Now that I have returned to the world of co-op employment, there really hasn't been that much to talk about in my predictible life.

Quite bitter, I am, as a matter of fact.

I decided to be a good Catholic boy and attend mass this week, but to my disbelief, our associate pastor, Fr. Huang, has resigned from our parish and will be returning to what I believe to be Taiwan, where he originally resides.

Anyways, I have always sensed some subtle turmoil between the pastoral team ever since we installed a new leading pastor, Fr. Leung. He is a rather strict and incredibly conservative (even more so that what I have expected in a Roman Catholic church).

During the homily today, Fr. Huang, told us the news, and pretty much set everything straight with congregation-- since, according to my parents, there has been some rumours floating around about why exactly he decided to go.

He was completely straightforward, and a bit shocking actually. It was quite incredible for a priest, a Catholic priest, to be so upfront and personal with the congregation. He was always been my favourite priest to attend mass to, just because he always talks about things that are relevant, and are just great to listen to. Sure, he speaks Cantonese with an awful Taiwanese Mandarin accent, which often means I only intake about 60-70% at most of what he's saying, but seriously, he understands people more, he understands that not everyone enjoys the unappealing "lecture-like" homilies that our Catholic faith seems to appreciate.

Anyways, he pretty much said exactly the culprit who instigated his resignation-- the parish's administrative secretary. I was just quite shocked that he actually revealed the person and putting him/her on the spot like that. It seemed so.... un-church-like.

Fr. Huang pretty much said that he did not want this individual has his farewell party, which took place on Friday. However, the individual did indeed show up and Fr. Huang just left. Left his own farewell party.

Seriously, this is a priest, a person who is to lead our congregation towards the ways of the Jesus; and this is exactly the opposite of that. Even though things were racing through my head during the homily, I really admired his honesty and I give him great respect for having the courage the things that he said. Seriously, that is like me telling everyone at the congregation that I'm gay and that I'm going to get married at our parish.

He told us and admitted that what he did was not very "Christian" of him to do; even citing references of Jesus-- but of which story specifically, I don't remember. He mentioned that when someone struck Jesus' left arm, he also gave the man his right arm to be hit. But to Fr. Huang's defence, even Jesus asked his "striker" why he needed to be hit, when he did nothing wrong.

Even in the Church Bulletin was without positive words, citing words like he's "physically and mentally tired" and that leaving would "allow a smoother execution of the daily operations of the parish."

I am really going to miss him as he leaves our parish later this week. Regardless of whoever is "right" or "wrong", I truly commend him for having the courage to speak up and let everyone know. His homily has made me realize that priests are human too, even though we sometimes don't think of them that way-- and that I really admire.

Fr. Huang - [chinesemartyrs.org]

Comments (3)

The biggest issue for this election seems to be about whether or not to publicly fund faith-based schools. For those who don't know, the Tories are a major proponent of this and wishes to spend $500 million to kickstart it. The Liberals are playing the opposition on this matter, as we continue to be bombarded with McGuinty's awkward commerical messages about how it's a 'mistake' and that our public schools is 'what makes Ontario, Ontario.'

Just as an aside, I feel that the way McGuinty speaks really bugs me. He's always really awkward and uncomfortable when he speaks in these scripted video announcements. It seems very clear that he has an image consultant working for him, but he's not playing a good actor.

At the same time, let's give McGuinty some credit, his ads are way better than the PC ads, which only attempts to attack McGuinty, and never actually tells us anything about his and his party's political directions. The NDP seems to be doing pretty much the same thing.

Anyways, back to the topic of funding for faith-based schools. What do you guys think of this issue? I am a bit torn, being that I attended a separate school ever since I moved to Canada. As much as I see myself as a undevoted Catholic, I saw the value of my education in its whole part, and I can't imagine actually cutting Catholic school funding. But at the same time, I also believe in McGuinty's vision that 'whatever race or creed, [students] attend the same schools.' Schools is the best place for young people to integrate and grasp an understanding of the diversity that surrounds them.

So I'm kind of being a hypocrite. I don't support the expansion of religious schools, but I also don't support the elimination of Catholic schools.

I've been thinking for a while about some options that would make me less hypocritical, and it involves the support for heritage and religious programs held outside of student's core education. In other words, what if the government provided religious education in public facilities on Saturdays, just like how current students can receive free language and heritage schooling? This would provide equitable religious education to all Ontarians and would help to expand use existing infrastucture which mostly have been active only during Mondays to Fridays. As for the existing Catholic schools, they can be coverted to provide 'public-public' education. Would you support this plan?

On an aside topic, I don't think people are aware that you don't need to be Catholic to attend Catholic schools. There were a high number of non-demonination and even Sikh and Muslim students (although in low numbers) in my high school. Regardless, I see that it is obviously unfair that Catholic students receive publicly accessible education, and Jewish or Sikh students, for example, do not.

Comments (7)

Students in Catholic schools have sex. Probably at the same rate as other schools. They are and will continue to have sex no matter how much Catholic officials preach. I'm sure this is not coming as any shock to any of you.

It's interesting that this topic is coming up at a time when I just blogged about the fact that I valued my Catholic education.

A few weeks ago, the Ontario government announced that it will offer all Grade 8 girls a HPV vaccine. The issue here is that some catholic school boards have questioned whether the program promotes sexual activity among teens.

According to HPVontario.ca, the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) "is a very common virus transmitted through sexual activity. HPV has been found to cause cervical cancer, some other rare cancers and genital warts."

I think this non-issue quite hilarious. I don't see how the HPV vaccine encourages teens to be sexually active, and I found this quote that pretty much sums up the debate:

An anti-STD vaccine no more encourages promiscuity than locking your doors at night encourages burglars. Sure, it would be a fine thing if we lived in the best of all possible worlds, where locked doors and vaccines were unneccessary because burglars and diseases don’t exist. But we don’t live in that kind of world.

While most Catholic school boards have ultimately approved these vaccinations to take place, I don't understand why there is even a debate. It ultimately comes down to health. Regardless of what school you go to, teens should have access to information and attention they need to make informed choices.

You can't stop teens from having sex, and being in denial doesn't help teens prevent contracting STD's. What we can do as a society is at least ensure that they know everything they need to know and be protected.

Catholic schools debating moral issue of HPV shot - [thestar.com]

Comments (3)