Charlotte Catholic High calls meeting for parents after uproar over speech
Charlotte Catholic High School has invited parents to a meeting
Wednesday night to air concerns many of them – and their kids – had
about a recent speaker’s comments about homosexuality, divorce and
single parents.
Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, a Dominican nun based in Nashville, Tenn., addressed a student assembly on March 21. Days later, some students launched an online petition that called her comments “offensive and unnecessarily derogatory.”
A record of the comments was not available. But students attending told their parents she criticized gays and lesbians and made inflammatory remarks about single and divorced parents.
The petition, which has drawn more than 2,000 supporters, listed 10 objections to her remarks, including this: “We resent the fact that a schoolwide assembly became a stage to blast the issue of homosexuality after Pope Francis said in an interview this past fall that ‘we can not insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods.’ We are angry that someone decided they knew better than our Holy Father and invited (this) speaker.”
Some students told their parents that a few teachers left the assembly in tears.
In addition, parents called for a letter-writing campaign, sending out emails that listed the addresses of the Diocese of Charlotte, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, even the pope in the Vatican.
Shelley Earnhardt, who is divorced and who sent one of the emails, wrote that “in my home, there was outrage, embarrassment, sadness, disbelief, and further reason for my 16-year-old to move as far away from her religion as possible and as soon as she can.”
Other parents faulted the school for not notifying them about the sensitive nature of Laurel’s planned remarks. “It’s too big of a topic for parents to be surprised,” said Casey Corser.
Diocese spokesman David Hains acknowledged parents were not told ahead of time that Laurel would speak. But he said she has spoken frequently in the diocese and has a doctoral degree in sacred theology from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
“We have seen the petitions, and we have gotten the emails,” Hains said. “And we really hope to be able to answer their questions and address their concerns” at the meeting, which he said will be closed to the media.
The Rev. Tim Reid, pastor of St. Ann Catholic Church, sent an email lauding the nun, saying “she represented well the Catholic positions on marriage, sex, same-sex attraction and proper gender roles … The Church has already lost too many generations of Catholic schools students to … a very muddled and watered-down faith.”
The division over Laurel’s speech is a reflection of the culture wars being waged within Catholicism and in society at large. Conservatives point to the denomination’s traditional teachings against homosexual behavior and divorce.
Liberals look to Pope Francis, who has called for less emphasis on those issues and a more welcoming church that focuses on helping the poor.
Many U.S. dioceses, including Charlotte’s, are led by conservative bishops who were appointed by Pope Francis’ more conservative predecessors.
Asked whether Bishop Peter Jugis planned to attend the meeting with parents, Hains said, “I don’t believe so.”
Wednesday’s meeting for parents is set to begin at 7 p.m. in the school gym.
Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, a Dominican nun based in Nashville, Tenn., addressed a student assembly on March 21. Days later, some students launched an online petition that called her comments “offensive and unnecessarily derogatory.”
A record of the comments was not available. But students attending told their parents she criticized gays and lesbians and made inflammatory remarks about single and divorced parents.
The petition, which has drawn more than 2,000 supporters, listed 10 objections to her remarks, including this: “We resent the fact that a schoolwide assembly became a stage to blast the issue of homosexuality after Pope Francis said in an interview this past fall that ‘we can not insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods.’ We are angry that someone decided they knew better than our Holy Father and invited (this) speaker.”
Some students told their parents that a few teachers left the assembly in tears.
In addition, parents called for a letter-writing campaign, sending out emails that listed the addresses of the Diocese of Charlotte, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, even the pope in the Vatican.
Shelley Earnhardt, who is divorced and who sent one of the emails, wrote that “in my home, there was outrage, embarrassment, sadness, disbelief, and further reason for my 16-year-old to move as far away from her religion as possible and as soon as she can.”
Other parents faulted the school for not notifying them about the sensitive nature of Laurel’s planned remarks. “It’s too big of a topic for parents to be surprised,” said Casey Corser.
Diocese spokesman David Hains acknowledged parents were not told ahead of time that Laurel would speak. But he said she has spoken frequently in the diocese and has a doctoral degree in sacred theology from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
“We have seen the petitions, and we have gotten the emails,” Hains said. “And we really hope to be able to answer their questions and address their concerns” at the meeting, which he said will be closed to the media.
The Rev. Tim Reid, pastor of St. Ann Catholic Church, sent an email lauding the nun, saying “she represented well the Catholic positions on marriage, sex, same-sex attraction and proper gender roles … The Church has already lost too many generations of Catholic schools students to … a very muddled and watered-down faith.”
The division over Laurel’s speech is a reflection of the culture wars being waged within Catholicism and in society at large. Conservatives point to the denomination’s traditional teachings against homosexual behavior and divorce.
Liberals look to Pope Francis, who has called for less emphasis on those issues and a more welcoming church that focuses on helping the poor.
Many U.S. dioceses, including Charlotte’s, are led by conservative bishops who were appointed by Pope Francis’ more conservative predecessors.
Asked whether Bishop Peter Jugis planned to attend the meeting with parents, Hains said, “I don’t believe so.”
Wednesday’s meeting for parents is set to begin at 7 p.m. in the school gym.
MY COMMENTS: I don't know how Sister Jane phrased her talk and as the news article states, there is no record of her talk. There are ways to teach truth to adults and children without inflaming the sentiments of those who attend.
One would hope she began with the Church's teaching on chastity and that it applies to all Catholics, married, divorced or single. Then one would discuss what chastity is given one's state in life.
Then one would speak of sins against chastity. In a high school one needs to use prudence. Hopefully Sister Jane backed up her presentation through the use of Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law.
I would be cautious about attacking individuals or groups of people who sin, but I would not be afraid to call a sin a sin, describe the differences between venial and mortal sins and then explain that in terms of chastity, the degrees of sin are determined by their seriousness.
For a sin against chastity that is serious, there has to be three things: 1. grave matter; 2. one knows that it is wrong; 3. one commits the sin with full consent of the will.
In order to challenge those who only partially listen to the truth that Pope Francis speaks, a good teacher should give the full context. In terms of homosexuality, the pope was speaking in the context of the Catholic Catechism which he mentions immediately, that he is a son of the Church, and that the person in question is seeking the Lord, which means that sinner knows what the Catechism teaches.
Since Pope Francis speaks so often that we are all sinners, that we need to recognize our sin, examine our conscience, repent of our sins and seek God's Divine Mercy in the Sacrament of Penance, we can rightly point out that Pope Francis has placed sin and repentance as a priority of his papacy and the recovery of the use of the Sacrament of Penance.
We can also say that Pope Francis has promoted a recovery of the theology of Satan and that the devil does exist and that he tempts Christians to be unfaithful to Holy Mother Church.
We can also say that Pope Francis does judge sinners and quite explicitly when a sinner is corrupt, be that an active, unrepentant homosexual or a member of the mafia, a thief, an adulterer, a fornicator or a murderer and if a corrupt sinner prefers his sinful lifestyle and its perks to the Kingdom of God, that they have condemned themselves to hell.
Pope Francis has consistently pointed out that personal sinful corruption leads to damnation!
However, if a person is struggling to live a good life and has placed their lives into the hands of God and is seeking the way of perfection, who are we to judge?
If Catholics don't like what the Catholic Church teaches, they should either shut-up, pull their children out of all Catholic religious education programs and schools or leave the Church altogether.
72 comments:
As we have been saying, the damage the Pope's careless talk has caused will take a long time to fix.
Gene, you sound like the kids in the high school taking the Holy Father out of context to promote your particular prejudice against him. Either way (liberal or conservative), it is evil. You should know better. Jesus was taken out of context on many different occasions as is the Bible, why else was there a Protestant Reformation?
Fr, I really do not have any pre-conceived prejudice against the Pope. I pray that we are all proven wrong by him. But, his careless statements are there for all to see and be concerned about. And, of course, I agree with you regarding misunderstanding Scripture and the Reformation, else why would I be here.
However, for these people to quote the Pope in defense of their outrage and their stupid petition speaks volumes regarding his ambiguous statements.
Pope Francis makes a clear distinction between public proclamation of the Gospel to the world, on one hand, and the catechesis of Catholics, on the other. The proclamation to the world must focus on God's mercy, while the instruction given in Catholic schools must focus on the details of faith and morals. Therefore, this good sister was operating entirely within the guidelines provided by the Holy Father.
If parents of Catholic school children want to hide the Gospel truth from their children, then why do these silly people enroll their children in Catholic schools?
the Pope said "not to judge" but he never said "allow"! the parents pick and choose what they want. I wander how many of our parents would sign similar petition. ;/
Folks here are constantly whining about what they don't like about the Pope, the liturgy, the Church. Are you saying to them..."Love it or leave it"?
Father, please re-read the last paragraph in your comments. Is that truly the way you feel? If it is, perhaps you should consider a different vocation.
"Diocese spokesman David Hains acknowledged parents were not told ahead of time that Laurel would speak. But he said she has spoken frequently in the diocese..."
"The Rev. Tim Reid, pastor of St. Ann Catholic Church, sent an email lauding the nun, saying 'she represented well the Catholic positions on marriage, sex, same-sex attraction and proper gender roles … The Church has already lost too many generations of Catholic schools students to … a very muddled and watered-down faith.' "
This sister has a doctoral degree in sacred theology from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
She knows the faith.
When you can't preach Catholic teaching at a Catholic high school without generating controversy, what have we come to?
Father McDonald's last statement seems rather strong, but the differnce between a Catholic school and other private and public schools comes down to the teaching and proclamation of the Faith. A quality education is part of the package but if that is primarily what parents want for their children then they can get that elsewhere.
When you come to the end of this life, how well you did on calculus or biology won't matter.
won't matter.
Father, I found some "errors" in your post and I took the liberty to correct them (CAPS).
Fr. Allan J. McDonald should have said...
SOUNDS LIKE the ADULTS at the high school taking the Holy Father out of context to promote THEIR PARTICULAR AGENDA. Either way (liberal or conservative -ALTHOUGH NO CONSERVATIVE EXAMPLES COME TO MIND. I WONDER WHY THAT IS?), it is evil. THEY(ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ENROLLED THEIR CHILDREN IN A *CATHOLIC* SCHOOL) should know better. Jesus was taken out of context on many different occasions as is the Bible, why else was there a Protestant Reformation?
My comment:
Actually Father, those of us who have lived these last 50 years and have *experienced* the liberal side of the church taking things out of context and using Rome as justification of their abuses saw this coming. We said that damage would be done (and clearly damage is done when anyone can get in hot water at a *CATHOLIC* high school for reiterating Catholic Doctrine) from the Holy Father's loose talk. We have simply said that a man with his education and experience should know better.
Those of us, growing up in this media age should know that the first soundbite that gets out becomes the "truth". Subsequent clarifications don't get the play and don't change the initial impression made by the first soundbite.
Once again this is the FRUIT of Vatican II. Return to the Traditional LATIN MASS the Mass of All Times and the Traditional sacraments!!!! Our Great Holy Father Pope Benedict the XVI said he would prefer a Church with less people who believe in The Holy Faith then many who do not!!
What is wrong with Fr.'s last statement? Belief is an either/or proposition. You don't believe in Christ "a little bit." Being Catholic is sort of a "love it or leave it"
proposition. You either believe and confess all the Catholic Church teaches and believes, or you do not. If you do not and you are still here, you are either staying to cause trouble or you don't get it. I like cut and dried.
I read Father McDonald's last paragraph and he's right on target. As Christ said in John ch6, to his disciples, "...let them go...", when they couldn't accept the teachings of the Blessed Sacrament. If people can't accept 2000 years of truth, then find the exits. We are a Church with a small # of practicing Catholics and my guess is that many of the outraged parents are good Sunday morning sleepers. Why should anyone be surprised that you get this reaction when 75% of the Catholic population cares little or is hostile toward fundamental teachings of their faith. What's disturbing is that it's in North Car and not in one of the liberal sewers of this wonderful country.
Anonymous,
Those Catholics who have made up their minds to reject and openly oppose clearly defined Church teachings have already cut themselves off from salvation. Fr. McDonald is only suggesting that they show some integrity about their deadly decision. However, I know he would be very happy to reconcile such persons should they ever change their hearts.
Well it has started, the "famous" words were - WHO AM I TO JUDGE? This is just a 50 year nightmare that has to end soon. Now the good sister will be sent to the GULAG just like the Franciscans of The Immaculate.
If only His Grace Cardinal Burke was elected as the Holy Father, we would see the winds of change enter the Church like you would not believe and he would not be a rock star but hated by many and loved by us!!!
Being a convert, how did Catholic schools get like this??? And why does it only seem to be Catholic schools that do this crap??
I went to a non-denominational Christian school and if this nun had come to speak top us, Catholic or not, she would have had a standing ovation by all of the students.
So why is it that Catholic schools are so bat sh*t crazy?
Because a lot of non-Catholic families send their kids to Catholic schools for the quality education, plus Catholic schools have become quite secularized in many places, teaching social justice nonsense and catering to the "modern" urban mentality. Catholic schools have been infiltrated by cafeteria Catholics, non-Catholic teachers, and text books that are written and controlled by the Left. Catholic schools ain't so Catholic anymore. Just ask some of the teachers from Mt. De Sales in Macon, where Fr. is at St. Jo's.
PS Anonymous, the whole Church appears to be bat sh*t crazy…but it is Holy batsh*t...
"If Catholics don't like what the Catholic Church teaches, they should either shut-up, pull their children out of all Catholic religious education programs and schools or leave the Church altogether."
The Church was not established to care for those whose hearts and minds are always perfectly in sync with the values of the Gospel and the teachings of the Church. The Church was established to care for sinners, and as long as we are on this side of the Parousia, there will be sinners in the Church.
To suggest that those who do not "toe the line" should leave the Church is anti-evangelical, unrealistic, and somewhat Pharisaical.
Anti-evangelical: The Lord's own example is to challenge those who sin to accept the grace to step away from that sin. Jesus did not cast out the woman caught in adultery, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, Zacchaeus, or other sinners who sought him.
Unrealistic: There have always been members of the Church who disagree, even in the "halcyon" days of excommunications being thrown about like to much bone meal in the garden. To aim for a Church that is made up of only "the pure" is to fall into the same utopian error of the Separatists of the Plymouth Colony whose ended up with nothing more than an evanescent Elysium.
Somewhat Pharisaical: The Pharisees always judged and always judged themselves to be better than others. "You are that man's disciple, we are disciples of Moses!"
"The Downtown Macon Catholic Sinners Club" would be an appropriate name for St. Joseph, as would the "South Macon Catholic Sinners Club" be for Holy Spirit and the "Ward Street Catholic Sinners Club/Club de Pecadores de Calle Ward" be for St. Peter Claver.
Ignotus, Sinning is one thing, unbelief is another.
PI, you have a very specious ecclesiology to say the least! The Church, good unknown Father is not a club for anyone, sinner or saint, nor is she a non-governmental organization. She is a Holy Mother who calls her children to perfection by God's grace, which begins with Holy Baptism and finds its conclusion and ongoing life in the Holy Spirit with the resurrection of the body at the second coming and the final judgment.
Yes, since the first century Catholics have been sinners, but it took someone else to point that out to the heretics and often they were excommunicated if they thought their rationalizations were above God and thus more than sinners, they were corrupt.
If parents don't want a Catholic education and all that this entails, and then object when the Church's teachings are taught, then, Houston, or Rome, we have a problem.
No, Good Father, my ecclesiology is not specious.
When the Church calls her sinning children, you and me included, to perfection by God's grace, she does so according to the model set by her founder, Jesus Christ. That model does not entail "Get out if you don't like it" or, to use your words, "...leave the Church altogether."
The Church has never in her history included only those who agree with everything. Never. To aim for such a goal - "smaller but holier Church" you so often pine for, is an historical fantasy.
So....Fr. Mc...your official, public position is that stated in the last paragraph of your comments. Yes? No?
Yes or no, that is the question. Are you opposed to people being true to their convictions and following through on them?
Once again, Ignotus, we are talking about unbelief. Sinners are not necessarily unbelievers. Those who stay in the Church and attempt to "change Her from within" are who I am talking about when I say unbelief. Christ issued very strong warnings to those who would "disturb the least of these my little ones."
Christ was kind of an all or nothing guy, "Whom do you say that I am?" And, when asked, 'What must I do to be saved," he replied, "Believe on him who was sent."
But, then, Ignotus, you see the Church as sort of a friendly campus club where we just want to be nice to everybody…"
I am not opposed to people being true to their convictions and following through on them. I guess my problem is that I'm a bit disappointed with your convictions.
Christ is very forgiving, but when he forgives he also says to go and sin no more.
A person cannot 'sin no more' if they are not educated on what sin is.
Is there a petition of support for this Sister; I would like to sign.
I have tried to imagine that statement coming from Pope Francis. I cannot. Can you?
He has spoken of being worldly and corrupt and indicated the unrepentant corrupt will go to Hell. That is much stronger than what I am suggesting to at the least.
PI – Seems you’ve skipped a step in your rush to offer absolution. The penitent needs to ask for forgiveness first. The group attacking the nun has no interest in their own forgiveness rather they are the accusers eager to destroy someone for speaking the truth. That sounds more like Pharisees to me. The victim in this case is the nun, not the lynch mob. You’ve got the roles reversed.
I have tried to imagine that statement coming from Pope Francis. I cannot. Can you?
"Who am I to judge" TM...will haunt us for decades...regardless of the explanations, justifications, or whatever else is said....I'm with both Gene and Rob on their comments...
In most respects Catholic teaching runs so counter to the prevailing culture that I don't blame some 16-year-olds and their parents for regarding it as akin to heresy.
Shelley Earnhardt's hope that her 16-year old daughter 'will move as far away from her religion as she possibly can' gives me hope that the daughter will display some teenage rebellion and move as far away from her ghastly mother as soon she possibly can. Perhaps becoming a Dominican nun? (N.B. Not the Sinsinawa variety, who are on their last legs, and deservedly so.)
Have we really reached a point when a nun who actually teaches the Faith correctly in a Catholic school is being persecuted by the "Catholics" in that school!
What more proof is needed that we are hardly in the greatest "springtime" the Church has ever had. Heresy and disobedience has been allowed to run rampant in the Church for the last 50 years and the result is worldwide apostasy.
Does anyone think that a Vatican investigation will not know begin. This nun and her order will be persecuted by Rome. Meanwhile the new cardinal of Buenos Aires is going to publicly administer Confirmation and the Eucharist to a "married" lesbian couple and baptize their baby. He is praised as showing mercy, while teaching the truth is seen as evil.
Yet we are to believe the third secret of Fatima was about JPII getting shot. Gee it's too bad Our Lady didn't think it important to warn us about the apostasy spreading throughout the entire world and embraced by Rome.
This "who am I to judge" nonsense will prove to be the most damaging statement ever made by a Pope. Regardless of what the Pope intended (and that is not clear), the media have absolutely galloped away with it and are using it as a foil for Leftist/liberal propaganda. Catholics in name only have also seized upon it to justify their cafeteria Catholicism.
Now, about this Pope's lip service to doctrine…lots off people do that…acknowledge doctrine and then continue to speak and behave as if doctrine did not mean anything. This causes many of us to be distrustful of this Pope's actual thoughts. It is like the sheep are all out grazing peacefully on a sunny hillside when suddenly they look over and see the shepherd petting the wolf...
Sr. Jane is not being "persecuted." This is a typical inflammatory reaction, used by the Right AND the Left, when someone questions them or disagrees with them.
Ok this papacy has gotten out of control I give you kudos Father Mcdonald for doing your best to cover for him but enough already, there has to be some of his words and actions you don't think are doing the Church any good do you Father? The good sister needs to retreat to the F.S.S.P. or The Institute of Christ the King or she is toast.
I for one cannot tolerate the Novus Ordo disaster any longer, enough with altar girls, dancing nuns with incense bowls, felt banners, giant puppets, guitars, drums, tamborines, rock, mariachi, polka, Masses if you can call them Masses, sissy weak bishops who will not defend the Holy Faith and say no to Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians. Vatican II did not say to rip out altar rails high altars, statues, kneelers, kick out Gregorian chant or LATIN. Yet all of this has happened and look at the Church an utter disaster that will take decades to recover from.
Pater: You're being obfuscatory and disingenuous, as usual. It is one thing to sin and to admit (even if only to yourself) that the sin you have committed is a sin. it is another to deny that it is a sin.
Those who do not accept the Church's doctrinal teaching on what is and is not sin aren't Catholic, no matter what they call themselves. Such people should be true to their own convictions by not associating with the Catholic Church.
Of course, many of these people, for the same reasons that they disagree with the Church, see the Church as a purely human institution whose "policies" (i.e. doctrines) can be changed if they stick around and scream long and loudly enough. That's the real reason why they won't leave.
PI: "Sr. Jane is not being persecuted. This is a typical inflammatory reaction, used by the Right AND the Left, when someone questions them or disagrees with them."
I suspect your initial statement is correct, in that Sr. Jane likely takes this outcry as rather less a criticism than a compliment of her fidelity.
But from the reportage I've seen, she said nothing that a faithful Catholic has any right to disagree with. Because it appears that her remarks consisted of "de fide" doctrine.
Anon 10:51 - No, I am not being disingenuous nor obfuscatory.
I do not agree that the best (or the proper) attitude to take toward those who 1) disagree with, 2) struggle with, 3) doubt, or 4) do not accept certain teaching of the Church is to say, "Get out" or "Leave" or "Buh-Bye!"
You are entirely free to cut yourself off from those who you find troublesome. The Church does not possess that same freedom, however. Excommunication is a last resort and may be exercised only in extreme circumstances and only when there is an expectation that the penalty will have a "remedial" effect.
The Code of Canon Law says it must be applied with the "greatest moderation." (1318) This is not a penalty to be spoken of lightly or to be threatened lightly.
Henry,
You've provided the key words to this discussion: "no right". Catholics have no moral or canonical right to publicly protest Church teaching. If they want discussion unbounded by truth, then, as Fr. McDonald suggests, let them join religious communities and utilize religious schools which lay no claim to revealed truth.
What did Sister say about single and divorced parents?
PI says, "I do not agree that the best (or the proper) attitude to take toward those who 1) disagree with, 2) struggle with, 3) doubt, or 4) do not accept certain teaching of the Church is to say, "Get out" or "Leave" or "Buh-Bye!""
But these people are not just disagreeing, struggling with, doubting, or not accepting the truth- they are writing complaints to the school and the bishop because she proclaimed the truth. They want the truth to be left unspoken in a school that is supposed to be teaching the truth. If a CATHOLIC school cannot proclaim Catholic doctrine, how can it call itself Catholic? If they do not want a Catholic education, why pay to send their kids to a catholic School? If they don't want a Catholic Education, then they should go somewhere else. This is not being judgmental, it is just common sense.
I have heard Sister speak in person. She regularly presents this topic to high school seniors and their parents. Sister speaks the truth in love. I was very impressed when I heard her presentation in Florida last year.
If anyone would like to hear her speak, she presents a full course called The Rich Gift of Love here: http://www.newmanconnection.com/institute/courses/rich-gift-of-love
Carol H. - Good Father McDonald said they should "leave the Church."
This is not just about children in Catholic Schools, but the rather unwarranted suggestion that they should "leave the Church."
If they do not believe what the Church teaches, they should leave the Church. There are those Catholics, on the other hand, that may have questions or difficulties about some teachings who keep their mouths shut while faith seeks understanding. There is a difference.
PI
Yes, the last option that father McD gave was to leave the Church. That would be far more honest on their parts than to claim to be Catholic and create scandal after a religious sister professes the truth at a Catholic institution.
Well put, Gene.
Among the Church's many problems, not least is that of the large numbers who have left the faith but, instead of having the decency to leave the Church, have stayed--many of them feeding at the Church's trough as priests, religious, and functionaries--to fight Church and Faith from within.
Carol H. - I don't agree that "honesty" is the fundamental issue. Salvation is.
When you tell someone that, because of what their doubts, disagreements, etc., they ought to walk away, you are suggesting they cut themselves off from the chance of being transformed by the grace that is available to them uniquely through the sacraments. I don't think that that is the best way to respond to the issue.
Some don't believe that they are not obliged to follow the teaching of the pope and bishops regarding Social Justice - and it is an essential part of the Church's magisterial teaching - but we don't tell them to hit the road.
Some reject the Church's teaching regarding the dignity of all people and races, but no one is telling them to get out.
There are, and I suggest always have been, those who might not fit neatly into the Church - they may be silent or they may be vocal. But the idea that the latter should take a hike is, I think, antithetical to the mission of the Church.
PI: Yes, you are consistently disingenuous and obfuscatory on this blog. You have often feigned misunderstanding or pretended to be dense when it's obvious you're _deliberately_ misunderstanding in order to avoid making concessions you wish to avoid. You repeatedly mischaracterize the statements of others and you introduce red herrings to derail arguments of your opponents. You're not an honest debater. You seem far less interested in an honest dialogue than baiting those who disagree with Modernism.
Case in point: Of the four categories of dissenters whom you mention, categories 2 and 3 are digressions. The people who went after this sister apparently fall into categories 1 and 4 based on the vehemence of their reactions, and most of the discussion on this thread also concerns 1 and 4. By introducing 2 and 3 you're obfuscating. I shall address 2 and 3 later if you wish, but not here.
As to 1 and 4: As many modern theologians like to put it, the Church no longer excommunicates people formally very often because they excommunicate themselves by their actions. (In my view this is a cop-out, but we won't worry about that now; I'll accept the validity of their view arguendo). Well, by that rationale, the Church isn't saying goodbye to the people who fall into those categories; rather, it's the people who have said goodbye to (or never said hello to) the Church. They are therefore not in communion with the Church. According to Mystici Corporis, these people don't meet the definition of Catholic. Therefore, the Church should (in this VII ecumenical age) honor the consciences of those people (and incidentally protect the Faithful from scandal and confusion) by openly acknowledging the fact of their excommunication (thereby showing them the wrongness of their position and encouraging them to return to the profession of the Catholic faith if that's what they wish to do in good conscience). I there's a chence thatthese people genuinely don't understand that they're bound, as Catholics, to believe all that the Church teaches to be revealed by God, then treat them as catechumens until they understand and accept this point. What good does it do the dissenter, or the Church, to pretend that the dissenter isn't dissenting from the faith or to encourage him to receive Communion?
For the Church just to publicly ignore the fact of dissent is for the Church to tolerate heresy and to be promoting indifferentism, as well as to encourage Communions made while in a state of mortal sin.
Anonymous, Ignotus and his ilk may be found classified in the phylum "annelida."
Gene, I haven't laughed that hard in a long time- my sides are killing me!
Pin/Gene - Now, son, you can't insult an old biologist by referring to him as an annelid. These beautiful segmented worms, part of God's marvelous creation, are pretty glorious and fulfill essential roles in ecosystems from deep sea thermal vents to tidal zones to damp terrestrial areas.
You suffer from the same narrow vision/understanding that effects Anonymous 8:57 p.m. It's an epistemological narrowness, a generalized egoism. If YOU think of annelids as nasty or worthless or unimportant, then EVERYONE has to think of them that way. But, that's not reality. Well, it is reality, but a reality that exists only in your own mind.
Anonymous 8:57 cites MC and, given his/her epistemological starting point, assumes that EVERYONE will understand MC as he/she does. It's a kind of delusional egoism that is, sad to say, rampant in our Western culture at present. "My View Is The Right View, The Only View" is the mantra of those, on the Left and the Right, who have retreated out of fear into a narrow, everything's black-and-white, no questions allowed existence.
(More on Anon's comments later in the day.)
I live in the world, not a world that I try to create and maintain, but one that is created and maintained by God's Providence. I gave up long ago the belief that I possess the capacity to be right about everything, and that anyone who disagrees with me is, by definition, wrong.
So, here's to the annelids, to their relatives, and to the other simple creatures upon which life as we know it depends!
Ignotus, far from denigrating the annelids as one of God's glorious creations, I was merely referencing their intelligence level and the fact that they are coated with a mucoid secretion, commonly referred to as "slime."
"Pater not", not sure what world YOU refer to be inhabiting. God's created world is beautiful. Fallen because of us, but open to all in every-way. You ride the "right" harshly all the while claiming asylum with YOUR pin-hole view. You should step back and take a look at yourself! A worm...is a worm.
Seek - You will notice that I criticized the Right and the Left in my 7:47 a.m. post...
Pin/Gene - I know you weren't denigrating annelids; rather you were trying to insult me by comparing me to a segmented worm.
It didn't work.
Hell, Ignotus, I thought it worked just fine. Several people agreed and found it quite apropos.
Pin/Gene - Sorry, the only one who can say if your intended insult against me worked is me.
Others may have clucked, but the attempt fell flat, for the reasons I have already explained.
And let me save you from wasting time on "insulting" me in the future.
You can't.
Anonymous 8:57 - No, I am not dishonest or disingenuous here or elsewhere, for that matter. If I miss a point someone here is trying to make, it is an honest mistake. As I and other here have done, if we misread or misunderstand something, we acknowledge it and move on.
Where we differ is, I think, in how we see the world. Your view seems to me to be of the "Black and White" variety. Mine is a much more nuanced view where there is lots of room for shades of grey. For you a single quote from a single papal document says it all. Mind you, that approach relies on your idiosyncratic interpretation of the passage cited.
I, on the other hand, would never see such magisterial "proof-texting" as a solution to or as offering the final word on ANY doctrinal or juridical disagreement.
As an example, some have cited Mortalium Animos as the final word on all things ecumenical, and some have cited Quo Primum as the final word on changing the liturgy. Neither is the final word on either. It's far more complicated than that. Proof-texting doesn't settle things.
Please define how you understand "Modernism." It is a term that is often used by traditionalists, but I often find that different people mean very different things. To define it as "the synthesis of all heresies" doesn't count.
I don't know how you can know with such certainty the motivation of the people who objected to aspects of Sr. Jane's presentation. I have not seen a transcript of the talk nor have I found a recording of it. What I have seen is snippets of remarks made by those who objected to what she said. These have been disassociated from Sister's talk, so I have a hard time determining 1) just what was said, and 2) just what the parents were objecting to.
"Latae sententiae" excommunications have nothing whatsoever to do with the thinking of "modern" theologians. This penalty is also found in the 1917 Code, so I don't understand how you manage to see this as a problem of "modern" theologians.
I don't agree that ignoring dissent is the equivalent of tolerating heresy. That's a tremendous stretch, to say the least.
I don't think the Church "ignores" the dissent, but chooses not to address it in the way that may meet with your approval. You would prefer a hammer, while those bishops who hold the responsibility for dealing with dissent may choose a less damaging response.
No, no, Ignotus. That is the whole point. You have no control over how others respond to my comments. You see, it is all a lot of fun to us, making dismissive remarks and telling the truth about a modernist, apostate Priest who is also an arrogant, condescending twit. Whether it bothers your not is completely immaterial. Carry on...
"Grey" just about says it all, doesn't it, pater not?
No, Ignotus, what you think doesn't matter. The rest of us agree about you and it is fun laughing at you. You can't control that. Too badm eh. LOL!!
“Any comment that is vitriolic and disrespectful of the laity in general, and Pope Francis, bishops and priests in particular will not be posted! Discuss ideas and leave the personalities out of it. No name calling or calling anyone disastrous. Post an intelligent and civil comment. Comments contrary to these two norms, regardless of point of view, will not be posted.”
Well, that didn’t last long, did it? Pity! Perhaps some are just taking advantage of Father McDonald’s convalescence to slip “hilarious” insults through the filter again. And yet, when Father McDonald composes a clever April 1 “spoof” post about the Pope, suddenly people seem to lose their sense of humor and get all serious about it. Indeed, they actually seem to suggest, seriously suggest, that Pope Francis, a self-confessed “son of the Church,” might really do those things. Funny that!
All these comments about Sister being “persecuted, etc.” may indeed be well taken. But at this point I am suspending judgment. Can someone please answer Pater Ignotus’ point:
“I don't know how you can know with such certainty the motivation of the people who objected to aspects of Sr. Jane's presentation. I have not seen a transcript of the talk nor have I found a recording of it. What I have seen is snippets of remarks made by those who objected to what she said. These have been disassociated from Sister's talk, so I have a hard time determining 1) just what was said, and 2) just what the parents were objecting to.”
And let us not forget Father McDonald’s very important observations at the beginning of his Comments:
“I don't know how Sister Jane phrased her talk and as the news article states, there is no record of her talk. There are ways to teach truth to adults and children without inflaming the sentiments of those who attend.”
In my own work I have frequent occasion to see the importance of understanding the context in which things are said and done and the mischief caused when those things are taken out of context. Therefore, wanting to know more about the precise context before making a judgment does not seem unreasonable to me.
Pin/Gene - So, you post comments that are intended to insult me, but don't.
Then you say that you post them so that you can laugh at what you have posted?
Well, that is an area in which you succeed splendiferously. Conrgats!
No, Ignotus, that is not what I said at all. You lie and twist once again. Are you even aware that you do so? If you are not, you are simply a hysteric. If you are, you are a sociopath. I'll vote for the latter.
There are reports that in her talk Sr. Jane stated that masturbation can make a young boy gay and that gay couples are more likely to abuse their children.
These are unconfirmed and from a left-leaning source, so I will keep looking for actual quotes.
Pin/Gene - And was with your insults, which have zero impact on me, your "vote" is meaningless.
Ignotus, I do not care whether my comments have any effect on you…it is the other people on the blog that I write them for. Many of us enjoy laughing at you together. Plus, newbies need to know what they are dealing with in Priests of your phylum. LOL!
For those interested in subsequent developments, including the Wednesday evening meeting with parents of students at Charlotte Catholic High School, here is a report from USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/03/catholic-nun-homosexuality-speech/7250825/
Post a Comment