Rally at archdiocese backs ousted Eastside Catholic High School vice principal Mark Zmuda

[Viewer]

Yes, it could come to this. It wouldn’t be the first time the Church was ordered by the State to reject its core beliefs or get out of business. (We face the same thing on a lesser level with the HHS mandate.)

Mmm…I have heard such although I wonder how the Church there is handling it, or it’s long term plans depending on whatever is the outcome.

If the battle over same sex ‘marriage’ is lost, and it may well be, the loss was years in the making. Catholics pretty much guaranteed the emergence of gay marriage once they rejected Humanae Vitae.

Eh…I’m not so sure about this one. Gay acceptance has come to it’s greatest head in the past 10-12 years among the young. They too call into question contraception (for the financial costs of raising a large family primarilly) but this is something many of their parents agree with. Homosexuality acceptance however is not so prevalent among the parents, more common than rejection certainly but not absolute by any stretch.

I know individuals who deplore homosexuality yet use contraception out of “financial necessity”. Not exactly the best individuals to deplore the former act but there you have it.

The embrace of contraception unlinked sex from child bearing; it unlinked marriage from children. It made children into optional accessories, to be chosen or rejected, and only perfect specimens need apply.

I would disagree with this. Times are hard in the UK and children are inordinately expensive to feed and raise. I’m not on minimum wage nor do I send my children to private academies (Catholic schools here don’t demand large fees for their services for the most part) but I certainly couldn’t afford to raise more than two of them and thankfully they are all that I have.

People use contraception here because they think it less evil than dumping offspring they cannot afford to mantain into adoption.

With childbearing no longer linked to marriage, neither was marriage linked to sex. Promiscuity of every variety followed as a natural consequence. And contraception is not perfect, so abortion became a necessity too.

Promiscuity is prevalent in secular society yes, thankfully not so much among Catholics here it seems . I can’t agree with it leading to abortion though, that itself is still loudly rejected and increasingly thanks to a few advances within science secular groups are jumping on the bandwagon to deplore it.

Well, if marriage isn’t about procreation, then it can be about anything, and if it isn’t fulfilling, divorce is also a necessity. And why should only married couples get to have sex? Sex is for everybody, at any time, in any way they want it, and marriage equality for all.

I’m not so certain about this either. Ideally a marriage should last for a lifetime and this view doesn’t seem to be challenged to much as an ideal. In practice where a woman is being beaten by her husband and finds a new lover and marries him instead? That tends to draw more of a “look the other way” approach than approval. Among Catholics of course.

The domestic family inevitably entered a state of decline, in which it still remains. Without the domestic family as its bedrock, society also entered a state of decline and social chaos. We are seeing the effects even now. The full results have yet to play out. (But a good documentation of the disastrous social effects to date can be found in the book “Adam and Eve After the Pill.”)

I actually wouldn’t say the state as a whole is in decline, the nuclear family itself perhaps but not society. This might be a feature we don’t like but there have been advancements in other areas.

I think perhaps that your students don’t just reject historic Christian teaching about same sex marriage. I hope I am wrong about this, but they likely hold to a wholesale rejection of Catholic sexual morality.

Many of my students are actually far more sexually conservative (homosexual acceptance not included) than their parents! To what I don’t know to attribute it too, fear of AIDS? Success in Church teaching? Who knows, but somethings working there.

One thing flows from another. And why not? Their parents rejected it before them. They divorced, aborted their brothers and sisters, enjoyed sexual libertinism as much as anyone. Why would they expect their children to hold to traditional marriage?

I ought not to condemn prior generations in such a wholesale manner. Certainly many have held fast to the faith. But many have not. It began with a rejection of Humanae Vitae.

Haha, oh don’t worry about it, it’s just trying to find what started it and how best to deal with the aftermath . I am actually rather doubtful that the origins lie within any one church action, but rather how the church has [badly] reacted to secular developments (The LGBT movement, Politics).

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Viewer says we need to be silent on this issue. McCall says that silence is compromise. So what should we do?

I don’t like the silence option either. BUT … how bout we stop talking in terms provided by the culture wars?

All we need to say about sodomy is this: “The Catholic Church reiterates its rejection of any sexual activity outside of marriage, and reiterates its definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.”

But then we need to express a Catholic vision for how a gay person should live. “Be chaste” is not enough; the Church needs to explain what chastity looks like, in the case of a gay person. The Church needs to express the passionate love that Christ has for sinners. The Church needs to find a way of connecting with teenagers who are gay.

And the Church needs to silence, swiftly and decisively, those among the Church who would say that conversion therapy is necessary for personal holiness. This message has been the most offensive one to the gay community – and it is genuinely offensive.

 

[stewstew03]

Please consider ‘liking’ a page I set up on Facebook (to counter the students who have set up a page to support the ousted vice principal).

Stand With Archbishop Sartain

http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/facebook_like_button_blue.jpg

 

[Viewer]

Please consider ‘liking’ a page I set up on Facebook (to counter the students who have set up a page to support the ousted vice principal).

Stand With Archbishop Sartain

Something I have wondered about this topic, and in regards to the Archbishop.

What is the US’s legal status for the former school VP’s employment? We have a homosexual head-of-department within our Catholic school who entered into a civil union and his position is unchallengeable, being protected by anti-discrimination laws. Does the state have anything governing this scenario?

I know our principal wouldn’t and isn’t able to fire or expel anyone on the grounds of being homosexual (nor would she want to), is there any precedent in favor or against the decision there?

 

[Viewer]

All we need to say about sodomy is this: “The Catholic Church reiterates its rejection of any sexual activity outside of marriage, and reiterates its definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.”

If all that had been said was this it might have worked It wouldn’t have helped any ministry to gay teenagers or a wider outreach but It wouldn’t have formed the huge resentment against church teaching that is now present.

But then we need to express a Catholic vision for how a gay person should live. “Be chaste” is not enough; the Church needs to explain what chastity looks like, in the case of a gay person. The Church needs to express the passionate love that Christ has for sinners. The Church needs to find a way of connecting with teenagers who are gay.

This one I really cannot offer any solutions, since any gay teenagers I have met have left or are on their way of leaving the church (remaining nominally Catholic perhaps but little more).

We can say “Love the sinner, hate the sin” or other platitudes as much as we want but in practice there are those within our church who do not want homosexuals to even have a right to exist. A church that tells them they must life their life alone and that continually describes them as disordered, disabled or innatley evil in some way? It will never work, temporary results perhaps but I can see myself right now with one student who I know that experiences SSA that it does not work.

And the Church needs to silence, swiftly and decisively, those among the Church who would say that conversion therapy is necessary for personal holiness. This message has been the most offensive one to the gay community – and it is genuinely offensive.

Agreed. “Courage” and all of it’s ilk are a mistake, and a grossly offensive one at that. The LGBT movement does not even need to protest when all they have to do is advertise this to the public.

 

[stewstew03]

Something I have wondered about this topic, and in regards to the Archbishop.

What is the US’s legal status for the former school VP’s employment? We have a homosexual head-of-department within our Catholic school who entered into a civil union and his position is unchallengeable, being protected by anti-discrimination laws. Does the state have anything governing this scenario?

I know our principal wouldn’t and isn’t able to fire or expel anyone on the grounds of being homosexual (nor would she want to), is there any precedent in favor or against the decision there?

Technically, the VP resigned, and the school accepted his resignation. Still, there is no federal law that protects an employee’s sexual orientation in the private sector.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Technically, the VP resigned, and the school accepted his resignation. Still, there is no federal law that protects an employee’s sexual orientation in the private sector.

Nor should there be. Catholic institutions should always have the freedom to hire and fire at will. Especially where youth are involved. Standard operating procedure in many schools is to have a contract with a morality clause in it. You should be able to terminate a teacher than opens a porn store across the street, or a teacher that scandalizes youth by “marrying” a same sex partner.

Again , What I don’t understand is why this man was hired as VP in the first place! Oh wait, I lived in seattle. I understand.

 

[MacBP]

First things first, don’t shoot the messenger. I’ve made an account purely to comment on this, because I would hope to clear up a misconception.

I’ve snipped the rest from the sake of conserving space, but I do find what you wrote to be interesting. I also don’t really believe it. I find it very easy to believe that individuals might not like the Church’s teaching, but unless we’re being incredibly dishonest, it’s impossible to ascribe the subjective motive of hate to them.

We can say “Love the sinner, hate the sin” or other platitudes as much as we want but in practice there are those within our church who do not want homosexuals to even have a right to exist.

Love the sinner, hate the sin isn’t a platitude; its an attitude that fundamentally distinguishes Christianity from every other belief system (or lack thereof) in the world. This isn’t just about sex, it’s about every single sin in the world. Love the sinner, hate the sin is why we can love a pedophile, a rapist, a murderer, an adulter, or any other sin you can name. We’ve all sinned, we’ve all done things that are unlovable. If we don’t love the sinner and hate, then we don’t love anyone.

I’ve also never heard anyone say that homosexuals don’t have the right to exist.

A church that tells them they must life their life alone

I have to stop you right here. Living your life alone and gaining the kingdom of Heaven is a fair trade. What does Jesus say on the matter?

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, even their own life–such a person cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

and that continually describes them as disordered, disabled or innatley evil in some way?

Bad news… the Church describes all of us (wherever you fall on the sexual orientation scale) as disordered. That’s the effects of original sin. The Church most certainly does not call homosexuals to be evil but does describe an active homosexual lifestyle as sinful. It also describes my cowardice as disordered and if I act upon it it becomes sinful.

Agreed. “Courage” and all of it’s ilk are a mistake, and a grossly offensive one at that. The LGBT movement does not even need to protest when all they have to do is advertise this to the public.

I’ve met with people in Courage, and they never mentioned conversion therapy. They were a support group for men, living with SSA, who were striving to live chastely within the Church. No crackpot “therapy” needed or wanted.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Agreed. “Courage” and all of it’s ilk are a mistake, and a grossly offensive one at that. The LGBT movement does not even need to protest when all they have to do is advertise this to the public.

Factcheck: Courage is not about conversion therapy.

 

[RPRPsych]

Viewer says we need to be silent on this issue. McCall says that silence is compromise. So what should we do?

I don’t like the silence option either. BUT … how bout we stop talking in terms provided by the culture wars?

All we need to say about sodomy is this: “The Catholic Church reiterates its rejection of any sexual activity outside of marriage, and reiterates its definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.”

But then we need to express a Catholic vision for how a gay person should live. “Be chaste” is not enough; the Church needs to explain what chastity looks like, in the case of a gay person. The Church needs to express the passionate love that Christ has for sinners. The Church needs to find a way of connecting with teenagers who are gay.

And the Church needs to silence, swiftly and decisively, those among the Church who would say that conversion therapy is necessary for personal holiness. This message has been the most offensive one to the gay community – and it is genuinely offensive.

This is a very good post.

As for “conversion therapy”, in my own opinion as a professional, it probably doesn’t work, raises false hopes, and has often been associated with the use of coercive and unethical techniques. These are excellent reasons why the Church should avoid it, barring further advances in neurobiology or psychology that would make it both safe and effective.

 

[Viewer]

Technically, the VP resigned, and the school accepted his resignation. Still, there is no federal law that protects an employee’s sexual orientation in the private sector.

Ah, I see, thank you So he may have a viable support case then. It will be interesting to watch this develop.

Nor should there be. Catholic institutions should always have the freedom to hire and fire at will. Especially where youth are involved. Standard operating procedure in many schools is to have a contract with a morality clause in it. You should be able to terminate a teacher than opens a porn store across the street, or a teacher that scandalizes youth by “marrying” a same sex partner.

Again , What I don’t understand is why this man was hired as VP in the first place! Oh wait, I lived in seattle. I understand.

There was actually a case within the UK about 4-5(?) years ago involving a teacher who did in fact work as a part-time pornstar alongside his day-job at a secular school and was fired once one of his films were discovered by a student. I usually remain quiet on issues like this but I actually joined the protest in support of the decision.

He was fired and won a case of unfair dismissal, can’t recall what the compensation was but that wouldn’t be a cause for dismissal here these days.

I believe as teachers we should present ourselves in both our professional and private lives with a certain degree of dignity, and having us featuring in a sex-marathon orgy video isn’t what I had in mind when I joined the profession :bighanky:

 

[Prodigal_Son]

This one I really cannot offer any solutions, since any gay teenagers I have met have left or are on their way of leaving the church (remaining nominally Catholic perhaps but little more).

Young people respond to challenges. If we tell them that they can be saints – that there are gay Catholics who have done the work of saints (Nouwen, Hopkins) – if we inspire them with a vision of friendship and intimacy that is not sexual, if we do these things, I see no reason why they wouldn’t respond. Gay kids are abandoning the Church because the Church abandoned them first.

(I say that as a person with SSA. If I were not also attracted to women, I think it is very unlikely I would be a Catholic right now.)

We can say “Love the sinner, hate the sin” or other platitudes as much as we want but in practice there are those within our church who do not want homosexuals to even have a right to exist. A church that tells them they must life their life alone and that continually describes them as disordered, disabled or innatley evil in some way? It will never work, temporary results perhaps but I can see myself right now with one student who I know that experiences SSA that it does not work.

There are a group of openly gay but celibate bloggers at a website called Spiritual Friendship, who are trying to explore a way of life for celibate gay people which involves deep and meaningful friendships. I highly recommend the site.

Spiritual Friendship | Musings on God, friendship, relationships

 

[Cle_GDP_10]

As a student at a Catholic high school, I cannot say I am surprised by this situation. I truly believe it is the result of poor catechesis. Gay “marriage,” in my opinion, has become a “bandwagon” issue. If one is against it, the culture it quick to label the person as a bigoted, hateful, anti-equality, etc. person. Therefore, most people, especially teenagers, are backing the issue.

It is kind of ironic that the gay “marriage” supporters use slogans like “Love always wins.” I’d like to argue, yes, love always wins. However, it’s Christ’s love for his Church and people that will win at the end of time. I love all my LGBT brothers and sisters, and want to see them in heaven if I get there, and therefore I cannot support something that might damage their relationship with God.

I want to leave you with a quote. I think it is excellent.

Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate.

 

[Viewer]

I’ve snipped the rest from the sake of conserving space, but I do find what you wrote to be interesting. I also don’t really believe it. I find it very easy to believe that individuals might not like the Church’s teaching, but unless we’re being incredibly dishonest, it’s impossible to ascribe the subjective motive of hate to them.

The truth is rarely pretty MacBP but that is the state of affairs I am greeted with every day.

If not hate, what would you say describing somone as “morally evil” or falsely labelling somone a pedophile on grounds you do not approve of their lifestyle?

You are preaching to the choir here MacBP, but even I can see why this outrages non-Catholics as well as the laity.

Love the sinner, hate the sin isn’t a platitude; its an attitude that fundamentally distinguishes Christianity from every other belief system (or lack thereof) in the world. This isn’t just about sex, it’s about every single sin in the world. Love the sinner, hate the sin is why we can love a pedophile, a rapist, a murderer, an adulter, or any other sin you can name. We’ve all sinned, we’ve all done things that are unlovable. If we don’t love the sinner and hate, then we don’t love anyone.

You’re preaching to the choir again here and you’re missing the point of my posts. The overwhelming majority of the laity do not accept homosexuality as a sin anymore. We are all sinners, but people do not regard loving someone of their own sex as one of them.

There are things they still regard as sins, pedophilia, abortion, theft, murder and so on but homosexuality is no longer in this frame. It is viewed as neither inherently holy or sinful, it is merely something that can be good or bad for individuals as can be a hetrosexual relationship.

I’ve also never heard anyone say that homosexuals don’t have the right to exist.

Great Catholic figures from history such as Queen Isabella of Castille would like to disagree, as would more recent ones like that minister from Uganda that visited Pope Francis.

It’s on a lower level too, and there are less of them within the laity here. Only because most of the laity is in favor of SSM.

I have to stop you right here. Living your life alone and gaining the kingdom of Heaven is a fair trade. What does Jesus say on the matter?

My students continually remind me he never said a word on homosexuality in the Bible. You don’t need to convince me here, it’s not me supporting it.

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, even their own life–such a person cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

This really deserves a thread all of it’s own. “Hate speech” of any description is not tolerated full stop. You will be prosecuted for it as people are free to live there lives here “in any way the see fit that brings no harm to others”. Let’s not drag this one out here.

Bad news… the Church describes all of us (wherever you fall on the sexual orientation scale) as disordered. That’s the effects of original sin. The Church most certainly does not call homosexuals to be evil but does describe an active homosexual lifestyle as sinful. It also describes my cowardice as disordered and if I act upon it it becomes sinful.

That’s funny, I don’t recall being called a pederast or evil by the Pope the last time I missed mass

There is a way to teach about sin and provide moral guidance, and abuse is not it.

I’ve met with people in Courage, and they never mentioned conversion therapy. They were a support group for men, living with SSA, who were striving to live chastely within the Church. No crackpot “therapy” needed or wanted.

It is not how it is perceived by the public though, and again this is what is crucially important and people forget about, popular support. It may not guide our teachings, but if we are to have any hope of seeing them carried out we need to have it.

At the moment in the UK? We have none from the public and minimal support for church policy within the faith on this matter. All the Public see is a group of men who were “born a certain way” being encouraged to deny who they are, not form a family as so many have the pleasure of doing and live under the belief they were born defective.

Truth or lies is irrelevant here, perception is key and Courage is lumped in with the conversion therapy groups. I really wouldn’t advertise and promote it so heavily it while this image persists.

 

[Viewer]

Young people respond to challenges. If we tell them that they can be saints – that there are gay Catholics who have done the work of saints (Nouwen, Hopkins) – if we inspire them with a vision of friendship and intimacy that is not sexual, if we do these things, I see no reason why they wouldn’t respond. Gay kids are abandoning the Church because the Church abandoned them first.

(I say that as a person with SSA. If I were not also attracted to women, I think it is very unlikely I would be a Catholic right now.)

You see the problem then As a Bisexual (If I may use that term) you can continue to live a relatively normal life within society entirely within church teaching. Gays (that is those with only homosexual desires) cannot do this, whatever their choice they will stick out in society and their church.

There are a group of openly gay but celibate bloggers at a website called Spiritual Friendship, who are trying to explore a way of life for celibate gay people which involves deep and meaningful friendships. I highly recommend the site.

spiritualfriendship.org

Thank you Prodigal_Son I’ll keep this link and suggest it to the boy in question if he comes to me again to talk about it.

It’s actually a shame with him really, he looked like the first student I had who might have been suitable for Holy Orders and was previously considering it. :imsorry:

 

[Tigg]

The Church doesn’t need to accept gay marriage, but it does need to stop ranting about it. When the average gay moans about his plight nobody cares, when Christ’s Vicar comes out and proclaims them to be pederasts and demonic it makes the headlines and makes readers think ill of the church………….

I suggest pacifism. We do not fight this losing battle anymore by voicing our displeasure, but neither do we support it……………

It is the least concession that comes to mind. It will not win the Catholic Church much favour, but it will dispell much of the growing hostility towards official teaching if it goes quiet on the matter. Treat the subject as “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” unless directly questioned in private……………

We have lost the battle, and all further attacks on this matter so far have only blackened our name further. There is nothing to win here, pitch our cannons on another battlefield…………

If not the spiritual battlefield which one do you propose? And what subtle suggestions you have for the Church to no longer be the bulwark on the hill or the light in the darkness. You are not proposing the survival of the Catholic faith but rather that she disregard her mission which is to establish the Kingdom of God on earth and bring about the means of salvation. A battlefield kills and there is no neutral ground in the war. Either you defend the Church without exemption, compromise or reservation or you are serving on the wrong side which ultimately will lose. Being silent about evil is not an option but prayerfully arming oneself with truth and love is.

I have observed the Vatican’s plan of action put into effect over the past few years and I have come to knowledge what a spectacular failure it has been.

You have absolutely no knowledge of the hidden conversions of the heart so how can you make a statement like this? You would discount the power of the Church and the merits of the saints who have gone before us as well as God’s amazing grace which is the means of redemption and whose language of blessing alone can bring the sinner into light.

 

[Viewer]

If not the spiritual battlefield which one do you propose?

A fight against other issues such as abortion where we actually have a chance of influencing events.

And what subtle suggestions you have for the Church to no longer be the bulwark on the hill or the light in the darkness. You are not proposing the survival of the Catholic faith but rather that she disregard her mission which is to establish the Kingdom of God on earth and bring about the means of salvation. A battlefield kills and there is no neutral ground in the war. Either you defend the Church without exemption, compromise or reservation or you are serving on the wrong side which ultimately will lose. Being silent about evil is not an option but prayerfully arming oneself with truth and love is.

This is why we can’t have nice things :banghead:

I merely share a few observations and an opinion and you automatically call my faith into question.

The only reason I continue to teach the party line regardless to any of my own beliefs is because of my faith and love of the church. I see the Church digging a deeper hole for itself and if we carry on it won’t be able to climb back out. We are already viewed as a hate organization by many, we need to work to change this.

When an army comes upon a castle it cannot take by force does it continue to throw and lose men by charging at the walls? No, of course not. They would walk around it and pitch another battle in their campaign elsewhere.

You have absolutely no knowledge of the hidden conversions of the heart so how can you make a statement like this? You would discount the power of the Church and the merits of the saints who have gone before us as well as God’s amazing grace which is the means of redemption and whose language of blessing alone can bring the sinner into light.

In the past five years I have watched church attendance in my parish fall to one quarter of what it once was. Purely, on, this issue. Most of those who left now attend a more liberal Methodist church a few streets away and I want to see this stop.

I do not doubt any hidden conversions sir/ma’am but I have been forced to question the Church’s ability to handle this issue. It is not Christ who is falsely declaring people to be pederasts on the world news after all.

Here’s a quote from a 15 year old in one of my classes today: “If the Pope tells us my sister [a lesbian] is a child abuser, why won’t the church acknowledge it within itself?”.

She then proceeded on a five minute lecture about the events in Newfoundland. Seriously people, this is a serious issue.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I don’t know what to suggest, but I do know this. With Same Sex Marriage becoming law (Under a CONSERVATIVE led government no less! ) in only a few months time, and with the prospect of a case forcing the Church of England to marry homosexual couples likely to win…

uch:

I think that could help cost them the Prime Minister spot, although Cameron does a great job answering Prime Minister’s questions…

It’s kind of the same to some extent in America where some republicans have latched on to so-called “gay marriage”. Of course, since large sections of groups like African-Americans, Orthodox Jews, Muslims and heartland farmers and union workers don’t vote their social values more than say half the time for their own 30 pieces of silver, they feel like they don’t have much choice, especially since young republicans/independents have been all the difference in it passing some states.

The Catholic Church is going to have a huge task on it’s hands no matter what path it takes next. Acceptance may not be an option for it, but outright denial isn’t either anymore.

I don’t envy the clergy’s position one bit, put it that way.

A more active approach would be just get together with some Muslims and protest and see what they’ll do then.

The secularists in the UK and in Northern/Western Europe come to screeching halt when it comes to Islam with rare exception.

 

[JimG]

As a student at a Catholic high school, I cannot say I am surprised by this situation. I truly believe it is the result of poor catechesis. Gay “marriage,” in my opinion, has become a “bandwagon” issue. If one is against it, the culture it quick to label the person as a bigoted, hateful, anti-equality, etc. person. Therefore, most people, especially teenagers, are backing the issue.

It is kind of ironic that the gay “marriage” supporters use slogans like “Love always wins.” I’d like to argue, yes, love always wins. However, it’s Christ’s love for his Church and people that will win at the end of time. I love all my LGBT brothers and sisters, and want to see them in heaven if I get there, and therefore I cannot support something that might damage their relationship with God.

I want to leave you with a quote. I think it is excellent.

Yes, it certainly is a bandwagon issue. How can anyone be against love? The intended result is to instill fear into anyone who might wish to speak moral truth, and force them into silence.

 

[Brendan]

What is the US’s legal status for the former school VP’s employment? We have a homosexual head-of-department within our Catholic school who entered into a civil union and his position is unchallengeable, being protected by anti-discrimination laws. Does the state have anything governing this scenario?

Most, if not all, Catholic schools have a morality clause in the contract. The contract becomes terminated when the clause is violated.

Those clauses require that the singers not engage in public acts contrary to Catholic teaching.

So by engaging in a public act of entering into a marital contract with another man, that act triggered a personal termination of the contract.