Replies

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]