Bishop backs Catholic school’s removal of teacher over pro-marriage comments [Catholic Caucus]

SOMERVILLE, NJ -- A Catholic school has decided not to rehire a theology teacher who rejected the argument in favor of gay “marriage” on her private Facebook page, her family has announced.

The controversy began last week after a student found a Facebook post by Patricia Jannuzzi, a 57-year-old theology teacher at Immaculata High School in Somerville, New Jersey. In it, Jannuzzi said that advocates of redefining marriage argue that they “are born this way and it is not a choice, to get 14th amendment rights equal protection” – which was intended for “unchangeable characteristics such as race and disability.” Then, “they will argue everyone should be able to choose” to engage in the homosexual lifestyle.

The former student, Scott Lyons, a homosexual who says he is “married” to another man, posted a message branding Jannuzzi's views as “extreme.”

His aunt, actress Susan Sarandon, reposted it and it went viral, spawning a petition to the school administration on Change.org that “this kind of behavior needs to be stopped.”

Jannuzzi was placed on administrative leave in a letter signed by Monsignor Seamus Brennan and Principal Jean Kline.

On Friday, Bishop Paul G. Bootkoski of the Diocese of Metuchen issued a statement “to correct some misstatements with regard to the teacher in question,” adding that “ certain individuals and groups are using inaccurate media reports to push their own agendas.”

Jannuzzi's “comments were disturbing and do not reflect the Church’s teachings of acceptance," he wrote. “Pope Francis reminds us that we are to accept all of our brethren. We must ensure that our educators steer away from harsh and judgmental statements that can alienate and divide us.”

He said that Jannuzzi “has never been terminated, as some media outlets have reported. She has been put on administrative leave. There has been no interruption in her pay and benefits.”

However, her family revealed that, while the diocese has not canceled this year's teaching contract, the school will not extend another contract to teach in the 2015-2016 year.

“My mother was informed by her lawyer that she will be on administrative leave receiving salary and benefits until August, but will not be rehired to teach this September 2015,” her family announced on a website dedicated to raising funds for Jannuzzi. “Our fears have been confirmed!”

LifeSiteNews.com has made repeated attempts since Friday morning to contact the diocese to ask if Jannuzzi will have a job after her contract runs out in August, and to ask what specific aspect of her comments Bishop Bootkoski found to be “disturbing” or “harsh.”

Rod Dreher wrote at The American Conservative that “the bishop may have technically been telling the truth in his statement, but it will have been extremely misleading (and that’s putting in charitably).”

“This is — or rather, will be, if Jannuzzi is not rehired this fall — a Catholic school that answers to a Catholic bishop canning a Catholic teacher for holding Catholic opinions that run contrary to the spirit of the age. And it will have been carried out by a Catholic bishop who is more afraid of mouthy celebrities than he is loyal to his people or his principles,” Dreher wrote. “This is not a culture war outside the Catholic Church. This culture war is taking place within it. And not all the bishops are on the same side.”

I wrote to Bishop Bootkoski
bishop@diometuchen.or

Dear Bishop Bootkoski, I have carefully read your statement on the controversy concerning Patricia Vannuzzi. Knowing that you wish to bring this to a truly pastoral conclusion, I thought you might be interested in my response, which I give in numbered comments. I would be honored if you would read this and reflect on the larger issues.

(1)If you're trying to teach your students, faculty and teachers with respect, why do you fail to even address Patricia Jannuzzi by name?? And why do you fail to quote her actual words, showing where they differ from Catholic teachings? This isn't "respect," it's leaving the victim of you actions nameless and voiceless.

(2) You've "never wavered" in upholding the Church's teachings? ? Can you show is even one instance in which you have actually taught "our traditional Catholic teachings" on the question of homosexuality?

(3) That a teacher's comment is "disturbing" may or may not be relevant. One may "disturb" another by telling the truth, or by telling an untruth. Christ said things which were so disturbing that the religious and social hierarchy of His day wanted to kill Him. Would you want to dispute the truth of anything Patricia Jannuzzi said?

You say she has not upheld the Church's teaching of "acceptance," and yet these are the actual words of the Catechism:

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Para 2357: "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.”

The Catechism also says that persons with a deep-seated homosexual tendency "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity" and that "Homosexual persons are called to chastity." If Patricia Jannuzzi's comments were blunt, they were no more blunt than Paragraph 2357 of the Catechism.

(4) "She has never been terminated"? She was put on administrative leave (with pay) until August, and informed that she would not be re-hired in September. That means she is terminated as of September.

(5) There is a difference between accepting "brethren" and accepting the social and political agenda of LGBT activist groups, the "Gay Lobby."

As Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis (Abp. Bergoglio) called on the priests of his Archdiocese to bring the faithful to an upcoming protest against homosexual "marriage."

"Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God," wrote Cardinal Bergoglio in a letter sent to the monasteries of Buenos Aires. "We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

Pretty disturbing, isn't it? I'm thinking Bergoglio would be considered unfit to teach in the Catholic schools of the Diocese of Metuchen.

To the clergy of the parishes, Bergoglio requested that all of them read from the pulpits a declaration defending the true definition and understanding of marriage.

"The Argentinean people will have to confront, in the coming weeks, a situation whose result could gravely injure the family. We are speaking of a bill regarding marriage between people of the same sex," a bill that calls into question "the identity, and the survival of the family: father, mother, and children."

It's impossible to miss the parallels between Bergoglio's statement, and Mrs. Jannuzzi's comment on Facebook that the Gay movement threatens to “reengineer Western civ[ilization] into a slow extinction...We need healthy families with a mother and a father for the sake of the children and humanity."

(6) Patricia Jannuzzi made no "harsh and judgmental" statements toward any individual gay student or any individual whatsoever. She was speaking of the homosexualist movements, ideologies and social-change groups which are even now coercing acceptance of homosexual acts and the relat

ionships predicated upon those acts, by force of law. The only report of her speaking to or about an individual, was the following from the New York Daily News. "I left this school after being told in religion class I must live a celibate single life if I had gay ‘feelings,’” wrote Doug Bednarczyk.

Is this wrong? Isn't this the same choice facing every human being, no matter what their orientation: either chaste celibacy, or marriage as defined by Divine and Natural Law?

This should have been an excellent teaching moment. In my opinion, Mrs. Jannuzzi should have been invited to clarify and expand on her thoughts by citing the Catechism and Bergoglio statements quoted above.

Jannuzzi should not have been suspended or terminated. That kind of heavily punitive reaction is entirely disrespectful of her, and consists of silencing, shaming, and exclusion as well as a punishing loss of vocation and income. Such radical exclusion of an excellent teacher with decades of honorable service to the Church and School is disturbing and unjustified.

Sincerely in Christ,

[signed]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.