San Francisco Catholic schools to host pro-condom play

  • Thread starter Thread starter thereseozi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thereseozi

Guest
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=4310

October 13, 2009

Four Catholic secondary schools in San Francisco are planning to stage a play that offers a sympathetic view of homosexuality and encourages the use of condoms, the California Catholic Daily reports. Entitled Secrets, the play is by Patricia Loughrey, an openly lesbian author.

 
I want to vomit.

Great comment by David Horowitz in the Comments Section of CalCatholic Daily: “Liberals are liberal about sex and drugs, and fascist about everything else.” (i.e.,Forcing agendas.) So true.
 
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=4310

October 13, 2009

Four Catholic secondary schools in San Francisco are planning to stage a play that offers a sympathetic view of homosexuality and encourages the use of condoms, the California Catholic Daily reports. Entitled Secrets, the play is by Patricia Loughrey, an openly lesbian author.

Where is the bishop? Why are these schools being funded? I’m beginning to think that the gates of Hell do not have to prevail against the church. They don’t have to. We’re doing their work for them.
 
Where is the bishop? Why are these schools being funded? I’m beginning to think that the gates of Hell do not have to prevail against the church. They don’t have to. We’re doing their work for them.
That’s not the bishop’s job. It’s the job of the Sperintendant of Catholic Schools. Many Catholic Schools are private, parrochial or charter. There are few private schools that are diocesan over which the bishop has authority. Those that are not diocesan must come under the Superintendant for matters of accreditation, but do not get funding from the Church. They get their funding from the parish if they’r’e parrochial, religious order if they are private, or from the state if they are charter.

For me the issue is that any school that calls itself Catholic, regardles of its affiation with the Church has no right to do something to inappropriate.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Sacred Heart Cathedral Prep
www.shcp.edu
1055 Ellis St
San Francisco, CA 94109-7795
(415) 775-6626

Sacred Heart School Contacts
Receptionist: 650.473.4085
Director’s Office: 650.473.4001
shschools.org

Mercy High School


2750 Adeline Dr
Burlingame, CA 94010-5597
(650) 343-3631

St. Ignatius College Preparatory
www.siprep.org
2001 37th Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94116
(415) 731-7500
 
That’s not the bishop’s job. It’s the job of the Sperintendant of Catholic Schools. Many Catholic Schools are private, parrochial or charter. There are few private schools that are diocesan over which the bishop has authority. Those that are not diocesan must come under the Superintendant for matters of accreditation, but do not get funding from the Church. They get their funding from the parish if they’r’e parrochial, religious order if they are private, or from the state if they are charter.

For me the issue is that any school that calls itself Catholic, regardles of its affiation with the Church has no right to do something to inappropriate.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Even if the bishop has no authority over the schools, which I doubt, why is he being silent. I bet diocesan money is going to those schools. Why is he letting them call themselves catholic? Why isn’t he telling parents they are wasting their money and they should pull their kids out? I’m sure there are a lot of things he could do but he’s doing nothing. The Church is at war with the forces of evil and he is handing our kids over to the enemy.
 
Even if the bishop has no authority over the schools, which I doubt, why is he being silent. I bet diocesan money is going to those schools. Why is he letting them call themselves catholic? Why isn’t he telling parents they are wasting their money and they should pull their kids out? I’m sure there are a lot of things he could do but he’s doing nothing. The Church is at war with the forces of evil and he is handing our kids over to the enemy.
We have to slow down. We have to give the school system time to deal with this. We have no idea what they are doing. I went through the list that was posted above, only one of those schools belongs to the diocese. That means that only one gets a subsidy from the diocese. Every school must be subsidised by its owner. If the diocese does not own it, it does not subsidize it.

That being said, the diocese does have the authority to rescind the name Catholic from any institution. But they do not do that unless they have run up a dead end. They usually try to engage the leadership of the institution to see how to repair the damage before they take such a measure. That’s done through the Office of Catholic Schools, not the bishop’s office. The Office of Catholic Schools relates what is happening to the bishop. Bishops rarely get directly involved until all the resources beneat them have been exhausted.

I do agree 100% that the schools are wrong. They should never have allowed such a program. I hope that the Office of Catholic Schools does correct them. Regardless of who owns the schools, they are using the name Catholic. If they use that name, they should represent Catholicism.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
That’s not the bishop’s job. It’s the job of the Sperintendant of Catholic Schools. Many Catholic Schools are private, parrochial or charter. There are few private schools that are diocesan over which the bishop has authority. Those that are not diocesan must come under the Superintendant for matters of accreditation, but do not get funding from the Church. They get their funding from the parish if they’r’e parrochial, religious order if they are private, or from the state if they are charter.

For me the issue is that any school that calls itself Catholic, regardles of its affiation with the Church has no right to do something to inappropriate.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
In our diocese, the Superintendant of Catholic schools reports directly to the Cardinal Archbishop. All of the recognized schools in the diocese are under varying levels of control by the Superintendant. That would make the Cardinal Archbishop ultimately responsible for those schools regardless of who owns or funds them. The only schools that fall outside this system are those private schools who are allowed to say they teach in the “Catholic tradition” but not that they are “Catholic schools”. Is this different in other dioceses?

And in Texas, at any rate, charter schools can’t be Catholic since the charter is from the state.
 
We have to slow down. We have to give the school system time to deal with this. We have no idea what they are doing. I went through the list that was posted above, only one of those schools belongs to the diocese. That means that only one gets a subsidy from the diocese. Every school must be subsidised by its owner. If the diocese does not own it, it does not subsidize it.
Letting the school system deal with it is absurd. They are the people who created the problem. Even if they did not specifically permit these atrocities, they hired the ones that did. Clearly they are not up to the task.

Waiting is not an option. If someone was drowning ten feet away from you, do you stand there and do nothing until the lifeguard notices or do you take some action of your own?

You said only one of the schools belongs to the diocese. I assume the others belong to another diocese meaning that we have two bishops sitting on their hands doing nothing while our kids are being sacrificed to Molech.
That being said, the diocese does have the authority to rescind the name Catholic from any institution. But they do not do that unless they have run up a dead end. They usually try to engage the leadership of the institution to see how to repair the damage before they take such a measure. That’s done through the Office of Catholic Schools, not the bishop’s office. The Office of Catholic Schools relates what is happening to the bishop. Bishops rarely get directly involved until all the resources beneat them have been exhausted.
Again, there is no time to go slowly. They’ll go so slow that the plays will go on. I refer you to the Notre Dame University scandal. Lot’s of talking but no action from the bishops and no consequences to Notre Dame.
 
What many people outside the state may not understand is that San Francisco is a very homosexual friendly city with a very radical lefty mayor. As long as the rest of the country does not stand up to the evil of such a population their agenda will spread like a cancer.

youtube.com/watch?v=4kKn5LNhNto

newsweek.com/id/180047
Trust me. I think most people here are fully aware of that. Unfortunately the people who run these schools seem to agree with them. The city’s political atmosphere is not an excuse.
 
In our diocese, the Superintendant of Catholic schools reports directly to the Cardinal Archbishop. All of the recognized schools in the diocese are under varying levels of control by the Superintendant. That would make the Cardinal Archbishop ultimately responsible for those schools regardless of who owns or funds them. The only schools that fall outside this system are those private schools who are allowed to say they teach in the “Catholic tradition” but not that they are “Catholic schools”. Is this different in other dioceses?
Yes, it is diffeferent in most diocese. Schools owned and operated by religious are not property of the diocese. They are property of the religious. They are accredited through the diocese and the some other secular organization. But not a property of the diocese.

In some states, Catholic schools can be charter schools as long as the school pays for all religious educatio. Then in parishes, the parish schools are owned by the parishes. In many dioceses the parishes are no longer owned by the diocese. Each parish is an independent corporation. The parish runs its school, pays its salaries, insurance, and so foth. This reduces the cost to the diocese of running parishes. It also helps parishes that are poorer, because they get to keep more income, rather than pay a diocesan tax every month, quarter or however it may be done in specific dioceses.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Letting the school system deal with it is absurd. They are the people who created the problem. Even if they did not specifically permit these atrocities, they hired the ones that did. Clearly they are not up to the task.
The Office of Catholic Schools does not hire principals and other administrators. These are hired either by the parish, the religious order who runs the school, or the Board of Directors of the school is a diocesan school. It is not the job of the Office of Catholic Schools to hire administrators or teachers. So they are not to be blamed.

The Office of Catholic Schools deals in matters of accreditation, school and state affairs, implementation of IDEA, implementation of JLA, curriculum, and other academic matters. The bishop deals in futures planning of diocesan and parrochial schools, strategic planning and development. He does not deal in content. That’s the Office of Catholic Schools and the Principals.

This is the system of subsidiarity that has been setup by the Vatican since the 1800s.
Waiting is not an option. If someone was drowning ten feet away from you, do you stand there and do nothing until the lifeguard notices or do you take some action of your own?
I understand your concern. But you must understand the way that the Church structures work. We can’t change them. The principal of subsidiarity was claerly repeated in the rivision of Canon Law and by Benedict XVI in his recent encyclical.
You said only one of the schools belongs to the diocese. I assume the others belong to another diocese meaning that we have two bishops sitting on their hands doing nothing while our kids are being sacrificed to Molech.
As I said, many Catholic schools do not belong to the local diocese. The bishop is responsible for the care of those souls, as he is responsible for the care of your soul, but he does now own your home. He is responsible for the care of the soul of children in public schools too, but he does not own those schools. The individual student belongs to the diocese, but not the school. Therefore, the bishop has the right to take away the title Catholic from the school, because he is trying to protect his student. But he cannot touch the school, if he does not own it. He has no jurisdiction. Remember, this relationship is going to be different in each diocese. It’s going to depend on how the contracts were drawn up when the schools were chartered. For example, my community ran (past) a school that we built, but did not belong to us. The idea was to give it to the local people when the friars left. That was the way it was chartered. We were its caretakers and administrators. We promised to do so until the school became a middle class school, then we would move on. We only run organizations for the very poor.
Again, there is no time to go slowly. They’ll go so slow that the plays will go on. I refer you to the Notre Dame University scandal. Lot’s of talking but no action from the bishops and no consequences to Notre Dame.
They have no jurisdiction over ND. ND belongs to a private organization. The Brothers of the Holy Cross have no ownership. They run the university, not own it. We don’t know what the bishops, the board and the Pronvincial Superior of the Brothers have spoken about.

We have no choice but to wait and see. The bishops can’t force themselves on the university’s board. This is a slow process.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Re Post #8:

It was very, very recently (this calendar year) that one of the schools on the list performed a different pro-gay play, about how good it was to Come Out, etc.and the whole teen sexual identity thing. (One wonders how much time one should be spent on such a concept as a school subject, “project,” or performance.) One of the parents in that school called Catholic Answers Radio when Patrick Madrid was hosting. She was very upset & appalled & felt that this had been o.k.'ed behind the backs of parents, as I recall. Also, I think I recall that attendance at the play was going to be mandatory, with no family opt-out rights.

You could just hear the anger behind a gritted set of Madrid’s teeth as he tried to compose himself and offered to the caller the course of action he would take as a parent (which would include both a letter and in-person meeting with someone in authority). He may have also discussed going to hierarchy in the archdiocese as well.

So clearly, the same school offering twice in a row (2nd semester of last year, 1st semester of this year) a public performance about the Joys of (all kinds of) Sex, to teens in a Catholic school, speaks to having a political agenda, to say the least.
 
Re Post #8:

It was very, very recently (this calendar year) that one of the schools on the list performed a different pro-gay play, about how good it was to Come Out, etc.and the whole teen sexual identity thing. (One wonders how much time one should be spent on such a concept as a school subject, “project,” or performance.) One of the parents in that school called Catholic Answers Radio when Patrick Madrid was hosting. She was very upset & appalled & felt that this had been o.k.'ed behind the backs of parents, as I recall. Also, I think I recall that attendance at the play was going to be mandatory, with no family opt-out rights.

You could just hear the anger behind a gritted set of Madrid’s teeth as he tried to compose himself and offered to the caller the course of action he would take as a parent (which would include both a letter and in-person meeting with someone in authority). He may have also discussed going to hierarchy in the archdiocese as well.

So clearly, the same school offering twice in a row (2nd semester of last year, 1st semester of this year) a public performance about the Joys of (all kinds of) Sex, to teens in a Catholic school, speaks to having a political agenda, to say the least.
Not having seen the play, I can’t say if they presented it within a Catholic mindset, such as one would find in the Cuorage Ministry by Father John Harvey, which is approved by the Vatican. If they went over those boundaries, then they are out of order and they need to stop.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Post 16:

That was definitely not the mindset. Nothing close to that. In fact it was quite the opposite in its message.
 
Question: Does anyone know where the idea to do this play on these campuses came from, and who gave the okay to run with such a project? I would find the root of the problem first, and then take the appropriate course of action.

I know that the LGBT community of late has been very strong in trying to sway Catholics to see things their way. If I were trying to educate a community about something I felt strongly about, the first place I would go would be to the schools and youth centers. I think that’s what may be happening here. They were looking for an in to the Catholic community, and figured that they needed to start with the kids. Get the kids educated, and they will educate the parents, and sooner or later the view of the whole world is changed.

Someone needs to find out where and by whom the project was given the go-ahead. Find the root, and nip the problem in the bud.
 
Good response, MoonChild!

I will tell you that in CA, this same marketing strategy is being promoted with regard to Prop 8. I mean, yes, youth are more open to variant viewpoints to begin with, but the gay community has made a deliberate effort to target them regarding SS “marriage,” declaring it to be “a right,” etc., and under-educated youth (about what is and is not a constitutional right) have been buying into the propaganda.

For all I know, these two recent plays (spring/fall) could be very much part of the Prop 8 effort. Usually I’m not a “conspiracy theorist,” but it strikes as not too wild a possibility.

Yes, I think discovering the source would be helpful, but whatever the source, the plays are utterly inappropriate on these campues. Oversight, despite the source, is still the issue, i.m.o.
🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top