows illegitimate children or technologically produced illegitimate children to exist He does so because of the good He can bring from the evil that was done to create them.

One of the Saints it may have been St Margaret of Cortona or a contemporary had two illegitimate children from an immoral relationship before her conversion. In one of her visions Jesus appeared to her and told her that because her children were illegitimate that they would have to do twice as much as a legitimate child to find salvation. One was the abbot of a nearby monastery and still Jesus asked her to warn him that he had to do more then other monks to find salvations even though he was a priest.

God takes everything serious. We should to.

 

[Zatzat]

Even if you can’t believe it, this split in dichotomy with your wife will become obvious at some time in your children’s lives.

It actually won’t…my wifes an A+ Cafeteria Catholic.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

We cant decide moral issues on the grounds it might make someone cry to hear the truth. The Church has a responsibility to teach the truth not popular social ****.

The main thing I saw and wanted to respond to was the idea that no matter what is done to create a child that God loves the child all equally. That I dont think is true. God cannot feel the same about a legitimate child as He does about an illegitimate child another concern would be a child born from IVF this again God could not feel or treat the same as a legitimate child.

“There are those born of the will of the flesh, Those born of the will of the devil and those born of the will of God.” All legitimate children are born of the will of God. God cannot even will the existance of the other children but he sometimes permits it. When God allows illegitimate children or technologically produced illegitimate children to exist He does so because of the good He can bring from the evil that was done to create them.

One of the Saints it may have been St Margaret of Cortona or a contemporary had two illegitimate children from an immoral relationship before her conversion. In one of her visions Jesus appeared to her and told her that because her children were illegitimate that they would have to do twice as much as a legitimate child to find salvation. One was the abbot of a nearby monastery and still Jesus asked her to warn him that he had to do more then other monks to find salvations even though he was a priest.

God takes everything serious. We should to.

I have never heard of something so ridiculous. Of course God loves everyone equally, including “illegitimate” children, IVF children, etc. All I can say is that the vision you are speaking about cannot have been from God if it happened at all. It sounds to me like that vision was the result of an extremely guilty conscience, and not God at all. We are all children of God, no matter what our parents have done and we are all born of God’s will and with His love, equally. If what you have said were actually true, then there would be some sort of absurd ranking system for everyone according to the sins of their parents and we would all have to fight it out for God’s love. Ridiculous.