Scottish Catholic Education Service Actively Promoting LGBT Agenda…editor
The following extracts are taken from the website of the Scottish Catholic Education Service, section entitled Equality & Inclusion Learning and Teaching…
The Usual Introductory Blurb… Editorial comment injected
All schools should have robust policies that seek to ensure the safety and inclusion of all children.
Ed: except those whose parents send them to a Catholic school foolishly expecting them to be protected FROM the “inclusion” baloney, “inclusion & equality” being cover terms for permissive sex “education” – more accurately described as “exploitation”.
Anti bullying, Nurture, Safeguarding and Safe Spaces are all positive aspects of the Equalities and Inclusion work of our schools.
Ed: these would be the “safe spaces” for “gay” pupils, as reported in the Scottish press In 2017
However, there is always more that could be done to ensure that staff feel confident, informed and enabled to put the policies into practice. Therefore, as well as creating resources for use in classroom, materials will be added to this page for use at whole school level and to inform policy and practice relating to the Equality Act and the protected characteristics.
Ed: yet again, we see the so-called Catholic educators showing more concern for the law of the land, than for God’s law. They use the law of the land as an excuse to corrupt children. In fact, no Inspectorate could find against a Catholic school refusing to teach this garbage, because, by defending the right of Catholic schools to teach Catholic Faith and Morals, they are, in the very nature of things, unassailable. By teaching immorality in Catholic schools, all of those responsible, from the Bishops down, are – literally – Hell bent. Millstones and depths of the sea, spring to mind. Check out Matthew 18:6
All of the materials note that the starting point for any work with young people in the area of Equality and Justice is rooted in a vision of what it means to be in relationship with others.
Ed: note, “a vision…” not “God’s plan…”
The materials hosted on this page should be used in conjunction with the existing RSHP/HWB/RERC resources for Relationships and Moral Education – Called to Love (Secondary schools) and God’s Loving Plan (Primary schools)
Extracts from year themes follow – after setting the scene with wish-washy emotionally based thinking in the first two years, the attack of the morality of the young attending Catholic secondary schools gets down to brass tacks…
Put aside differences and starting anew
Rights of the Child
Justice, Respect and Equality
Challenging Prejudice – case study homophobic language and bullying
What is the Equalities Act & why should I know about it? *
Hate Crimes – case study on homophobic, transphobic and biphobic *
Growing up in the 21st Century
Values V Tolerance (I don’t need to agree with you to like, respect or value you?)
Catholic Social Teaching – preference for the poor, protection of the vulnerable
Protected Characteristics – why are they protected, what is the history, how can we remove prejudice
Learning still to be developed:
Modern Studies/ History
What has influenced the law in Britain regarding the protected characteristics.
A historical review of the facts that led to the various changes in law and what that has meant for people within these protected characteristics – women’s rights movement, race relations act , religious hate crimes, stonewall riots, disability rights etc.
Cyber bullying Ends.
Regular readers of this blog will know that the above involvement of the Scottish Catholic Education Service in the corruption of young people using the excuse of Government legislation is not exactly breaking news. We have discussed it before, more than once. What IS new, however, is the likelihood that those ultimately responsible for this corruption of young people will face justice – and not just in the next world. Little by little, we are seeing victims of sexual abuse turning on the perpetrators of their abuse and demanding that heads roll. To date, this has been limited to those who have physically sexually assaulted children and young people, but the day will come when those who have effectively groomed the young will also be called to account. Bishops take note.
The key question for this discussion has to be this: why are the educators so keen to follow the secular laws of so-called equality and inclusion when they are diametrically opposed to Catholic teaching – i.e. to God’s moral law? Why not just explain to the Inspectorate that by teaching elementary Christian purity, pupils will learn to live in a healthy manner, in time building stable homes, and, by learning basic Christian charity, they will know how to live by the Gospel imperative to love everyone – even enemies! They will learn NOT to be unkind to people who are different.
* What is purity and why should I know about it?
* Young famous Catholics – case studies: Maria Goretti [ and others…]
What’s wrong with those for challenging headings in a teaching programme for Catholic schools in Scotland?
I think if truth be told it is that the people running the Scottish Catholic Education system are no longer Catholic. They may call themselves Catholics, but we know truly what they are by their bitter fruits. The Bishops, for the most part, have also lost the Catholic Faith, or at least are cowards in the face of a perverted hostile world.
It’s as Our Lady of Quito predicted for these times way back in the 16th century, a universal assault on marriage and the family by the Masonic sect and the stripping of all innocence and purity from the minds and souls of children. The Catholic Education Service is in the service of this destructive sect, whose leader is Lucifer. They’re lost to all modesty and decency now, having first lost the treasure of the Faith. Such a tragedy. But what else can be expected when the Pope appears in public wearing a rainbow cross.
God is still in charge of His Church, though, and these perverters of faith and morals will be brought to justice by Him. Two things tell me this is imminent: 1. It’s children they’re targetting, and Our Lord loves children. 2. Infallible moral teaching is being undermined by a Pope and some of his cohorts, which will never be permitted by the Holy Ghost.
Didn’t Our Lady say when it all seemed lost she would intervene and bring this crisis to an end swiftly and suddenly? I’m paraphrasing but you will catch my drift.
Our Lady did promise this. She made it clear that her intervention would be just when the enemies of God think they have the victory. That’s why we have certainty of a return to Traditional Faith and morality to look forward to. I think Our Lady’s time is very close because all at this moment does look lost.
Athanasius the above article on the Teaching of Morality along with the Catholic Faith is now to me a seemingly lost cause. There was a Photo of that Horrible Woman Sturgeon with the Letter Writing Branch of the LGBTQIXYZ mob telling us we Have to be all inclusive. In other words as the Ed says it seems You have to like and go along with the Deviants and your thoughts never mind your Children are being watched . In fact this new Sign on The Bus Shelters from the Scottish Police saying ( We have a Phobia about your Transphobia ) for God’s Sake what are we becoming . Also as regards who is running Catholic Schools i wouldn’t be surprised if it was the Devil Himself wee Patrick Harvie. I much suspect he has more of an input through this Horrible Scottish Government than most of the so called Higherarchy of the Catholic Church in Scotland . To Finnish up on your post the Rainbow Cross on Francis was the LGBTQIXYZ icing on their cake . I always said that this Sinnod was to completely exonerate the Homosexual way of Life as Normal. I honestly don’t know how lower he himself can go in acceptance of this immoral lifestyle. But also as the Ed pointed out retribution can also be swift in this Life . The only problem with that is making sure it’s the correct Deviants that are charged and jailed after a number of years have passed since Sexual Abuse.
I don’t think Francis will get away with it. There are somewhere in the region of 265 bishops at this so-called “Synod of Youth”, or whatever they call it. A majority of these, I feel sure, will not endorse anything that contradicts the moral teaching of the Church. Apparently, they will be voting on a paragraph by paragraph basis the content of the final letter to youth. My feeling is it will say nothing new, though the lavender mafia may try to insert some ambiguous wording in there that can be twisted into a pretend U-turn on Catholic moral teaching relating to homosexuality. But as Archbishop Chaput said, and I paraphrase: “there is no homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual or other category. The choice is purity or impurity.”
As for those in the so-called Catholic Education System, the words of G. K. Chesterton always come to mind: “Only dead fish flow with the current”. And dead fish don’t go to heaven.
I hope you are right above. My fear is that the synod is really just stage managed theater, which pre-determined conclusions, such that the voting is really only for show and has no effect.
Remember at the previous synod, certain paragraphs were rejected by the voting Bishops but Francis insisted they be included anyway.
And there was tinkering prior to this synod, meaning – as I understand it – that the final document automatically becomes part of the ordinary magisterium.
The coverage of this synod has not been so intense, which is actually refreshing given how stressful I find it to closely follow Francis’ machinations and stage managed papacy!
However, the known-lack of transparency is a disgrace and shows that the modernists are very autocratic, for all their waffle about collegiality etc.
On the couple occasions that I have noticed something on this blog catches my eye it never ceases to surprise me that a certain percentage off bloggers feel the need to act as if they know Our Lord’s very thoughts.Why do you feel the need to predict the punishment is imminent.Anyone with an ounce of Catholicism knows that undoubtedly Our Lord’s punishment will be no more than each one off us deserves for the loss of the faith,the destruction taking place in his church and the overall evil and corrupt world we live in.Be satisfied with the knowledge it will happen .When our lady didn’t give exact dates why do we feel we know better.I’m really not having a go but it is truly fascinating how some want it to happen like yesterday when the reality of it is absolutely terrifying.
I’ve scrolled up to see what may have prompted your claim that bloggers here predict “the punishment is imminent”. I can’t find anything which justifies your claim.
Would you quote something specific, so that I can offer a considered response?
It’s disgraceful that the SCES Director, Barbara Coupar is overseeing this corruption of the innocence of young people. How can she justify this stuff?
It’s really important to join up the dots here with the previous discussion on Father Marsden’s open letter to the bishops of the UK. It’s they who are permitting this corruption of the young but it is not surprising since they don’t see it as corruption if they are allowing men engaging in homosexual activity to have relationships under the seminary roof and go on to be ordained priests. Obviously, these SCES people, and the bishops, must think they are helping to enlighten the next generation, that there’s nothing wrong with being homosexual, or “T”, otherwise why would they allow it to be taught and provide “safe spaces”?
This has been going on for years now, and we didn’t even guess it. We need some brave souls in the school sector to do what Father Marsden did, and write an open letter, if private approaches to the bishops doesn’t work.
The bishops need to be forced to realise what they are presiding over – the destruction of faith and morals in young souls, and not only young Catholic souls, but done in the name of the Catholic Church, so any young person attending a Catholic school, whether Catholic or no, is at risk of being corrupted.
I wonder how any Catholic teacher could work under these conditions, knowing that by their silence they are actually enabling the corruption of children, because the above extracts from the resources being used in Catholic schools is utterly disgraceful. Any teacher seeing those headings, and putting it into effect in schools, is sharing in the guilt of corrupting the young, IMHO.
In general I agree with you. The problem is that the situation is now so far gone that very few Catholic teachers speak out. In fact, most would agree with the above guidelines or think they don’t go far enough!
There are a handful of faithful Catholic Teachers who do speak out. However, it’s always a balance between not compromising and being complicit and prudence. It must be a really difficult line to walk for faithful Catholic teachers.
I think the “prudence” card is pulled out at every stop. What can be prudent about allowing kids to be encouraged to accept perverted sexual behaviour as normal?
I agree it must be difficult for faithful teachers but, IMHO, the least they can do is get out of the schools and say why they are getting out. There must be jobs in non-denominational or private schools where they can use “conscience” as a reason not to teach this perversion.
Come to think of it, why can’t they use “conscience” as a reason not to teach perversion in a Catholic school?
I don’t think it’s ever justified to use prudence when it comes to teaching immoral material. A teacher just can’t do it. So I’m with you there.
It’s not as easy just to say that teachers should “get out”. Jobs are not easy to find, especially side ways moves. Neither is it easy to use “conscience” in either sector. Teachers can be disciplined for breach of contract for outright refusing.
What you need to remember is that teachers have bills to pay and families to feed. It can be very easy for outsiders to say what anyone should, or shouldn’t do.
You have me curious now. If “a teacher just can’t do it”, that, is can’t teach this equality and diversity material, and it’s not easy to use the conscience argument, how would a teacher get away with not teaching the lessons?
Also, don’t teachers have access to the bishops? Can’t the orthodox teachers not approach the bishops and explain their conscience problem?
I know a teacher so I will ask her those questions and try to get back to you.
While I do sympathise – totally – with your sentiments, I have to say that, as a former Head of RE in three Catholic educational institutions, it has to be experienced to be believed.
It’s like working in a maze. Here’s one example of the double standards which permeate the day in any Catholic school…
A new Head of RE takes up post and is warned to be very careful when teaching or discussing anything to do with family life. Most of the pupils are from broken homes, single parent families etc. Above all do NOT speak as if a married mum and dad living together with children under one roof is the norm. Right. Got it. The new Head of RE’s point – that it might be long-term beneficial for the pupils to read about and talk about how to change that for themselves, try to reflect on what would be the best possible form of family life, fell on deaf ears. It was as if everyone round the table at the RE meetings had four ears each, none of which worked. So, as I say, new Head of Department “got it.” Avoid the subject. Take care. Danger ahead. OK. Got it.
This particular school was in an area of social deprivation with a very high crime rate. Most of the pupils had parents in prison. Thieves and brigands galore. That was the other thing new Head of RE was told in her first days – just be aware, most of them will be visiting [name of local prison] at some point this month, to see “dad”. OK. Got that, as well.
So, imagine the surprise when the Deputy Head, taking assemblies, read the riot act to each Year Group because someone had stolen a small, inexpensive wall clock from one of the classrooms. Wasn’t the price of the clock that was the issue, she yelled, it’s the fact that someone would steal something – but then, why should anyone be surprised? You’re a bunch of thieving so & so’s, never known anything better, that’s what you’re used to, you think that’s OK, just take what you want…. blah blah.
Now, that’s not a verbatim quote but it’s pretty close. No concern about not upsetting the children whose families were known to the police, whose dad or “uncle” was in jail, not at all. It was OK to yell at them not to steal – but sexual promiscuity? Whoops! Don’t go bothering consciences about that….
That was a few years back now, and the first thing visitors saw on entering that school was a huge and beautiful statue of Our Lady, flanked by lovely flowers… The externals were unmistakeably Catholic. Everything else was anything but…
The new Head of RE’s attempts to change things were less than successful. And that was with the backing of the Head Teacher! He wanted to make the place more Catholic, once told her that “nobody” would convince him that these children were not permanently damaged by “the lack of a proper family life.”
Any Head Teacher expressing such a view today would end up on the front page of the nearest Tabloid, so while I agree that we need whistle-blowers, I think they need to be protected. It’s one thing for a priest, who is living a celibate life and thus free to speak out, as did brave Father Marsden, but a Catholic teacher who is also a father, for example, who has to feed, clothe, and house his own family, doesn’t have the same moral freedom to speak out in that way. St Thomas More’s example springs to mind. Even single people with financial obligations, are not always in the best position to speak out, so let’s simply pray for teachers that they will do what they can to help apostolates like ours to warn parents and senior pupils about the dire state of Catholic education.
Here endeth the lesson…
I see you like the Untouchable same here. Ed i agree with you on lots of points and it’s easy to criticise when your not in the line of fire. I saw many dodgy dealings and Brown Envelopes being passed around as an Engineer. I would have liked to have reported such but it would have been futile as I would only have ended up Sacked . What really gets me here though is that if all of these teachers are afraid of speaking out and losing their jobs then as it’s been said our Clergy must step up to the Mark . And at the moment that Mark seems a long way for them to step on in Our Catholic Schools. Just as a matter of interest are Muslim Pupils exempt from these all Inclusive Rules and Regulations.
Onto the Eds statement of retribution in this Life needn’t come from outside sources so to speak. The Homosexual Lifestyle is a Diseased ravished way off Life of which practically nothing is spoken of. The Teaching of this Lifestyle should first be taught by telling the Youth of the Health Risks involved. This seems to have evaporated into thin air and one would think now that AIDS is not a life threatening disease which we know is not so. Of course there are so many health risks with the Deviant Homosexual Lifestyle both women and men that that should be the number 1 talking point in schools rather than this ” we all have to be inclusive garbage. “.
It’s pretty scary when an allegedly Catholic (see Athanasius’ leadoff post) school system not only fails to formulate its policies in Catholic language, but instead actually adopts hook, line and sinker the language of Satan – i.e. the LGBT brown shirts. Are these school administrators really as dumb as a box of rocks, or are they just cowards who don’t want to face the orchestrated intimidation (or worse) of the brown shirts? Or are they card-carrying members of the LGBT crowd? Or have they been deceived into thinking that this anti-Catholic behavior is actually “compassionate”? Or (last option I can think of) are they trying to protect their paychecks?
I think their capitulation can be summed up thusly (cf. today’s Gospel reading):
“Render unto Satan what is Satan’s, and render unto Satan what is God’s.”
It’s an open secret here that the Catholic school system is anything but Catholic. Our First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, supports Catholic schools and praises them all the time, so that tells you how Catholic they are!
I am not sure of the reasons on your list but I think their willingness to push the gay agenda is down to their own lack of Catholic education. They actually don’t know what the Church is for and they think it’s a kind of extension of the welfare state, LOL!
Being kind to everyone, especially the so called “marginalised” etc. is the main thing, not doctrine, not living a moral and Catholic life.
These people would laugh at apparitions like Quito and Fatima – they really don’t have any Catholic understanding at all, and really need prayers. How they get into these jobs in Catholic education, beats me. It’s obviously a case of who you know, not what you know.
Well, today a shocking article was published on the Scottish Catholic Observer website (I’m not certain, but I assume it was been published in the print edition too). Sally Fraser, a 36 year old pastoral assistant (whatever that is!) At St. Mary’s Star of the Sea in Leith, Edinburgh, has written an article entitled “Keep A Space Open For Catholics On A Different Path”. This article, under the cloak of feigned admiration and praise, belittles the 100 young orthodox Catholics who wrote a letter calling for an uniquely “Catholic” Church (isn’t this like writing to the Vegetarian Society asking for a completely “vegetarian” society?) and the 200 young Catholics who signed a letter upholding Humanae Vitae. The article can be found here:
Sally Fraser admits that, if she had been asked, she wouldn’t have signed either letter. Immediately, I concluded that Sally doesn’t want, or believe in, an uniquely “Catholic” Church and doesn’t uphold the Church’s teaching on contraception. Reading on, my fears were confirmed.
Right from the get go Sally lays her cards on the table by writing:
“In order for the Church to appeal to young people, it also needs to challenge sexism, embrace diversity and be open to ecumenical work—those with no Faith see infighting and divisions as contrary to the general message of peace, love and understanding.”
The minute someone calls for the Church to “embrace diversity” we know that they are suspect. I’m pretty sure Sally Fraser would wholeheartedly support the material produced by SCES which capitulates to the LGBT lobby. We see that she does not believe in the infallible dogma “outside the Church there is no salvation ” through her call to ecumenical action.”. Furthermore, she indicates that she considers the “Church” to be bigger than the Catholic Church by claiming that disagreements between Catholics and those outside the Church are examples of “infighting”. This is heresy.
As for the “general message of peace, love and understanding” I’ve no idea what she means by this, but it has very little to do with authentic Catholicism. The dogmas of the Church and tenents of the Faith, defined in Scripture and Tradition, are a radical call to conversion and holiness, not a general message of peace, love and understanding! I think Ms Fraser confuses the Church with Greenpeace !
She goes on to write:
“They point towards a lack of inclusivity which, while appealing to some, will alienate others. Orthodoxy and tradition can be beautiful, but life is messy and dangerous and often downright painful, and all of that somehow has to find its way into the Church too.”
We see here the influence of Pope Francis, who encourages Catholics to “make a mess”. Incredibly, Ms Fraser wants to see “messy, dangerous and painful” experiences “find its way into the Church”. This is completely contrary to Sacred Scripture and Tradition. Our Lord calls us to be “perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect”. He does NOT call us to engage in, indulge in or promote messy or dangerous lifestyles. In fact, St Paul writes that Christ gave Himself up for the Church and sanctified Her with a cleansing water (Ephesians Chapter 5). At no point does He call for anything “messy” or “dangerous”.
We can clearly see Sally’s ignorance, or misuse, of Scripture when she writes:
“Jesus taught us about silence and prayer but he also got his hands very dirty and broke rules and was subversive, and I would like to hope young people can hold on to a bit of that because lets face it, the world and the Church badly need it. ”
Where did Our Lord “get his (sic) hands very dirty and broke the rules”? Our Lord refused to be confined by the man made, hypocritical rules of the Pharisees which placed unecessary burdens on others, but it’s absolutely not true to suggest He encouraged anyone to “break the rules”. This shows a real contempt for the teaching of the Church.
Incredibly, she goes on to write, ”
With regards to the upholding of traditional marriage values, I applaud these epistles and young signatories. I am happy for them, and perhaps even envious. Would I hope that my own daughter, when she grows up, would find a nice devout boy like the ones on these lists, rather than most of the scumbags I misspent my youth with? Maybe.”
Leaving aside the snide comments about traditional values, what kind of mother wouldn’t want a “nice devout boy” to be the future husband of her daughter? Why is there a “maybe” at the end of her question? Again, we see Ms Fraser’s contempt for the moral law.
Sally reaches the end of her diatribe against the Church and moral law by writing:
“But I would ask that in your confidence and your ‘big C’ Catholicism and your ‘big T’ Truth, that you keep a space open for all those who are a bit less black and white, and for all of us women-at-the-well whose lives have been different to yours. After all, Jesus quite liked us women with sketchy pasts, our tears on his feet, our hair and perfume to anoint him. He made room for us—that is my ‘big T’ Truth.”
Once again, we see the snide, condescending attitude shine through, as well as the misuse or Sacred Scripture. Sally suggests that Our Lord turned a blind eye to the woman caught in adultery when this is absolutely not true. Yes, He refused to condemn the woman, but was crystal clear in His admonition to “go and DO NOT sin again”.
Sally Fraser prefers her own version of the Truth, to the truth of the Catholic Faith. She’s an out and out Modernist who clearly holds the teaching of the Church with contempt. It’s shocking that this article was printed in a so-called Catholic newspaper. Sally Fraser must be removed from her post at St Mary Star of the Sea and never be allowed to take up a position in a Catholic parish again.
Many thanks for posting that alert to that horrendous article.
I was so incensed when I read it, that I have cobbled together the following email:
For the attention of Fr Martin Moran OMI, St Mary’s, Leith
Copy to Sally Fraser, “Pastoral Assistant”
Copy to Archbishop Leo Cushley
Dear Father Moran,
Firstly, may I record my disquiet that in order to reach you, I have to send this message via a lay woman. I’m sure I am not alone is feeling very uncomfortable about that. Writing to a priest, I would expect to have my concerns treated directly by him, and thus, I would never write about anything personal, knowing that an employee is reading it. I doubt that others would risk confidences, either. That, however, amounts to a mere aside, for now.
There is nothing of a personal nature in this email, the purpose of which is to draw your attention to a discussion on our blog here where, at 7.44pm this evening, a commentator (Petrus) posted a link to a disgraceful article published in today’s Scottish Catholic Observer (SCO), attributed to Sally Fraser, your “Pastoral Assistant” – presumably another paid employee; forgive me for the thought, but how can a parish afford to pay not one, but two women, and that at a time when the Church pews have seldom been so empty? Really, the crisis in the Church is multi-layered. In any event, my first thought on reading the SCO article was to suggest to you, with respect, that, whatever these “Pastoral Assistants” do, if Sally Fraser is the best you can find, perhaps that’s God’s way of telling you that since we’ve managed without them for 2000 years, it’s perhaps time to get back to the drawing board.
This woman, Sally Fraser, is publicly owning up to sexual promiscuity, which we read as unrepented in light of the fact that she goes on to speak about “embracing diversity”, which is, of course, double- speak for sexual immorality and perverted unnatural behaviour. She ridicules orthodox youngsters – who are few and far between these days – and isn’t too keen on her own daughter(s) marrying a decent Catholic boy. Tell you what, she won’t be mother-in-law to either of my lovely, handsome, thoroughly Catholic nephews, who serve the traditional Latin Mass and express disgust at the modernist mentality displayed by Mrs Fraser in her outrageous article. She may think she “converted to Catholicism in her 20s” but, the fact is, she is far from Catholic and would be every bit as comfortable singing Kumbaya in the nearest Protestant church.
Sally Fraser is not a suitable candidate for employment in any Catholic parish, and so – especially if her duties involve any level of influence over vulnerable parishioners, especially young people – I would strongly urge you to find her some other way to earn her living. I am copying her into this email, as a courtesy.
I have also copied the Archbishop into this email, since, ultimately, it is he who is responsible for protecting the faithful in his charge from spiritual and moral danger from those who are exercising influence whether in parishes, schools or through the writings in Catholic publications.
All good wishes
Editor, Catholic Truth Ends.
Ed Does this Woman actually receive a Salary from The Catholic Church. Surely to God there has to be Limitations even here . Will you get back to me please .
I doubt if she will be working for free. They do employ people to work as these Pastoral Assistants – no idea how much they are paid.
Thanks very much Ed . It’s really a free Country ( as long as your Diverse of course) and she’s entitled to Her Non Catholic opinion but most certainly not in a Catholic Newspaper. As for the title of Pastoral Assistant I don’t suppose that means cleaning the Church. For a wee Laugh al tell you a Joke .
This Guy gets his Brother in Law a great Job as an Engineer in a Factory. Now the Brother in Law knows nothing about Machinery but the Guy says ” Look 👀 just walk up and down all day with a Big Spanner and pretend that your tightening up a bolt here and there you’ll be paid £600 a week no questions asked .
2 weeks go by and the Brother in Law goes to the Guy and says he wants to talk . ” What is it do you want more money ” no says his Brother in Law ” I think there onto me ” howzat says Guy
” Well for the last few days every where I go am sure I see someone following me ” O I meant to tell you says the Guy
That’s your Assistant. —- Good Night and God Bless .
I am stunned at that article in the SCO, though I don’t know why – I never buy the rag any more and any time you post a link it’s always bad news, but this is something else.
I just hope the priest realises that he’s made a huge mistake giving her a job in his parish and I hope the archbishop takes the decision to put an end to these posts. Pastoral Assistants – ridiculous.
What’s the bet she is giving out Holy Communion at their Masses and taking Communion to the sick – all the while the priest is attending meetings to generate ideas on how to use the Assistants even more. They’ll be hearing confessions next, never mind reading emails, LOL!
You really do have to laugh, otherwise you’d cry. What a mess the Church is in right now. The lunatics really are running the asylum.
I’ve read that article through and it really is a shocker.
The woman who wrote it should be sacked immediately from that parish.
She hasn’t a clue, claiming that Our Lord ignored “the rules” when he actually said that he had come to fulfil the law not to replace it and he said that “not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away…” So, her ignorance is mind-boggling.
What really left me speechless though was her words about her daughters. Putting it as a question, she wonders if she would like her daughters to “…find a nice devout boy like the ones on these lists, rather than most of the scumbags I misspent my youth with?” and answers her own question, amazingly, with a “Maybe.” – So, she would possibly prefer her daughters to marry (or maybe shack up with) a “scumbag” rather than a “nice devout” Catholic boy. Well, some mother. Mothers generally want the very best for their children – not Sally Fraser, it would seem.
That’s one parish that I would not want to belong to. I’d love to meet some of the ordinary parishioners to ask what they think of their priest’s “Pastoral Assistant”. If she’s as arrogant as she comes across in that SCO article, I imagine the answers would include not a few negatives.
That really is a disgraceful article. I can’t add anything to what has been said about this so-called Pastoral Assistant, except to add my voice to the call for her to find another job. I’d also like a look at the parish accounts – we really should know how much these people are being paid out of church funds.
My God this Woman is as Humble as Francis. I read your link up until she said that she Addressed The Catholic Men’s Society and said more or Less that Our Lord was a revolutionary to be honest that was enough of her Garbage for me . Who gives these people a voice certainly not Catholics trying to live The Faith of which she’s obviously trying to talk down. Question. Does she get paid for writing this rubbish in a so called Catholic Newspaper.
Faith of our Fathers,
“This woman is as humble as Francis” – LOL!
I would imagine she does get paid by the SCO for her article, and she’ll definitely be getting paid for her parish job. The Church really is bankrolling its own destruction.
Petrus emailed me late last night to say that Sally Fraser has launched an attack on him, and on Catholic Truth, on her Facebook. Petrus took screenshots and sent to her parish priest, the archbishop, the editor of the SCO and to my unworthy self. He got up this morning and they have been deleted. There is also a screenshot of her Twitter page which is illuminating and underlines everything I have said about her in my letter to her PP. I used to be in the habit of saying this or that modernist “is about as Catholic as Iain Paisley” but he’s dead. I’ll leave it there…
FROM SALLY FRASER’S FACEBOOK…
“I’ve just had my first bit of Catholic trolling! from someone who says I ‘shouldn’t be allowed to have any influence over Catholics in any parish.’ Sitting on my hands to stop myself writing a smart a***e response because OTHER CHEEK FOLKS
Here is the offending article in case you fancy exposing yourself to a little of my evil heretical influence on a Sunday afternoon. (provides link to the SCO article).
Her Twitter page is similarly enlightening. She reports that her son asked if she could still have babies. Reply, yes, but not sure that she wants to.
And we all know that it’s what we WANT to do that matters in this life… Yes, she’s every bit the “modern” Catholic.
Oh and she reports on Twitter that her son wrote “F**K” on his bedroom wall and she wants to be “cross” but part of her is “proud that he shares her desire to express his rage through writing”
I mean, a mother who indicates she’s not sure she wants her daughters to marry decent Catholic boys rather than the kind of “scumbags” she knew in her youth (I’m presuming she didn’t marry one, but who knows) and then is unfazed by her son’s bad language, not in an outburst of annoyance, but written on his bedroom wall. Mother of the Year award? These days, she’s probably in with a fighting chance…
Note the allegation that we are “trolling” her. This is just another way of shutting down criticism. After all, if, by commenting on something she has written which is in the public domain, we are trolls, isn’t SHE “trolling” us?
Just a (logical) thought…
I agree with others that the SCES material is a disgrace and the whole SCES Catholic School system is just an exercise in “going through the motions”.
Despite this, sad to say, I think it still represents the “least poor choice” for many families, educationally. The schools are not places where one would learn or experience anything worthwhile about Catholicism, but at least sincere faith might be respected and given a hearing.
The SCES output is clearly designed chiefly to please secular politicians, rather than to form Catholic minds. The material is completely un-tethered from the Catechism.
Recently, when St Kentigern’s High School (Blackburn) was “caught” (by secular activists) with CTS material referencing the Catechism on homosexuality, the SCES did not defend it, by just went into grovelling mode and immediately withdrew the material claiming it was “not age appropriate”. In this way they imply that the basic faith teaching tool is somehow inappropriate and they also infantilise young Catholic adults.
I am not impressed by Barbara Couper, who seems too malleable and conciliatory towards enemies of the faith. She strikes me as a superficial careerist akin to the “pastoral assistant” mentioned elsewhere on this thread. I much preferred her predecessor, Michael McGrath.
The SCES material has a strong focus on “homophobia” among other kinds of prejudice – meaning many pupils will inevitably become pro-LGBT behaviour (especially those from superficially Catholic families, i.e. the majority) – but remarkably it seems to completely avoid anti-Catholic prejudice despite this being the chief prejudice in Scotland statistically.
I remember reading about the task force set up with respect to the tie-campaign agenda. It was noticeably that Barbara Couper was the only person who *might* have had an agenda other than to completely normalise and promote homosexuality.
The one crumb of comfort in all this, is that it seems this position has been arrived at without the need for formal legislation. In this way I hope faith schools in particular will have some leeway, especially when it comes to respecting the wishes of parents who may object to some of the content.
Your post is, as ever, full of charitable interpretations. I fear, however, that your conclusions are entirely divorced from reality.
I really need to be elsewhere, so am only going to highlight a couple of key points.
Firstly, where you say that “at least sincere faith might be respected and given a hearing” … No way.
Teachers who attempt to pass on the Faith in its purity, are punished and removed from Catholic schools. I know of more than one who had to take refuge in the non-denominational sector and one who had to move to Spain after he was caught teaching primary pupils the Rosary, called into the Head’s office where the Religious Sister, RE Adviser and Head Teacher told him they would give him good references if he applied for English teaching posts, not RE, in other schools. He’s now lost to the Catholic sector. Apart form my own experiences in not one but THREE Catholic educational establishments, I could write a book on the subject.
So, sincere faith is not acceptable in the Catholic sector. A sincere parent will receive assurances that the school caters for their concerns, but that’s because every child represents cash. Believe me, one chaplain told me that he was exhausted after the Open Evening. When parents approached him to enquire if the school was rigidly orthodox or was there a liberal element, he pointed them to my assistant who was rigidly liberal, with bells on. Often wore a badge which read “ordain women or stop baptising them”. Then, when parents asked for assurance that the school was teaching the Faith and not liberalism, he sent them over to me, with assurances that the school was thoroughly orthodox. Liar.
As for Michael McGrath – as someone who reads (I presume!) our newsletter and has done over the years, I do worry about your memory! Michael McGrath, as we have reported many times and reminded readers many times, dropped a bombshell in his very first article in the SCO on his appointment as Director of the SCO. He wrote that Catholic schools were not about “imposing” any particular tradition on pupils but on providing a spiritual dimension to education.
THAT is in every mission statement in every non-denominational school in which I’ve ever taught. And, as I’ve repeatedly pointed out, do we speak about “imposing” something good? Do we speak about “imposing” birthday and Christmas presents on our family and friends?
No, these people have lost the Catholic Faith if ever they had it. Barbara Coupar MUST be convinced that there is not wrong with unnatural sexual activity or she’d hardly be pushing it in Catholic schools.
That’s all I have time to write at this point in the day, but – honestly – even a former Archbishop in Wales once said publicly that Catholic parents would be better off sending their children to non-denominational schools. At least then, you can correct what they are hearing and seeing at school by pointing out that these teachers are not Catholics. Much easier than having to contradict alleged Catholic teachers, head teachers and priests.
Your post is, as ever, full of charitable interpretations. I fear, however, that your conclusions are entirely divorced from reality.
I do not think they try to be “charitable”, so much as they try to be balanced and constructive.
Firstly, where you say that “at least sincere faith might be respected and given a hearing” … No way.
(In my earlier post, I was talking about the families whose children attend the schools, not the staff).
I would have to disagree with you, as I am aware of traditional Catholics who use Catholic schools but on the grounds that their children do not attend modern worship or attend modern RE.
The reason given is that these things do not meet their requirements as traditional Catholics (which is obviously true).
That is surely an example of the schools respecting the faith of sincere Catholics who have concerns. Why would they not respect such requests? After all – as you said yourself – the modern schools do not aim to “impose” anything.
As for Michael McGrath – as someone who reads (I presume!) our newsletter and has done over the years, I do worry about your memory!
I said I preferred Michael McGrath to Barbara Coupar.
I didn’t say Michael McGrath was flawless or beyond reproach.
This preference is because I observed him being combative towards elements such as the TIE-campaign, whereas Coupar seems to have been only accommodating towards them.
I completely agree with you that the leadership of the SCES, many teachers and many families are at best superficially Catholic.
dropped a bombshell in his very first article in the SCO…. wrote that Catholic schools were not about “imposing” any particular tradition on pupils but on providing a spiritual dimension to education.
Sadly, this is true – that is the modern approach of Catholic schooling. They are quite open about it.
I do not agree with it and would of course agree that traditional ways are better.
However, I think that – as per the example above – if parents take an active interest in their child’s schooling and insist on their principles, then they can still achieve what is best for them and avoid harmful things such as the novus ordo mass and wishy-washy drivel presented as Catholicism.
former Archbishop in Wales once said publicly that Catholic parents would be better off sending their children to non-denominational schools.
I can see his point, but I wonder if that will still be true with this latest LGBT material.
My children are not of school age yet, but I would have thought even a modern Catholic school would be more receptive to the demands of Catholic parents than a non-denom one, in this day in age. (especially as there is to be no formal legislation, as I understand it).
I was heartened to learn of the Catholics whose kids are exempt from attending the novus ordo etc, however I am under no illusions as to modern schools which is why I describe them as “the least poor choice” for most families – and only then if the parents are alert and “on the ball”.
I think that primary schools, at least, have something to offer in the way of a sense of Catholic identity / community and the practice of daily prayers etc.
I think it is incumbent on parents during this crisis to do try hard, be aware of the manifold problems of today and make the best of things.
A constructive / positive approach is surely best – If we are to adopt constant negativity and tell our kids “everything is rubbish” – then why would they even bother?
I don’t see how being allowed to withdraw children from “modern worship and RE” in Catholic schools means that Catholic schools can be justified. Surely if “traditional Catholic parents” feel that their children are not safe in the new Mass and RE lessons, there’s a very serious question mark over the schools?
I apologise if that sounds negative, but I’m just asking the question, as I really can’t understand why any traditional parent would be satisfied with that, after all religion in Catholic schools is meant to go right through the curriculum. There will be plenty of other times when children are exposed to teachers’ view and the one thing they are not allowed to withdraw from, I think I’m right in saying, is PHSE where they teach the LGBT rights.
don’t see how being allowed to withdraw children from “modern worship and RE” in Catholic schools means that Catholic schools can be justified.
So are you fundamentally against Catholic schools are a concept?
Surely if “traditional Catholic parents” feel that their children are not safe in the new Mass and RE lessons, there’s a very serious question mark over the schools?
Well, its a serious question mark over the modern mass and how the faith is taught today – but of course readers here already know that.
I think there are other, worthwhile parts of the schools – though I do not suggest this excuses the failings we discussed.
Looking back at my own schooling, although our catechesis was rubbish, I can see that the learning environment was imbued with Christian values – respect, tolerance, hard work etc – and while this is not sufficient in itself to teach the faith, it is still a desirable learning environment.
I think non-denom schools often lack elements of this, and this is why even secular opponents of Catholic schools will acknowledge (for example) the high standards of behaviour, emphasis on discipline, encouragement given to all pupils, effort expected from all pupils etc.
I do not suggest this means the poor catechesis is therefore tolerable, but I would rather my children attended a school with good discipline, where hard work was the norm, than some of the zoos (!) with pass for schools today.
Of course, high standards are not unique to Catholic schools, but both popular opinion and formal inspections do acknowledge that Catholic schools are more likely to have high standards than a non-denom school, thanks to Christian values.
I really can’t understand why any traditional parent would be satisfied with that, after all religion in Catholic schools is meant to go right through the curriculum. There will be plenty of other times when children are exposed to teachers’ view and the one thing they are not allowed to withdraw from, I think I’m right in saying, is PHSE where they teach the LGBT rights.
So what is the alternative?
For most people the choice is a straight one between a Catholic or non-denom school.
We are agreed on the weaknesses of modern Catholic schools, but even if every supposedly Catholic aspect of a modern school was wishy-washy, are we not then just left with a non-denom school in practice?
As per the original example I gave, Catholic schools will (should) be respectful of parental wishes regarding forms of worship and styles of catechesis – although judging by Elizabeth’s comment below, this can be a lottery.
The other parts of the school curriculum which you praise, e.g. Christian values, are not, really, Christian values but ordinary values (arising from Christianity, of course but they are in every school) – respect, etc. is something taught in every school.
Also, I don’t think discipline is any better in Catholic schools than in non-denominational, from what I have heard from teacher friends. Just looking at the pupils walking along the road from our local Catholic secondary, I doubt it. The girls are dressed in mini skirts that are a disgrace and it’s not the first time I’ve seen a police car in the yard.
I don’t know what the answer is, except I agree with Petrus who recommends home-education, that you get one shot at raising your kids, so it’s important to make the right choice.
The other parts of the school curriculum which you praise, e.g. Christian values, are not, really, Christian values but ordinary values (arising from Christianity, of course but they are in every school) – respect, etc. is something taught in every school.
Also, I don’t think discipline is any better in Catholic schools than in non-denominational
I agree with you – I acknowledged above that such values are not necessarily unique to Catholic schools, but I do believe Catholic schools manifest them better and more reliably.
In the last couple of years, (~2016), the University of Glasgow did an analysis of Scottish State School inspections and found that 51% of Catholic schools were rated “very good” or “excellent”, compared with only 30% of non-denom schools. That is quite a significant difference.
These inspections take into account various aspects of the schools, including how well they are run, discipline, attendance and outcomes for the pupils etc.
And so, even despite the inadequacies we agree on regarding the teaching of the faith, in other ways they are demonstrably getting things right.
I agree with Petrus who recommends home-education, that you get one shot at raising your kids, so it’s important to make the right choice.
I think there is a lot to be said for home education, but equally I think it is impractical for many (probably most) families.
I admire parents who home educate their children, but the choice is simply not available to all, for a variety of reasons.
There are also likely deficiencies to home education. I do not think there is – or has ever been – a perfect type of education and there are pros and cons to all varieties.
Even if there was a perfect model of education, its value in practice would be variable dependent on the competence of the specific teachers in question.
My feeling is that all modern schools, Catholic and non-denominational, are a danger to young children. They are so imbued with the spirit of this world that I couldn’t, in good conscience, send my children to either.
The only acceptable form of education, in my opinion, for traditional Catholic children is home education. Granted, it’s very difficult if both parents work. However, my opinion is you get one chance to raise your children and you need to make the most of it.
Catholic and non-denominational, are a danger to young children. They are so imbued with the spirit of this world that I couldn’t, in good conscience, send my children to either.
But how would it be moral to even work in the sector then?
Surely your own good example of a professional teacher- hard-working, with good values and his head screwed on properly – shows that we should hesitate before writing off the entire system?
What Catholic parent could be dissatisfied with someone like yourself teaching their children, regardless of the type of school?
I would think, ideally, a traditional Catholic school would the best – such as St Michael’s (SSPX) or the new one (ICKSP) in Preston.
Even then, I have read previous inspection reports about St Michael’s which absolutely hammered it in some areas and have heard negative remarks about both teaching methods and bullying, from people with experience of it.
These above are the only 2 such schools I know of and they are simply too far away, and likely too expensive!
I remember, not long after Fr Brucciani took over as District Superior, there was a comment in the newsletter about the possibility of a junior school opening in Glasgow, but I have heard nothing more about it. Maybe just wishful thinking.
As i said to Margaret Mary above, there are likely pros and cons to all forms of education and its up to parents to identify and address any weaknesses.
One has to make a living so, providing the teacher doesnt teach something that is immoral or heretical, their conscience can be clear.
The key point is, the spirit of the world is now at the heart of all schools. Even with the most Traditional of teachers there would still be problems. Assemblies, visiting speakers, supply teachers, other children etc. Too much of a risk.
One has to make a living so, providing the teacher doesnt teach something that is immoral or heretical, their conscience can be clear.
I did not mean my question above as a “dig” (apologies if it came across like that) – rather I was genuinely surprised to hear your opinion on non-denom schools.
You are very well placed to comment on them, of course, but I didn’t realise you rated them so poorly in general.
Your not correct.I can assure you quite categorically that where a parent has exercised their right to withdraw from the above class this has been honoured and this is as well as withdrawing from r.e.It may be selective schools but it certainly is achievable.
If you recall, the Catholic primary school in Leith so much lacked respect for at least one traditional Catholic family that they accused them of belonging to a sect because they attended SSPX Masses in Edinburgh, and brought in the social services department on what are, more likely than not, spurious claims of child abuse – all, I think it is clear – because the father had expressed concern at some of the teaching in the school. So, I’m sorry to say so, but I totally disagree that – generally speaking (there may be the odd exception) – schools respect the wishes of parents.
Indeed, my own niece removed her children from the new Mass and RE before, eventually, deciding to give up her career and home-school, a few years ago.
She found she was still having to deal with the rubbish the children were being fed outside of RE, such as when her daughter arrived home to ask if Muslims and Catholics worship the same God, what’s the difference? This in an art lesson when drawing something relating to something “Catholic” – a poster for SCIAF or something like that, can’t quite recall but by way of making a Muslim pupil feel (you got it) included, the teacher said that “not to worry, we all worship the same God anyway.”
Conversations about family life take place outside of religion lessons and that, itself, is a minefield these days. In fact, the final straw for my niece, who deliberated over her decision for a year before taking the plunge and trying home-schooling, was when a parent, chatting in the yard at the end of the school day, mentioned that she was waiting to speak to her son’s teacher because said teacher had the temerity to speak about mums and dads in lessons, whereas her son (and many others) live in a single parent home, so they’ve no right to speak as if it’s normal to have a mum and a dad.
Just time to make one more point. I must be honest and say that I was close to despair reading your argument: “a constructive/positive approach is surely best…if we are to adopt constant negativity and tell our kids “everything is rubbish” – then would they even bother?”
Breaking it down, and to begin at the end…. this discussion is really about how we protect children against this LGBT onslaught, now affecting Catholic schools, not about what we “tell the kids”, although I imagine that if your children came home to report that the Maths teacher said 2 + 2 = 10, or the English teacher rubbished the advantages of reading books or said not to worry about spelling, you’d quickly point out that the teachers were wrong. So, unless you are saying that it really doesn’t matter what your children are being taught about the Faith, then, the same principle, surely, applies. When I heard that my Great Niece had been told that Muslims and Catholics believe in the same God, I (being helpful to Mum) asked her to remind me why that is not true; she was able to repeat what her dutiful (not “negative”) mother had told her, that since Muslims do not believe that Jesus is God, they do not believe in Father, Son and Holy Ghost, then we obviously do NOT believe in the same God, however much easier it might be to frame the answer more “constructively”. It’s really not always easy to do that!
I’ve had this put to me for years and years, that it’s better NOT to be “negative”. I remember once being in a meeting with the then Bishop of Middlesbrough of extremely unhappy memory (he disappeared off the episcopal scene, no explanation ever given) when he accused me precisely of such “negativity”. This was a meeting of school and college chaplains but since my institution didn’t have a chaplain, I was sent along instead.
Throughout the morning, I listened to the bishop and his priests throwing out their imaginative, creative ideas about how to better use their time in the schools; how they could make a difference. All based on the premise that we were dealing with schools and colleges packed with practising, if not zealous, young Catholics.
Eventually, I ventured my contribution. I expressed concern that the clergy and Bishop did not perhaps fully understand the level of lapsation among the student population. I offered some concrete evidence of my own attempts to have various of these priests into my Department and so on. The fact is, I said, the majority of students are lapsed and by the time they arrive in secondary school or sixth form college, they show amazing ignorance of the most basic tenets of the Faith. They wouldn’t have a clue about any of these ideas – they need the basics. One priest surreptitiously gave me the thumbs up. He was obviously as fed up as I was listening to the Alice in Wonderland version of Catholic education.
That was one priest. The Bishop? “Tut tut… don’t let’s be negative! he replied. Silence fell. Alice in Wonderland re-emerged.
On recovering my equilibrium, I raised my hand again to say that I really needed to reply to the Bishop’s charge that I was being “negative”, that it is surely not being “negative” to identify a problem because only then can we really begin to solve the problem. If the priests come in to schools to put some of these ideas into practise, they are going to be very disappointed and, perhaps, shocked. Heavens, we had to send one student home early from a pilgrimage to Lourdes! Life is a whole lot different these days (or even back then) to what most people think when they ponder the ideal of Catholic education. The theory and the practice are two very different things.
In fact, it is because our newsletter is perceived as “negative” that it is unpopular with so many people. I don’t get them now, but for years I received letters and email suggesting that I report more positive stuff, as if I’m a silly sausage who just wants to pass her time writing about the Church. The ONLY reason we produce the newsletter is to report on the crisis in the Church, all the negative stuff! – and for this reason: to warn our fellow Catholics of the fact that what they are witnessing in their parishes is not Catholic. If they want to read the “good news”, the reports of women’s guild coffee mornings and pilgrimages to hoax shrines, let them buy the Scottish Catholic Observer. That was (and remains) my stock reply.
When the day dawns that there is nothing “negative” to report, we’ll be closing down – with delight!
Yes the Leith story was very concerning, but I think that is very far from typical. There seemed to be many things in the mix there. Let’s just be happy there seemed to be a happy conclusion.
I think you misunderstand what I meant by negativity. I was proposing that, with Catholic schools and anything in life, we can take the positives and reject the negatives.
This is what I meant by being constructive, looking for worthwhile aspects, while rejecting or addressing negative ones.
To give an example: I would not dream of taking my children to the modern mass, for obvious reasons, which rules out attending the local parish on a Sunday.
However, I will happily go to confession at the local parish – if the time it is on particularly suits me, or simply because I cant go on a Sunday because my daughter is too young to be left alone while I go “into the box”.
That is an example of taking what is good / useful / positive and rejecting what is bad / rubbish / negative.
If I wrote the (hypothetical) parish off in its entirety, I would have much less opportunity to go to confession (or perhaps other worthwhile activities). it would be cutting my nose off to spite my face.
My arguments re the schools are just the same principle: take the good – the good education, the learning environment, the daily prayers – and reject whatever negative there many be: poor catechesis or exposure to the new mass etc.
As I said above, I admire parents who home school, and the home schooled children I have met are a great credit to their parents. But not everyone enjoys the option of going down this route and as I also noted, there are also downsides to home school and to every form of education.
I’d be interested in what you think the downsides are to home education….
I think there are likely downsides (maybe that is too strong a word) to every type of education. With home school, I would wonder about:
– how does the quality of teaching compare to that of professional teachers? (neither myself or my wife possess a teaching qualification, for example)
– is the curriculum less broad and are there less learning opportunities? (compare the skills and resources of a single family, to a school with a large teaching faculty and large budget)
– how do the social aspects compare to that of mainstream school? (for example, at a mainstream school pupils mix with a variety of others, there are opportunities for sports or hobby clubs, community / charity work, school dances etc. These things are obvious secondary to faith and education, but are still important in terms of a child’s development).
Of course, home schooling parents will identify such points and no doubt have means to address / mitigate them, but these are just some things which come to mind.
I could list similar reservations about private / boarding schools, non-denom schools, every type of education really – Catholic schools are the only type I have personal experience of.
And while, yes, I would say we were let down in the faith aspect, the whole experience was not to be condemned. I received a very good education, which I am grateful for, and the school community was pleasant to be part of.
I’d like to respond to your questions to Petrus, because I help my home-schooling niece with her children, doing some English with them. She is not a qualified teacher and deliberated long and hard before deciding to take a career break to try home-schooling, on the understanding that she could return them to school if it didn’t work out. She enjoyed it so much (hard work as it is) that she just couldn’t return to work, although her job was available to her at the end of her formal career break.
On the 18th September, she had a visit from the local education authority, an official in charge of home-education. I was invited to attend.
At the end of the visit, which lasted most of the afternoon, the official declared herself “blown away” by what she had just witnessed. This is what she had just witnessed…
An overview of the teaching programme used by my niece – there are programmes available to purchase online, and my niece uses a well known American programme, equivalent to a private school, operating online, with teachers available by telephone and email when necessary, and tutorial videos online. Books are posted out – and the books are terrific. Science for Young Catholics, English for Young Catholics, History for Young Catholics, etc plus various novels. In other words, the school runs according to the theory of Catholic education, with every subject imbued with the Faith. For example, in English lessons, where pupils may be given a list of sentences for whatever purpose (to inject adjectives, identify punctuation, whatever it is) there will be at least one relating to the Faith. E.G. (I’m just making up the following, as typical of their methodology):
Insert an adjective or adverb into the following sentences…
1) The boys were happy because they had looked forward to the school trip for months.
2) Saint Maria Goretti is a very good role model for young people because of her love for her Catholic Faith.
3) There was a queue at the stop because bus was late. Ends
After the brief overview of the programme, the official sat down to chat about the children’s progress. She was impressed that the eldest child is now in her final year at university; then she watched as the remaining three, including the 5 year old, conducted presentations in History, Science and Drama.
15 year old son used photographs, pinning them to a board, to outline the history of the area in which they live in Glasgow.
13 year old son used factual material about the human heart which he had researched to show his learning in a science presentation. He had drawn a human heart, posted it on the “classroom/kitchen” wall, and added the facts to the wall as he described the workings of the human heart.
5 year old daughter stood up to perform her little drama activity; she sang, with actions to make us all smile, Hickory Dickory Dock (the mouse ran up the clock).
Having expressed herself impressed with the presentations, noting the children’s self-confidence and remarking that each child is sociable and articulate (the subsequent letter expressing enjoyment at the afternoon and praising the children/mum to the skies, should be framed!) the official then asked about extra-curricular (social) activities.
All family members are competitive swimmers. Five year old is moving up the various grades quickly, and they all explained how much they love swimming. 13 year old is a member of a tennis club, which he attends on Saturdays, weather permitting. He’s received a pack from Judy Murray, mother of Andy, to encourage him to work hard to fill Andy’s shoes in the future! Two items in the pack are signed by Andy, so 13 year old thrilled to bits. Local Authority official, very impressed.
The older children also have commitments at church [serving Mass] and they attend annual summer schools [run by the Latin Mass Society] where they have made very good friends. One of these is actually here in Glasgow right now, spending the October break with my nephews. The friends they have made through the home-schooling network are quality children – sorry if that sounds snobbish but I’ve lost count of the number of teachers I’ve heard affirming that, no way, would they permit their children to befriend some of the inmates of their local comprehensive. Generalisations are not good, though, I know that, and I must say, in all honesty, that there are some lovely children in all schools. The problem is, all too often they are outnumbered by less desirable types. Home-educators cut out that downside of school and avoid the bullies.
However, I must also say, in all honesty, and the education official did not contradict me when I said so on 18 September, that, while teachers often attend in-service courses to update their strategies on how to encourage pupils to speak out in class (often a real struggle) there is no such issue with home-schooled pupils who are almost always more confident and self-assured that those educated in mainstream schools. Already, the 15 year old has shown the initiative to approach the University of Edinburgh to find out about certain courses and was invited to visit. He was assured that having been home-educated would not be a barrier to achieving a place at the university. On another occasion, a solicitor acquaintance offered to provide work experience for him, since he was, at that time, considering law.
Which brings me to my final point. A major problem in schools today is “peer pressure”. It is unusual to find a pupil who is indifferent to the opinions of those around him/her so while, in theory, you are right to seek to remove your children from certain lessons in Catholic schools, there is every chance that your children won’t be too keen on that because they will be singled out and separated from peers. Then comes the inevitable questioning from said peers, why don’t you come to RE? Why not PHSE? why not Mass? And – if there is a nasty element – possibly “so you’re above the rest of us, we’re not good enough for you?”
On the other hand, my nephews tell me, they are the envy of their friends from the swimming club – all of whom say they wish they were being home educated!
I note you mention “school dances”, so allow me to highlight just one occasion which sticks in my mind. It was a school disco, and I later heard of a conversation between one of the staff and the school chaplain, a priest, who said, watching the antics on the dance floor, that he felt very sad because he couldn’t help wondering just how many pregnancies would begin that night.
Gabriel Syme, it’s really essential to decide whether it’s wise to try to keep a foot in “the world” as it has traditionally been understood by Catholics, or whether a clean break is better. We do have to live in the world, St Paul tells us, but not be OF the world. It’s difficult.
Final word – whether or not you can home-school your children, and, understandably, it’s not always possible these days – you CAN ensure that they engage in wholesome reading, both the lives of the saints and other solid literature. My niece swears by such reading, arguing that THAT is what makes a (if not THE) major difference to the thinking and behaviour of young Catholics.
Phew! I’ve rambled on again – apologies. Hope some, at least, of this helps.
I’m no expert but home schooling definitely seems a better option. Most of the grandchildren of a good friend of mine have all gone through expensive private Catholic schools (although not actually run by Opus Dei, they are affiliated with that organisation). I’ve known all of them from birth, and some of them are now young adults. Having witnessed certain signs over the years, I said a long time ago that I feared that most of them would lapse. Sadly, it looks like I was right. Now, most, if not all, of the older ones are showing signs of lapsing, or have lapsed already – despite a lot of input from family and friends. My feeling is that they have been corrupted by peer pressure.
I agree with you and would say, judging by the young people I have met, home school produces very confident, well educated, polite and conscientious young people.
Done well, it is obviously a very fruitful system, but I don’t think education is “one size fits all” and I think people have to do their best according to their own circumstances.
Due to the current (poor) model of society, my wife and I both work to pay out mortgage and other significant bills, like the costs for the cars we need to get to work (I drive about 50 miles a day).
If we didn’t pay the mortgage, we would have no home, which would obviously be a big barrier to home education haha! It would also be a major parental failing, especially for me as a father.
And I take seriously the notion that we should not be seduced by the world, or become too materialistic.
I speak of a house and cars above, but we are not selfishly prioritising work over education, in order to have needlessly expensive or flashy things.
We have a nice family home for our children, but its far from the biggest or flashiest house in the neighborhood. I drive a nice car, but its an older model, nearly 8 years ago and not a glamorous brand.
Like all parents, we have a balancing act in providing a comfortable upbringing for the kids, without straying into either materialism on one side, or perhaps making them “miss out” on things (e.g. perhaps a family holiday) on the other.
there are some lovely children in all schools. The problem is, all too often they are outnumbered by less desirable types.
I honestly cant agree that problem children outnumber children from decent families in Catholic schools.
With great respect, I think that lacks perspective.
My own memory of Catholic schools is, (while we learned nothing about Catholicism), the school had high standards of discipline and, in the main, pupils were well behaved children from decent families.
Of course, every class has its clown and every school has it’s eejits. But then encounters with eejits are form of life lesson, because there are eejits at every university, in every workplace, sitting on every bus and living in every street.
You rightly highlight other dangers, like peer pressure and impurity, but these are not new challenges for young people and were around in the time of Christ, let alone before the Council.
It is incumbent on parents to do their best for their children. Ultimately a young persons best defence against these various dangers will be the values instilled within them and the standards demanded from them.
I agree with what you say about good quality reading, and material from my daughters kids Bible and the “for little Catholics” series makes up the bulk of the bedtime stories, prior to brushing teeth and prayers! 🙂
I hope I didn’t give the impression that I think home-education should be mandatory! I fully appreciate the practical reasons why it is not possible for many parents today to home school, even if they were minded to do so – I truly understand that it’s just not possible. I was simply responding to your comment about the “downside” of home-schooling and the overall impression I’ve had from your posts that formal schooling per se is better than home-schooling, with which, as an experienced teacher in several schools, both non-denominational and Catholic, I simply do not agree. Enough said there, soonest mended, except to throw in a reminder that the entire liberal culture now endemic in our society, is the culture within the school system and no matter how good the home, children will definitely be affected by it. No question. Remember, a key aspect of education today is encouraging children to think independently of their parents. I had a wee reminder of that during the visit from the Education official mentioned above, when the 5 year old was about to launch into her song and drama piece; unexpectedly, she produced the little book containing the words of the song and, realising that she might forget to do the comical actions, I said “Oh, you don’t need to use the book…” Immediately, the official leaned forward and said to the child “Unless you WANT to…” That was a little taste, for me a timely reminder, of what home-schoolers are missing in the “let’s undermine parents” department – Deo gratias!
As for discipline – it has long been claimed that discipline in Catholic schools is better than that in other schools. I think at one time that would have been true – at a time before the crisis in the Church took hold when children were disciplined at home prior to going to school! However, from my own experience, I could see no difference whatsoever in the behaviour of pupils in Catholic schools – apart from one, all-girls, grant-maintained high school with parents who were wholly supportive. Indeed, on one bus journey across Glasgow a few years back, I was getting hot under the collar listening to a bunch of boys behind me using the most foul language. Eventually I turned round to see the culprits… and noted that they were pupils from a top private Catholic school in the city. I just couldn’t resist it, I said “Ah, so THIS is what you learn at these wonderful Catholic schools we keep hearing about…” Giving them credit, they stopped the bad language and didn’t backchat me, so that’s something.
I note you disagree about the not so well behaved outnumbering the rest – but, this is in the context of learning. Pupils get as fed up as the teachers with the disrupters in lessons. It did used to be the odd one, as you indicate, but not any more. They come in packs and entire classes may be ruined because of a group of pests. That doesn’t mean the disrupters are horrible children. They can be very nice kids on a one-to-one basis, which is why I used to (all too often) weakly cancel detentions after a few minutes when faced with an (apparently) contrite culprit. It all depends, really, on whether you are OK with lessons being disrupted, sometimes on an industrial scale. Not that you are likely to find out. Ask any pupil who complains about classroom pests why they don’t tell their parents and urge them to complain, and you’ll see the peer pressure/fear of bullying at work.
Discipline, or lack of it, however,IS an issue and it is one of the reasons why so many teachers leave the profession. Several of my colleagues left to work in other professions and, perhaps saddest of all, one of the small group of teacher-students I had in my department just before my retirement decided to not apply for teaching posts because of the indiscipline which was then increasingly a problem in secondary schools. Maybe it’s better now, maybe everything has improved, and the stories I hear are the exception rather than the rule. One lives in hope! Proof of the pudding, however… when you hear people (and the TV gurus) banging on about the “best schools” and buying homes near “the best schools” remember that the teachers in those “best schools” were trained in precisely the same universities and colleges as the teachers in the less desirable schools. The difference is… drum roll… the pupils.
In any event, don’t let me talk you out of using the schools – Heavens, no. I don’t want to be held responsible for my friends and former colleagues being on the dole! 😀
I think you ask good questions. I’m typing on my smartphone so please excuse any typos etc.
I would not worry about lack of teaching qualifications. There are many support groups, message boards, forums etc there to guide parents. I’d also point out that a teaching qualification does not necessarily make someone a good teacher. A recent report criticised the literacy levels of newly qualified teachers in Scotland. What does that tell you?!? I think the example given above by the editor goes to show how successful a parent without a teaching qualification can be.
Regarding the curriculum, if you’ve been following the political news stories over the last decade, you will be aware that the curriculum is is disarray. In a home setting the parent can ensure the curriculum is broad, cohesive, relevant and challenging. I’m afraid from listening to friends who are teachers, those are not words that can describe the curriculum in schools.
Regarding the social aspects, I’d say this is the strongest attribute of home education, although people often assume it’s the most challenging (I’d say that’s discipline). Home educated children tend to be the most confident children I’ve met. Regarding clubs etc, from what I’ve heard, the opportunities in a school setting are limited to maybe three or four pupils per class. So, there’s no guarantee that a child will be chosen. My cousin is always complaining that it’s the same pupils who are chosen. I think the majority of school educated children attend clubs outside of the school setting. As for “school dances” the least said about them the better. I’d say they are an occasion of sin.
I hope you will find this interesting. It’s just my take on your very good questions.
Why do you think the experience of the Leith family is “far from typical”? Because there have not been similar instances in the mainstream media? But, this case didn’t make it to the mainstream media either. Only because the family confided in a CT reader who attends the Edinburgh SSPX chapel, did we find out about it and obtain permission to publish it here – limited permission since to say too much would have endangered the family. Very few people get to hear about the way teachers are sacked or forced to resign for refusing to toe the modernist line. Teachers are “encouraged” to take a pay-off and sign a confidentiality agreement which prevents them from blowing the whistle. Believe me, Gabriel Syme, you would be surprised at how these situations are much more commonplace than you might think. I’m not saying they’re a daily occurrence – unlikely these days because, well, my next paragraph explains that one…
Given that over 90% of young people are lapsed even before they leave school (stats provided by the Catholic Education Service in England some years ago – it’ll be 100% + by now, I’d imagine) the evidence is clear. Whatever else children are receiving in Catholic schools, it’s not remotely akin to an authentic Catholic education. This was true some years ago, in the 1990’s, when there were still a few orthodox teachers battling in the schools, but nowadays, you will be hard pressed to find any teacher in any Catholic schools who doesn’t complete a sentence about the Faith with “but I don’t believe everything… I don’t agree with everything… I make up my own mind…” blah blah. Nobody wants rid of that type – that’s how they’re trained these days! Catholics in name only making their living out of destroying the Faith in the souls of the youngsters in their (abysmal) care.
As for the “values” in Catholic schools – as someone else has said, respect, kindness, tolerance etc are not specifically Catholic values and every school lists them in their mission statement. Here’s Hillhead High – one of the best Glasgow schools, I believe. https://blogs.glowscotland.org.uk/gc/hillheadhigh/
Devotion to the LGBT agenda permeates every school website that I’ve examined; I only looked at one Catholic school (Notre Dame) and they don’t have a section on “our values”, but mention them in the Welcome page. However, Catholic schools use the anti-bullying message as a cover for pushing LGBT and you can find that on the ND site, Partnerships section.
In any case, read the intro to this thread again to refresh your memory. Catholic schools are expected to follow the “equality and diversity” agenda, they’re instructed to be knowledgeable about the Equality Act. Look no further than the Scottish Catholic Education Service website, linked above in the introduction, to gauge what lies ahead for children attending Catholic schools.
I understand the problem – I really do, and I am aware that not everyone is free to home-school. The alternative, however, means vigilance and a readiness to be unpopular and put down by staff who, contrary to what you have suggested above, do not, in my experience, look sympathetically on “nuisance” parents.
I do think, however, that the staff in the non-denominational sector may be more sympathetic – although my experience there dates from before the drive to push the LGBT agenda.
It’s a real mess. Just what Pope Francis ordered!
I understand the problem – I really do, and I am aware that not everyone is free to home-school. The alternative, however, means vigilance and a readiness to be unpopular and put down by staff who, contrary to what you have suggested above, do not, in my experience, look sympathetically on “nuisance” parents.
Well I think that would reflect poorly on the schools / staff, if parents who may have specific requirements are considered a “nuisance”.
I had assumed that schools would be willing to work constructively with parents, where practicable.
Given many of the staff will be superficially Catholic (if at all), what do they really care if little johnny or jemima is present at Church for the holy day anyway, or if a family wants to do their own (proper) sacramental preparation?
Although it is some time away yet, I had imagined I would discuss things with the priest and head teacher in advance of the first term and explain (i) this is what I want and why I want it; and (ii) this is how I will make it work and avoid any issues.
I figured as long as it did not increase anyone’s workload, or cause anyone grief, then they would likely be accomodating.
Probably a lot depends on the personalities involved and how the matter is approached. I do not know anything about the local head teachers, but I have a good opinion of the local priest.
Maybe I am naive? Ultimately if the schools want a nuisance, they can have one! haha! 😛
I don’t want to exaggerate. You may be very blessed and find a co-operative school. Generally speaking, though, having pupils withdrawn from lessons or sacramental preparation, DOES add to someone’s workload, as someone needs to supervise the child. It’s not that difficult, of course, but I’m simply highlighting the point.
I LOVE the fighting talk in your final sentence! Brilliant!
I agree with much of what you say.These decisions are difficult regarding education.One thing that strikes me about this discussion is the general kind off feeling somehow is that those home schooled will be better children adults than those who go to Catholic schools or elsewhere.I don’t think either anything about homecoming because I look at this very simply.Homeschooled,traditional schooling or just ordinary education does not guarantee how your children are going to turn out.As parents you do your best to install good Catholic values and bring your children up as best you can in the faith and morals so you give them the tools necessary however ultimately they will choose how they live their life when they are adults and whilst you hope and pray that you have done a good job and they will stick with the faith morals and principles you have instilled it is then out of your hands.Just to add to what was said above about home schooling and nice friends and bad behaved children those who are home schooled will at one point be living in the world presumably and whilst they may have been protected from these things because they were home schooled they are without doubt going to be exposed just like everyone else when they go off to university or join the working world .This is off course when you would hope your teaching kicks in but like i said there are no guarantees.Even the best raised and educated children go wrong.
With respect, Hope, I think your posts are full of misconceptions. I don’t have a lot of time right now, so I will simply correct the most glaring.
It is irresponsible for a parent to allow their children to be exposed to situations that will endanger their souls. Yes, at some point in their lives, children will come across bad influences in the world. However, they have to have the knowledge of the truth bad influences and have the maturity to recognise bad influences and how to respond appropriately. They must be grounded in the truth. When children are most impressionable, it is the role of the parent to protect them from bad influences.
This same argument is used for sex education. Children will hear about these things and be naturally curious, so we should give them the information at a young age to prepare them. No! It is psychologically damaging to give children graphic sex education before puberty as they are not emotionally mature. Therefore, we promote purity and modesty first, so that when the appropriate time comes, young people have the proper grounding in doctrine before they are given information about sex.
We wouldn’t allow five year olds to cross busy roads on their own because one day they will have to do it! No, we teach them how to do it safely, ensuring that they have a firm understanding of the basics before we allow them to do it for themselves.
Well said. I agree with every word.
I had meant to clarify my own posts here on home-schooling because I think I have given a rosy picture which may be misleading; everything I’ve written is true – just not complete!
The parent to whom I refer above, who home-schools, is the very first to say that she hopes and prays that her children will stay with the Faith but none of them are perfect and she is very well aware of the dangers that lie ahead.
So, you are correct. The fact that children are home-educated is no guarantee that they will remain faithful. Not at all.
The advantages of home-education that I’ve witnessed are that (1) they are introduced to solid literature, beautiful books that are of a much nobler quality than anything I’ve seen used in schools (2) they are protected from LGBT+++ propaganda, learning instead about virtues, purity, modesty etc. (3) they are not slow to offer an opinion, free from the sort of peer pressure that is the norm in classrooms.
There is also, of course, the argument that we do need pupils and students of strong enough Faith to act as apostles in schools, able to recognise the propaganda for what it is, but, since this LGBT +++ propaganda is being introduced to children at younger and younger ages, this is difficult. Still not impossible, certainly at secondary school level, with thoughtful preparation and alert parental supervision of what is being taught in lessons.
So, again, well said. Thank you for your thoughtful comment which prompted my memory to write this one.
PS – just read Petrus’ comment and he is, of course, correct in everything he has said about sex-education (brilliant analogy about crossing the road), but I don’t think anything he says is contradicting your post to which I am replying. He would agree, I have no doubt, that no home-schooler would claim to guarantee that their children will all remain faithful, while hoping and praying to that end.
Gabriel Syme, I’m not sure that the Leith family is far from typical. I was speaking to social worker from England, who happens to be a Traditional Catholic, and she told me that, sadly, this kind of thing is all too common in the Social Services in England where children are removed into care for the flimsiest of reasons. I suspect that the Social Services in this country are not any better.
I read all letters since last night with some sadness but at least We Are Asking Questions. The LGBTQIXYZ Problem ( and it is a huge problem ) is most certainly not going away .In fact the Horrible BBC came out again on their website and said that the Corporation has not got enough inclusive LGBTQIXYZ fellows in their ranks and here was i thinking that it was Compulsory to be a Homosexual before one could get a Job at the BBC.
The thing is now we know that Free Speech is most certainly not Free and what is being fed to our Youth either through the Marxist BBC or the Marxist Facebook and Twitter is now a real problem. I personally used Twitter but was suspended and not alone obviously when Judge Kavanaugh was being torn limb by limb by these outlets and attempted to put in my little bit of support. Also the BBC gleefully reported the attacks on Ms Ford and most certainly thought that Judge Kavanaugh would not be installed in The Supreme Court. All week this was on the BBC web on the day he was going to be at last confirmed Nothing from them as they knew they were beaten. I know this is a long winded post but the element to it is that in this Day and Age nothing Honest is written on the MSM as far as Morals are concerned. I am certainly no Saint but I most definitely know Truth from a Lie and what is being fed to our Youth either through the corrupted LGBTQIXYZ media is all Lies. And this is where it’s so important that if a young Catholic reads a Catholic newspaper or Magazine then it should be about the True Catholic Faith and no blending with the times. As far as Catholic Schools go too here some of the things like teachers saying that basically there is no difference between a Catholic and a Muslim makes me shudder. Can you just imagine the Outrage if that was said the other way round. There would be probably be a Fatwa put out on the all inclusive Teacher.
On reading this letter of yours again Ed that’s exactly what we have to get back to first is The Basics which is true in most if not all Problems in Life.
The clergy in my local parish have withdrawn from being school governors at the high school here (which is rated outstanding by Ofstead) in protest at the poor quality of Catholic teaching. One priest told me that parents would be well advised to send their children elsewhere as they would be much more likely to hold on to their faith. In his opinion most of the children were lapsed by year 9 because If they admitted to going to Sunday Mass they were mocked and teased. Whereas at the state school no one cared whether children went to church or not! My grandsons attend a catholic primary school which thank God seems to be thoroughly embued with traditional belief and practice but their parents are not so keen on the secondary schools to follow. The primary school is heavily oversubscribed with lots of non Catholic parents trying to get their children in, usually in vain.
Interesting comments – but do not the clergy who have withdrawn from the board not bear at least some responsibility for the standard of Catholic teaching?
From what you say, it seems like the schools are a lottery and parents would be advised to pay close attention to the standards in their own local area.
Presumably the attitudes of individual head teachers have a large bearing on this.
I see the SCES material references the “stonewall riots”, claimed to be the spark of the LGBT liberation movement.
I believe that this is in fact a mythical event and is part of the lies and deceit which the LGBT movement lives off. A convenient story to explain where this movement came from, through misdirection.
We are led to believe that the riots were large scale public disorder, lasting some 2 days.
Such public disorder draws Police and the Media like moths to a flame, and these groups document such events with video and photographs, each for their own purposes.
But there is no TV footage of the stonewall riots and seemingly no photographs either.
This is simply remarkable, in the fact of what the riots are claimed to be.
Compare to when I was a child in the 1980s: public disorder was fairly common and often would dominate the UK news – such as disorder associated with the miners strike**, the broadwater farm (race) riots and, of course, the oingoing northern ireland conflict.
There is no shortage of footage and pictures from these events, but stonewall is comparatively anonymous. I think, at best, there might have been a minor, unremarkable disturbance which has subsequently been blown out of all proportion by the LGBT propaganda machine and their media allies.
I am open to correction about this, of course, but I resent the idea that the SCES is teaching lies as well as promoting immoral behaviour.
**my dad was a policeman and I was often worried about him going to work, as TV scenes of miners confronting the Police often resembled large scale medieval battles and there were often serious and bloody injuries. (Accordingly, my young self adopted a vision of Policing that would have made even Reinhardt Heydrich blanch, though fortunately age has mellowed me in this respect! 😛 )
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-1371108/Jodi-Picoult-reveals-felt-son-told-gay.html…..SHE HAS ALSO WRITTEN A VERY PRO DEATH BOOK AS WELL ABOUT A GUNMAN IN AN ABORTION MILL
Can I ask that everyone who has commented and /or read the information about Sally Fraser contact her parish priest/line manager at St Mary’s Star of the Sea, the editor of the Scottish Catholic Observer and the Archdiocese of Saint Andrew’s and Edinburgh ? It’s important we do not allow Church funds to be used to employ heretics.
And As Petrus’s
PastoralPersonal Assistant, I am here to supply the email addresses 😀
Parish Priest – Fr Martin Moran OMI, St Mary’s, Leith: firstname.lastname@example.org
Archbishop Leo Cushley: email@example.com
Editor, Scottish Catholic Observer – Daniel Harkins: firstname.lastname@example.org
Please can you sign and share widely the above Petition thank you so very much ….
It’s all about the destruction of the family. Cardinal Sarah nailed it earlier:
Just as I was thinking that we’d not heard anything much from or about the Youth Synod… this…
“Manila Cardinal Tagle said during the October 23 Youth Synod’s press conference that the Church’s approach to what he called LGBT-Community was raised “many times”, discussed “very much” at the Synod and should be “welcoming”.
“Welcoming” is an innuendo word used by gay lobbyists to insinuate that calling homosexuals to conversion is “not welcoming”.
Tagle said that it is his hunch that the propaganda-word “LGBT” will be in the Synod’s final document.
Fortunately, the journalists at the press conference were more illuminated than the rambling cardinals on the panel.
One journalist reminded Father Antonio Spadaro who called for a “more Synodal Church” that in the patristic age the diocesan synods in Rome were “chaos” adding, “They would literally kill each other.”
Edward Pentin noticed that the Church’s moral teaching is almost totally absent in the reports from the Synod’s small groups.
You are right to say “brace yourselves”, no doubt this pantomime synod will be as as rigged as the previous one under Francis.
What Tagle says contradicts what Cardinal Napier says; he claims “LGBT” matters were raised only 2 or 3 time and one of those was a forceful put-down.
I am encouraged by reports elsewhere that the heretics are having to modify their tactics in the face of resistance and are now talking about including the Instrumentum Laboris (IL) document as an appendix to the final document (purely as a means of including the LGBT reference).
Of course, the German idiots are talking about “new anthropology” which is as absurd as their usual offerings.
The African Bishops say the rubbish IL document must “die” so it can give way to a worthwhile final document.
Edward Pentin is saying that the big surprise he knows of so far, is that references to synodality and permanent revolution have appeared in the final draft, despite not really being discussed at all.
My expectation is that the final document will be as per last time – the Bishops will vote down most rubbish, but a petulant Francis will insist it be included anyway.
I know you are not a fan of Fr Z, but he recommended this commentry on the synod by a Protestant writer, who seems to understand the Church much better than Francis and many prelates:
Instrumentum Laboris points to a church that seems to be losing sight of sin, redemption, grace, faith, the sacraments, and eternal destiny. The Catholic Church could well be exchanging her theological birthright for a Mass of sociological potage.
Catholicism is defined by dogma, not by focus groups. Those who dislike her dogma but still want to belong to her face a hard but unavoidable choice. And failure to make this point—that Catholicism is dogmatic and therefore by definition exclusive—is emblematic of the timidity of the document as a whole.
https://consult.education.gov.uk/pshe/relationships-education-rse-health-education/..PLEASE PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE IT IS VITAL PEOPLE MAKE THEIR VIEWS KNOWN THANK YOU
Perhaps these numpties should read this:
And perhaps the Archbishop should challenge them!
Here’s a “Tweet” from Edward Pentin claiming that the Synod doc gave the German bishops everything they wanted. If true, further evidence that this Pontificate is just a puppet of the [schismatic] German episcopate.
Even ‘sex change’ surgeons now expressing doubt about transgenderism : https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/even-sex-change-surgeons-now-expressing-doubt-about-transgenderism but are being silenced by the ‘trans’ lobby
I’ve been alerted to the latest front page of the Scottish Catholic Observer by a Glasgow reader, who had trouble keeping his face straight pointing to the headline below (drum roll)
POPE BRIEFED ON SCOTLAND’S CATHOLIC SCHOOLS SUCCESS
The Holy Father was presented with a copy of the Jesus Our Teacher icon
Read it right through – it’s totally… a.m.a.z.i.n.g… Gives a whole new meaning to the word “fiction”.
Honestly, my first thought was to launch it as a new thread, subtitled
JUST WHO DO THEY THINK THEY’RE KIDDING?
But I think it’ll do nicely here, because, given the headline to THIS thread, anyone with half a brain should be able to join the dots without too much trouble, and identify the nonsense in this latest highly imaginative piece of fiction about Catholic schools in Scotland.
What I DON’T understand is why they omitted to tell the Pope about the “safe spaces” for “gay pupils” in Catholic schools and the concern to cater for “gender identity” issues… That’s a puzzle. He’d have been delighted… probably thought “now THERE’S a diocese (or 8) which are in a REAL mess! Just what I said I wanted! Great stuff!
Anyway, read the entire piece through… and offer it as a penance for the Holy Souls!
Blech. Reminds me of leftist Hollywood actors constantly giving themselves awards for being minions of Satan.
Anyway, since Francis himself lives in a leftist, secularized fantasy world, perhaps the SCES thought he’d be willing to buy into theirs….
Comments are closed.