Sexual Morality "Opt-out"

[CaptainPrudeman]

Then they should have no problem with their kids being tested to ensure they know about sexual morality.

Please stop this crusade against the clergy. It’s not helping your case.

 

[Pup7]

It’s not only that, it has nothing to do with what was being taught. Telling someone divorce is wrong is not the same thing.

I’d be furious if someone in confirmation class brought up the abuse scandals with my kid, because that has nothing to do with confirmation. The fact that marriage is between a man and a woman and that birth control is wrong has everything to do with confirmation.

This has been going on for two days now. It needs to stop. It’s out of hand, it’s tired, and the point has been made.

 

[AndrewAxland]

Then they should have no problem with their kids being tested to ensure they know about sexual morality.

If the Bishop wants to administer such a test and base his decision to offer the sacrament on that basis, it is certainly his right to do so. And the parent’s have no right to object if he does just that. They do have the right to refuse the testing, for whatever reason, and will have to answer to God for that.

 

[CilladeRoma]

If the Bishop wants to administer such a test and base his decision to offer the sacrament on that basis, it is certainly his right to do so.

This is exactly what is happening. The Bishop has expectations, he has told my priest that they can opt-out and test (a couple of different ways) or attend the session (with or without parents and or guardian and sponsor)
He then told my priest that we need to deal with it in-house. These are the expectations and if they are not met, Confirmation may be delayed. It will be decided case by case with (name removed by moderator)ut from all involved.
Why are you trying to paint me in such a bad light?

 

[Pup7]

This is exactly what is happening. The Bishop has expectations, he has told my priest that they can opt-out and test (a couple of different ways) or attend the session (with or without parents and or guardian and sponsor)

He then told my priest that we need to deal with it in-house. These are the expectations and if they are not met, Confirmation may be delayed. It will be decided case by case with (name removed by moderator)ut from all involved.

Why are you trying to paint me in such a bad light?

You have no reason to re-explain yourself. Unless this person knows you, they can’t paint you in a bad light. It’s not about you - it’s about something else, something none of us know about, and no amount of explaining is going to correct whatever wrong this person believes has been committed against them. But I feel fairly certain it wasn’t you that committed it, so I wouldn’t worry about it too much in that regard.

 

[AndrewAxland]

The Bishop has expectations, he has told my priest that they can opt-out and test (a couple of different ways) or attend the session (with or without parents and or guardian and sponsor)

He then told my priest that we need to deal with it in-house. These are the expectations and if they are not met, Confirmation may be delayed. It will be decided case by case with (name removed by moderator)ut from all involved.

That’s totally appropriate on the part of the Bishop. He’s well within his bounds. He obviously thought this through very carefully and knows where his responsibilities lie. I’m actually impressed.

It will be decided case by case with (name removed by moderator)ut from all involved.

You’re no longer involved. You would be foolish to assume any role in the testing, and you should keep any “(name removed by moderator)ut” to yourself. It’s the Pastor’s job to handle that, and he cannot delegate that responsibility further down the line, because as far as this matter is concerned, there is no further down the line. Like I said, this is a serious matter for the parties involved. and it is way beyond your pay-grade.

If the kids do not get confirmed, that is not your problem. God will never call you to account for that. The thing that I can’t understand is why you are so intent to make other people’s problem your own, rather than butting out and letting them handle it on their own.

I apologize for being harsh, but your apparent refusal to recognize that the parents have absolute authority here and your lack of empathy for the parents’ point of view really got to me. You don’t have to sympathize with their view. But you should be able to out yourself in their place and see things from their perspective, rather than judging them and treating them as enemies that you have to “battle”.

One last thing. If your Pastor should be foolish enough to ask you to be involved in the testing process, politely decline. You have no obligation in this matter. I doubt he will, though.

The game is fun when everyone stays on their side of the net.

Good luck!

 

[steve-b]

I am a Confirmation catechist. Our 2nd-year candidates (Confirmation prep is a 2-year program in my diocese) are at the end of their 9th-grade year. One of our last sessions is about Catholic sexual morality.

We have excellent resources and have worked closely with the diocese in developing this portion of the program.

The problem:
Out of 30 candidates, 10 parents want to “opt out” of the lesson that day because they feel it is “inappropriate” for us to be teaching sexual morality to their kids.

TBH, my head is still spinning. I am not sure how/why we would even entertain this request, but the Pastoral Administrator is. He has taken the complaints and our curriculum (which he had a hand in also) to the Bishop and Department of Catechesis for review and advice.

Has anyone else ever dealt with this? How did your parish/school handle it?

My kids and grand kids have been through such classes. Only because I’ve seen some real problems in parishes I’m familiar with, who haven’t vetted their teachers properly

I have to ask,

only because we all know, there are some programs in some parishes, ( I stress it’s only a few) who are squishy on the PC angles, as in squishy on the alphabet soup of sexuality issues people are in, and actually downplay or even give a pass to those in those sexual conditions which is MY concern. I think you know what I’m getting at.

That said, here’s my

Q’s

1. Is your program devoid of promoting PC squish and confusion on sexual issues or is it NOT devoid of that ?
2. or is it the parents who are squishy on these issues, and don’t want you to give solid Church teaching on morality and sexuality.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Q’s

Is your program devoid of promoting PC squish and confusion on sexual issues or is it NOT devoid of that ?
or is it the parents who are squishy on these issues, and don’t want you to give solid Church teaching on morality and sexuality.

She has said several times now that 1. The program is not squishy. 2. The parents are, in several cases, living in irregular ways and don’t want their kids to be taught the Church’s actual position.

 

[AndrewAxland]

the parents who are squishy on these issues, and don’t want you to give solid teaching on this subject.

Whether the parents are “squishy” or fully in support of Church doctrine does not diminish their right to attend to the education of their child on their own terms, and their decision whether to delegate this responsibility or not to anyone else is their call, which they are obligated to explain only to God himself on Judgement Day.

and actually downplay or even give a pass to those in those sexual conditions which is MY concern.

No, it’s not your concern. Or mine. Or anyone else’s but theirs. Can’t imagine why you would think it is.

 

[Pup7]

No, it’s not your concern. Or mine. Or anyone else’s but theirs. Can’t imagine why you would think it is.

Then why on earth do you keep hammering in a point and have been for the last two days? I have to ask.

It IS his concern as it’s been posted in a public forum. You have assuredly made this woman’s situation yours.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Q’s

Is your program devoid of promoting PC squish and confusion on sexual issues or is it NOT devoid of that ?
or is it the parents who are squishy on these issues, and don’t want you to give solid Church teaching on morality and sexuality.

She has said several times now that 1. The program is not squishy. 2. The parents are in several cases living in irregular ways and don’t want their kids to be taught the Church’s actual position.

Thanks

I didn’t have the time to read every post, therefore the questions

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

the parents who are squishy on these issues, and don’t want you to give solid teaching on this subject.

Whether the parents are “squishy” or fully in support of Church doctrine does not diminish their right to attend to the education of their child on their own terms, and their decision whether to delegate this responsibility or not to anyone else is their call, which they are obligated to explain only to God himself on Judgement Day.

I agree.

and actually downplay or even give a pass to those in those sexual conditions which is MY concern.

AndrewAxland:

No, it’s not your concern. Or mine. Or anyone else’s but theirs. Can’t imagine why you would think it is.

The OP asked the following question
“Has anyone else ever dealt with this? How did your parish/school handle it?”

That leaves the question rather wide open… don’t you think?

 

[AndrewAxland]

That leaves the question rather wide open… don’t you think?

Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by “concern”.

 

[goout]

…

Is it possible to be correct but anti-ecclesial? Yes it is.
No one can disagree with the rules you put forth. But that overall point of view is what I would call individualist.
The Church is a community composed of individuals who form a community. You get the idea. It’s not individualist. Ideally everyone is concerned with the whole of everyone else. In an imperfect world it doesn’t always work out that way. It’s messy but in the Church “the good of one is the good of all”:

We want these children to embrace the faith, not simply be subjects of their parents rights (which they are…) It’s the concern of a catechist to aid or initiate that process. Not because they assert authority but because they desire to serve and educate. And we can give this the weight of a vocation for many catechists. It’s a call from God to do this.
And parents are not doing their job. You can point fingers at everyone, but the bottom line is people are falling away from the faith.

 

[1ke]

Why would any faithfull Catholic find the Church’s teaching “controversial”?

Perhaps because they disagree with the Church and want to lead their children into the same error?

If so, I don’t think the Church needs to avoid teaching the truth, just because some disagree or would be offended by the truth. Of course, it should be presented in a loving, compassionate way.

You are way off base here. These are deeply personal areas. A parent who does not want their child discussing these things in a classroom setting does not necessarily have an agenda that includes dissenting from church teaching.

I am 100% on board with church teaching, and I would not have my children in the classroom either.

You are assuming things about the parents, which could be the sin of rash judgment.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

Seriously, you’re A-OK with the OP’s apparent lack of respect for the parents’ explicit request? With her uncharitable second-guessing of their motives? With her bloated sense of self-importance and lack of servility? With her apparent refusal to bug off when she has been unambiguously told to?

Flagged

I suggest you read CAF rules.

People get suspended and banned for this type of attack on other CAF members

 

[Roseeurekacross]

My impression is that the OP is frustrated by the fact that she has been denied a captive audience. That’s not a healthy reaction for a catechist to have.

Again, Flagged.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

I don’t think so. In all of her posts, she appears to have a severely aggrandized conception of her role. She says she has a problem with these parents, when she certainly shouldn’t. Any problems associated with these opt outs are not hers at all, but of those far above her pay-grade. If she has a “problem”, it’s solely because she has chosen to make it a problem. Bad move.

Again, flagged. You have been lurking for years, where is the Christian charity?

 

[CilladeRoma]

But it has been perfectly OK to assume things about me, make rash judgements against me and all other Catechists who are trying their best to do what they have been asked to do by their pastor’s and Bishop’s.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

But it has been perfectly OK to assume things about me, make rash judgements against me and all other Catechists who are trying their best to do what they have been asked to do by their pastor’s and Bishop’s.

The attack on you should not be tolerated by the CAF community. It’s our CAF. We keep it nice or turn it into a free for all and expose a very uncharitable Catholic underbelly.