"He does not seem excessively concerned about the bad example she sets for her hearers, only that she is doing good and bringing others to faith," he wrote. "I thought I worked for the kind of institution that followed the example of Jesus."
Hold the phone... what was Jesus supposed to do, stone her? Just because he didn't doesn't mean he approved of her behavior. Good grief.
It sounds to me like the university is trying to maintain a consistent set of guidlines based on the morals, values and teachings of the Catholic faith. The students and the parents that pay the hefty tuition bills at the private university should expect nothing less than professors and university staff exemplifying the lessons of the faith while in the company of the students.
If the NBA and NFL can institute dress codes while employees are out in public, then so too and even more so should a private university be able to manage the behavior of employees while they are "at work."
Perhaps if they had taken a hard line in the beginning when they knew these folks were living together without being married, they would not have this problem. I don't see why people who work for religious institutions are shocked when they are expected to live according to the standards of the institution.
"If sin and vice become disqualifying factors for university employees, then students might have to start teaching themselves," theology professor David Landry wrote in a recent faculty newsletter.
Sin does not disqualify one, but unrepentant sin certainly does. Sounds like professor Landry needs a little brush up on the topic he claims to be a professor in.
He apparently FAILED to note however that Jesus CONFRONTED the woman for her adulterous relationship and certainly did NOT condone it. What can be inferred from the story in the Gospel of John is that the encounter of the Samaritan woman with Jesus produced a transformation in her life and in the town, and that afterward she was no longer shacking up with the man whe was not her husband (i.e. either they got married or one of them got a new address).
Right under your signature on the employment contract dipstick.
"If sin and vice become disqualifying factors for university employees, then students might have to start teaching themselves," theology professor David Landry wrote in a recent faculty newsletter.
Strawman argument alert! Sin and vice are not (or at least shouldn't be) the issue. It continueing to commit the same sin with no attempt to stop that's the issue. As any theology professor worth anything SHOULD know.
What's this? A Catholic school trying to act Catholic?
Be still, my beating heart.
Didn't Jesus command her to sin no more?
Having a faculty and student honor code, including specific prohibitions on this kind of crap, has worked well for Brigham Young University and the LDS Church. I should think the Catholic Church could find qualified instructors who are willing to live up to high standards. I hope they do.
Why are these moral reprobates still getting paychecks from a Catholic university? They should not be in a position to teach young people since their lifestyles are not Christian.
Imagine that! A Catholic University standing up for Catholic vakues!
Too bad the selfish narcissistic professors can't do the same.
About 4 years ago my wife's sister and her boyfriend came to visit us from out of town for a few days. My daughter was at the time about 12.
My wife asked if they didn't mind sleeping in separate rooms while they were at our house as we were/are raising our daughter to be a good Catholic.
You would have thought we had asked them to clean the septic tank. They got all huffy and left immediately, and the relationship has never been the same.
And if flouting sin and vice becomes a badge of courage for university employees, then students might be better off teaching themselves.
It's better to have no role models than to have bad role models.
Hmmm, they have a very interesting take on the episode of the Samaritan woman.
She must be using the Jesus Seminar's heavily expurgated "Bible," the slim volume that emerged after the seminarians had voted (by casting colored beads) that Jesus really didn't utter 82 percent of the Biblical quotes attributed to Him.
Here's the "Jesus" he's following:
Itching ears: Making a "real" Jesus to fit the present time
. . .A stripped-down, Buddha-like Jesus is just the Jesus for our times. He is serene to the point of lobotomized. He makes no demands, brings no conviction of sin, is a hollowed-out vessel to be filled with what America's itching ears long to hear.
Professors violate doctrine
Paul Tosto's Jan. 3 article, "University asks cohabiting couple to get two rooms," will be a great humiliation to St. Thomas University, not because of the University's stand on cohabitation and other Catholic teachings and doctrine on which it should stand firm, but on the fact that one of the University's theology professors apparently did not read St. John's gospel carefully (if at all) because, while Jesus did not judge the woman who sinned and He forgave her, he also added "do not sin again." This is a very important factor.
SISTER JANE DE CHANTAL SMISEK Mendota Heights
When a theology professor says, "If sin and vice become disqualifying factors, students might have to start teaching themselves," it's a sad commentary on today's professors. Still, if we believe God is everywhere and knows everything, isn't it true that He knows what the sinner is doing? This could be an interesting debate that a community should follow with heightened interest.
PAT DUNN Roseville
It appears the University of St. Thomas has more to do than regain moral high ground. It has a theology professor who appears either to believe fornication is not un-Biblical or who finds no problem in thumbing his nose at the Bible. The university would be better served by a professor who does not lack a clear grasp on his subject matter.
CONNIE PEASE Roseville
The article of the two cohabitating professors reminds me of the Star Trek episode in which Capt. Picard reprimands Worf for killing a rival in revenge, saying that anyone who feels he can't live up to his duties because of his cultural beliefs should resign.
Now before we hear the usual kvetching and tired cries of "discrimination!" "homophobe!" the professors should be reminded that they work for the church, which has rules as does any employer. An unmarried cohabitating couple, no matter how "cool" in today's society, contradicts Judeo-Christian values, and working for or being part of the church while doing so would be like an Orthodox Jew eating a bacon double cheeseburger.
Anyone who takes issue with the church's teachings and biblical values really shouldn't work there.
KEVIN QUIGLEY St. Paul