Recent Posts
- Bill Donohue: blame Madonna not Catholic Church
- Governor Chris Christie cares little about civil rights
- Kansas Speaker Mike O'Neal's prayer for President Obama's Death
- Governor Chris Christie says majorities should vote on minority rights
- Newt Gingrich plays on racial, political and social resentments
Archives
-
February 2012
(2 entries)
-
January 2012
(10 entries)
-
December 2011
(10 entries)
-
November 2011
(7 entries)
-
October 2011
(15 entries)
-
September 2011
(14 entries)
-
August 2011
(8 entries)
-
July 2011
(10 entries)
-
June 2011
(12 entries)
-
May 2011
(11 entries)
-
April 2011
(11 entries)
-
March 2011
(11 entries)
-
February 2011
(8 entries)
-
January 2011
(10 entries)
-
December 2010
(9 entries)
-
November 2010
(12 entries)
-
October 2010
(11 entries)
-
September 2010
(8 entries)
-
August 2010
(8 entries)
-
July 2010
(10 entries)
-
June 2010
(1 entry)
-
May 2010
(2 entries)
-
April 2010
(7 entries)
-
March 2010
(8 entries)
-
February 2010
(18 entries)
-
January 2010
(13 entries)
-
December 2009
(2 entries)
-
September 2009
(2 entries)
-
August 2009
(1 entry)
-
July 2009
(3 entries)
-
June 2009
(2 entries)
-
May 2009
(1 entry)
-
April 2009
(1 entry)
-
March 2009
(6 entries)
RSS 
Most Recent Tags
55 Comments
Posted on Sunday, September 05, 2010 at 02:09 AM
Catholic Church fires Mass woman for marrying
Larger Text
Print
E-mail
It's happening again.
Cathedral High School in Springfield, Massachusetts has forced out the school's athletic director, Christine M. Judd, after she married her female partner in August.
Judd, who is described on the school's website as 'one of the key members of the faculty and a positive role models for the students,' said was pressured to leave after marrying her female partner last month.
The local diocese has listed her departure as a resignation, but Judd said she is currently exploring her legal options. It's believed that matters came to a head when an unidentified person made a photograph of Judd's wedding available to the diocese. Judd also clarified that the Cathedral High School had nothing to do with her departure, it was strictly a diocesan decision she said.
Mark E. Dupont, a spokesperson for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield, told the press that Judd did resign, but he declined to respond to Judd's parting comments, or on the issue of her marriage in August.
'Without being specific to this matter, it should be clear that all employees of our Catholic schools are made aware of our policies and regulations,' Dupont told the press. 'This includes language that clearly states that whenever by public example, an employee engages in or espouses conduct which contravenes the doctrine and teaching of the Catholic Church, that employee may be subject to disciplinary action. To do otherwise would be in contradiction to the values we believe in and are teaching in these same schools. So while we certainly want to be compassionate and understanding, we must be true to who we are.'
We must be true to who we are. So any teacher in contravention of Catholic dogma at Cathedral must be sweating right about now - I mean all the divorcees, the married people who use birth control, the men who have had vasectomies, and anyone who's privately pro-choice on abortion.
Call me a cynic, but somehow I imagine they'll all be spared. The Church is highly selective over which sins it puts up with, after all. Call it cafeteria contrition - or just call it what it is, text book religious discrimination.
It's being gay that seems to really incite Catholic purges. The question is why? What's so inherently more sinful about being gay that any trace of it must be eradicated? Do Church authorities think that just the mere fact of being gay put's you in total contravention to every Catholic teaching? Judd, 35, never discussed her sexuality during her 12-year employment at Cathedral High School.
So could it be that her firing was predicated on one the most frequent charges we hear about marriage equality - if it's passed at the federal level eventually gay people will start suing to have their marriages performed in church?
The fact that this has never happened anywhere in the world, ever, hasn't deterred conservatives from making this argument. It could happen, they say. The Cleveland Spiders could win the World Series, too - hey, you never know.
But hypotheticals are unreal things, what's happening to Christine M. Judd is a terrific reality.
Critics who say that it's a private school run by the Catholic Church, and that she knew the rules and got what was coming to her, need to examine their own reasoning for cognitive dissonance - marriage equality wasn't legal in the state twelve years ago. And it may be worth mentioning that many gay people work these jobs because they're an economic necessity.
However you look at it, it's a sad story. In recent months children as young as five have been thrown out of Catholic schools in the United States for simply having gay parents. It's a new and disturbing tactic.
When Massachusetts' Saint Paul Roman Catholic Elementary kicked out an eight-year-old boy with two mommies, Boston's archbishop Sean Patrick O'Malley stepped in to condemn the move. Let's hope he won't sit silently this time.
Most recent of 55 comments - See all comments
It may take several minutes for your comment to appear.
Posted by Irishjule on Sep 26, 2010, 03:43 PM EDT
It's time for the Catholic laity to stand up and defend the faith. Too many people, even some clergy, have become too liberal and secular. Too many don't believe in the True Presence of the Eucharist, the sinfulness of abortion or of the immorality of homosexual relationships. It is no sin to be born a homosexual, but those who are can become saints by accepting their cross and living a good single life. (Believe me, the married life isn't a piece of cake for most people, either.) The priesthood and sisterhood have sacrifices and challenges too.
This woman knew the church's teaching but completely disregarded it. The diocese had a moral obligation to defend the teachings of the church. The Catholic faith is a precious gift and we should all treasure it and nurture it throughout our lives.
Posted by jacersagain on Sep 21, 2010, 05:03 PM EDT
The more I see of hollabackgurl's rants, the less sense I can make of them. Conversely, Carroll09's posts I find well thought out and full of sense, always developing as they go on whereas hollabackgurl's just fade into nonsense. Hollabackgurl and others, incl me, should learn from Carroll09 - always honourable in points, posts and ripostes.
Posted by Carroll09 on Sep 10, 2010, 10:59 AM EDT
Hollabackgurl- since you're so keen on pointing me towards what the story says: where does it say that she went out of her way to be discreet with reference to the "marriage" specifically (not to her sexual orientation, which the article does indeed mention)? Where does it say that it was a parishioner who went to the diocese with a photo? Where does it say that said parishioner had a grudge? If it was a parishioner with a grudge, where do you suppose they got the details of Ms Judd's wedding time, date & venue if Ms Judd was keeping her relationship such a secret?
Posted by hollabackgurl on Sep 10, 2010, 10:33 AM EDT
She didn't publically marry. In fact she went out if her way to be discreet. It was a parishioner with a grudge that ran to the diocese with a photo of her wedding to out her. That's all there in the story but you're going to overlook it to rationalize your religious discrimination, Caroll09. Many Cathoilcs take a view that's contrary to Church dogma, but only the gays lose their jobs. You can try to excuse it, but you'll fail because it's inexcusable.
Posted by Carroll09 on Sep 09, 2010, 04:12 PM EDT
Mr O'Doherty, you ask "It's being gay that seems to really incite Catholic purges. The question is why? What's so inherently more sinful about being gay that any trace of it must be eradicated? Do Church authorities think that just the mere fact of being gay put's you in total contravention to every Catholic teaching?". Clearly you know nothing about the teaching of the Catholic Church on sexuality- you are, as usual, making up your own version of the Catholic Catechism to create another anti-Catholic rant. What the Catechism of the Catholic Church ACTUALLY says is that homosexual ACTS are intrinsically disordered- not the person, not the inclination, but the ACTS. The homosexual PERSON, however, according to the Catechism [2358], is to be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Yes, there may be others in the school whose lifestyles are at odds with the Church's teachings, however, Ms Judd made a public statement about her lifestyle by "marrying" another woman. She never discussed her sexuality during her 12 years of employment at the school- clearly, therefore, it was her PUBLICLY going against the teachings of the Church that caused the current situation.
Posted by James12 on Sep 08, 2010, 08:34 AM EDT
minpindally, Please don't confuse judgement with admonishment. The passage you reference deals with judgement - not admonishment. Scripture and Church teaching allow admonishment (a warning).
Posted by minpindally on Sep 08, 2010, 01:26 AM EDT
He who is without sin,let them throw the first stone.We are all sinner's .
Posted by rndidonato on Sep 07, 2010, 11:46 PM EDT
"...I mean all the divorcees, the married people who use birth control, the men who have had vasectomies, and anyone who's privately pro-choice on abortion"
This is such a ridiculous statement. First of all, divorce in itself is not a sin. Remarriage outside of the Church is a sin. As to the other things mentioned, how would anyone know if a couple were using birth control, if a man had a vasectomy or if someone was privately pro-choice. This woman "married" another woman knowing that is was against the policies of the school and the teachings of the Church. What's your problem? Not that it's any of your business anyway. It's between this woman and the school/church. Some things are absolutely wrong no matter what the "law" is. Abortion is legal but that doesn't make it right. It is the Catholic Church's right to abide by its convictions.
Posted by hollabackgurl on Sep 07, 2010, 05:00 PM EDT
Saint Florentius protected the Holy See against heresies. I see you're carrying on the tradition. But you can't become a saint by telling lies.
Posted by Florentius on Sep 07, 2010, 03:05 PM EDT
Want to talk about cognitive dissonance? Just a few years ago, the Boston archdiocese was rocked by a hideous homosexual sex abuse scandal. Yes, it was a HOMOSEXUAL scandal--read the Jay Report if you don't believe me. Nearly 90% of the cases were homosexual in nature.
After being burned so badly by homosexuals in its employ, the Church has taken a zero-tolerance stance against homosexuals in positions with easy access to children. And in my opinion, Mother Church is absolutely right to do so.
I went to Catholic (Jesuit) school in the 1970s & 80s and the whispers about both homosexual priests and lay teachers were everywhere. We only found out later that many of these whispers were true--and much worse--that abuse was covered up and that those doing the covering up were often homosexuals as well.
For this reason, among others, Catholic parents of my age are homeschooling our children in greater numbers than ever before.
I fully support any and all efforts by the Church to make sure that homosexuals--and anyone who publicly embraces a lifestyle contrary to the teachings of the Church--have no access to children in Catholic-run institutions.
Posted by islandgirl21 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:51 PM EDT
First of all, Mr. O'Doherty's piece of writing is incredibly biased and misinformed and second he doesn't know what his is talking about. For example, Catholic teaching does not state that a Catholic cannot get divorced! It does, however, state that a divorced Catholic cannot remarry --- that is very lot different. Next Mr. O'Doherty lists "Catholic who use birth control and are pro-choice: Those Catholics are "Catholic" in name only and do not practice their faith honestly or faithfully; and yes, if they work for the diocese, they should be worried if it were to become public knowledge and cause scandal to faithful Catholics.
And then the author writes the following: " And it may be worth mentioning that many gay people work these jobs because they're an economic necessity" Give me a break! When is it economic necessity to work as a teacher for the Catholic Church in the United States. In the U.S. there are more teaching positions in public schools than in parochial or private schools. The article is a total farce, a complete joke!
Posted by James12 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:29 PM EDT
akellyny, show me the evidence that the words of Scripture were changed millions of times. Translated into other languages many times yes, but if you compare, for example, the Qumram tests from 2K yrs ago to modern hebrew texts they are vitually the same. People may interpret words differently, but that is where Scriptue says only the Church has the proper interpretation on matters of faith and morals.
Posted by PhlutiePhan on Sep 07, 2010, 01:28 PM EDT
In regard to sin, there are public and private sins. This woman lived a lesbian lifestyle for years and it was known. Once she entered into a public and legal marriage, the issue changed. She was publicly flaunting the rules of the institution for which she worked. Yes, let's see if C. O'Malley "wimps out" again.
Posted by James12 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:22 PM EDT
Cahir, your statement about gay weddings in Church is a strawman and you know it. By doing so you give the misleading impression that it is fear of being sued that drives the Church. It is not. It is that active homosexuality is always immoral and must be opposed. See the way St. Paul admonished the Corinthian church in regards to the man who married his mother in law. Same with homosexual marriages.
Posted by James12 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:13 PM EDT
What is wrong is that 'gays' want to make active homosexuality OK within the Church. That is why they are rebuked openly. I havn't seen too many adulterers who want to make their activity OK within the Church. If I did, I would rebuke them also.
Posted by James12 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:09 PM EDT
lemonhead, you confuse judgement with admonishment - there is a difference. Admonishment is permitted in Scripture and Church teaching. Also, God does judge - ultimatley at the Last Judgement.
Posted by James12 on Sep 07, 2010, 01:07 PM EDT
akellyny, your comments would be considered premature at best by people (including atheists) who have had near death experiecnes.
Posted by who12345counts on Sep 07, 2010, 11:59 AM EDT
How much more slanted can this article be? We are Catholic. We are Roman Catholic. If you do not want to conform to this religion then choose something else. Make up your own. We have the obligation before God to uphold His laws. It is not about the gay teacher it is about the gay "marriage" which is truly an abomination before God. We all sin. We don't publish those sins. We are ashamed of the sins. We teach as Catholics that the natural family is a man and a woman. The child who was spared the embarrassment that would have been raised when he went home and asked about his parents and were they obeying God would lead to more pain for him.
Posted by LeticiaVelasque on Sep 07, 2010, 10:30 AM EDT
I agree that all Catholics who are fornicating, aborting, and contracepting are equally guilty and should resign. Tell me, how do you prove that they are? When Judd took the job, she knew the Church's teaching and that the school enforced it. Period.
She's trying to make a martyr of herself for 'the cause'. Spare me. She can make twice the money she's making in a public school where she will probably get preference for her so called marriage.
Posted by elainep on Sep 07, 2010, 09:31 AM EDT
The world will soon be awakened from it's spiritual slumber and those who do not believe will be in for a very big shock. Teachers who work in Catholic schools know they must be practicing Catholics and must lead by example. When they choose to push there own agenda and go against the teaching's of the church they can expect to be repremanded.
Posted by akellyny on Sep 07, 2010, 09:09 AM EDT
"God" is the Santa Claus for adults. When will people stop believing this rubbish, written and changed by man millions of times. Such gullible fools are these "hypochristians."
Posted by mayoman on Sep 07, 2010, 08:01 AM EDT
This is yet another example of what distresses me about my Church. How terribly tentative and slow the bishops are to deal with the crime of pedophilia, and yet how determined and prompt they are to summarily fire a woman, (that the Church itself has applauded), that committed no crime, but has only exercised her legal rights.
Posted by WatchingMedia on Sep 07, 2010, 06:32 AM EDT
Where did this author get her education in a barn? It is not a sin to get a Divorce. It is sinful to get remarried.
Nobody knows who uses birth control since this is done in the privacy of ones own home. Yes any man who publically shows off his vasectomy would be fired. MARRIAGE IS A PUBLIC ACT. Do you understand that?
Posted by WatchingMedia on Sep 07, 2010, 05:17 AM EDT
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear on homosexual behavior - which will NEVER be approved (#2357 -2359). So are PROTESTANT and Catholic Bibles: Rom 1:24-24; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10; Gen 19:1-29.
All sexual acts outside of marriage (defined as being between one man and one woman) is a Mortal Sin.
Posted by WatchingMedia on Sep 07, 2010, 05:09 AM EDT
Anyone who wants to be employed by a Privately owned Catholic organization must respect, and "publically" adhere to Church teachings. Marriage is a PUBLIC act.
If anyone wants to know the teachings of the Church, read the "CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition".
Posted by lemonhead on Sep 06, 2010, 09:10 PM EDT
I feel if she is doing her job in which it seems she has, they shouldn't discriminate. Her private life is hers, as long as she doesn't bring into the classroom. No one has the right to discriminate, remember God is forgiving, and non-judgemental, it's us humans who are judgemental.
Posted by macstwo on Sep 06, 2010, 05:05 PM EDT
She knew the rules and also the church's feelings on same sex marriage. She's trying to make a statement, but if you want to do the crime, you have to be willing to do the time. No questions the school administration was correct.
Posted by wasqazz on Sep 06, 2010, 12:03 AM EDT
makes me ashamed of being catholic.. why take it out on an 8 year old.
it's okay to have sex with little BOYS and GIRLS and you don't get fired, but two adults get married and you loose your job?? sick
Posted by Colliegirl on Sep 05, 2010, 10:55 PM EDT
The regulations clearly state "whenever by public example, an employee engages in or espouses conduct which contravenes the doctrine and teaching of the Catholic Church, that employee may be subject to disciplinary action." Private sins are a matter between the employed person and God, but 'marrying' one's gay partner is definitely making a public statement that one is living in a sinful manner and proud of it. She is a popular teacher who is giving scandal. She has rejected the moral teachings of her faith. And she knew that this would happen. I'm not unsympathetic to the woman but this is giving a poor example to her students. They would see that a nice person can live the gay lifestyle; therefore there's nothing wrong with acting out your sinful sexual impulses. As a Catholic parent, this isn't the message I want my kids to learn in Catholic school. I want them to learn to follow God's will even against their inclinations.
Posted by 2BorNot2B on Sep 05, 2010, 09:19 PM EDT
Mavaureen, cry not for the Church and its priests, there will be plenty left to carry on the work. She will survive like she has for 2000 years, with saints and sinners in her midst, because Christ guaranteed her survival.-- So far, the Church should, has, and will continue to kick out those priests who entered the ministry to have easier access to other men. Those are the ones that have brought shame upon her. However, I personally know homosexual priests who live a holy and courageous life, keeping their vow of celibacy intact. They are not, and should not be condemned; they are in fact a great asset to other Christians and they do, will, and should remain.-- People like you and the writer of the article are so angry and eager to slam the Church, you forget her ultimate purpose is to facilitate the forgiveness and redemption of sinners and a path to a happier life after this one.
Most Popular Blog Posts
Most Popular Entertainment Stories
