Posted on 03/09/2010 7:48:47 AM PST by NYer
.- Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver weighed-in today on the recent decision to not re-enroll the child of a lesbian couple in a local Catholic school. The archbishop explained, “If parents don’t respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible.”
Staff members at Sacred Heart of Jesus Church in Boulder, Colorado were told early last week that that an attending preschooler, whose two parents are women, would not be re-enrolled for the following semester.
After mostly negative media coverage, Archbishop Chaput dedicated his weekly column in the Denver Catholic Register to addressing the decision to not offer enrollment to the Boulder, Colo. preschooler.
The Denver archbishop began by discussing the historical background of Catholic schools in America, which he explained were founded in the 19th century “as an alternative to the public schools of the day, which taught a curriculum often hostile to Catholic belief.”
“In many ways times have changed, but the mission of Catholic schools has not,” the prelate stated. “The main purpose of Catholic schools is religious; in other words, to form students in Catholic faith, Catholic morality and Catholic social values.”
The archbishop explained that “Many of our schools also accept students of other faiths and no faith, and from single parent and divorced parent families. These students are always welcome so long as their parents support the Catholic mission of the school and do not offer a serious counter-witness to that mission in their actions.”
“Our schools, however, exist primarily to serve Catholic families with an education shaped by Catholic faith and moral formation. This is common sense,” he added. “Other religious traditions do the same according to their beliefs, and at a heavy sacrifice. We need to remember that Catholic families pay twice for a Catholic education: through their taxes, they fund public education; then they pay again to send their children to a Catholic school.”
Therefore, the “idea that Catholic schools should require support for Catholic teaching for admission, and a serious effort from school families to live their Catholic identity faithfully, is reasonable and just,” Archbishop Chaput noted.
He also wrote that the “Church never looks for reasons to turn anyone away from a Catholic education. But the Church can’t change her moral beliefs without undermining her mission and failing to serve the many families who believe in that mission.”
“If Catholics take their faith seriously, they naturally follow the teachings of the Church in matters of faith and morals; otherwise they take themselves outside the believing community,” he explained.
Archbishop Chaput also stressed that the “Church does not claim that people with a homosexual orientation are 'bad,' or that their children are less loved by God. Quite the opposite. But what the Church does teach is that sexual intimacy by anyone outside marriage is wrong; that marriage is a sacramental covenant; and that marriage can only occur between a man and a woman.”
“These beliefs are central to a Catholic understanding of human nature, family and happiness, and the organization of society,” he said. “The Church cannot change these teachings because, in the faith of Catholics, they are the teachings of Jesus Christ.”
In light of this, the “policies of our Catholic school system exist to protect all parties involved, including the children of homosexual couples and the couples themselves,” said the prelate.
“Our schools are meant to be 'partners in faith' with parents. If parents don’t respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible.”
“It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church,” he added.
Archbishop Chaput concluded his remarks saying that “Most parents who send their children to Catholic schools want an environment where the Catholic faith is fully taught and practiced. That simply can’t be done if teachers need to worry about wounding the feelings of their students or about alienating students from their parents. That isn’t fair to anyone – including the wider school community.”
“Persons who have an understanding of marriage and family life sharply different from Catholic belief are often people of sincerity and good will. They have other, excellent options for education and should see in them the better course for their children.”
To read Archbishop Chaput's column, visit: http://www.archden.org/index.cfm/ID/3560
They’re probably looking for a lawsuit and easy money too. That poor child is going to endure abuse from other kids, regardless of where the parents send them, because of their chosen lifestyle.
I hope the homosexual attacks on the traditional churches and the military are being seen for what they are. This “couple” could care less about keeping the kid in this school because it is the best. This is just more of the same- attack and destroy traditional religions.
I am not a Catholic, but I attended a Catholic school through 6th grade. I would like to say that they were very respectful of non-Catholic beliefs and expected the same respect when it came to their beliefs. I applaud this school for making a stand in what they see as a subversive witness to their mission.
I believe that they have thought it out very well. We are getting all the negatives in this story from only one side, that of the parents. The school and the Archdiocese have taken the high road here and are not saying anything negative about what the parents have done. There is much more to the story than we are getting from the media who have gotten their story from a group of activist homosexuals.
I think that the school and the Church should be commended on their handling of this situation. They have chosen not to be confrontational.
BTW Did you see the other article posted about this where the church members crossed the street to offer the protesters donuts and coffee during Sunday services?
Of course. Generally speaking they come from the same tradition and share a common ethos. The exceptions are of course those who cherry-pick the tenets of their faith in the name of a dubious progressivism. Those who feel no remorse in engaging in homosexuality do not share in the traditional Judeo-Christian ethos. While a point may be made that it's not the child's fault, it is the parent, not the Church who is to blame here. If the tenets of the Christian ethic are not reinforced at home, a Catholic education is a waste of time.
As it is, there are parents at my children's school who are not doing their part and their kids end up being a bad influence.
The purpose of a parochial school isn't merely to impart values. It's to bring the children deeper into the life of the Church. When you have a child who is unable to do so as a result of her upbringing, it defeats the purpose. The Church's role in this scenario is to convert the unconverted in an external and/or worship setting (minus the sacraments); not invite the unconverted to participate in a Christian educational setting.
Of course. Generally speaking they come from the same tradition and share a common ethos. The exceptions are of course those who cherry-pick the tenets of their faith in the name of a dubious progressivism. Those who feel no remorse in engaging in homosexuality do not share in the traditional Judeo-Christian ethos. While a point may be made that it's not the child's fault, it is the parent, not the Church who is to blame here. If the tenets of the Christian ethic are not reinforced at home, a Catholic education is a waste of time.
As it is, there are parents at my children's school who are not doing their part and their kids end up being a bad influence.
the kid will do just fine in a Quaker, Episcopalian, Unitarian, UCC, Lutheran, Methodist, Presby or any other number of private religious schools- among others
Attending a private religious school is a privilege, not a right
The fact that this poor girl’s mother and partner chose a Catholic school is problematic, since they would undoubtedly spend a great deal of time arguing with the school over “bias” or “bigotry”, and/or telling the child to ignore or consider wrong and bigoted the values she was taught there
The child has ONE mother and ONE absent father.
the other woman is just the sexual fetish partner of the mother.
That is my impression as well. The mere fact that this is a “re-admission” issue reinforces that impression.
Maybe, but then the “parents” will begin to worm other ideals into the curriculum and then site bias’ that are against federal laws and then you have a whole new can of worms opened. Attending a Catholic school is a privedge not a right. I smell a rat with the parents on this one.
Excellent response.
re-admission but did the mother mislead to imply the child had a mother and a father?
The article is a “fail” because it uses “parent” in the tradition of the heather has two momies book.
misleading is the same as a lie.
I think you should get all of the facts before opining on a topic you know little about.
Yeah, I guess he had to. What’s sad is that he even had to explain it to boneheaded Catholics.
The media, as you know only too well, like to extract pieces of information and spin it into something controversial. In this article, the bishop goes into details. Enjoy!
“The child, whose two parents are women”
Now THAT’S interesting!
Didn’t think humans could reproduce by parthenogenesis! And if they could, what’s the second woman for?
I suspect this poor, abused little girl has a father, somewhere. Some people have no shame!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.