Pregnant Student Banned from Graduation, Walks

[felra]

Penny Plain:

The Catholic school administration is entrusted with upholding the Catholic Christian (isn’t that redundant?) mission by means of lying? I think the school deserved to be defied.

As for “public manifestation of sin,” are you talking about (gasp!) the fact that she’s … preggers? Certainly nobody would have known about that if she hadn’t gone to the ceremony, right? I mean, can’t you just hear the dialogue back in March, or whenever it was she was removed from school for safety reasons?

Student 1: “Where’s Joanie?”
Student 2: “Gone.”
Student 1: “Gone? Why?”
Student 2: “Safety reasons.”
Student 1: “Well, she HAD been gaining weight. Perhaps her parents have checked her into an obesity clinic.”
Student 2: "That’s what I thought as well.

Please.

However the school administrators presented the sanction, does not change the facts that both mother and daughter presented as openly defiant to “I will do it my way”; which is why this student started and exacerbated this whole mess. Time for this student (and mother) to do it the right way, beginning with learning obediance to legitimate authority.

 

[Brad]

TPJCatholic:

Brad,

It is really very simple, whenever a case of mortal sin comes to the public knowledge of the student body and is verifiable, then there should be consequences.

In a day and age where sin and murder can be covered up quite easily, I don’t know if this approach is proper, unless the school itself was a target of the sin. This is still the parent’s job, along with the pastor. The student body knows about a whole bunch of sins of the students, believe me.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Brad,

There is little doubt that there is plenty os sinning going on all the time. The issue here is that the girl/boy fornicated and it then became very public because of her pregnancy. The schol should not go looking for sinners, yet it has to respond when they are faced with such a clear mortal sin. They must do that for the sake of the sinniers and for the sake of the student body–part of teaching is discipline and correction…Scripture even tells us that we must embrace it when God chooses to discipline us because God only disciplines those He loves. It is unloving to NOT discipline students who we know have commited grave sin.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Brad,

I agree the parents must be parents…and that is a huge problem today. Yet, the school has a role because the parents pay them to have a role…it was not a public school, discipline is an expected thing in Catholic schools.

 

[fix]

TPJCatholic:

Brad,

I agree the parents must be parents…and that is a huge problem today. Yet, the school has a role because the parents pay them to have a role…it was not a public school, discipline is an expected thing in Catholic schools.

Exactly. The school has rules of conduct that must be respected. No one is forced to go to a Catholic school. That there are other sinners is not the issue. That one is “caught” is the issue. Should all standards be eliminated because each offender is not “caught”?

 

[TPJCatholic]

fix,

It is incredible that many people on this thread would clamor about how the Church needs to teach the faith more strongly, yet in this case they are turning a blind eye towards any thought of proper discipline. That school is part of the Church and it was teaching strongly by not allowing the girl to walk. We really should be applauding that school for going against the culture–the school administrators simply did what they had to do and we should celebrate that, not bash them for it.

 

[fix]

jim orr:

It also seems that if any Church should wrap their arms around a young girl in this girl’s situation it should be the Catholic Church to show God’s forgiveness, the forgiveness the Church asks each of us to pray for one another in the Penitential Rite at the beginning of the Liturgy of every Mass

The article says nothing about the students views on her moral transgression. What if she is defiant and said that she made the right decision to get pregnant? What if she thinks the Church teachings are wrong? What if instead of getting pregnant she was homosexual and openly carried on with another female student. May she be banned then?

 

[TPJCatholic]

The school did not pull her diploma away…it merely said we will not support your sin.

 

[fix]

TPJCatholic:

fix,

It is incredible that many people on this thread would clamor about how the Church needs to teach the faith more strongly, yet in this case they are turning a blind eye towards any thought of proper discipline. That school is part of the Church and it was teaching strongly by not allowing the girl to walk. We really should be applauding that school for going against the culture–the school administrators simply did what they had to do and we should celebrate that, not bash them for it.

Where is the sign of contradiction to our culture if we do not uphold a high standard of conduct for our Catholic students?

People are acting as if they know the entire story. This girl and her parents may have signed a pledge to act in a certain way when she enrolled. Are Catholic schools to be no different from public ones?

As I said in another post It used to be that those who attended a Catholic school abided by the school’s code of conduct. The code may include penalties for moral turpitudes like fornication. That may mean dismissal, or prohibitions from partaking in certain school activities like graduation ceremonies.

 

[TPJCatholic]

fix,

I agree and I will add that proper Catholic formation comes from the parents, the Church and the Catholic schools. If all three of those legs work together, we can see some truly Catholic kids raised. Kids need to know there is no ambiguity about these matters, that they must not commit mortal sin and when they do they must be repentant and receive confession. Those are absolutes, not wishy-washy opinions.

 

[Penny_Plain]

TPJCatholic:

The thing I think you and others are forgetting is that the girl graduated from a Catholic school and part of her studies was learning the Catholic faith. Part of learning the faith is to come to know how to actually live the faith. She utterly failed to show a good example of the Catholic faith by fornicating, and she compounded that sin (made it worse) by defiantly going against the orders of her administrators, as a Catholic student she failed completely.

Since she was attending a Catholic school, part of her work to receive her diploma is her studies in the faith and since she utterly failed in that area, I feel the school was doing the right thing to tell her not to walk…she is a miserable example–she simply presented a horrible Catholic example at that moment in her life and she should not have walked. Now, God’s forgiveness may have been given already through confession, yet nevertheless her example was still an utter failure as a Catholic student.

You’re assuming she was Catholic; non-Catholic students attend Catholic schools as well, and I am aware of no requirement that you be a “Catholic student” to graduate from a Catholic high school.

I am impressed by the phrase “a horrible Catholic example at that moment in her life.” Which moment?

The moment where she had sex outside marriage with her boyfriend? I agree. But there is nothing in the article to suggest that the school knew she was going to have sex with her boyfriend on the graduation stage or, in fact, that she did.

The moment, where, having sinned, she nevertheless chose to carry her child to term and complete her education? I think that’s a great Catholic example, actually. Everybody sins. The point of the Catholic community (with the exception of this thread, perhaps) is not to point fingers and say “You – you’re very, very sinful.” It is to reconcile sinners to Christ and His Church and welcome them back as the father welcomed the prodigal son, with much love and joy and respect for the overwhelming scope of divine mercy.

In failing to do so, I think the school provided a horrible Catholic example, and it compounded its error by lying about its reasons. I think she was right to call the school to account for its wrongheaded exercise of authority. I think the other students were right to applaud her.

 

[Penny_Plain]

TPJCatholic:

It is incredible that many people on this thread would clamor about how the Church needs to teach the faith more strongly, yet in this case they are turning a blind eye towards any thought of proper discipline. That school is part of the Church and it was teaching strongly by not allowing the girl to walk.

TJP, I think there is a legitimate argument over whether this consituted “proper discipline,” especially since the school did not claim it was done for disciplinary reasons.

Let’s take this to a discussion of what the Church should do. Assume she is Catholic. Should she be banned from coming to church until she delivers? There certainly are other unwed teenagers there who do not know her, and she might give them the idea that the Church approves of pregnancy outside of marriage.

Should she be banned from receiving the sacraments until she delivers? People might get the wrong idea, even if she is in a state of grace.

Should she be banned from parish activities?

Some people are waayyy too quick to draw conclusions about the state of other people’s souls. We are taught not to do this.

 

[Trelow]

felra:

However the school administrators presented the sanction, does not change the facts that both mother and daughter presented as openly defiant to “I will do it my way”; which is why this student started and exacerbated this whole mess. Time for this student (and mother) to do it the right way, beginning with learning obediance to legitimate authority.

The sickest part of this whole story is the liberalism that all those who support her action have bought in to, It is an excellent example of our cultures view of authority and dissent.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Trelow:

The sickest part of this whole story is the liberalism that all those who support her action have bought in to, It is an excellent example of our cultures view of authority and dissent.

Some would say that the sickest part of this thread is the knee-jerk kowtowing to an unjust authority that lies about the reasons for its actions. It is an excellent example of Catholic culture’s emphasis of punishment and inflexible authority over the virtues of mercy, love, compassion, and community.

Now what have we accomplished by calling all these names?

Nothing.

 

[Brad]

fix:

Actually, the article did not state whether the girl thought her actions were sinful or not. In fact, her behavior may lead a reasonable person to conclude that she thinks fonication is a trivial matter…

Quite possible.

fix:

It used to be that those who attended a Catholic school abided by the school’s code of conduct. The code may include penalties for moral turpitudes like fornication. That may mean dismissal, or prohibitions from partaking in certain school activities like graduation ceremonies.

It was a lot more obvious prior to abortion on demand and birth control. Now, it is difficult to determine who has fornicated and who has not, and way too difficult for the school to monitor. Plus, the support of parents is nothing like it used to be. I don’t think the school can act in the same way as it did but it can act in a radical way - unwavering and uplifting Catholic teaching, centered on Christ.

fix:

The girl was dead wrong in acting out as she did. The school’s policy may be questioned, but in actuality I think more proscriptions are needed, not less.

I agree.

 

[Trelow]

Penny Plain:

Some would say that the sickest part of this thread is the knee-jerk kowtowing to an unjust authority that lies about the reasons for its actions. It is an excellent example of Catholic culture’s emphasis of punishment and inflexible authority over the virtues of mercy, love, compassion, and community.

Now what have we accomplished by calling all these names?

Nothing.

Whom did I call a name?

If you are going to make a clam, back it. I clam that the school is a legitimate authority, and that the action they have taken is not contrary to moral law, and that given our limited and biased knowledge of the case is not to be found unjust. Given such, I assert that those who stand contrary to the legitimate authority in this matter, are promoting and spreading dissent and setting a precedent for the rejection of authority, which in turn accounts for the libertine morality in our culture, whereas the desire of the individual trumps any established order. I have backed my claim with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you would like it, I will gather further evidence to prove right.

But whereas you reject the Church’s Authority on contraception, I see no reason you would succumb to Truth even if it were to poo on your head.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Trelow:

But whereas you reject the Church’s Authority on contraception, I see no reason you would succumb to Truth even if it were to poo on your head.

Wow, you take really good notes.

I find myself reluctantly agreeing with you. I do not think that I have ever succumbed to anyone solely because they “pooed” on my head. In fact, should the situation ever arise in the context of a theological argument, I would think it would make me less likely to succumb.

What a disturbing image.

I agree that the school is a legitimate authority. I do not think it acted appropriately, not least because it lied about its reasons for excluding the student.

I certainly do not think that questioning a legitimate authority’s inappropriate actions promotes dissent, libertineism, anarchy, jaywalking, and whatever other societal ills you attribute to it. It promotes accountability and good judgment on the part of the authority, something that is often lacking from institutions (such as schools) that are accustomed to blind obedience.

I am not aware that the school claims infalibility or that it was speaking on a matter of faith or morals. In fact, it claimed to be speaking on a matter of “safety.” Would the Pope himself claim infallibility if he, I don’t know, ordered bishops to install sprinkler systems or non-skid linoleum?

Does this mean you are going to come to my trailer and poo on my head? I’d rather direct you to my mother’s garden. I am low on shampoo, and she could use the fertilizer.

 

[Brad]

fix:

Exactly. The school has rules of conduct that must be respected. No one is forced to go to a Catholic school. That there are other sinners is not the issue. That one is “caught” is the issue. Should all standards be eliminated because each offender is not “caught”?

I think this is a bit of an over-generalization. I’m not saying all standards should be eliminated (although in many Catholic schools, they are); I’m saying this particular idea by the school was not so hot. I don’t think this policy was in their handbook. I don’t know if you have surveyed Catholic schools lately but a good many of them don’t discipline school violations and promote immorality through dances etc and also don’t teach the faith properly. Let’s focus on what can be controlled as general policy and teaching. The school’s rules of conduct cannot include behavior outside of school. It’s not practical and impossible to be fair when all parents are not on board. Fairness is an issue, especially with schoolchildren - it is important for credibility and consistency, which encourges faithfulness. Johnny may be a bad seed outside of school but he sure will be good inside of school.

 

[Brad]

TPJCatholic:

Brad,

I agree the parents must be parents…and that is a huge problem today. Yet, the school has a role because the parents pay them to have a role…it was not a public school, discipline is an expected thing in Catholic schools.

If my kid fornicates, the school better stand out of my way while I carry out appropriate discipline. Missing graduation would seem like a trip to DisneyLand. This is not the school’s role. It is the parent’s role. Parents pay people to “raise” their kids but you cannot pay your way out of your proper role. It doesn’t work and it is unbiblical and against Church teaching.

 

[Brad]

fix:

The article says nothing about the students views on her moral transgression. What if she is defiant and said that she made the right decision to get pregnant? What if she thinks the Church teachings are wrong? What if instead of getting pregnant she was homosexual and openly carried on with another female student. May she be banned then?

Promotion of sin and sinning are two differnt things. I don’t think we know which category she fell into. I am assuming the latter only. If I am wrong, then the school should have expelled her.