Christian schools under ATTACK!

A Christian school recently buckled under the weight of left-wing activist tactics. What is the Christian response? [5 Minute Read]

Written by Matthew Fischer, co-host of the Backbench Drivers podcast

St. Ursula’s, Kingsgrove, a private all-girls Catholic school, has recently been catapulted into the middle of Australia’s ‘culture war’. The inner-south Sydney school recently found itself in the media’s firing line after a change.org petition gained attention, in which the disgruntled ‘partner’ of a student sought to force the school to change its decision to bar their attendance to the school’s formal.

Sydney Catholic School spokesperson stated that

“... (they) traditionally celebrate year 12 completion through events that either do not involve students bringing friends or partners, or they bring friends or partners of the opposite sex.”

The Mainstream Response

Long-time National Observer readers will recognise this event as the latest in a long series of attacks on Christianity led by Australia’s political and media class. A previous article of mine, ‘The War on Christians’, explored a similar case in which then-Prime Minister Scott Morrison attacked Livingstone Christian College via talk radio for their enforcement of modest (Christian) dress codes. Todays article explores a very similar case.

In an unsurprising turn-of events, the St. Ursula’s decision to adhere to Catholic teaching has been met with similar backlash, with NSW Premier, and Marist College Kogarah Old Boy, Chris Minns publicly stated that he “think[s] in this day and age you should be able to take anyone you like to your Year 12 formal ... We are after all talking about teenagers who are close to or over the age of 18”.
Federal Education Minister, Jason Clare, went on Channel Seven’s Sunrise to proclaim that “It’s 2023”, unironically.
The minister went on to reiterate that “You should be able to take whoever you want to the year 12 farewell.”

What is Homosexuality? Why is it Wrong?

Homosexuality is defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) “... (as) relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” (CCC 2357).

The Catechism outlines that “(b)asing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”

As alluded to in the Catechism, the Church teachings on homosexuality are sourced from Sacred Scripture. Commentary on a few passages throughout the old and new testaments is provided by a Catholic Answers articles, with an extract below.

In Genesis 19, two angels in disguise visit the city of Sodom and are offered hospitality and shelter by Lot. During the night, the men of Sodom demand that Lot hand over his guests for homosexual intercourse. Lot refuses, and the angels blind the men of Sodom. Lot and his household escape, and the town is destroyed by re “because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord (Gen. 19:13)

In Romans 1, Paul attributes the homosexual desires of some to a refusal to acknowledge and worship God. He says, “For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see t to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. . . . Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practise them” (Rom. 1:26–28, 32).

...

Elsewhere Paul again warns that homosexual behavior is one of the sins that will deprive one of heaven: “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9–10, NIV).

Scripture has since been expanded through divine revelation, with the writings of Aquinas illustrating that

Now, it is good for each person to attain his end, whereas it is bad for him to swerve away from his proper end. Now, this should be considered applicable to the parts, just as to the whole being; for instance, each and every one of his acts, should attain the proper end. (SCG III, 22).

Aquinas continues;

It is evident ... that every emission of semen, in such a way that generation cannot follow, is contrary to the good for man. And if this be done deliberately, it must be a sin. Now, I am speaking of a way from which, in itself, generation could not result: such would be any emission of semen apart from the natural union of male and female. For which reason, sins of this type are called contrary to nature. (SCG III, 22).

More broadly Catholic Ethics teach that there are two key conditions for sexual actions to be morally licit, being outlined in a document produced by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, which states that:

The Church's teaching on marriage and human procreation afrms the "inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between

the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning. Indeed, by its intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the generation of new lives, according to laws inscribed in the very being of man and of woman".

...
Thus, fertilization is licitly sought when it is the result of a "conjugal act which is per se suitable for the generation of children to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one esh". But from the moral point of view procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not desired as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say of the specic act of the spouses' union.

It is clearly outlined that homosexual acts, like fornication, contraception, adultery, and masturbation, do not satisfy both preconditions, those being the unitive and procreative, which are necessary for the sexual act to be morally licit.

How are we to Treat Homosexual Persons?

Liberals, when confronted with the above teachings, will often resort to Christ’s commandment to love one's neighbour as a ‘gotcha’. This raises questions regarding the definition of love, and how we are expected to treat others who are afflicted by same sex attraction.
To answer these question, we must first understand what Jesus actually said about loving one another. When a Pharisee asked Jesus what commandment in the law is the greatest, Jesus responded;

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:34-40).

Many when considering this call to love one’s neighbour imagine that were they leading an un-Christlike life they would prefer to be left unimpeded - but is this really love? Is it loving to react permissively to our neighbour engaging in activity that is risking the eternal damnation of their soul? Is it loving to act indifferently or accept an activity contrary to nature itself?

Instead of accepting sin, Christians are called to follow the familiar aphorism ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’, a modern interpretation of a statement expressed more eloquently by Aquinas in one of his letters. This idea is expanded upon in the Catechism, which states:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulll God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrice of the Lord’s Cross the difculties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them their inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Capitulation and Conclusion

In the process of writing this article, the pressure placed upon St. Ursula’s by the political and media class has resulted in school administrators lifting the formal restriction.

This represents another victory to the progressive cause in their long march through Australian society, following the legalisation of gay marriage, abortion, euthanasia, as well as the continual march of feminism, racial ‘justice’ and relativism.

This is a perfect example of how a lack of true Christians in leadership positions within Australian government, media and business left a Christian institution vulnerable and unguarded. The result of St. Ursula’s capitulation could devastate the ability of Christian schools nationwide to resist the leftist bully tactics which succeeded in this case, in turn imperilling the proper teaching of Christianity.

This capitulation by St. Ursula’s administrators, whilst disappointing, is a reminder to every one of us to remain steadfast in our own adherence to Christ’s teachings. We cannot let the whims of the world lead us astray from the path God wants us to walk and whatsmore we must work to put ourselves in a position to protect the Christian faith, for what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?