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

[Marialis_Cultus]

Orange County Parents force Catholic School Policy Barring Gay “Couples” From School Events
Diocese avoids taking any position on parents’ effort

COSTA MESA, June 15, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Parents at a Catholic school in California have moved to protect their children from attempts to normalize homosexuality. Costa Mesa’s St. John the Baptist School, in the diocese of Orange, has drafted a policy that would prevent homosexual partners from appearing at school functions as a ‘couple.’

The LA Times quotes a memo sent out to parents, “Practically speaking this means: The children adopted by a same-sex couple” may enroll “on the condition that the same-sex couple agree not to present themselves as a couple at school functions."

Sister Mary Vianney, the school’s principal for 31 years, purportedly objected to the policy and parents have said that her employment contract has not been renewed for the coming year. The school is administered by the Norbertine fathers, a religious order that is considered ‘conservative’ by some Catholics.

The diocesan spokesman declined to comment. “The ball is in the court of the St. John the Baptist parish and the Norbertine community,” said Father Joe Fenton.

That the diocese has declined in the past to become involved with the controversy between parents and the school is not surprising to long-term observers.

The diocese of Orange’s record upholding Church teaching on homosexuality has been spotty. In 2000, while Californians debated a ballot proposition that affirmed the meaning of marriage as being between one man and one woman, the Bishop of Orange, Tod Brown, sent priests of the diocese a confusing article by a Fr. Gerald D. Coleman of the Archdiocese of San Francisco as expressing his own (the Bishops’s) views.

Fr. Coleman, a prolific author and frequent contributor to the liberal Jesuit magazine, America, wrote, “Some homosexual persons have shown that it is possible to enter into long-term, committed and loving relationships…I see no moral reason why civil law could not in some fashion recognize these faithful and loving unions with clear and specified benefits. These unions would then be recognized by society as sustaining an important status deserving our respect and protection. I believe that this possibility could be pursued without equating such unions with marriage, and without in any way demeaning our needed respect and protection for the institution of marriage.”

Credible allegations have been made that the bishop of Orange as well as three of his predecessors have turned a blind eye to at least one priest living in a notorious and open homosexual relationship.

HW

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jun/05061505.html

 

[stanley123]

Marialis Cultus:

Fr. Coleman, a prolific author and frequent contributor to the liberal Jesuit magazine, America, wrote, “Some homosexual persons have shown that it is possible to enter into long-term, committed and loving relationships…I see no moral reason why civil law could not in some fashion recognize these faithful and loving unions with clear and specified benefits. These unions would then be recognized by society as sustaining an important status deserving our respect and protection.

Is this what the Catholic bishops are now endorsing? Are Catholics supposed to follow their bishops?

 

[Promotor_Fidei]

stanley123:

Is this what the Catholic bishops are now endorsing? Are Catholics supposed to follow their bishops?

No. Pope Benedict has urged the Spanish bishops to fight against homosexual marriage laws.

Fr. Coleman is deeply involved with Dignity, which has been condemned by the Church. It is a shame that he has not been disciplined for publicly opposing clearly taught doctrines. He is a false teacher, and deserving of a millstone necklace.

 

[GloriaPatri4]

Promotor Fidei:

Fr. Coleman is deeply involved with Dignity, which has been condemned by the Church. It is a shame that he has not been disciplined for publicly opposing clearly taught doctrines. He is a false teacher, and deserving of a millstone necklace.

:yup:

 

[CARose]

Promotor Fidei:

… and deserving of a millstone necklace.

Charity alert.

He may be deserving of ex-communication, but I’m not in a position to make that judgement. Beyond that, and we’re falling out of Charity.

I, however, would strongly recommend we stear clear of his teachings, based on what has been said here.

CARose

 

[A.Pelliccio]

I want know if these two men present themselves for communion on sunday?

 

[Catholic_Heart]

Thekla:

What does that mean “present themselves as a couple?” They can’t both be there? They can’t stand next to one another? They can’t hold hands? They can’t make out in the back row? What does it mean?

This is not about the “cafeteria” but about the children. We have the children of gay couples at my school and no one pays much attention to them. This school has painted a sign on their foreheads and is now rubbing salt in the wound; they already know they are different. I just find this intolerance unacceptable and morally wrong.

I agree that this is about the welfare of two little boys…Children should never be made to suffer for the whatever their parents have done.

Whoever is in charge has made the matter worse be calling MORE attention to the situation…Shame on them for putting these two children in such an untenable situation…

 

[Promotor_Fidei]

Catholic Heart:

I agree that this is about the welfare of two little boys…Children should never be made to suffer for the whatever their parents have done.

Whoever is in charge has made the matter worse be calling MORE attention to the situation…Shame on them for putting these two children in such an untenable situation…

I’ll repeat it again: The parents brought this on themselves. They are published homosexual advocates. You can read about their relationship in a New York Times article (it names them) from last year long before this issue came up. They were extremely public about their relationship at the school in their volunteer capacity. To my knowledge, they belong to a group seeking full acceptance of active homosexual relationships in parochial schools.

 

[HagiaSophia]

Promotor Fidei:

I’ll repeat it again: The parents brought this on themselves. They are published homosexual advocates. You can read about their relationship in a New York Times article (it names them) from last year long before this issue came up. They were extremely public about their relationship at the school in their volunteer capacity. To my knowledge, they belong to a group seeking full acceptance of active homosexual relationships in parochial schools.

Remember the Pledge of Allegiance father who used his daughter as the buffer between himself and his court battles? Apparently there are some who have agendas and seek to use children to accomplish them. They victimize the school and cost them money and divert both energy and personnel to these arguments – and as usual, the “perception” is to blame the victim for the problem – the cry of every bully – look what you made me do.

 

[InnocentIII]

Catholic Heart:

I agree that this is about the welfare of two little boys…Children should never be made to suffer for the whatever their parents have done.

Whoever is in charge has made the matter worse be calling MORE attention to the situation…Shame on them for putting these two children in such an untenable situation…

This argument is pure sentimentality and frankly silly.

First let us consider why the Dads decided to send the boys to school.

1. They are really faithful Catholics who know they are doing wrong and hope the school will teach their children what is right.
2. They don’t care about the Church but think their children will get a better academic education.
3. They oppose the Catholic teaching on homosexuality and hope to use their children to normalise their sin in the eyes of themselves and others.
4. Ditto and they hope to make political capital out of it.

Take your pick but only the first is a valid reason for choosing a Catholic school, and would require the Dads to make at least a serious effort to live in harmony with the Church’s teachings.

As for children paying for the sins of the parents, don’t they always. These children will be raised to believe that what the Church teaches is mortal sin is a normal lifestyle. If the children follow their parents then they will indeed be paying for their parents sins. Our Lord said that it would be better for a millstone to be placed around their necks than that any should cause one of these little ones to sin. Who is causing them to sin? The Church or the parents.

It is time we stood up and for our Faith and not use children as an excuse to tolerate sin and evil. Besides a Catholic school is not just a public school with a uniform and is intended for Catholic children. Has anyone asked what effect this would have on all the other children in the school seeing this relationship normalised. Would not the school then be guilty of causing these little ones to sin by publicly tolerating it.

 

[StJeanneDArc]

InnocentIII:

This argument is pure sentimentality and frankly silly.

First let us consider why the Dads decided to send the boys to school.

1. They are really faithful Catholics who know they are doing wrong and hope the school will teach their children what is right.
2. They don’t care about the Church but think their children will get a better academic education.
3. They oppose the Catholic teaching on homosexuality and hope to use their children to normalise their sin in the eyes of themselves and others.
4. Ditto and they hope to make political capital out of it.

Take your pick but only the first is a valid reason for choosing a Catholic school, and would require the Dads to make at least a serious effort to live in harmony with the Church’s teachings.

As for children paying for the sins of the parents, don’t they always. These children will be raised to believe that what the Church teaches is mortal sin is a normal lifestyle. If the children follow their parents then they will indeed be paying for their parents sins. Our Lord said that it would be better for a millstone to be placed around their necks than that any should cause one of these little ones to sin. Who is causing them to sin? The Church or the parents.

It is time we stood up and for our Faith and not use children as an excuse to tolerate sin and evil. Besides a Catholic school is not just a public school with a uniform and is intended for Catholic children. Has anyone asked what effect this would have on all the other children in the school seeing this relationship normalised. Would not the school then be guilty of causing these little ones to sin by publicly tolerating it.

Thank you for putting this so well. I and other posters have repeatedly raised the issue of the other students. Unfortunately, the live-and-let-live apologists have repeatedly told us that the other children have to live in the real world, better get used to seeing it, learn how to get along, ad nauseum.

It has since occurred to me that the live-and-let-live parents have no shortage of advice for us over-protective types, but seem really reluctant to advise the flagrant sinners out there. Really interesting.

 

[fix]

StJeanneDArc:

Thank you for putting this so well. I and other posters have repeatedly raised the issue of the other students. Unfortunately, the live-and-let-live apologists have repeatedly told us that the other children have to live in the real world, better get used to seeing it, learn how to get along, ad nauseum.

It has since occurred to me that the live-and-let-live parents have no shortage of advice for us over-protective types, but seem really reluctant to advise the flagrant sinners out there. Really interesting.

The reverse good Samaritan? More mercy for the one giving the beating than the one getting the beating.

 

[SusanL]

fix:

The reverse good Samaritan? More mercy for the one giving the beating than the one getting the beating.

Well put.

 

[Penny_Plain]

StJeanneDArc:

It has since occurred to me that the live-and-let-live parents have no shortage of advice for us over-protective types, but seem really reluctant to advise the flagrant sinners out there. Really interesting.

And yet, despite our namby-pamby ways, you guys have stepped in to cover the advising-the-flagrant-sinners base for us.

(wipes sweat from forehead in relief)

 

[StJeanneDArc]

Penny Plain:

And yet, despite our namby-pamby ways, you guys have stepped in to cover the advising-the-flagrant-sinners base for us.

(wipes sweat from forehead in relief)

Just trying to be helpful, and maybe slip in a corporal work of mercy along the way.

 

[fix]

Penny Plain:

And yet, despite our namby-pamby ways, you guys have stepped in to cover the advising-the-flagrant-sinners base for us.

(wipes sweat from forehead in relief)

Someone ought to advise them, it is not Christian to watch our neighbor’s skip and dance down the road to hell.

 

[catholicwife]

InnocentIII:

As for children paying for the sins of the parents, don’t they always. These children will be raised to believe that what the Church teaches is mortal sin is a normal lifestyle. If the children follow their parents then they will indeed be paying for their parents sins. Our Lord said that it would be better for a millstone to be placed around their necks than that any should cause one of these little ones to sin. Who is causing them to sin? The Church or the parents.

Has anyone asked what effect this would have on all the other children in the school seeing this relationship normalised. Would not the school then be guilty of causing these little ones to sin by publicly tolerating it.

Exactly the point! It’s bad enough that our children are bombarded with this (the homosexual agenda) from every angle in the secular world, but to have it shoved down their throats as something normal and just another type of family at a “catholic” school is beyond belief.

 

[GloriaPatri4]

StJeanneDArc:

Thank you for putting this so well. I and other posters have repeatedly raised the issue of the other students. Unfortunately, the live-and-let-live apologists have repeatedly told us that the other children have to live in the real world, better get used to seeing it, learn how to get along, ad nauseum.

It has since occurred to me that the live-and-let-live parents have no shortage of advice for us over-protective types, but seem really reluctant to advise the flagrant sinners out there. Really interesting.

So true. Boy did we get a mega dose of that this year. Everytime we spoke out against the scandalous activities that were displayed this year we got the “you’re being judgemental, self righteous, we’re all sinners, cast the first stone, IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT LEAVE etc, etc, etc.”. And of course the people who were creating the scandal were the victims.

 

[Edwin1961]

Lisa4Catholics:

Why is it that nobody is angry with the activist parents using the kids to promote their agenda I can tell you now they put their children in a Catholic School to push their agenda and their kids are being abused and used

I wonder if the two men are ‘actually’ Catholic. If not, they are pusing an agenda and making the Church look foolish.

Battles like this will flare up all over this country because the Gay/Lesbian groups want it ‘Their Way’ when THEY don’t even make up 3% of the total population of the U.S.

We (the Church) need to hold our ground HERE!

 

[Gabriel_Gale]

Catholic Heart:

I agree that this is about the welfare of two little boys…Children should never be made to suffer for the whatever their parents have done.

Whoever is in charge has made the matter worse be calling MORE attention to the situation…Shame on them for putting these two children in such an untenable situation…

But children do suffer for what their parents do. Asks children of alcoholic parents, adulterous parents, deadbeat parents etc.

If a parent decided not to pay tuition and the school decided to remove the child, would we be getting this “Children should never be made to suffer…”

The Church or this local priest has not “made” any child to suffer for what the parents do. What the parents do or don’t do makes their children suffer.