What do other priests think about St. Ann Catholic School refusing to enroll the child of a same-sex couple?
Hundreds are protesting a Prairie Village Catholic school for denying the enrollment of a same-sex couple’s child. Signed by nearly 1,000 people, a petition on behalf of the members of St. Ann Catholic School urges leaders of the church to allow the student’s admission.
“Respectfully, we believe that the decision to deny a child of God access to such a wonderful community and education, based on the notion that his or her parent’s union is not in accordance with the Church’s teaching in sacramental marriage, lacks the compassion and mercy of Christ’s message,” reads the petition dated March 1.
In a letter released Feb. 27, St. Ann’s pastor, Father Craig Maxim, said he asked for the counsel of the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas to make a decision about the child’s enrollment.
“The Archdiocese states that since same-sex unions are not in conformance with the Church’s teaching on sacramental marriage and these unions have no current ability to bring their relationship into conformity, the parents cannot model behaviors and attitudes consistent with the Church’s teachings. This creates conflict for those children and what is experienced at home. It could also become a source of confusion for other children,” Maxim stated in the letter.
Yesterday, we called around to local parishes and priests to ask what they thought about all this. We left several voicemails. Two priests declined to comment. Two parish receptionists told us their parishes don’t make comments to the media.
We did, though, get ahold of Father Don Farnan, pastor of St. Charles Borromeo Parish and School, in the Northland.
Farnan, who was ordained in 1987, has been the pastor of four parishes in Kansas City; he’s been at St. Charles since 2016. (Notably, Farnan’s church is part of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, which is separate from the Kansas Archdiocese in which St. Ann sits.) Farnan also publishes a regular blog, Charged With Saint Charles, in which he gives his insights into issues of faith, and confronts problems facing the church. We asked Farnan for his thoughts about how situations like the one at St. Ann should be approached in the church.
⇓
The Pitch: What are your views on St. Ann’s decision to not allow a same-sex couple to enroll their child at the school?
Father Farnan: It’s a difficult position for churches to be in, and a tough call for leaders to make. The purpose of Catholic schools is to pass along the faith. The central message of our faith is to love. We might argue that means welcoming children as Jesus did; in Mark 10:14 he says “Let the children come to me and do not prevent them.” It doesn’t seem good or right to punish children for behavior of their parents if we don’t approve. We certainly don’t do that for parents who are criminals, drunks, scoundrels, etc. On the other hand, children in our schools get taught about sacraments, like the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which is between a man and woman — different from civil marriage that society approves. And in our schools, children are exposed to the church’s moral teachings that would be in conflict with families led by gay couples. Believe it or not, St. Ann probably wants to protect the children of gay couples who would get caught in the conflict of the two cultures. Irrespective, it would be good if we all could deal with controversial situations like this through open, honest, and loving dialogue.
You talk about approaching controversial issues with open, honest, and loving dialogue. How does that happen?
I don’t know. I wish I knew. I think we just have to keep working at it. I think — let’s just say, for example, that if the community at St. Ann wanted to have a forum where the pastor, the principal, and others in that community would listen to the concerns of the other parents who are saying this is not really what we want our community to be. For them [church leaders] to listen, I think would be good, and for them to be able to speak. Now, what would be really wonderful is, if in addition to those leaders, they can also bring in the decision makers at the Archdiocesan level, the archbishop, and their director, the superintendent of schools, whoever else are at the core of that. It’d be great if they can listen also, and then also be able to receive the same respect they would give. If they have that, they start a conversation and hopefully the other side will think that it can begin to go somewhere.
If the same situation arose at your school, how do you think you would approach the situation?
There are some schools in our diocese in which there are kids from households with same-sex parents. And if I was made aware of that, to me it’s not something I would go and ask the Archdiocese, because I would view it a little bit differently. I would say it is our job to love. I mean, that’s the base of God. God is love. And how do we best love in any situation? It’s to welcome. Welcoming is an important aspect of loving, having open arms, open hearts, open doors. I think if you surveyed every Catholic school in our surroundings, I think you would find that there are probably several kids where the parents might be same-sex, we just wouldn’t ask that. This is not the first child from a same-sex couple that has been educated [in a Catholic school in the KC area]. Of course, this one’s not getting educated here — but there are others that do, and have, and probably have for generations.
You wrote a blog post last June about how Church law is not always just, and you said the task of the church is to help people come closer to God, not push them away. In that sense, how would you view the decision made by St. Ann?
I think sometimes the legalist in us gets in the way of what is the most important of all, which Jesus stated is the law of love. So if we can use that as our basis, I think the other laws make sense. But if you also remember, in the Gospels, Jesus was not a big fan of those who were overly observant or legalist, those that got so caught up in that kind of stuff. Personally, I don’t think he would want us to act like that. The Pharisees were overly concerned about such observances, and that’s where Jesus got in several arguments with them, and became angry over those things. I think again it should always be a base in love. That ought to be our guide, that there’s a way to reach out to this family.
You mentioned part of St. Ann’s decision-making may very well have been to protect the child who might get caught in the conflict of the two cultures, but isn’t that still pushing them away from the church?
Oh, gosh, yes. If I were the parents I would think: “You don’t want me here.” And I think that’s sort of the opposite message that we ought to be giving where all are welcome. There are some Catholics that would not agree, and might say, “Well, you’re welcome if you adhere to these standards.” It’s almost like if you can imagine a hill or a parapet and the church is at the top and the people are at the bottom, and it’s almost like we’re looking down and saying, “Please come up to us, and you’re welcome to come up to us if you can live according to this way that we live up here.” I get that. On the other hand, if you use that same image, I think Jesus was the one who always came down from that hill and was walking with the people, listening to the people and dining with the people and saying, “How can my walk with you bring us closer?”
What are your personal views on same-sex marriage?
“I’m going to answer that from the perspective of a Catholic priest. A Catholic priest and the church would say there is this thing called marriage, and we all have an idea of what marriage is, but there are really two definitions. One of them is a marriage of the society, in our case the civil union. And then inside the Catholic Church, there are only a few churches on Planet Earth that define a marriage beyond a civil union to be the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. The Catholic Church happens to be one of them. In that, they would say we have this more elaborate sacramental system and we can contrast the idea of the civil union versus the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. They’re both called marriage, it’s just that we have a different definition of what they mean. So the civil union is a contract, where the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony is a covenant. A contract is a 50/50 arrangement. You can agree to it, and break it if it’s finished. That’s how any contract and the civil society works. But in the church, it’s a little bit different — we say it’s a covenant, it’s not a 50/50 relationship between two individuals. It should be the giving of oneself in totality, that the other person becomes the center of your life, just as God has entered into a covenant with creation. So we would define it differently. The Catholic Church would say — or, I should say, Judeo-Christian history in the scriptures that we have would say — that marriage should be between one man and one woman. It’s just what is written, and what we believe, and what we think will always be the case. It doesn’t really negate that there is a civil union but could define who it’s between under different terms. But we know that the definition of marriage in our state has changed immensely in recent years, not just one man and one woman, but two women, two men. It’s just the Catholic church says marriage is more than the civil union, it’s this Sacrament of Holy Matrimony in this godly image where we believe that God is central to it. And that’s at least the way we read it, given to us by history — one man and one woman.
You don’t seem to shy away from talking about the controversial issues in the church. Last August, you wrote a blog post about how it’s important for the church to face the sex abuse scandal head-on, and to not shy away from it. And now you are openly talking to me about this controversy at St. Ann. A lot of clergy members have shied away from talking about these things. What made you decide to talk about it?
I think at the core of why people are so upset and sometimes embarrassed by their own church is that we don’t deal with things honestly, and as open as we should. I think it’s just part of the human condition, and human betterment to talk about things as opposed to not talk about things. It’s a healthier thing to deal with issues than to not deal with issues. I think if our church wants to be more healthy, more wholesome, and more happy, then we’ve got to be open and honest and loving. I always use those three terms together. It’s one thing to just be open, but you also have to be honest. Personally, I wish more leaders in the church would deal with things in a very upfront, forthright way. We often talk about transparency — that’s just a word that’s thrown around in the church, saying ‘Oh, let’s be more transparent’. And of course governments say that. Lots of people say that. But I think if we’re going to hold to these things, to me it just makes sense to do [be more transparent].”
♦
