Rainbow Sash Movement is happy with our bishop. Calls on the Diocese of Orange

[contemplative]

AlanFromWichita:

If we propose unity by kicking people out

NO one is proposing that anyone get kicked out. The thought so far is that parents should sign commitment papers before admittance of their children to a Catholic school…a commitment paper that declares upholding the Catholic Church’s teaching in and out of school. If the paper can’t be signed then those parents would be expected to find some other place to have their children educated. Simple - no booting or kicking.

 

[HumbleSinner]

AlanFromWichita:

We drag the “wrong” into the Catholic school so we can make it right. Somebody’s gotta do it, and the parents aren’t. Who will it be? Not us, I gather.

That is unless we think we are going to fix the parents by keeping their kids quarantined from our pristine hallways so they don’t track in mud they got on their feet at home. Wait a minute – is it because we think we need protection from children who are “carriers of evil” or because we are using the children as leverage to force the parents into Doing The Right Thing? Or is it we’d rather have them outside the school so we can vilify their parents without having to look them in the eye?

Alan

This should bring you up to date on some things

THE CAFETERIA IS CLOSED at St. John the Baptist School, Cost Mesa CA

From what I know no one was ever trying to kick out the kids.

 

[miguel]

If the goal of the Catholic school is to transmit the faith to young people, shouldn’t an environment conducive to that be fostered? If you let in all the rabble rousers, people who really couldn’t give a gnat’s eyelash about the faith, then you have to anticipate that the environment for those who do want to be there will be harmed. It seems to me that making parents commit before allowing their children in, provides an incentive. If parents want the undeniably superior education of the Catholic school for their kids, they need to be Catholic. Or at the very least supportive and not undermining. The whole reason to form Catholic schools was to transmit Catholicism with a minimum of fuss. We don’t want to be arguing every step of the way. There’s enough of that on the outside.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Attentive, committed Catholic parents really don’t need a Catholic school for their children to learn Catholicism.

Oh, and maybe they aren’t kicking the kids out of school; they are just denying them admission.

Oh yeah, if they had better parents, we wouldn’t do that. The parents won’t sign our papers, sorry, kids.

Those kids should be ashamed of their parents, and if they ever regret not going to a Catholic school, then we can assure them it was All Their Parents’ Fault.

It’s not that we don’t want the children, it’s just that, well, the children’s parents are icky and we just don’t think those children are worthy of taking up space in our pristine schools.

Yes, the children would learn better if the environment at home were more supportive of the school. Since it isn’t, cast them out and let them be at the whims of their parents whom we have certified as Not Worthy To Be Good Parents.

At some point you have to realize that denying admission to the Catholic school is either bad for children – any children – or Catholic school is not good for those children. To say that Catholic school is not good for children whose parents are jerks seems like it sells the schools kind of short.

Why is it so difficult to separate out what can be reasonably expected to be accomplished with obstinate parents, from what is good for their children who are innocent? We rail about the evils committed against innocent children even if they are products of rape when it comes to politics. When it comes to taking care of those children, we seem to give support to the most ugly stereotypes the pro-choice people have for us. Children who are inconvenient may go elsewhere because we don’t want to deal with them.

Let’s also deny admission to children whose parents are split up, whose parents are living in sin because they have had previous marriages, whose parents have ever cheated on their taxes or exceeded the speed limit, thereby defying authority. Also I don’t think we need the kids of anybody whose parents have gone to Communion with a mortal sin, or those who use any types of swear words. Those five children who are still in school, though, boy they are faithful and we can really do a lot with them! Better yet, their parents are going to homeschool so we can just save our money and not have a school. Voila! Problem solved. Now I see why this mentality is so stubborn, because it is just so, well, convenient.

He who is without sin may cast the first stone. All others may jump into the lake.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

AlanFromWichita:

We rail about the evils committed against innocent children even if they are products of rape when it comes to politics. When it comes to taking care of those children, we seem to give support to the most ugly stereotypes the pro-choice people have for us. Children who are inconvenient may go elsewhere because we don’t want to deal with them.

Just in case this wasn’t absolutely clear, consider this scenario. A young woman is raped. She is dissuaded from having an abortion by sidewalk counselors. Instead, she has the baby and gives it up for adoption. Some gays adopt the child and try to send it to Catholic school. No way, says we, because the child’s parents are gay.

Who is showing more kindness to the child, the Catholic school, or the gay parents?

Who will make the pro-choicers wrong that we really do intend to take care of all these children we would save? The Catholic school, or the gay parents?

Which is the proper way to deal with children, to take them in, or to keep them out? How does the story of the Good Samaritan figure in? Who is treating the children with acceptance and love, and who is using them as tools, pitting them against their parents – which is the act of God’s True Church, and which is the act of the evil gay parents?

Oh yeah. The evil gay parents are the ones hurting their child, not us. We just figure we can play a better game of chicken with them.

The other possible issue is this. We don’t like Rainbow Sash, whatever the h*ll that is anyway (I’ve never seen any in Wichita Kansas anyway) so anything that makes them happy must automatically be bad. If my enemy likes something about my friend, then by golly my friend had better change because we can’t be pandering to the bad guys.

Alan

 

[contemplative]

AlanFromWichita:

He who is without sin may cast the first stone. All others may jump into the lake.

Again - NO one is throwing stones or all the other negative things you are describing.

If a parent (any parent) doesn’t sign a letter of affirmation which upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church then they are shooting themselves in their own foot.

Got it now? They have only themselves to blame. Not the Church. Not a diocese. Not a bishop. Not a priest. Not a Catholic School faculty. Not a mystery man throwing stones. Not a mystery boot in the rear. Not even Alan from Witchata. Homosexual couples with kids have only themselves to blame if they don’t uphold the teachings of the Church.

Catholic schools are not about exclusivity but rather inclusiveness to all who uphold and teach the Catholic faith.

If we don’t want active homosexuals promenading around Catholic seminaries then I would bet that Catholic parents sure as heck don’t want their children going to school with Jim and Bob as volunteers for playground duty.

In fact, with all rapid legal changes favoring homosexual unions Catholic schools would be wise to act quickly and put together an affirmation/commitment for all parents of Catholic school children. I foresee more costly legal problems and troubles without it.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

contemplative:

Again - NO one is throwing stones or all the other negative things you are describing.

If a parent (any parent) doesn’t sign a letter of affirmation which upholds the teachings of the Catholic Church then they are shooting themselves in their own foot.

Got it now? They have only themselves to blame. Not the Church. Not a diocese. Not a bishop. Not a priest. Not a Catholic School faculty. Not a mystery man throwing stones. Not a mystery boot in the rear. Not even Alan from Witchata. Homosexual couples with kids have only themselves to blame if they don’t uphold the teachings of the Church.

Yes, I got it now. I had it before. It’s all about blame. When these kids are adults and have no Catholic knowledge at all, then we can take comfort in saying, “it was their parents who sinned so that this child is blind. It wasn’t our fault.”

Catholic schools are not about exclusivity but rather inclusiveness to all who uphold and teach the Catholic faith.

How are these kids going to uphold Catholic faith when they have disturbed parents and nobody who will teach them sound doctrine because of it?

If we don’t want active homosexuals promenading around Catholic seminaries then I would bet that Catholic parents sure as heck don’t want their children going to school with Jim and Bob as volunteers for playground duty.

Yes, we wouldn’t want our children hanging around with the children of sinners. Can you not hear yourself?

As far as I’m concerned, if I pull my kid out of the school because another kid has gay parents, then I am hurting my own child. If other parents do that, then all I can say is, it’s their fault their kids aren’t in school.

I don’t mind Jim and Bob having playground duty. I just have to be a bit careful that if I drop a penny I stoop rather than bend over to pick it up!

In fact, with all rapid legal changes favoring homosexual unions Catholic schools would be wise to act quickly and put together an affirmation/commitment for all parents of Catholic school children. I foresee more costly legal problems and troubles without it.

You’re right. The more we pick and choose whose children are worthy of educating the more legal problems we run into.

Are you in favor of kicking children out of school because they have divorced parents? How about single mothers? Single mothers with live-in boyfriend? How much of a sinner is “too much?” Do you advocate preventing kids from attending school if their parents use contraception? If not, then what happened to all this “absolutism” I keep hearing about? Sounds like we pick and choose for which sins of the parents we are going to punish the children. Which sins, why the ones we can see on the outside, of course. Didn’t Jesus say that we should judge others based on what we see in them?

Alan

 

[contemplative]

AlanFromWichita:

I don’t mind Jim and Bob having playground duty. I just have to be a bit careful that if I drop a penny I stoop rather than bend over to pick it up!

Sick
Stay away from me.

 

[HumbleSinner]

AlanFromWichita:

don’t mind Jim and Bob having playground duty. I just have to be a bit careful that if I drop a penny I stoop rather than bend over to pick it up!

Careful now Dorothy, that sounds a little homophobic.

Catholics need to be more concerned about homosexual unions being seen as acceptable and normal not whether or not homosexuals are going to molest someone.

 

[m134e5]

contemplative:

I am sick and tired of this ‘In your face homosexuality’ all over the place including my Catholic Church and Catholics schools.

Bishops in the USA need to start growing a little back bone and get to work cleaning the ranks of active homosexual clergy and people who are permissive of it! NOW! Do your job!!!

Amen!

(emphasis mine)
I hope all realize, as seems to be apparant in this thread, there is a difference between struggling and keeping it between an orthodox confessor/spiritual director, and perhaps a few close friends with whom chastity is not a problem at all- EVER, and being actively “gay” and proclaiming the condition for all the world to know, like they just won a gold medal, and demanding that people confirm them in their sin.

 

[m134e5]

AlanFromWichita:

I don’t mind… pick it up!

(censored)

Please…not here.:nope: That is just…crude (and unchristian).

 

[AlanFromWichita]

contemplative:

Sick
Stay away from me.

Really? Then why did you bring it up? What harm do you think they would do you?

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

HumbleSinner:

Careful now Dorothy, that sounds a little homophobic.

Catholics need to be more concerned about homosexual unions being seen as acceptable and normal not whether or not homosexuals are going to molest someone.

Yeah, I guess it was homophobic.

You are probably right. I have been “hit on” by homosexuals before, especially when I used to walk and/or hitchhike during all hours of the night from ISU (Indiana State U) back to Rose-Hulman, five miles east. (Rose was all women at the time so ISU was the nearest source of females.)

One said he was bumming about his job, just got off from work as manager of a large grocery store. We got to talking and he asked if I mind driving around some. I said, “no” and he drove to a remote place and then hit on me. I politely declined, and he took me back to my dorm. No danger at all, and we resumed our discussion. Another one picked me up and asked me along the way, and I politely declined. He gave my leg a bit of a pat when I got out of the car and said it was nice knowing me. Gee whiz, I figured a quick pat on the leg wasn’t too much to pay for getting a ride that saved me four miles of walking.

As far as image, lets get back to that. None of us are saints. Their sin is one I would never commit, but I just may have some that they would never commit. Your concern is that Catholics will look at them and think it’s normal. My concern is that Catholics will look at us and think that it is proper to exclude children of sinners from school.

Alan

 

[contemplative]

AlanFromWichita:

You are probably right. I have been “hit on” by homosexuals before, especially when I used to walk and/or hitchhike during all hours of the night from ISU (Indiana State U) back to Rose-Hulman, five miles east. (Rose was all women at the time so ISU was the nearest source of females.)

One said he was bumming about his job, just got off from work as manager of a large grocery store. We got to talking and he asked if I mind driving around some. I said, “no” and he drove to a remote place and then hit on me. I politely declined, and he took me back to my dorm. No danger at all, and we resumed our discussion. Another one picked me up and asked me along the way, and I politely declined. He gave my leg a bit of a pat when I got out of the car and said it was nice knowing me. Gee whiz, I figured a quick pat on the leg wasn’t too much to pay for getting a ride that saved me four miles of walking.

Your gay explorations are irrelevant here.
Your concern is that Catholics will look at them and think it’s normal.
Can you quote anyone in this thread saying this?

My concern is that Catholics will look at us and think that it is proper to exclude children of sinners from school.

Hopefully a letter of affirmation upholding the Faith will serve to support the Church rather than exclude anyone.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

contemplative:

AlanFromWichita:

Your concern is that Catholics will look at them and think it’s normal.

Can you quote anyone in this thread saying this?

I’m glad you asked.

Ask and ye shall receive:

“Catholics need to be more concerned about homosexual unions being seen as acceptable and normal not whether or not homosexuals are going to molest someone.”

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

quote=m134e5

Please…not here. That is just…crude (and unchristian).
[/quote]

I’m sorry that you were offended.

I’m not sorry I wrote it. :nope:

I’m not sorry because I soooo love it when someone calls me “unChristian.” It gives an opportunity to show them a little bit of the Truth in a way I could never do had I not been “attacked” in this way.

I think it would do you well to lighten up a little bit. Among a community of total strangers, we constantly delve into incredibly specific issues about the sex act, whether the man is in the right place when he ejaculates, and the specifics of his lustful feelings and whether that makes him hellbound.

Yes, it was crude. The whole subject is crude. The world is messy. There are people here using the sins of parents to keep children away from a Catholic education, and you’re worried about a little comment that, by the way, is in the favor of those I’m arguing against. :whacky:

Are there any gays watching this thread? What offends you more, my little attempt at humor at your expense, or the fact that these loving Catholics would keep your children out of “their” school because they don’t want their own children to associate with yours? (I find that 100 times more sick and repulsive – not to mention unchristian – than any flippant remark I might make, but of course that’s my personal opinion.)

I guess kicking kids out of school because of their parents’ sins is Christian, while cracking a joke about the parents is unchristian. Wow. You saw it right here, folks. Symbolism over substance – the hallmark of a liberal. :banghead:

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

contemplative:

Hopefully a letter of affirmation upholding the Faith will serve to support the Church rather than exclude anyone.

Well, that would be nice, yes.

If they wish to defy Church teachings, then excommunicate them. Just don’t take it out on their kids.

Or are we also to interpret this in a relative way?
Mark 10:14:

When Jesus saw this he became indignant and said to them, "Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.

Actually I haven’t been indignant, but staying rather calm. If I were more like Jesus I would be indignant over the whole concept.

Oh yeah, I forgot verse 14x that was edited out.
(not)Mark 10_14-14x:

When Jesus saw this he became indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. That is, unless their parents have unusual sexual practices in which case I trust you will screen those children out.”

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

contemplative:

Your gay explorations are irrelevant here.

Explorations? I was just asking for a ride home, and I got it.

My point is that my experience with gays is that you actually don’t have to “watch yourself” around them because they aren’t that pushy on a one-to-one basis. Therefore, the crack I made was clearly not intended to be taken literally.

Do you have examples in your realm of experience where gays have forced themselves on others or taken advantage of children, priests notwithstanding?

Alan

 

[GloriaPatri4]

AlanFromWichita:

If they wish to defy Church teachings, then excommunicate them. Just don’t take it out on their kids.

Dear Alan,

---

I don’t know how many Catholics you know that have been excommunicated but I don’t know of any. I would never want to kick children out of a Catholic school but what do we do about parents who insist on flaunting their sinful lifestyle on Catholic school grounds? Are not the other school children being made to suffer by their exposure to scandal?

---

Bad example and scandal are sins against the soul included in the Fifth Commandment.

From “My Catholic Faith” by Most Reverend Louis Laravoire Morrow (C) 1963:

What is BAD EXAMPLE?

Bad example is doing wrong in the presence of others.

1. Bad example is the principal occasion of scandal, which is occasioning the sin of another by any word or deed having at least the appearance of evil. ***If ***any help or encouragement is given in any way to cause another to do wrong, scandal is committed or given.

Bad example and scandal are sins against the soul included in the Fifth Commandment. They injure our neighbor’s soul, and so are worse evils than injuring his body. They do the devil’s work and draw souls into hell. If by deliberate scandal and bad example we cause another to commit a grave sin, we are worse than murderers. St. Augustine said, If you persuade your neighbor to sin, you are his murderer."

1. Our Lord condemned scandal in no uncertain terms, saying: ***“Woe to the man through whom scandal does come! ***And if thy hand or thy foot is an occasion of sin to thee, cut it off and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter life maimed or lame, than, having two hands or two feet, ***to be cast into the everlasting fire” ***(Matt. 18:7-8).

Grievous indeed must scandal be, to make our gentle Lord use such stroung words of condemnation. "The Son of man will send forth*** his angels***, and they will gather out of his kingdom all scandals and those who work iniquity, and cast them into the furnace of fire" (Matt. 13:41-42).

1. Some ways*** of giving bad example or scandal are:*** by indecent talk, by selling or circulating bad books or pictures, by singing improper songs, by dressing immodestly, by appearing in public in a state of drunkenness, by profanity and cursing, by doing servile work publicly on Sunday, by behaving indecorously in church, by ridiculing religion and priests, by writing against religion, by publicly violating one of the commandments of God or the Church, etc.

We should be very careful in our actions, however innocent, so that they may not be the cause of scandal to others. “And if thy eye is an occasion of sin to thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into the hell of fire” (Matt. 18:9).

1. By committing scandalous acts a person influences others to do the same. This is specially true of children, who easily imitate their parents and elders. He who gives scandal is like a man who digs a pit into which others fall, break their necks.

__________________

 

[Lisa_N]

Alan I think you are engaged in hair splitting. You might want to look at how this subject was discussed (to death I might add) previously. I am sure that the parents of many kids, heck all kids, going to Catholic schools are sinners. Just like all of us. OTOH the issue is that their sin is not only public but almost a source of pride. The case of the two boys discussed previously became such a bone of contention, not because of the boys and not necessarily because of their parents, but because of the two homosexuals insisting on insinuating themselves into the school, insisting on being listed as “the dads” of the boys, insisting on attending mass as a couple, insisting on getting involved in the school (one apparently helped out in the classroom).

Now say a heterosexual couple enrolls their two boys. Both are involved in torrid affairs. They show up at school with their lovers instead of their spouses. The lovers volunteer at the school. The lovers insist on attending parent meetings and being listed as parents. Do ya think that might raise eyebrows?

Blatant public sin is blatant public sin. However homosexuals seem to have little concern that we all get to know about their sex lives. I think we owe our kids more than to allow this behavior to be condoned, welcomed and affirmed by a CATHOLIC school. Further I believe the homosexuals who enroll kids in Catholic schools are trying to push their agenda, not get their kids educated.

Lisa N