Dominican Sister of St. Cecilia under fire by students for talk on homosexuality

[GraceSofia]

Some of the commenters on the news articles (not this forum, I hasten to add) are so disrespectful to Sr. Jane, accusing her of being ignorant. I was curious what her qualifications are:

Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, O.P. Assistant Professor of Theology

S.T.D., The Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas – Rome, Italy
S.T.L., The Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas – Rome, Italy
S.T.B., The Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas – Rome, Italy
M.A., University of Dallas
B.A. Post-Baccalaureate, Aquinas College
B.A., University of Dallas

Among her audiences have been students of the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, the North American College, Loyola Chicago, Vanderbilt University, Franciscan University of Steubenville, St. Mary’s College, and the University of Notre Dame.

STD = Sacrae Theologiae Doctor

• See more at: aquinascollege.edu/academics/undergraduate-studies/school-of-arts-sciences/curriculum-majors/theology-major/#sthash.PdjceD13.dpuf

This sister is really off on this issue. First of all to indicate that fatherless children become gay or that masturbation can make someone gay.

We don’t know what she said exactly.

However, she has given this talk 80 times in 25 states, and suddenly there’s a problem?
Hmmm…

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Well, at least it is nice to see the thread getting back on track with the OP.

Prodigal, I’m not really sure how to respond to your post other than to say I saw you’re disclosure coming. Here is a suggestion for you: Homosexuality and the Catholic Church by Father John Harvey. He’s the founder of the Courage support groups for persons with problems of a homosexual nature and they do help folks get reconciled to the Church. The book is available at Amazon:

amazon.com/Homosexuality-Catholic-Church-John-Harvey/dp/193292762X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396441488&sr=1-2&keywords=Father+Harvey

I imagine they probably have a website and may be available to you in the Diocese where you live.

Glendab,

I figured you already knew I experience same sex attraction – I’ve always been open about it on these forums, and I am not ashamed of it. It would be seriously silly to be ashamed about temptations.

As for your suggestions, I assure you I’m not new to this, and I have tons of support. You may be surprised to discover that I’m married, and that my wife and I have five kids. My wife knows all about my situation, and she doesn’t think I need to be fixed. She thinks – and I heartily agree – that I need to stay free from sin.

Your comment about “getting reconciled with the Church” totally puzzles me. I am reconciled with the Church. I don’t disagree with any Church teaching that pertains to morality, and certainly not to homosexuality. I confess regularly. I don’t consider myself any less of a Catholic than a man who struggles, for instance, with looking at heterosexual pornography.

I am just very puzzled by your take on all this. You seem to think that there are two categories of people: (1) gay or bisexual people who are opposed to the Church, and (2) straight people who support the Church. But there are tons of gay and bisexual people who support the Church, and attempt to follow its teachings. (I personally don’t call myself “gay” or “bisexual”, but I don’t think calling oneself gay excludes one from the Church).

At any rate, I reiterate my plea for your embrace.

And yes, I do think that you need to hear about these things. I think you need to realize that people confess out of a desire to experience a fuller conversion and out of a desire to help others who struggle in the same way. There is nothing wrong with these confessions. They belong in Christian forums. (Although I certainly agree that SOME such confessions come from an unhealthy place. But NOT ALL of them.)

Those who do “bare their souls” in such a place as this risk being hurt, damaged, attacked, ridiculed, etc. simply because that is the nature of this kind of forum.

Anyone who ever seeks intimacy risks getting hurt. Have you ever considered that, for some, sharing on this forum is far safer than sharing with someone they know in person?

It has little to do with being a support group for practicing and non-practicing homosexuals, bisexuals, lesbians, trans-gendered persons or any other of the myriad of sexual deviants that we are expected as supposedly “good” Christians to adopt and support to “prove” we’re good Christians.

A deviant is a person who deviates. A person who is tempted to deviate is not a deviant.

That said, most of us – myself included – are deviants, since most of us stray from Christ’s path of holiness and love. And those of us who are deviants ourselves, but deny it and accuse others of being deviants – we are Pharisees. But God loves us anyway, and He will never stop forgiving us and calling us to perfection!

 

[GraceSofia]

I figured you already knew I experience same sex attraction – I’ve always been open about it on these forums, and I am not ashamed of it. It would be seriously silly to be ashamed about temptations.

I agree with you that it is silly to be ashamed of temptations, but can I just say that, speaking for myself anyway, it can be very hard to remember facts about posters. Unless I come into contact frequently or have serious disagreements with the person, I tend to forget personal information.

I don’t consider myself any less of a Catholic than a man who struggles, for instance, with looking at heterosexual pornography.

But there are tons of gay and bisexual people who support the Church, and attempt to follow its teachings. (I personally don’t call myself “gay” or “bisexual”, but I don’t think calling oneself gay excludes one from the Church).

And yes, I do think that you need to hear about these things. I think you need to realize that people confess out of a desire to experience a fuller conversion and out of a desire to help others who struggle in the same way. There is nothing wrong with these confessions. They belong in Christian forums. (Although I certainly agree that SOME such confessions come from an unhealthy place. But NOT ALL of them.)

I would just be concerned that a very emotional or vulnerable person could have a bad experience. I think if they are honest when they post, and not arguing against Catholic teaching, but are clear that they want help to understand it and to follow Jesus to the best of their ability, then they should be okay. It takes time though for most people to learn not to take things personally on a forum. It is good that you are here to help people with this.

 

[JimG]

I’m sort of glad that this particular school caused a controversy, because it gave me the opportunity to research Sister’s talks. I came across this whole series of her talks at the Newman Connection website here. I watched the one entitled “Media, Culture & the Death of Intimacy, Part I,” because it seems to touch on some of the subjects that seem to have gotten her in trouble. I find her talks thought provoking and enlightening.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I agree with you that it is silly to be ashamed of temptations, but can I just say that, speaking for myself anyway, it can be very hard to remember facts about posters. Unless I come into contact frequently or have serious disagreements with the person, I tend to forget personal information.

Good point.

 

[whipp711]

Not sure about the universe of Catholic schools, but the Catholic schools in my area are highly viewed as excellent college prepatory schools. Non-Catholics actively seek to enroll their kids there to get a leg up on advanced placement classes.

Instead of deep seated heresy or doctrinal issues within the school, we may be seeing students and parents that do not accept Catholic beliefs. Thus, the negative petitions.

Just my observation from the cheap seats.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Maybe because it’s the truth!. Gods Bless. Memaw

There’s no solid evidence that homosexuality is the cause or the effect of the decline of fatherhood in the US (or anywhere).

 

[Prodigal_Son]

There’s no solid evidence that homosexuality is the cause or the effect of the decline of fatherhood in the US (or anywhere).

Does that make it seriously wrong for someone to suggest that increased incidence of homosexuality might be the effect of this decline? I just want to get clear on this.

Per comparison, I don’t think that there is a connection between autism and contraceptives in drinking water, but I wouldn’t consider it seriously wrong to suggest such a connection. When two things correlate, there’s always a possibility there is a causal connection.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Does that make it seriously wrong for someone to suggest that increased incidence of homosexuality might be the effect of this decline? I just want to get clear on this.

Per comparison, I don’t think that there is a connection between autism and contraceptives in drinking water, but I wouldn’t consider it seriously wrong to suggest such a connection. When two things correlate, there’s always a possibility there is a causal connection.

It makes it wasteful for her to spend a half of her lecture on it. It is also bad if it provokes outrage amongst listeners (which it did) because then people are less likely to listen to the rest of her speech.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

It makes it wasteful for her to spend a half of her lecture on it. It is also bad if it provokes outrage amongst listeners (which it did) because then people are less likely to listen to the rest of her speech.

I have seen nothing to substantiate the claim that she spent half an hour talking about the connection between absent fathers and gay sons. But speaking as a same-sex attracted man with an absent father, and knowing many other same-sex attracted men with absent or distant fathers, it doesn’t seem that crazy to me for her to at least touch on the issue.

It is likely, as I said above, that the sister made some bad decisions in planning her talk – indeed, likely she has some warped ideas about homosexuality. I have seen nothing to explain this amount of outrage, however. (If anything more comes out, I will be happy to revise my current view.)

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I have seen nothing to substantiate the claim that she spent half an hour talking about the connection between absent fathers and gay sons. But speaking as a same-sex attracted man with an absent father, and knowing many other same-sex attracted men with absent or distant fathers, it doesn’t seem that crazy to me for her to at least touch on the issue.

It is likely, as I said above, that the sister made some bad decisions in planning her talk – indeed, likely she has some warped ideas about homosexuality. I have seen nothing to explain this amount of outrage, however. (If anything more comes out, I will be happy to revise my current view.)

Did you miss the article in a Catholic paper from Charlotte where school officials said it?

Well, if she did say things like that petition seems to alleged the outrage seems understandable.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Did you miss the article in a Catholic paper from Charlotte where school officials said it?

Could you point me to the link? What I recall is that half her lecture was addressing homosexuality, not that half of it addressed the link between missing dads and gay kids.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Could you point me to the link? What I recall is that half her lecture was addressing homosexuality, not that half of it addressed the link between missing dads and gay kids.

source

School officials said Sister Jane spent about half of her hour-long talk on homosexuality, including attributing a correlation between the decline of fatherhood in America and the rise in homosexuality.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

source

That’s what I remember. Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense to spend half of the talk talking about the issue of homosexuality – though obviously with lots of compassion. The issue of homosexuality is the single most central issue driving Christian teenagers away from the Church. And it **certainly **isn’t just gay teenagers who are leaving the Church over this.

 

[TCEL]

That’s what I remember. Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense to spend half of the talk talking about the issue of homosexuality – though obviously with lots of compassion. The issue of homosexuality is the single most central issue driving Christian teenagers away from the Church. And it **certainly **isn’t just gay teenagers who are leaving the Church over this.

It’s a hot-button issue. I think the last thing we should do is ignore it, because that seems to be sticking our heads in the sand. We’re either salt, or we’re not. Ignoring catechesis on the matter tends to lead to the culture informing us, instead of the other way around. This issue is being brought to us. Even if the information is rejected, at least it will have been heard, and maybe later on the reason will be seen. It depends on how it’s delivered, and it most certainly needs to couched in the broader understanding of Creation catechesis, as well as the connection to other Church teachings, Christ’s love, and the Cross. Context is all-important. (I’m saying this because I had to find out Church teaching about contraception mostly on my own, and it would have spared me some trouble if it had been explained more. The tactic of silence hasn’t worked in that realm, either. Note HHS Mandate.)

 

[Orogeny]

Did you miss the article in a Catholic paper from Charlotte where school officials said it?

That is not what the article said. It said:

School officials said Sister Jane spent about half of her hour-long talk on homosexuality, including attributing a correlation between the decline of fatherhood in America and the rise in homosexuality.

She spent half of her talk on homosexuality, including the correlation. Not half of her talk on the correlation. Big difference. The title of her talk was “Masculinity and Femininity: Difference and Gift,” which explains Catholic teaching about gender using Blessed Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body. A talk about gender, especially in today’s environment, will have a lot of discussion of homosexuality. Is it a surprise, then, that half of her talk was about homosexuality?

Peace

Tim

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

That is not what the article said. It said:She spent half of her talk on homosexuality, including the correlation. Not half of her talk on the correlation. Big difference. The title of her talk was “Masculinity and Femininity: Difference and Gift,” which explains Catholic teaching about gender using Blessed Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body. A talk about gender, especially in today’s environment, will have a lot of discussion of homosexuality. Is it a surprise, then, that half of her talk was about homosexuality?

Peace

Tim

Surprising? It’s not surprising.
That said I don’t think it was worth it to spend that much time, maybe 10 minutes.

 

[frobert]

Everyone here should recall how teens can be:

—jump on the hot bandwagon! ! ! ! ! OMG ! ! !!

–conform, conform, conform; fear of nonconformity!! ! OMG!

—Just Because We’re Catholic Doesn’t Mean We’re Not Like Hollywood Says Everybody Should Be!

If the petition contains a true representation of what the good sister said then the teens were NOT jumping on a bandwagon and have not only the right but the duty to point out the misconceptions in the sister’s lecture.

Here are a few of the misconceptions from her lecture. Those who are on the bandwagon to condemn the good teens should at the very least be aware of what the the teens were protesting to.

1.We believe that children can thrive in spite of one or both of their parents short comings and/or absence because we know that role models do not exist solely within one’s nuclear family.

1. We reject the notion that the actions of one abusive Australian couple should be used to support the idea that same sex couples are unfit parents. Not only is this story weightless, anecdotal evidence intended to incite discrimination, but it further abuses that child.

1. We reject the suggestion that homosexuality occurs mainly as a result of a parent’s shortcomings, masturbation or pornography.

1. We recognize the difference between correlation and causation. As a result we realize that men don’t become gay by masturbating in the presence of one another but rather may engage in these activities because they are gay.

1. We take issue with the phrase “homosexual lifestyle” and the suggestion that it is a distortion for the media to portray homosexual couples “like heterosexual couples.”

1. We believe that homosexual couples are capable of monogamy.

My prayers go out to the good sister and hope she will take the opportunity to accept the criticism as constructive and review what she her lecture.

 

[Orogeny]

If the petition contains a true representation of what the good sister said then the teens were NOT jumping on a bandwagon and have not only the right but the duty to point out the misconceptions in the sister’s lecture.

Bolded the key word in this sentence.

Here are a few of the **ALLEGED **misconceptions from her lecture. Those who are on the bandwagon to condemn the good teens should at the very least be aware of what the the teens were **ALLEGEDLY **protesting to.

Corrected the sentence for you.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Surprising? It’s not surprising.
That said I don’t think it was worth it to spend that much time, maybe 10 minutes.

Without hearing her lecture, how can you decide what was appropriate? Did she take questions during her presentation that kept her on the topic? Did she use the half hour to explain the basis for the Church’s teaching in depth? Those are just two things that could very easily have kept her on the topic for 30 minutes.

Peace

Tim