There are a number of challenges facing Catholic schools in the 21st century, some unique and others age-old. One seeming minor challenge which will become a major challenge is brought to light by two cases, one in the Denver Archdiocese and the other in the Boston Archdiocese: both involve the children of same-sex couples. These two cases were handled similarly by the school's administrators (in one case, the children will be allowed to complete this year, but not to enroll next year; in the other, the child is denied enrollment altogether), though differently by the bishops of those two dioceses. His Excellency Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, has stood behind the decision of Sacred Heart of Jesus School, stating (emphases mine) that

The policies of our Catholic school system exist to protect all parties involved, including the children of homosexual couples and the couples themselves. Our schools are meant to be “partners in faith” with parents. If parents don’t respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible. It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church.

On the other hand, his Eminence Cardinal Sean O'malley, the Archbishop of Boston, writes (emphasis mine) that

In Boston we are beginning to formulate policies and practices to deal with these complex pastoral matters. In all of our decision making, our first concern is the welfare of the children involved. With that in mind, the essence of what we are looking at is the question of how do we make Catholic schools available to children who come from diverse, often unconventional households, while ensuring the moral theology and teachings of the Church are not compromised? It is true that we welcome people from all walks of life. But we recognize that, regardless of the circumstances involved, we maintain our responsibility to teach the truths of our faith, including those concerning sexual morality and marriage. We need to present the Church’s teachings courageously and yet in a way that is compassionate and persuasive.

The Archdiocese of Denver has formulated a policy that calls into question the appropriateness of admitting the children of same-sex couples. It is clear that all of their school policies are intended to foster the welfare of the children and fidelity to the mission of the Church. Their positions and rationale must be seriously considered.

The implication is that the Archdiocese of Boston will not necessarily follow the lead of the Archdiocese of Denver, especially in the context of the statement of Dr Mary Grassa O'Neill, the superintendent of the Archdiocese's schools (emphases mine):

The Archdiocese of Boston is committed to providing quality Catholic education, grounded in academic excellence and the teachings of the Catholic Church, to the students at all of our schools. We believe that every parent who wishes to send their child to a Catholic school should have the opportunity to pursue that dream. Our schools welcome children based on their parent’s understanding that the teachings of the Church are an important component of the curriculum and are part of the students’ educational experience. The Archdiocese does not prohibit children of same sex parents from attending Catholic schools. We will work in the coming weeks to develop a policy to eliminate any misunderstandings in the future.
-----
I am not a bishop, or any other type of clergy. I am also not an educator or administrator in a Catholic school setting. I can not claim to have expertise to solve the "practical" challenges faced by any of these people who will ultimately have to deal with this dilemma. There are plenty of reasons both for and against allowing the children under the guardianship of same-sex couples to enroll in Catholic schools. I do not propose a solution to the minefield which the bishops will ultimately have the unenviable task of navigating. I do, however, have some advice concerning what ought to be done regardless of this particular decision. First, what are some of the problems faced?

On the one hand, Catholic education ought to be available to anyone who wants to gain it, and certainly anyone who can afford it. I hate to hear of anyone knocking at the door of the Church and being turned away, and the same applies to the Church's school. It is possible that these children are deprived of the Catholic education which will ultimately evangelize them. Furthermore, there is also the question of drawing lines. If children under the guardianship of a same-sex couples are to be barred from the school on grounds the incompatibility of this lifestyle with the Faith, then what of the children of extra-married parents (that is, the parents have "divorced" and then had the state recognize a second marriage), who are by definition living unrepentantly in an adulterous relationship? For that matter, what of the children whose parents are not Catholic, and who will therefore likely undermine one or another of the Church's teachings? To my knowledge, neither the Church as a whole nor the bishops as individual teachers have ever barred children from such familial backgrounds from enrolling, and certainly not on a large scale*.

On the other hand, there are several reasons why such children might be legitimately turned away. The first is that a Catholic education can be greatly reinforced by having a community which affirms the Faith. As I have argued elsewhere, it is far more difficult to pass of the faith to even the "good" students when a large number of "bad" students exist. Sometimes the "bad" students are able to corrupt the "good" students--it's easier to do especially if sentimentalism can become the instrument of the rebels, as would be the case with a student who has same-sex "parents"--and so rather than losing only one child, several can be lost.

Secondly, it places the teachers in a difficult position, since he is asked to teach that homosexual behavior is immoral while knowing that his student has "parents" who openly engage in such behavior. This can risk traumatizing the student, or worse still can put an unfair stigma on said student. Consider: if the parents at said school are really and truly committed to upholding the Church's moral teachings concerning homosexuality, they are also less-likely to want their own children to be exposed to it. This means that (if they are at all good parents) they will not be allowing their children to stay over (or even visit) the house of the child with same-sex guardians. Such a child would be at a disadvantage in making friends at the school, even if no other stigma was attached.

The bishops (and school administrators, and individual teachers) must weigh these considerations carefully in formulating policy. Whatever they decide, there is one thing which they must not do: they must not "water down" the Faith, or ignore its moral precepts. The arguments in favor of allowing children of same-sex couples a attend Catholic schools are for the most part nullified if this occurs.

The first purpose of any school is to educate, but for a Catholic school it is to also catechize, and to evangelize (the two go hand-in-hand). Should the bishops ultimately rule that the children whose guardians are a same-sex couple may not enroll in Catholic schools, then these tasks appear to be easier. There is, at least, no excuse for saying that teaching the moral precepts of the Church risks hurting the children's feelings, or even damaging them psychologically: such children are not present in the case of such a ruling.

Suppose, though, that the bishops ultimately rule the other way, that children of same-sex guardians can enroll in Catholic schools. This does not change the morality which must be taught. It may perhaps change the level of tact necessary, though I believe that this particular subject requires as much tact as can be mustered: a child with same-sex guardians is still a child of God, and must still be loved, and not singled out for harassment or bullying. The moral truth, however, is still there: it transcends the bishops, the students, indeed all of humanity, since it is given to us by God through His Church.

The schools must be rooted in a joyful orthodoxy, and this includes morality. If the morality is taught only as "do" and "do not," then it fails in this regard. To be sure, "do" and "do not" is an important part of morality, but there is an underlying why, and really and underlying Who to which this morality should point. I am here to say that for us, the laity, how and what we teach does not depend on how the bishops rule in this case. Whether there are children with same-sex guardians or not, whether there are homosexual students (recall that Catholic education includes high school and even college) or not, homosexual acts remain immoral, and must be taught as such. The same is true for the children of extra-married parents: divorce is a lie and adultery a sin, regardless of who is or isn't in the room. Ditto for children whose parents have aborted their brothers and sisters, for that is still murder.

Catholic schools would be remiss to teach that Jesus Christ was not fully Man just because a child has parents who are Gnostics. They would be every bit as remiss in teaching that He was not fully God simply because one child had Arians for parents, or that neither the Resurrection nor any other miracles ever happened because one child had atheist parents. Our schools cannot dumb-down, subtract from, add to, or outright ignore the Faith which they have been charged with teaching just to avoid hurting the feelings of a particular student, or of the student's parents or guardians. Those parents and guardians chose to enroll their children in the Catholic school, which means that they have consented to allowing their children to be catechized by the Church.

Indeed, a great many of the parents have enrolled their children so that their children would be (more) properly, completely, and thoroughly, catechized, and an orthodox manner. It would be a disservice to those parents to ignore and alter parts of the Faith on the account of parents who might be hostile to the faith, and it would be an eve greater disservice to the children enrolled and entrusted to the care of the school. The schools is to co-operate with the parents in instructing the children in the Faith, but that the parents are the primary teachers in this matter does not exculpate schools from failing as the secondary teachers. The parents have responsibility as the primary teachers of the Faith to their children, but the Catholic Schools have the duty to be the secondary teachers, and they must do the best job of this that they can. They must teach the whole of the faith, and do so both joyfully and courageously, of said schools will have failed their students, their parents, their Church, and their God.
-----
In the final measure, this is largely an issue for the bishops to decide, given that they are ultimately the ones charged with ensuring that the Faith is handed on intact. However, the bishops rarely formulate their decisions entirely in a vacuum. Nor can they--or even should they--micromanage every lesson taught in every classroom, nor every homily in every Church. There is, therefore, ultimately some responsibility to teaching given to every priest, to every sister, brother, or nun, and indeed to every member of the Church. The bishop can't control what we say or do, but rather can only tell us what is moral and immoral, right theology and wrong theology, etc.

The bishops can and must make their decisions--with or without our advice--but it is for us to faithfully carry those decisions out. on the level of the school, that is done by joyfully teaching the Faith--proclaiming the Gospel Message--in the most orthodox manner we can as Catholics. This does not change whether there are people present who disagree with that message or not. Thus, whatever the outcome of this decision, whether the children under the guardianship of same-sex couples are present in the Catholic classrooms or not, the Catholic schools must teach the faith honestly, truthfully, and courageously. To not do so is a sin and a scandal greater than any which could be caused by the decisions of the bishops in these matters.
_____
*It can, however, be argued that such families would undermine teachings differently in kind than would same-sex couples. Certainly, those who argue that there may be psychological repercussions for children with same-sex guardians would not necessarily argue the same for Protestant children, or atheist children, or even children of extra-married parents. Thus, this particular argument may be called a red-herring, though I would argue that in addressing the particular case of the children whose guardians are a same-sex couple, the bishops must also address these categories at least in passing. If it's a matter of the ability to evangelize and catechize, these other categories must also be dealt with, though from here it gets complicated. That is, however, a topic for another day.