Jesuit Mucking It Up (Again)

...this time in the US.

Twenty years ago, I was told by a bishop from New York that "the Jesuits are the cause of all the problems in the American Church."

At the time, I was attending a Jesuit high school and staunchly defended the Society of Jesus.

And I still do.

The problem is that with Jesuits like Fr. Edward Salmon (Salmonella?) of McQuaid (so tempted to make fun of this name) Jesuit High School, it becomes so much harder to do so.

Headline says it all:

McQuaid Jesuit High School To Let Gay Couples Attend Prom

Note what Fr. Salmon says:

"[I]n the hope that I and all of us at McQuaid Jesuit will let a ray of light break through the darkness and the heavy clouds that have surrounded us, I have made the decision that, if our two brothers who have asked to attend the Junior Ball together wish to do so, they will be welcomed," it said."

So consenting on something so against Catholic doctrine is now considered letting a ray of light break through the darkness and heavy clouds.  Note that our "infallible" Jesuit says that "he" had made the decision.  He also says that they will be "welcomed".  Not even "tolerated" but "welcomed." And Jesuits wonder why other religious orders look on them with suspicion.

This part he kinda got right:

He urged members of the McQuaid community to "confront their own fears about homosexuality and to curb the humor and discrimination that offend homosexual persons," noting that he is not "encouraging nor am I condoning homosexual activity just as I do not encourage or condone heterosexual activity at a dance."

The point is not being intolerant or being uncharitable towards homosexuals.  The point is that homosexual behaviour is sinful in the Catholic Church (don't like it? don't be Catholic, and yes yes I know about pedophile priests - that's different and an unfortunate headache on the part of Catholics like I).  Hence, there should be no behaviour on our part, or especially on the part of a Catholic educator, that even HINTS at consent of such sin.

Note also this:

Same-sex marriage has been legal in New York since 2011, a fact that many people stated in their messages to the school in favor of its eventual decision. It seems only fair that, if these students are allowed to get married in the state, being able to go to junior prom together should be a non-issue.

Legal doesn't mean right.  Baby-in-womb murder Abortion is legal yet only the most obstinate "Catholic" dissenters would insist that it is not so.

Also the difference is that getting married civily is not the same as getting married in the Church, and this is supposed to be a Catholic School darn it.

And the most eye rolling moment:

The most hopeful section of Salmon's letter read: "The teachings of the Church make it clear that the fundamental human rights of homosexual persons must be defended and that all of us must strive to eliminate any forms of injustice, oppression, or violence against them."

The Teachings of the Church also make it clear that a) sin is sin and that b) we should not condone sin.
In this case, the good Father Salmon is seemingly so concerned about not doing injustice, oppression or violence to students that he forgets that by condoning sin he does injustice, oppression and violence to God.  Defending the fundamental rights of homosexual persons means not treating them like garbage.  It does not mean condoning their sins.

One may ask, what is so sinful about a gay couple attending a dance together?  It's not the attendance itself that is problematic, but the consent to it.  You consent that they are a couple.  You therefore imply that all the behaviours associated with being a couple are okay.  I suggest that Fr. Salmon look up the word "scandal" in his Catholic dictionary.

Then again I should not be surprised.  This is precisely the kind of logic also followed by Catholics who support artificial contraception or abortion.  Sure it's sinful and evil but we must not deprive people of the choice not to partake of them.  Duh, if it's sinful and evil and one truly believes in that then it doesn't really matter if others are Catholic or not.  Evil is evil and must be opposed.

On the other hand, this priest is just following the example of some higher ranking bishops who just "live and let live".  This mentality seems to be prevalent with regards to pedophile priests.  How can we expect individual priests to carry out the principles of the Church when the higher ups seemingly don't?

Sigh.

Oh and happy easter everyone!