Transgender and communion?

[Alex337]

I’m yet to see the trade off be worth it. I’ve taught in Catholic, public and a non-denominational private school and the violence in the Catholic school was the same. The teaching was better than the non-denominational school but worse than the public school, the teachers in that public school just cared a lot more about the kids. And the public school offered scripture, so there was no extra effort compared to the Catholic school.

What’s worse is most of the students I see leaving that Catholic school decide religion is not for them at all due to the experience of the school.

 

[Ardent_Fire]

I suppose whether or not someone considers themselves transgender can receive communion depends on how they are living and determined on a case by case basis with their priest.

As for the pantsuit kid,

The pantsuit kid was making a spectacle of herself by trying to flaunt the ceremony dress code, so they had every right to deny her communion. I blame this more on the mother than the child, but sometimes people need to learn that it’s just not always about you.

And I think people should do a little research on the group “Pantsuit Nation” that the child’s mother was posting this to. Their values do not line up with Catholic values and it’s hard for me to not question whether or not there was an agenda behind what they were doing.

Even giving them the greatest benefit of the doubt, they could have just sucked it up for the ceremony out of respect. That isn’t asking much if they don’t have an agenda.

I surely am more comfortable in my blue jeans than I ever was in my wedding dress, but hey, I survived for one day.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’ve taught in Catholic, public and a non-denominational private school and the violence in the Catholic school was the same.

That’s where you live.
Where I live, I can tell you there was, and is, a DEFINITE difference.

 

[Alex337]

It would seem then that, perhaps unsurprisingly, it comes down to the school rather than whether or not it’s private or public.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Probably partly the school and partly the neighborhood and the type of “customer” the school is angling to attract.
In many US cities, private schools, which include Catholic, Christian, Friends, non-denominational, or whatever are basically alternatives to a deficient and dangerous public school system. There will be a lot of children at the religious schools whose parents don’t necessarily share the religious values or practice that particular religion, and it frequently seems to cause tension.

 

[Alex337]

From all I saw, admittedly only in the UK and Aus, it wasn’t the children not coming from Christian households at Christian schools that caused the trouble. ymmv.

 

[Gorgias]

She was likely denied for not following the prescribed dress code for First Communicants and for her parents (as they presumably control what their kid wears to First Communion) pushing an unwanted agenda at a Church event.

Interesting photo in that article, eh? They’re in the store, trying on suits (notice the dressing rooms and the tag still on the jacket). Mom takes a picture in the mirror, posing her daughter in quite the interesting pose of defiance. You think the mom wasn’t being deliberate in her actions, knowing fully what she was doing? Yeah… right…

Interestingly, the issue isn’t one of “denying first communion”: the parish offered the option of wearing the suit – but doing so in a private ceremony. So, no, she wasn’t denied a First Holy Communion. Her mom chose not to allow her to participate. And to take it national. And then pull her out of the school.

 

[Gorgias]

I also disagree with you that parents should seek out special, individual ceremonies for their children to receive the Sacraments in order to fulfill a certain petty desire like wearing a specific outfit.

Think for a minute. That offer wasn’t meant in order to any sort of personal whim to be appeased – it was offered so that they couldn’t say “they denied my baby girl!” (which, as it turns out, they cried anyway).

I’d go so far as to suggest that one could reasonably anticipate, in advance, that this concession wasn’t going to appease them: the game was to place her in first communion with her classmates, but wearing a suit. When they weren’t gonna get that, nothing else would suffice. So, they defused the “you’ve turned her away!” response.

 

[Gorgias]

DignumEtJustum:

I would assume that most who would assume such labels are not in states of grace.

Are you sure about that? You’d be surprised to know how many people don’t know the rules of the church…

Some Catholics don’t even know what a mortal sin is…

None of this changes the rules. Yes, many, if not most Catholics are likely receiving communion unworthily these days; that was once me. Your point?

The point is that mortal sin requires full knowledge and deliberate consent. If folks don’t know the rules – and aren’t reasonably expected to have known them – then, at the very least, ‘full knowledge’ does not apply. And, therefore, it’s not a case of mortal sin and “not being in a state of grace.” That’s the point.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It reminds me of the dad who decided to make a big stink after his daughter was told she couldn’t have a pro-choice sticker on her laptop or folder at a Catholic school. The school responded by telling him that his two kids could finish out the year, but would not be accepted back at the school for the next year, so then he made a big stink about that.

I just get so fed up by parents who act like their kids are super special. My grandmother had a problem with how one of the nuns at the local Catholic school treated my mom - it was bullying basically. This was back in the late 1930s. Grandma called the school, told them the problem, and said, “If my daughter isn’t placed in the other teacher’s class tomorrow, I will pull her out of the school.” The school pooh poohed it and didn’t move my mother out of the nun’s class. When Grandma heard that at the end of the day, she called the school again and said her daughter would not be returning to the school, and enrolled her in the public school, where she continued to attend.

No yelling. No meetings. No newspapers. Simple, firm and direct action.

 

[woolycaterpillar]

Our friend at church is well-known. He has been going to the prayer meetings. He wears beautiful clothes and has his nails done. He is quite likable and doesn’t cause any controversy except that one parishioner made a big deal out of it and tried to cause problems.

It seems that some people just can’t live and let live.

 

[Socrates92]

He didn’t say that. He said it constitutes grave matter.

 

[Socrates92]

I see what you’re saying. We should just do away with all forms of law enforcement. It only further disrupt people’s days.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

He didn’t say that. He said it constitutes grave matter.

Again, depending on what your “involvement” is, it might not even be grave matter.

 

[Socrates92]

I would think that practically all formal (as opposed to material) involvement would br grave matter. I’d be hard pressed to think of an exemption. Can you?

 

[bobperk]

As far as I know, for the actual story, there was not a separate offer for an individual ceremony. Other posters suggested doing so as some kind of appeasement.

But you are correct, many times these are stunts performed where those taking part know what the response will be beforehand. But they do it anyway to become “victims” of authority.

 

[Gorgias]

I would think that practically all formal (as opposed to material) involvement would br grave matter. I’d be hard pressed to think of an exemption. Can you?

Really? Hard pressed? OK… let’s give it a whirl…

Let’s suppose I have an aunt, whom I love dearly. My aunt identifies as lesbian. (Doesn’t mean that she’s committing any sin, per se, just that this is how she identifies.) She doesn’t want to be discriminated against in a way that’s illegal, so she marches. As a sign of solidarity with my aunt, I march by her side.

That sure sounds like “not grave matter”, doesn’t it?

 

[Gorgias]

As far as I know, for the actual story, there was not a separate offer for an individual ceremony.

That’s why reading the story first, before commenting, is always a good idea. It’s right there. Paragraph five. In black and white.

 

[Socrates92]

Nope, that sounds like affirming the disorder to me. Try again.

 

[Gorgias]

Nope, that sounds like affirming the disorder to me. Try again.

First, you’ll need to explain how that’s a grave sin.

(By the way, you’re a sinner, right? So, if I affirm you, personally_, am I committing a grave sin? Nope. Try again. )

The legality question is also completely irrelevant.

No it isn’t. It provides the basis for a conceivable situation. You merely asserted that it would be impossible to come up with a situation that wasn’t “grave sin.” I did.