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

[Prodigal_Son]

No, the Church does not single out homosexuality. Homosexuality as a topic is in the public discourse today because of the movement toward legalising homosexual marriage, and the Church has had to respond.

Look at what the Catechism refers to as disordered. The difference is we don’t have things like Masturbating Pride parades.

Well, first thing: the Church needs better PR, to point these things out. As it is, we let the liberal media skew these things.

Secondly, if you’re right, can’t the Church come out and clarify that there are other objectively disordered dispositions?

 

[GraceSofia]

Unless we back off our attacks in this battle that as far as the law is concerned we have already lost this will come and bite us in the *** very soon.

Catholics are not going out and “attacking” anyone. It’s the opposite: we are defending Catholic faith and morals in this current phase of the centuries long “culture wars.” But when people bring the fight to us, we can not give up. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing, etc.

It…actually has dropped, or at least the suicide rate has apparently by 20%. Couldn’t comment on the others.

Since when? Do you have a reference link, please? I can’t imagine that there are dependable studies since older records did not include whether the person identified as homosexual.

I intend to watch with interest, and by the course of action the Church continues to take likely with great sadness in the future too. I believe the church itself agrees that when fighting a war it is best to turn the other cheek if you have no hope of victory. On this topic we do not.

The Church can’t win? Well, she might lose this skirmish, the skirmish of teaching the faith in schools in the UK in 2015 or 2025. Maybe Catholic schools will even be closed. They’ve been closed before. Hitler closed them. The English closed them during the penal times. Maybe the Church will meet again in the catacombs, but She will never stop teaching the Faith that Jesus handed to the Apostles, and she will live to fight another day. That is why the Church on earth is called the Church Militant, because the fight is never ending until the Second Coming.

But don’t be so sure that this particular battle is lost in our time. Laws can be repealed. There may even begin to be a backlash because acceptance of homosexual marriage and laudation of homosexual acts depends on society accepting a lie. This is very hard to maintain for very long or without coercion and force of law. The French are not taking homosexual marriage lying down, and the Croatians, Hungarians, Russians and others are fighting against it.

The Church will not give up, as you suggest, because it is the easier way. All St. Thomas More had to do was take the Oath of Supremacy recognizing Henry VII as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, and he would not have been executed. However, the main reason the Church cannot give up is because She exists for only one reason: to draw souls to Christ and to heaven.

I will second Ender on this one. If this is the quote your students are up in arms against, Viewer, then I think they’re listening to the press’s spin on the quote, not to the words of the Pope himself.

Earlier someone posted that they saw this as a teaching moment. Yes! If I were Viewer, I would teach my students not to trust the MSM for Church news but learn to analyse news stories, go to the sources, read Vatican documents, read papal teachings, and especially to read what the pope said exactly— not what somebody interprets or twists it to mean. Every time there is some media flap over what the pope says, there are threads on it here in the forum, where people post sources and references to help clarify.

 

[tm30]

The Church can’t win? Well, she might lose this skirmish, the skirmish of teaching the faith in schools in the UK in 2015 or 2025. Maybe Catholic schools will even be closed. They’ve been closed before. Hitler closed them. The English closed them during the penal times. Maybe the Church will meet again in the catacombs, but She will never stop teaching the Faith that Jesus handed to the Apostles, and she will live to fight another day. That is why the Church on earth is called the Church Militant, because the fight is never ending until the Second Coming.

But don’t be so sure that this particular battle is lost in our time. Laws can be repealed. There may even begin to be a backlash because acceptance of homosexual marriage and laudation of homosexual acts depends on society accepting a lie. This is very hard to maintain for very long or without coercion and force of law. The French are not taking homosexual marriage lying down, and the Croatians, Hungarians, Russians and others are fighting against it.

The Church will not give up, as you suggest, because it is the easier way. All St. Thomas More had to do was take the Oath of Supremacy recognizing Henry VII as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, and he would not have been executed. However, the main reason the Church cannot give up is because She exists for only one reason: to draw souls to Christ and to heaven.

This.

 

[tm30]

If they wanted to avoid this drama, they school should have included in the policies that clearly stated how employees should act in their personal lives if they wanted to work at that school.

What if this employee spent his free time marching with the Ku Klux Klan? Would you feel differently?

 

[tm30]

A valid point.

I wonder, though. How much was upholding Catholic doctrine stressed to the staff? Was it just some fine print on the contract that the vice principal signed that was not mentioned by anyone? My point is that I don’t think even the administrations of many of these Catholic schools make it a point to highlight this expectation. Guys, this is the archdiocese of Seattle.

Ishii

Seriously. The guy is teaching at a Catholic High School, and he entered into a homosexual marriage. Do you really think he believed that was kosher? If so, he deserved to be terminated on the basis of being a dangerously incompetent educator.

Not to mention, why was he hiding it, if he wasn’t aware it would be a major problem?

 

[stewstew03]

A valid point.

Not really.

…
My point is that I don’t think even the administrations of many of these Catholic schools make it a point to highlight this expectation. Guys, this is the archdiocese of Seattle.

This would be a valid point, except there was a clear enough expectation on this point (SSM) to ask the VP to resign.

 

[ishii]

Seriously. The guy is teaching at a Catholic High School, and he entered into a homosexual marriage. Do you really think he believed that was kosher? If so, he deserved to be terminated on the basis of being a dangerously incompetent educator.

Not to mention, why was he hiding it, if he wasn’t aware it would be a major problem?

Of course he deserved to be fired. But my larger point is about the catholicity (lack of) at Catholic schools in the archdiocese of Seattle. Some are Catholic in name only. That is the larger issue here.

Ishii

 

[tm30]

Of course he deserved to be fired. But my larger point is about the catholicity (lack of) at Catholic schools in the archdiocese of Seattle. Some are Catholic in name only. That is the larger issue here.

Ishii

I agree, Catholicity is a moving target these days. (See: DePaul University, Queer Studies Program).

Regardless, he wouldn’t have hid the marriage if he was unaware of the policy.

 

[Brendan]

I’ve never quite understood this. Is the object supposed to be an action – anal sex, oral sex, masturbation? In that case, there is nothing special about homosexuality. All inclinations toward these things – and they are extremely common among heterosexuals – are objectively disordered. Teach that accurately, and teens will have less righteous indignation.

As Grace noted, the inclination of Lust is a disorder

The desire to rape is objectively disordered.

One thing to keep in mind is that desire and inclination are two distinct things. A desire is an emotional appetite towards a particular act. An inclination is a propesitity towards.

Cocaine addiction? Meth addiction? Porn addiction? Serial adultery? These all seem like objective moral disorders. There is no morally appropriate way to pursue any of these things.

Are you referring to the object of consuming cocaine, or an addiction?

And explain to me why we should believe St. Thomas instead of science. I’m not disagreeing that we should, but – in the spirit of Aquinas – I think we ought to inquire about reasons why we should.

Science is natural philosophy. It is a tool to describe the natural world It says nothing about ethics. For example, science would be the tool to use if you wanted to describe the effect of a light beam of a particular wavelength on the retina of the eye. It would be the wrong tool to describe the effect of a Benediction upon the soul.

And even among scientists, the terms vary. A biologist uses the term “Order” to describe something completely different that what a physician uses the term for.

A ‘disorder’ to a biologist is an animal that has been misclassified, perhaps being classified as Order Paucituberculata when it is really Order Didelphimorphia. All of that is distinct from the animal having a medical ‘disorder’ or a moral ‘disorder’. When the biologist uses the term, should he\she have restricted themselves to the medical usage of the term?

And likewise, when Aquinas speaks of a term such as 'Substance", he uses it in difference sense than a chemist would. But it does not follow that we should restrict ourselves to use the scientific term when describing Transubstantiation. The scientific term deals with natural philosophy alone, while the Thomistic term is used by Metaphysical philosophy. Thus the Church uses the terms appropriate to the field of philoshopy being discussed. So when it speaks of ‘order’ and ‘disorder’ is uses the term as appropriate to Ethical philosophy.

 

[zab]

Of course he deserved to be fired. But my larger point is about the catholicity (lack of) at Catholic schools in the archdiocese of Seattle. Some are Catholic in name only. That is the larger issue here.

Ishii

I have have some questions along this line to. I had heard that Mark Zamuda last taught at Cardinal Gibbons High School in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, but was interested in coming to Seattle to teach because Washington State passed the gay marriage law. I haven’t yet found a source for the reason he came to Seattle, but his bio for Seattle Catholic Schools was added in August 13, 2012

I was glad to see this from King5 News: " Letters sent to Eastside Catholic High School parents and faculty indicate if there are any campus protests over former Vice Principal Mark Zmuda when school resumes Monday, those students will be sent home." king5.com/news/local/Eastside-Catholic-resumes-school-protesting-students-will-be-disciplined-238813151.html
However, Principal, Sister Mary Tracy’s remarks continue to puzzle me. *"“It’s a firm decision,” Tracy said. “If the teachings of the church change, I’d hire him back in a minute. He’s a wonderful educator.” *Maybe I’m being too critical, but it sounds like a stupid comment for a faithful Catholic principal to make. Why even give a hint of suggestion that the teachings of the Church might change?

Then there is this comment from -"Thomas Reese, a Jesuit priest, author and former editor of America, a weekly Catholic magazine, said Catholic institutions tend to ignore an employee’s sexual orientation and activities as long as those activities are not widely known.
But entering into a same-sex marriage, he said, crosses the line.
“Catholic institutions have been following ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ long before the U.S. miliary was,” he said.
In the 1950s and 1960s, he said, it wasn’t unheard-of for people employed by the church to be fired if they divorced and then remarried.
“We are seeing greater acceptance (of gay marriage) in American society — among young people and among a majority of Catholics,” Reese said.
“The church isn’t going to be celebrating gay marriage, but eventually people aren’t going to be fired for this kind of thing.” seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022494004_gayprincipalprotestxml.html

 

[Lormar]

“We are seeing greater acceptance (of gay marriage) in American society — among young people and among a majority of Catholics,” Reese said.

 

[Viewer]

Is he supposed to lie?

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=19267

Not quite as high as the support in the UK (Which I believe is around 85-90%) but still a majority. Not to mention it’s already like that in certain parts of the world.

 

[Viewer]

Maybe I’m being too critical, but it sounds like a stupid comment for a faithful Catholic principal to make. Why even give a hint of suggestion that the teachings of the Church might change?

She wouldn’t be the first, my boss (Principal) is all for gay marriage, and isn’t shy of voicing that opinion or hiring homosexuals.

Are you starting to get what I mean when I said the laity is against the magisterium on this? We don’t have to like it but reality is staring us dead in the face here and denying it isn’t helping anyone. .

 

[zab]

She wouldn’t be the first, my boss (Principal) is all for gay marriage, and isn’t shy of voicing that opinion or hiring homosexuals.

Are you starting to get what I mean when I said the laity is against the magisterium on this? We don’t have to like it but reality is staring us dead in the face here and denying it isn’t helping anyone. .

I hear what you are saying. I have a son who lives in a neighborhood where there are many gay bars. And he has lots of friends and acquaintances who are gay, bisexual, etc. Our son knows what we believe and respects our beliefs but I think he is confused and has a false sense of compassion for others. True compassion is a sympathy or pity for those suffering but always wants, hopes and prays for the good of that person. It does not condone what is wrong. I never stop loving any of my now grown children half of whom have strayed from the Church in one way or another. My love for them does not depend on my condoning the wrong things that they do. I will always pray for their conversion and the salvation of their souls. And neither will the Church change her teaching on gay marriage because the numbers who support it may be increasing.

 

[Elizium23]

What is wrong with saying that a strong inclination ordered to an intrinsic natural evil is an objective disorder? It seems rather obvious. And as a result of original sin exacerbated by our own actual sins, most of us have strong inclinations to some intrinsic evils. Those are disorders. And only if we acknowledge that disordered inclinations ought to be resisted can we hope to overcome them.

These are terms of art, in moral theology, and they have specific meanings, they are not to be taken at face value by laypersons and their import has been twisted and blown out of proportion.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church was written for a specific target audience: for bishops. It is designed as a prototype for those who write new Catechisms. It was not actually designed to be put in the hands of the rank-and-file, and it was certainly not designed for young students to get their teachings without some layer of interpretation.

That is not to say that “intrinsic evil” and “objective disorder” are not strong words. They are, and as mature Catholics we recognize them and their scope, and we know what they are not. But in the hands of angry anti-Catholic protestors, they become something different. They become symbols of an oppressive hierarchy of old men in dresses. The Catholic Church is not without her scandals and cover-ups, and to outside observers, the Church does not seem to possess the moral high ground. This was all reinforced for decades as priests and bishops were reluctant to preach about the truths contained in documents such as Humanae Vitae or even Theology of the Body. That is why, when someone does apply actual Church teaching there is outrage.

And in the first page of posts, Viewer said that people like these students do understand the teaching, and they still hate it. Well, I contend that people who hate these teachings do not actually understand them like they could. I, too, rejected many Catholic teachings on sexuality, because I was content in my sinfulness to continue on my evil ways. But the more I examined the underpinnings of these teachings, not just the teachings themselves but the “why” behind them, I came to understand how logical and true they really are. Sexual complementarity, the concepts of unitive and procreative aspects of sex, the imperative to be fruitful and multiply, the human need for order, the God-given facts of our biological makeup. All of these things fit into place, and if you only study the teaching on its face from a few paragraphs in the Catechism, and you do not delve into Blessed John Paul the Great’s Theology of the Body, if you do not turn to Thomas Aquinas in his Summa, if you do not listen to what Augustine had to say after his sinful past, then you will reject those teachings too.

 

[manualman]

She wouldn’t be the first, my boss (Principal) is all for gay marriage, and isn’t shy of voicing that opinion or hiring homosexuals.

Are you starting to get what I mean when I said the laity is against the magisterium on this? We don’t have to like it but reality is staring us dead in the face here and denying it isn’t helping anyone. .

I imagine that was Arius’ best argument too. Didn’t work then either. Truth is impervious to popular opinion. The whole reason there is a magisterium in the first place is to guard against herd stampedes into falsehood. If people weren’t susceptible to that, Sola Scriptura would actually WORK. But as history illustrates so well, people aren’t very good at doctrinal interpretation and faithfulness. Divine intervention is necessary.

 

[John_of_Woking]

She wouldn’t be the first, my boss (Principal) is all for gay marriage, and isn’t shy of voicing that opinion or hiring homosexuals.

Are you starting to get what I mean when I said the laity is against the magisterium on this? We don’t have to like it but reality is staring us dead in the face here and denying it isn’t helping anyone. .

Your principal seems weak. Have you confronted her on her betrayal re: marriage. Of course sexual orientation shouldn’t be a factor so long as striving for chastity. Not all laity in the uk are against the Magisterium. Maybe in your area. Remember what Jesus said about millstones. Hint: they are heavy

 

[Viewer]

Your principal seems weak. Have you confronted her on her betrayal re: marriage. Of course sexual orientation shouldn’t be a factor so long as striving for chastity. Not all laity in the uk are against the Magisterium. Maybe in your area. Remember what Jesus said about millstones. Hint: they are heavy

Weak?! Oh only if No,No,No…She’s not that, nor is she ignorant. It’s her decision to forward the gay agenda, she’s not being pressured in the slightest. Considering she’s my boss and stubborn I’ve not confronted her on it, and neither has she tried to change what I say (official teaching) in lessons or assemblies.

I believe one person on the board did get a bit short with her when she hired the first (openly) gay member of staff but there’s been not so much as a blip since.

I imagine that was Arius’ best argument too. Didn’t work then either. Truth is impervious to popular opinion. The whole reason there is a magisterium in the first place is to guard against herd stampedes into falsehood. If people weren’t susceptible to that, Sola Scriptura would actually WORK. But as history illustrates so well, people aren’t very good at doctrinal interpretation and faithfulness. Divine intervention is necessary.

Yeah well Unless the virgin herself walks into my next class waving a “God hates fags” sign I really don’t expect too much change of opinion on the matter. Children are stubborn

 

[Viewer]

These are terms of art, in moral theology, and they have specific meanings, they are not to be taken at face value by laypersons and their import has been twisted and blown out of proportion.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church was written for a specific target audience: for bishops. It is designed as a prototype for those who write new Catechisms. It was not actually designed to be put in the hands of the rank-and-file, and it was certainly not designed for young students to get their teachings without some layer of interpretation.

Agreed, but considering the level of literature some of the higher-band kids are using to defend or illustrate.their positions on various controversial topics this isn’t really above their understanding.

We were discussing ursury at one point today today and one began quoting Dante. I don’t think I had even heard of the Divine Comedy at their age never mind read it

I will aknowledge it has improved the amount of interest they take in religion and the depth they study it (and the upshoot in grades), even if they only reject it :sad_yes:

That is not to say that “intrinsic evil” and “objective disorder” are not strong words. They are, and as mature Catholics we recognize them and their scope, and we know what they are not. But in the hands of angry anti-Catholic protestors, they become something different. They become symbols of an oppressive hierarchy of old men in dresses.

I think they’re fairly poor translations considering their use in medicine and psychology but oh well.

The Catholic Church is not without her scandals and cover-ups, and to outside observers, the Church does not seem to possess the moral high ground.

Were it not for what the church is it clearly would not when it’s history of governance and abuse of power by a series of individuals are put under secular scrutiny. It’s only the value we place upon it that grants it any authority, we have to bear this in mind when dealing with non-catholics and some of our more rebellious own.

To them it is a hierarchy of angry repressed cross-dressing virgins with a long and colorful history of sex scandals and abuse of absolute temporal power. Without faith they struggle to see anything else. I know I certainly would were it not for my beliefs.

And in the first page of posts, Viewer said that people like these students do understand the teaching, and they still hate it. Well, I contend that people who hate these teachings do not actually understand them like they could. I, too, rejected many Catholic teachings on sexuality, because I was content in my sinfulness to continue on my evil ways.

This is the curious thing though, they think they are fighting for a good cause, that we are the bad guys by not letting adam and steve get married. They aren’t willing to live with sinfullness (their views on abortion prove that) but they do not see sodomy as a sin.

But the more I examined the underpinnings of these teachings, not just the teachings themselves but the “why” behind them, I came to understand how logical and true they really are. Sexual complementarity, the concepts of unitive and procreative aspects of sex, the imperative to be fruitful and multiply, the human need for order, the God-given facts of our biological makeup. All of these things fit into place, and if you only study the teaching on its face from a few paragraphs in the Catechism, and you do not delve into Blessed John Paul the Great’s Theology of the Body, if you do not turn to Thomas Aquinas in his Summa, if you do not listen to what Augustine had to say after his sinful past, then you will reject those teachings too.

We can only hope, although considering a good number of their parents share similar views I’m uncertain if this will change in time. Doubtful would be more truthful.

 

[JimG]

She wouldn’t be the first, my boss (Principal) is all for gay marriage, and isn’t shy of voicing that opinion or hiring homosexuals.

Are you starting to get what I mean when I said the laity is against the magisterium on this? We don’t have to like it but reality is staring us dead in the face here and denying it isn’t helping anyone. .

You teach at a Catholic school and the school principal promotes gay marriage? This just seems like hypocrisy to me, rather like taking a job at a Muslim school and actively promoting Christianity.