First of all, have you ever met a Nashville Dominican?
I have. They used to shop a religious goods store I managed. They are probably the coolest bunch of young women consecrated to Christ I have ever met. They exude joy and love for Christ - and enthusiasm for the Gospel - they are 'normal' and 'with it' young women. Nothing phony about them. They are well educated teachers - did I mention enthusiastic - as well as kind, friendly, loving, caring, and so on?
These women are not at all like the stereotypical mean old nuns who taught me in school. Not. At. All.
I never met Sister Jane Dominic Laurel*, but I just read that she is under fire from what may be just a 'clique' of students who resented a speech she gave at their school, presenting Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality. The students and their parents appear to have launched a letter writing campaign, and or petition protesting Sr. Jane Dominic's remarks. I don't know enough about the story to really comment, but my bets are the audience over-reacted. I also believe it is a pretty good sign of what I've been saying all along - though chanceries and bishops reject such "ministries" - New Ways Ministry and other organizations such as Catholic Pastoral Committee on Sexual Minorities have influenced progressive Catholic educators and education, and the results are showing up in situations like this one. Of course, pop-cultural influences play just as serious a role - its influence not lost on teachers as well as students and their parents.
The story:
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 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. - Charlotte ObserverObviously the kids are not okay.
*Sister's speaking engagement may be linked to Sisters on the Road, a program sponsored by from Aquinas College, Nashville.
The children have been brainwashed. They are like the Lawrence Harvey character in the Manchurian Candidate.
ReplyDeleteAre we brainwashed? Or is it that we just hold opinions and views that are different from hers? Is it ok to be offended if (see my main post below) your mom was part of that statistic or you have a gay family memeber? Guess not....
DeleteDerek: If my mom were a single mother, and someone told me that as a group children of single mothers do worse in every measurable way, I would feel bad for my mother... but I wouldn't get mad at the person who said it, because it's true. It's not fair to you or her to pretend it's not true, and it's especially not fair to young people -- just starting out and planning their lives -- not to tell them that there are much, much better ways of going about having children and families than many that are common. That doesn't make single mothers, or their children, bad people.
DeleteYes, I agree, that's what "came to mind", they are brainwashed and repeating all they have learned in the "culture of death". She's a brave, little nun too.
ReplyDeleteSister Jane Dominic is one of my professors at Aquinas College this semester. She teaches my Introduction to Sacred Scripture course, which I am taking as a Theology Major.
ReplyDeleteI have also attended her Masculinity and Femininity lecture which she delivered at the college in early January -- she is a very knowledgeable and dynamic speaker and theology of human sexuality certainly falls under her competence. Her formal specialization is in Dogmatic Theology.
I think the fact that a student body from a Catholic high school is opposing her talk, which is rooted in Catholic moral teaching supported by sociological data, is indicative of a deeper problem: the school, in part or whole is not doing its job in giving a proper moral formation to its students.
Please pray for Sister and for the students!
+
Ana
These days kids are taught what to think, not how to think. Praying for Sr. Jane Dominic - and those misguided students too.
ReplyDeleteThank you for calling me, and my fellow classmates and peers misguided.
DeletePerhaps, Derek, if you hear it enough, you will recognize the truth of it. You, your classmates and peers ARE misguided if you think you know better than Church Orthodoxy, better than the inerrant Word of God. Examine your motives, young man, please, and examine your soul. Why would Sr Jane Dominic's truth be offensive to you, except that you have become so conformed to the world's ways? This is something that Christ warned all of us to guard against.
DeleteOh dear, this is what I was afraid of. Did you see what they said in their petition? “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.”
ReplyDeleteThe heterodox parents aren't just going after the visiting nun, but the school chaplain who brought her. The orthodox parents held a 40 hour devotion after things blew up to pray for their good priest. I got an email from a friend in Charlotte asking for prayers. and posted it on my blog. You can read her email here if you're interested. http://lesfemmes-thetruth.blogspot.com/2014/03/prayer-request-for-our-scandalized.html Please pray for Fr. Kauth.
ReplyDeleteA friend inherited her mother's old townhouse. One day, the plaster ceiling in one of the upstairs bedrooms came crashing down. This turned out to be caused by a leaky roof. She had no idea the roof was in such shape until the ceiling fell. First she had to clean up the mess, then found good roofers, then someone to repair and plaster the ceiling. Then while she was at it, she had other rooms with water damage repaired and painted, new windows installed, and the floors refinished. She bought a new stove, and is redecorating little. This has taken over a year so far, and she is not finished. She can't wait to have friends over, and already hopes all is ready for her first friend to stay in her new guest room. It took the falling of ceiling to put her on this mission of repair and renewal.
ReplyDeleteThis is why people are buying condos. Someone else gets to worry about the roof, the plumbing, the trash pick-up, the landscaping, the shoveling of snow. There is a condo fee that covers it all.
The Church is not a condo but a House. It was designed by a very fine Architect, and was built by craftsmen from the old country. We inherited it. It does take upkeep and maintenance, but sometimes it takes a ceiling to come crashing down to point out that the roof is in poor shape.
Our Church is in need of repair and renewal. Perhaps we should ask the Architect to help us find some top-notch craftsmen who take pride and care in their work, and to help guide the rebuilding. After all, the Church is not just a House, but our Home.
Beautiful analogy!
DeleteFirst, I would like to see what she had said..I doubt it was too inflammatory as in Fred Phelps nuts territory, but who knows. I think it is great that young people question and challenge their faith..if they don't, they truly are "brainwashed," and they really can't embrace the fullness of their faith. I don't mean to diss my Mom but she still will not believe that there is no limbo and she still believe's Mary Magdelene was a prostitute as "that is what I was taught!" Not saying my mom doesn't understand your faith but she was indeed shall we say indoctrinated.
ReplyDeleteWhat I don't understand is why everyone is so quick to be "offended," by a different opinion or statement. It happens with everyone conservative or liberal , they don't want to hear another opinion. Gay activists saying that someone is a homophobe if they are against gay marriage (a lot of them are but that is not all of them..) now the anti gay marriage people are trying to co opt that by saying that someone is anti-Catholic or anti-Christian or trampling on their "religious liberty," to disagree.
Instead of raging against this woman, the students should have simply disagreed with her and gave their reasons for it, politely and well thought out. How are they going to get through life if they crumble if they come up against a conflicting opinion and want to shut it down?
Not sure you have read the petition the student body has in response to the speech but it is very well thought out, well written and peaceful.
DeleteI've read it, and it's not.
DeleteExcept that it contradicts Catholic teaching. From students at a Catholic school.
DeleteExcept that it contradicts Catholic teaching. Written by a student of a Catholic school. *sigh*
DeleteThe issue seems to be that Sr. Jane Dominic Laurel has spoken heresy to the New Leftist Orthodoxy. The Left feels itself to be in the ascendant at the moment, and are sure that their dark and terrible faith will supplant Faith in the Son of God proclaimed by the Catholic Church. The Left is militantly totalitarian and will brook no rivals.
DeleteI remember reading somewhere words to the effect that when evil is weak it pleads for tolerance. When it gains the upper hand its arrogance requires it to destroy all who oppose it.
What is truly sad is that the strongest argument made against Sr. Jane Dominic Laurel's presentation is that some of it's hearers were offended by her presentation. Not a very incisive refutation, but then, pathetic whining never is.
Okay..from the first reports....kids in the actual lecture (but who knows how valid the report is) it seems that they are not upset about her talking about Catholic teaching on sexuality, but her mis informed and ridiculous "theories," on how people are gay (i.e. masturbation makes you gay, which if that were truth, 98 percent of the men on the planet would be gay)and the old standards of gays having between 500 to 1000 partners (uh, where was I hiding when they were doling all of those guys out) and the old canard about men being gay as they had an absent father, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo she is promoting Catholic teaching which is you know, her job since she is a nun, but why does she feel she needs to throw in nonsense to "support" this teaching. People loose their credibility and the people she is attempting to reach shut down and don't listen to anything else.
As I said, who knows if that is what was actually said though.
Mack Malone,
ReplyDeleteSister has delivered her "Masculinity and Femininity:Difference and Gift" lecture around the country; it is a condensed version of her Masculinity and Femininity series which is available (free of cost) on the Newman Connection site. It is divided into 8 parts. Link below.
http://www.newmanconnection.com/institute/courses/rich-gift-of-love
+
Ana
Ana,
DeleteThanks and I understand that, I watched a bit of one video and I think the Sister comes across as very charismatic, eloquent and intelligent. I am referring to a couple of posts on other sites where the actual parents talk about what she said to their kids. One parent commented that the complaint they had with the sister was not about the Church teaching but about the mis-information that she gave out about the hows and whys. This parent also commented, and I think this is the most interesting point of this incident, that the complaints have been hijacked by a group that wants to push their own agenda. (i.e. the Chaplain and the Bishop are being attacked, Catholic teaching is being attacked, etc.) As someone also posted, and I am paraphrasing, if you start talking and making outrageous claims, your true message gets lost or ignored.
Personally as I remember back to my high school, I would have been MORTIFIED if I had to sit and listen to a nun discuss masturbation!!!
This talk is very different from the one we received at CC....do not watch this and assume it is the same one because it is far from it.
DeleteI believe there were two problems here, perhaps three. First, the students, and some of the less orthodox parents felt that they were "bushwacked". If they were not presented with an outline of who this person was and why she was coming, in advance, they are correct. This was simply an attempt to mak a rigid and doctrinaire presentation, on male and female sexuality and the most conservative interpretation. Second, it was presented as absolute truth to young people who probably already know better. Third, there was obviously no attempt to entertain or allow an alternate opinion. My Irish Catholic grandmother would have called that, "a lie that was ashamed of itself". If you believe this is truth, present it that way, and be public and open about what you are doing and why. If you can't do that, it is not the faith of your audience in question, it is your own beli
ReplyDeleteThe problem here is that people forget that the Church is not a democracy. Nobody was bushwhacked; the Church presented Church teaching as Truth. That's what the Church does. Typically when people want to present another opinion, what they mean is they don't follow Church teaching and don't think the Church should either.
DeleteI am a student at Charlotte Catholic and sat through this speech so I know exactly what she said and how she said and everything else that you do not. I want to start of by saying the beginning of her speech was nice it was very interesting as she described the male and female brain and the student body was very engaged and interested. After that is where the talk went south. She began to talk about how people need both mothers and fathers in their lives while for some this is true it is NOT true for all. She said "the only way for a woman to be fulfilled in life is to be married to a man". This is a complete load of crap....there were students in the audience who only have a mom because, their dad passed away, their dad was abusive and their mom left the marriage, or other reasons. So they are being told their mom is not fulfilled because they are single/divorced. Her stance on women in the marriage was also that women should be subservient in a way to their husbands which is not right. Men and women are equal. Next I will address her facts one by one. She brought up an Australian gay couple who did abuse the child the adopted. While a horrible crime she singled them out as if to say this is what ALL gays do. Well if she brings that up why not bring up the thousands upon thousands of straight families who abuse their children too? Cannot eat your cake and have it too sister. Next she said 44% of homosexual males will have between 500-1000 sexual partners in their life. This is not possible. Take the gay population of the US...every gay man would have to meet every other gay man in the US and have sex with that person at least once. Also for a person to have 1000 sexual partners in their life time(she said a person who has sex 3 times a week) theyd have to have sex three times a day with three different people. Tell me how that would be possible......exactly. She also said the transfer of HIV/AIDS the #1 transfer of it is from gay sex. As someone who re-searches my facts the #1 transfer of HIV/AIDS is unclean drug needles. Her info while some may have been valid in the 1970s-80s is not valid today. She also did NOT breach one ounce of love, forgiveness, acceptance, understanding, or any other core Catholic belief when it comes to accepting those who are single/homosexual. She also did not once mention lesbians. After the speech several kids who had single parent families were breaking down in teachers rooms because they did not feel loved because of her words. Tell me if that is right. The chaplain Father Kauth also crossed the line too. When a senior(a good friend of mine who is going to Davidson college on a full ride-not easy to do) emailed him disagreeing with the speech. My friend is one of the most reverent and religious people at the school and Father called his email "That of an 8th grader who watches TV all day" and if one were to read his email you would see an 8th grader would not have written it, but a very well educated highschool senior. Hsd she preached love, respect, understanding, and other values Jesus taught us we would not have a problem with it. However, when you ignore those key parts of our faith and basically tell someone your mom is not fulfilled because she does not have a husband I am sorry that is not right. I respect your opinions but DO NOT post on here like you know it all when you were not there...
ReplyDeleteGO COUGARS.
I also forgot to add that several teachers including religion teachers walked out on the speech because they like many of the students found it disgusting. Some of the teachers have also made their voices heard.
DeleteHi Derek,
DeleteThank you for explaining what went on in the talk that Sister Jane gave. I'd like to take the opportunity to point you in the right direction. You said earlier "As someone who searches my facts.."... it seems that you didn't find the correct facts or you didn't do the proper research on the following topics. First lets deal with what Sister Jane said about the average sex partners of gay men:
1. Sister stated gay men have an average of 500-1000 partners in their lifetime.
1b. You said that there was no way that number could even be correct.
The Truth: Studies show that white gay men have on average 1000 sex partners during their lifetime. Here is a link to the site that has the proof, statistics, and numbers to back up the data: http://josephnicolosi.com/an-open-secret-the-truth-about/
2. Sister stated that the transfer of HIV/AIDS the #1 transfer of it is from gay sex.
2b. You said that what she said was completely wrong and it was in fact dirty needles.
The Truth: Empirical evidence states that in 1981 AIDS was found to be an STD that was spread by homosexuals. The data states: "80% of adults acquire HIV-1 following exposure at mucosal surfaces, and AIDS is thus primarily a sexually transmitted disease" -- http://perspectivesinmedicine.org/.../1/1/a006841.full.pdf+ 25 Million people have died from AIDS in the last 30 yrs, the majority of those deaths were from sex, particularly anal sex. The UN has an article that deals with AIDS and 80% of the article.. states that it is spread through sex and that it's an STD: https://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/briefing/hiv/hiv.pdf
2C. Derek.. you are incorrect in your statement about needles. Here is a statistic from the official AIDS.gov site: "Injection drug users represented 8% of new HIV infections in 2010 and 16% of those living with HIV in 2009" -- The report goes on to say: "Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most profoundly affected by HIV. In 2010, the estimated number of new HIV infections among MSM was 29,800, a significant 12% increase from the 26,700 new infections among MSM" Here is the link: http://aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/statistics/
I think the kids in this room (including you) were way over sensitive, took things personally, and were threatened by plain and simple facts. You all have been brainwashed by the media, television, the internet, music, and the public school system as well as the Catholic schools that have teachers that are CINO's (Catholics in Name Only).
I think you should go to confession and then adoration to think about what Sister Jane O.P. said and about how God looks at this. Take an afternoon and watch Sister Jane's videos here for a dose of true Catholicish: http://www.newmanconnection.com/institute/courses/rich-gift-of-love
You are in my prayers Derek.
God Bless,
Michael
Derek, you wrote: "Had she preached love, respect, understanding, and other values Jesus taught us we would not have a problem with it." I am not trying to be inflammatory here but every time I hear that sort of sentiment expressed it usually means that the speaker is accusing someone of not accepting/tolerating the pro-gay/pro-lesbian/pro-gay adoption/pro-abortion/choice, pro-contraception stance. I am not trying to start an argument here - I would just like to know if this is what you meant. If it is not then can you please explain. I am honestly asking this with charity as I would like to understand what happened. Thank you.
DeleteAddressing Michaels comment: The AIDS comment came directly from someone who has toured the country for years discussing how to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS and has done it for years. I will take his word since he has lived it his whole life(he is negative too). Also a credible government/organization website would be good for stats not a website holding the name of the person who made it(referring to sexual partners). Sister said the 1000 sexual partners were basically 1000 different people not the same person several times. Just to clarify. We have been brainwashed? Have we? Or are we simply concerned for those who were hurt deeply by the speech so much so that afterwards they were CRYING in teachers rooms after the speech. Teachers walked out on the speech and the students wished they had too. How dare you insult the educators at Charlotte Catholic you do not know what these teachers do for the faith or how we as a community really do so please stay out of those comments. Oh, and by the way, some of the teachers who walked out were religion teachers because she did NOT preach God's message that: Everyone is God's Child and should be LOVED no matter what they are. What has happened to love the sinner hate the sin? I don't think it is appropriate to go to confession for something you believe either because then you wouldnt believe it. God Bless
DeleteAngela, this is not an issue of her stance on any of those matters. We already knew her view and the Church's view on gays/gay married couples before the speech. It was an issue of her insulting with not only her tone, but also the presentation of the facts which were not totally true/right. Also her stance on single mothers/fathers and divorce was very offensive to those int he audience who have divorced/single parents and cannot control those circumstances. Why should someone be made to feel horrible over something they cannot control? The love comment was saying that if she talked about how we should all love single parents and admire them for the job they have done raising their kids and still sending them to a Catholic school. Things like that it would've gone over much better. I also ask that you do not watch her video on line of the speech and compare it to this one as it is different. God Bless
DeleteDerek, thank you for taking the time to clarify. My late parents were divorced and I was too. I have also been hurt by remarks about divorced people - I understand how your friends were feeling. I can't speak to the statistics that Sister used but one thing I have learned since coming back to the Church is get my own facts squeakly clean and correct. I love what Terry wrote to you - he is a very wise man and knows of what he speaks. God bless you Derek as you seek to find the Truth. I will pray for you. Angela.
DeleteDerek, it IS preferable that a child have both a mother and a father who remain married and work very hard at their marriage when it is troubled. This encourages a fighting spirit in their children; kids with backbones, crust, and ultimately True love. And, yes, women should be subservient to their husbands. This does not mean they are not equal; it means they support their husbands. A priest once told me if I ever complained about my husband in front of our children, that we'd have spoiled brats on our hands for the rest of our lives. As far as Sister herself not being married, she IS married... to Jesus. As far as her stats go on sodomite sex, I don't know the correct numbers, but a gay man having sex with another should not even occur once. If it does, he should go to Confession and ask forgiveness of Our Lord, just as a heterosexual single man having sex should do the same. I'm sorry Sister was upsetting to those who went off and cried in a room, but the judgement coming down from Jesus after we die will be so much more severe. We should prepare our souls right now for that day, and as Terry says, "pray." http://adorationrocks.com
DeleteDerek,
DeleteI was a parishioner of the Charlotte Diocese for 20+ years, I know Charlotte well and I know of the school that you attend. Calm down on the indignation. Think about this for a minute. The CDC and Aids.gov have both come out on the number of sexual partners of gay men... and they were exactly the number that sister stated. Do better research!
"Everyone is God's Child and should be LOVED no matter what they are." Wrong in the wording.. Everyone is a child of God and should be loved regardless of what they CHOOSE to be. Sexuality does NOT define someone nor does it define a behavior or choice. Sister is clearly loving the sinner and HATING the sin.. not the other way around. Get a grip man.
Derek, you said "Next she said 44% of homosexual males will have between 500-1000 sexual partners in their life. This is not possible. Take the gay population of the US...every gay man would have to meet every other gay man in the US and have sex with that person at least once. Also for a person to have 1000 sexual partners in their life time(she said a person who has sex 3 times a week) theyd have to have sex three times a day with three different people. Tell me how that would be possible......exactly"
DeleteIt appears that your reaction to the talk upset you enough to challenge your mathematics! The math you suggest shows how one person could have sex with 1000 different partners in ONE YEAR. The talk said "in their life." Since, in general sexually active homosexuals frequently have shorter lives, let us take a 30 year sexual life - there would be 10,950 + about 7 or 8 additional days for leap years in 30 years. That averages 1 new partner each 10 or 11 days over the 30 year period.
Further with the population of the US being somewhere in the 300 million mark, and the number of persons with SSA being anywhere from 2% (as some claim) to 10% (as others claim), let us assume around 5% we are talking about about 15,000,000 persons. If 50% of these are male, then we are looking at 7,500,000 men, 44% of which is 3,300,000. It is not impossible at all.
When we are incensed, offended, by someones statements it is essential that we objectively look at the numbers they are quoting and look at the logic. You really need to re-think your reaction to what was said at that talk.
Mr. Miller,
ReplyDeleteYou quoted Sister Jane Dominic Laurel as saying "the only way for a woman to be fulfilled in life is to be married to a man." It seems odd to me that Sister would believe this statement since she has taken a vow of chastity which precludes her being married to a man. Apparently, Sister Jane Dominic had previously given this talk at many high schools without incident. Did Sister deviate from her script at Charlotte Catholic? I'd like to hear her account of the evening.
If you refer to her script as the video posted earlier in the comments then yes. Each talk is different for any speaker on any topic. She did indeed say that which is why many were puzzled because she joined the convent either at 17 or 18 so very early on. If one is to talk about fulfillment through marriage I think someone even a nun who was married is better qualified...a PHD is great but in those kinds of circumstances first hand knowledge is always best.
DeleteHi Derek - sorry you felt disrespected here, and I'm especially sorry you did not get to converse with Sr. Jane Dominic - extensively - after her presentation. I hope she is able to read your comments here and understand more profoundly how deeply these issues have affected you and your peers. I'm sure it doesn't sit well that older people believe everyone your age has been brainwashed. What they mean to say - I suspect - is that those who have been responsible for your formation in faith and morals have not received proper - traditional - education in Catholic faith and morals. I expect they have transmitted to you what they have experienced in their difficulties to live according to Catholic teaching, as well as have learned at Catholic universities, teachings which very often contradict Catholic moral teaching.
ReplyDeleteI think many people are deeply shocked at the response of your fellow students and their parents who object to Sr.'s speech. Many people are not at all aware how acceptance of homosexuality, same sex marriage and gender neutral theory has become embedded in Catholic education at every level.
There are so many levels of experience and understanding as regards alternative lifestyles and adaptation. You guys see fellow students and their parents doing well, coping, making a family. The long term poses significant problems, and Sr. is probably addressing the big picture in her presentation.
What you need to do - in your wonderful enthusiasm to defend yourself from such an onslaught upon your moral convictions, is to study everything Sr. Jane Dominic addressed. Research her sources with the intention to refute her thesis, and contrast that with what you have learned. And pray. I think you will discover the truth - the 'veritas splendor' St. John Paul II celebrated in his famous encyclical of the same name. You won't be wrong, but you will come to the fullness of truth.
From what you have written, I think you are a cool guy - very intelligent, very sharp - keep studying, keep learning. Just do not neglect prayer and the sacraments. No matter what. God bless you Derek - I wish you were my kid - but I'll pray for you as if you were.
Terry
That was something I wish she had done was leave about 20-30 minutes for Q and A from the student body. She was given well over an hour to talk and I am not sure the speech online is even 45 minutes. If so then maybe she would've been able to clarify the stats she used or maybe some things she said that when said can be mis-interperted. Apparently she is coming back to the CLT area in May maybe she can stop by and have a Q and A for the students after school which would be very good I think. God Bless Terry!
DeleteI think Derek is an example of many young people today. They arent stupid so being directed to an agenda driven website that has a first line "You dont have to be gay," really tips them off that this might not be a website that will present the unbiased facts. They also have been exposed to "alternative," families not just by "Modern Family" (which has a very sterotypical gay couple on the show by the way) but GASP who have actually seen single and gay parents be good parents, who actually have a friend,or a beloved family member who is gay. They might have a classmate with gay parents, or neighbors, and have actually sat down and had dinner with that family, or been part of the car pool with them, etc. Now that gays are not hiding in the shadows and more people are honest with themselves and others, the kids can see it and make decisions for themselves. They also have more access to more information then we ever had, so they can do the research and not be spoon fed it.
ReplyDeleteI think that if the good Sister had kept to Church teaching she would have been fine and the kids would have accepted the talk. But kids today don't live in the world we did, or even this young nun did. They won't accept a totally biased narrative on either side.
There are good and bad people who are gay and straight. So bringing in some crazed gay couple who did horrendous things to their kids is not going to change the views of these kids when they can open a paper (or I should say see it online) several articles each day of straight people and couples abusing families. Cherry picking just ruins your whole argument..
See, this is the problem with these Christianist witch hunts: they affect REAL people.
ReplyDeleteI'm not scolding you and I understand where you're coming from, but don't think Sr.'s presentation was part of any witch hunt - despite the fact lately some teachers around the country have been terminated because of lgbtq issues. Though students protested Sr.'s address, this isn't quite the same situation - although it indicates a problem in Catholic education.
DeleteA huge part of the confusion is due to inconsistent teaching on marriage and divorce and sexuality: On one hand we have Cardinal Dolan praising some jock for coming out gay, and then we hear of a Catholic educator - who happens to be a very solid academic who is also a nun - lecturing about Catholic doctrine and teaching on marriage, sexuality and gender. It sounds pretty schizoid.
But you are right - these arguments affect real people - and the students are real people whose personal domestic situations may not model Catholic teaching. The fact they take offense is a sign they need to be listened to and their concerns addressed with compassion and understanding, patience and respect for their intelligence.
I still maintain that if the students were able to have a discussion with Sr. Jane, and or some in her community, they may not always at first agree, but they wouldn't feel talked down to or dismissed, and the students would have a better understanding of clear Catholic teaching.
It's apparent that what caused the controversy was not matters of Faith and Morals, but Sister's comments on single parenting. A topic which I am not the least surprised caused unhappiness with some parents and students.
ReplyDeleteVery few people are well disposed to having their own ox gored, especially on matters a personal as one's own family.
Sister Jane is, or course, completely correct. And the truth of her understanding is not changed because there appear to be exceptions.
The problem is that what she said is not only not immediately knowable, and but the truth of it is further obscured by examples which appear to prove the contrary as well as by emotions getting in the way by those who are personally involved in single families.
What is apparent is that Sister Jane attempted to cover too much ground, especially when some of that ground is needed to be covered and explained well while walking on eggshells so as to not cause the hurt that did occur.
When I think back on my own parent's divorce when I was a sophomore in high school I highly doubt any of us children would have been offended by what Sister Jane said because what she said was culturally commonly known, but that culture is gone and I alone among all my friends siblings did not progress to embrace the new where it is not difficult to imagine their rather strong reaction if I were to say the same to them as Sister Jane said to those students, and through them the parents.
I think you are right - the situation today with single parent families is so far from ideal and what the norm should be. Kids in that situation are so sensitive to what they perceive as criticism or even condemnation of their immediate experience/reality - a single parent doing everything to ensure the kids have a good life, and so on.
DeleteI also agree that Sr. Jane may have tried to cover too much ground for one assembly.
Thanks for commenting.
Now this would be a scandal -- a Dominican professor getting the facts wrong.
ReplyDeleteHer facts were not only wrong in some areas, but simply impossible in one case with the 44% of gay men having 1000 different sexual partners a yr(not the case where you have sex with the same person 5 times and thats 5 sexual partners...she meant 1000 different people). She also singled out one gay family in Australia as I mentioned before to try and back something that she had NO stats for....she did not cite any of her sources and any well educated college professor ALWAYS cites their sources don't you think?
DeleteWow, that's what I get for having to actually..go to work..and sleep..you totally miss out on the crazed homo party!
DeleteI think that she got her stats like a lot of people do on both sides of the aisle..someone says it or posts it and it suits your narrative or point, and people keep repeating it and repeating it, until it becomes..real...despite what the facts actually may be.
There are sources for the numbers given by Sister Jane, but let them be incorrect, let them be 'simply impossible'. What is proven, or accomplished, by proving her numbers are incorrect?
DeleteI was not at the lecture, obviously, but the type of argument that uses those numbers are typically anecdotal intending to be helpful towards understanding the harm that is caused by acting on homosexual inclinations. It would be the same if Sister Jane put forth impossible numbers pertaining to pregnancy or STDs occurring during fornication. Chance of pregnancy or STDs is not why fornication is evil, but when the evil is not obvious to someone, sometimes bringing up an undesirable consequence is what is needed to cause someone not to act on an inclination.
The intent of the anecdotal is to move someone in a good direction by moving them where they can be moved. When fear of loosing one's immortal soul from grave sin is not sufficient as aversion, sometimes fear of procuring STDs is sufficient.
Obviously Sister Jane's anecdote failed in its intent, but what does disproving her anecdote prove? Nothing really, because its propose was not so much to prove anything, but instead intended as a nudge to move others in the right direction.
LTG - excellent points.
Delete" What is proven, or accomplished, by proving her numbers are incorrect?" Because they aren't true, and if one presents oneself as an expert in a particular area, you cannot just throw out wrong numbers and not expect to be called on it, especially with kids. They knew b.s. when they hear it and you loose whatever credibility you do have. You wont move them in any direction except to tune you out.
DeleteAlso, its the typical campaign to make gays look like promiscuous creeps, trollling parks and shadowy places who are destined to die of a horrible disease...cue to the dramatic music. We've all heard it all before and it just shows how out of touch the person spouting them off are. As I have discussed above you can't pull this with kids, many of whom know and love gay family members or friends or have neighbors who are gay. You can't scare kids now the way they used to try and scare us.
And your right, pregnancy or STD's are not the reason the Church considers sex outside of marriage bad...so why did the Sister go there? All she would need to do it to talk about the Church's teaching on sexuality. That should stand for itself. Why go there? Well its to try to scare people in the age old tradition that religious have always done. Imagine the gay kid who just got painted as a freak who will soon develop into a "sex maniac." You think that kid is going to go to a religious figure for help? Do you think that kind of thing will scare him "straight?" The only nudge the good Sister might have given was to drive someone further away.
"The intent of the anecdotal is to move someone in a good direction by moving them where they can be moved. When fear of loosing one's immortal soul from grave sin is not sufficient as aversion, sometimes fear of procuring STDs is sufficient."
As we can see from countless years of the Church and everyone else doing this, it unfortunately does not work. What does work is to teach kids about healthy respectful sexuality and the ways to protect themselves from disease. Trying to scare kids into abstinence, which is what the sister did, never works (actually abstinence as a concept only works for conservative politicians in the bible belt trying to get re-elected, it has no basis in the unfortunate reality we live in. )
I have to admit the stats are hard to believe. I have never met anyone who could claim that many sexual encounters - straight or gay - unless they were hookers. In the last couple days I've asked a few people and they just laugh. Though they say it's 28% of gay men who have 500 to 1000 partners in their lifetime, these would have to be guys who lived in the baths or something.
DeleteLike you said Mack - the experience of kids today is they know 'normal' gay people - business associates of parents, teachers, relatives and so on. The stats don't really scare people. Gay people themselves changed behavior after the initial AIDS outbreak - now not so much. It's like smokers - you're never going to get cancer. We all live in denial.
Your other point is excellent however "What does work is to teach kids about healthy respectful sexuality" - exactly. Which is why there should have been a Q and A after the talk and perhaps a follow up scheduled. Stick to Catholic teaching and make it attractive.
The fear factor is no longer a turn off.
BTW - I fine with stats - but keep them in their place - and make sure they are accurate.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree on both counts. Let me say this, I actually have no problem with saying that "some" gay men do have more sexual partners then some straight men.. (I think I have always been pretty neck and neck with my straight buddies but maybe I just hung out with a lot of cads..) but that entails a bigger discussion on biology (and here is where I think Sister could have introduced the topic of masculinity and femininity that some studies say that men are hardwired to have a stronger sex drive then women, and that women, as they will be left holding the baby so to speak, are the ones to put on the brakes..) and the lack of proper role modeling for responsible sexuality for young gay men from their fathers and older men in the gay community,(believe me I can go on for hours on how we, both the straight and gay communities have failed to provide a structure for younger gay men who are left to flail on their own and figure it out, and we all know what happens when young men, gay or straight or left to figure out sexuality on their own... a lot of pants being dropped. ) It also doesn't need to be blown out of proportion to make it more dramatic, it is an issue in and off itself.
ReplyDeleteI think there is some merit to what the sister is saying,so I am not putting her down. I just think that it was a misguided attempt to encompass too much, with some very iffy stats to the wrong crowd (call me old fashioned but I don't think a nun should be addressing young men gay or straight about sexuality, even the Church teaching. That is for the "fathers," to do, biological, adoptive, and clerical. I think the Sister was coming from a "good place," but the Chaplain made the wrong decision here.
3000 signees on a Change.org petition and enough upset students, parents, alumni and staff is a little more than a "clique." Additionally, listening to a lecture on male sexuality from a nun is almost as worthwhile as taking a driving lesson from Stevie Wonder or Zumba with Stephen Hawking.
ReplyDelete"...listening to a lecture on male sexuality from a nun is almost as worthwhile as taking a driving lesson from Stevie Wonder or Zumba with Stephen Hawking."
DeleteThat's a real demonstration of charity, bobby.
Mack Malone writes : " lack of proper role modeling for responsible sexuality for young gay men from their fathers and older men in the gay community"
ReplyDeleteHow is this different from proper role modeling for responsible adultery?
First of all. the controversy isn't about her stating "official Catholic positions" on sexuality, gender, etc. This is about her making ludacris 100% erroneous statements, as if they were fact, about masturbation leading to boys becoming gay and homosexual parents sexually abusing their children. These comments are patently FALSE, disturbing and should be condemned. I wonder what her position is/was on the systemic raping of generations of young boys at the hands of countless Catholic priests - and the coverup the Church engaged in. Would that be considered part of "official Catholic doctrine" ???
ReplyDeleteMaura, do you really think Sister, after hearing the content of her talk, would think that pedophilia within the ranks of the Catholic Church was part of their doctrine? And masturbation is a mortal sin that leads to ALL sorts of other sin as well; I'm sure homosexuality is at least ONE of the possibilities. For this reason, it's good to speak out against masturbation. And homosexual parents "do" sometimes sexually abuse their children; it's abusive just to be forcing them to live in such a disordered household. So Sister's comments weren't patently false. She's warning this era of young people against one of the most disturbing sins known to mankind; sodomy. If they choose not to listen to her, it's because they've been tricked into thinking the homosexual lifestyle is approved by Christ. It isn't. Just like Mother Teresa's prayer breakfast speech against abortion, God love Sister Jane for showing no fear. http://www.fightingirishthomas.com/2014/03/the-saints-on-sodomy-why-church-fathers.html
DeleteBecause being gay isn't a choice....adultery is. And if you can't see that helping to stop more people from dying ..wreaking their lives or others, killing themselves, having respect for themselves and others isn't important.we really can't deal with each other. I've given more then one of my good Catholuc friends a bit of advice and role modeling when they were "adulterers"..its called fixing what you tore apart. I live in this real imperfect world.. how bout you? Sometimes using your own mistakes to help others does a hell of a lot better then intoning scripture and rigid orthodoxy. I hope to leave the world a little better in whatever small way I can when I go go whomever I can. Good enough.."love"?
ReplyDeleteWonderful, brave, charitable sister! God bless you, Sr. Jane Dominic!
ReplyDeleteCatechism of the Catholic Church
ReplyDelete2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing 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.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2357.htm
Sr.Jane;
ReplyDeleteBeloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove you, as though something strange were happening you. But rejoice in so far as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when His glory is revealed. 1 Peter 4, 12:13
Mack Malone said: "being gay isn't a choice....adultery is"
ReplyDeleteIt is because of statements like yours, that I avoid the term "gay" -- it is ambiguous. I prefer a more precise term.
Homo-genital acts certainly belong to the category of choice, regardless of the genesis (origin/source) of same-sex attraction. I am attracted to men, but I lead a chaste life. This proceeds from a choice to not engage myself sexually with a man.
Second Point:
There doesn't have to exist a causal relationship between individual masturbation and homo-genital acts in order to understand how they are related in SUBSTANCE.
Sex, which properly speaking is only possible between a man and a woman (other kinds of acts, even if they involve the sexual organs, are not sex, but sexual acts of a different species) -- is ordered to procreation. What makes sex unique among other expressions of human intimacy, such as holding hands, hugging, kissing, etc? Not pleasure-- that difference is only one of degree, not essence (i.e. degree of bodily pleasure). The uniqueness of sex lies in its power to generate new life. Sex is ordered to something BEYOND itself, to a gift -- a new creation, a new human being.
Sex, by it's very nature, is life-giving.
Now consider homo-genital acts: it is essentially mutual masturbation. It doesn't matter whether or not hands are used to stimulate the genitals. It doesn't matter if it involve the anus, the mouth, the thighs, or whatever else. The end is still the same: willful erection outside of natural order.
It is a degradation of the sexual powers to misuse them. It DEBASES human sexuality. People have no problem identifying dehumanizing behaviors in other contexts. Yet when it comes to sexuality, people fail to recognize dehumanization on account of a notion of radical autonomy?
Derek- I must tell you that I get a strong impression that you may be confused about your sexuality. You seem to be too offended by the Truth, God's Truth, in Catholic Church teachings that pertain to same sex attraction. You are very focused on trying to defend homosexuality. It would be awesome if all the effort and energy that you are putting into trying to justify homosexuallity, you would decide to put it on the most important person in this world which is Jesus Christ. I seriously and kindly suggest that you make the decision to go to a Church or Chapel to sit and pray in Adoration in front of the Blessed Sacrament in the True Presence of our Lord Jesus, asking Him to completely deliver/detach you from your obsession with defending homosexuality; pray to the Lord to give you clear guidance on how to live your life in a most holy way, to be an example of a true and faithful Catholic; pray to the Lord to detach you from all immoral tv programs, books, music, videos, social media, shirts with negative words, and everything else that promotes promiscuity, death (including abortion), violence, vampires, zombies, raunchiness and anything else that is dark because that ugliness is all the working of the evil one. Pray to the Lord Jesus asking Him to keep your mind on things that are good, pure, holy, beautiful, and most reverent to Him.
ReplyDeleteKeep in mind that Holy Scripture which is the Word of God, clearly condemns homosexuality- read Leviticus Chapter 18 (Laws concerning sexual behavior) verse 22: "...you shall not lie with a male as with a woman, such a thing is an abomination). Also read the Catechism Catholic Church.
Catholic teaching and the Word of the Lord (Holy Scripture) is always encouraging us to observe chastity, purity, holiness, to respect our bodies which were given to us by God as the "Temple of the Holy Spirit'. It's unfortunate that many so called "Catholic schools" are not teaching the Truth of our Catholic faith. The devil, is always seeking and gets control over the people (especially the youth) that are vulnerable so that he can poison and destroy their minds with his filth, deceptions, lies, illusions, twisted realities, pornography, promiscuity, and all human behaviors that promote impurity, immorality, and lead to degradation of the human soul.
The Lord God created man and woman to PROCREATE. The Lord made man and women in His image and likeness, which means that the human being is supposed to be holy- our goal in life is to strive to be holy like our Father in Heaven is holy. But the devil hates God so the devil does everything he can to destroy the that wonderful creation (man and women) that God made. When you feel tempted to do something that you know will offend God, make a decision right there that you won't let the devil win, so immediately pray to the Lord Jesus Christ asking Him to deliver you from the grip of the evil one.