Bishop Jugis Backs Sister Jane

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Share on digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
Share on email
Share on print

Bishop Jugis



Hattip to commenter Scott W.  From Lifesite News, with comments by Father Z, a heartening development:



CHARLOTTE, NC, April 7, 2014 ( – The bishop of Charlotte is backing a Dominican nun who has been at the center of a fiery controversy since last month when she gave a speech promoting Catholic teaching on sexuality to students at Charlotte Catholic High School.

After a public meeting with diocesan and school officials turned ugly, with parents and students alike shouting at administrators over what they perceived as “hateful” remarks criticizing homosexual behavior, divorce and extra-marital sex, [To think… that’s how conditioned people are now by the MSM and the “new normal”.] a spokesman for the diocese told LifeSiteNews that the nun in question, Sr. Jane Dominic Laurel, did nothing wrong and will be welcome to speak on the issue again if she chooses.

Nothing in Sister’s talk opposed Church teaching,” Diocese of Charlotte Communications Director David Hains told LifeSiteNews in an email. “Sister would be welcomed to speak in the diocese in the future.”

Hains said Bishop Peter Jugis is expected to make further public comment on the situation soon.

Sr. Laurel’s critics have complained about a section of her talk in which she discussed scientific findings related to the causes of homosexuality. [And here I thought the Church embraced science.] According to the Charlotte Observer, she was accused of using “suspect anecdotes, antiquated data and broad generalizations to demonize gays and lesbians as well as divorced and single parents.” [That’s right… if you state what the Church teaches, that homosexual acts are disordered, that’s “demonizing”.]

But one Catholic scientist says he recently heard the sister give the exact same speech she delivered to the students, and in his opinion, there is nothing in it to which a practicing Catholic could possibly object.

“I was in attendance at the same presentation when given on Long Island, NY a few months ago,” Dr. Gerard Nadal told LifeSiteNews. “In that meeting, Sister Jane gave medical and scientific data that came from reputable sources and were presented as examples of the consequences for human behavior that contravenes the moral magisterium of the Church. As a Ph.D. in medical science, and as a Catholic schooled extensively in my faith, I saw no contradictions, but rather a seamless presentation.”

Still, in light of all the controversy, Aquinas College announced in a press release Friday that Sr. Laurel has asked to take a sabbatical from her teaching and speaking duties for an indefinite amount of time.

After the sister’s speech at a school assembly last month, students at the school launched an internet petition drive demanding an apology from everyone involved with arranging the speech, which quickly garnered thousands of signatures. Some parents also initiated a letter-writing campaign to the school’s chaplain, the bishop and even the Vatican, to complain. [Complete with pitchforks and torches.]

Last week, school and diocesan officials held a public meeting to address the issue. The meeting attracted nearly 1,000 people, most of them offended by the nun’s remarks.

The Diocese of Charlotte’s newspaper, the Catholic News-Herald, reported that the meeting was acrimonious, with those who dared to speak out in support of Sr. Laurel or the Church being shouted down by an angry mob. The paper’s sources called the atmosphere “disrespectful” and “hate-filled.

[… READ THE REST THERE… several quotes of reactions, all interesting…]

Go here and here to read the rest.  This is the stance that the Bishop should have taken from the beginning, but I will not be churlish.  The important thing now is that he has spoken out clearly and Sister Jane is now no longer left alone defending Catholic Truth.

More to explorer

Brightness to the Sun

  This is the one hundred and tenth anniversary of the birth-day of Washington. We are met to celebrate this day. Washington

Hate Crime

News that I missed courtesy of The Babylon Bee:   WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a statement to D.C. police given Tuesday, senator and presidential

PopeWatch: Cardenal

  Hattip to commenter Greg Mockeridge.  Pope John Paul II shaking his finger at Ernesto Cardenal, Culture Minister for the Sandinista government


  1. “The important thing now is that he has spoken out clearly and Sister Jane is now no longer left alone defending Catholic Truth.”

    Excellent news. Now he has to stand strong and we have to support him.

  2. This news is a great relief during Passiontide (!) of what is becoming constant worry about the Church and its adherence to the age old truths. I hope this serves to eliminate confusion and worse, as well as give some a standard for manners and study.

  3. Finally! This incident is merely added proof of the abject failure in our Catholic Schools to catechize.

  4. This too little, too late. Those who slandered this nun should be subjected to a formal inquiry and if culpable be required to seek her pardon in public, to repudiate their comments/writings and to accept, in public, the appropriate Church teachings or face canonical, public sanctions.

    Without that, this “support” by Bishop Jurgis is empty and actually an insult.

  5. Money quote: “. . . , there is nothing in [Sister Laurel’s speech] it to which a practicing Catholic could possibly object.”

  6. Thank God!
    Sister’s testimony and the first response from the Bishop called to mind 2 Cor. “My brothers, have I become your enemy by telling you the truth.”

    Sharing in Christs passion isn’t fun, but it is fruitful. Bless you Sr. Jane.

  7. One of the defenses of Aquinas College I’m hearing now is the safety defense. That Sister Jane is going on sabbatical because of potential threats. I’m having a hard time buying this given the groveling apology they issued without a hint of any threats.

  8. I’m glad we’ve finally reached this point, but shouldn’t this statement have been the start of the discussion?

  9. Years ago in the later 1990’s I attended, at Dunwoodie, the Catholic Seminary in Yonkers, a meeting involving annulments which was, in essence, run by Cardinal O’Connor. To me it was a pep talk in support
    of the process, which I had personal experience with and a very different
    opinion of. The speakers had their say until it was my turn to speak from the assembly. I was pretty much the only person to speak as I did and I
    spoke from my terrible experiences but I spoke the truth.

    I was shouted down and spoken over by the assembly so instead of battling a mob, which it was, I ceased trying to speak as the Cardinal stood in front and did nothing to preserve my chance to speak.

    I sat through the rest of the meeting. As the meeting ended an older lady
    approached me with tears in her eyes, openly crying. She walked up to me and wrapped her arms around me a through her cracking emotional voice thanked me for being the only person with the courage to speak the truth. She said God bless you for saying what I was afraid to say. Then she left.

    Very soon after, a man with brown hair and a beard dressed neatly but in street clothes and carrying a sizeable book(Like a commentary on the Code of Canon Law or another reference book) walked up to me an apologized for how I had been treated and said it was a disgrace how the
    Cardinal stood there and allowed me to be shouted down. He said he was apologizing for how I was treated and that I should have been allowed to finish speaking when I was naturally done and that my issues
    should have been noted and everyone addressed adequately.

    They never have been.

    Do not give the hierarchy credit that they do not deserve. For decades they have done far worse than the mob in Charlotte did for a short time.

    They have never repented. They never will. It is not in their programming to pursue truth, justice or healing. I have seen this for decades.

    What happened to this religious sister is nothing like what happens to those of us who have stood in the face of the unrelenting violence and abuse encouraged by the Catholic Church pastoral practices involving
    wounded marriages and annulments.

    And we ain’t seen nuthin’ yet!

  10. Paul Zummo, Donald McClarey, and Foxfier
    I hope it is ok if I use this space to ask a question about commenting on an old post: I was interested in commenting on Paul last July post about immigration (because of the mass on the border with Cardinal O’Malley) but I see no com box there anymore.. how long do you leave posts open for comment? Thank you

  11. This is all VERY premature. As of 8:50 pm ET, there is no such published statement by the Bishop or the Diocesan spokesman at the Diocesan website [] or the Diocesan newspaper [] or their FB page []. There is not even a link or mention of the LifeSite News article.

    However both the “Catholic” News Herald and their FB page do report that the original petition protesting Sr Jane has been taken down. They quote (the unnamed student as saying: “Thank you to everyone in the CCHS community who supported my petition. I have now removed it from because I feel that its goal has been accomplished. I wanted to call attention to something I felt was wrong so that something similar would not happen in the future. :

    Nothing has changed on the front page of the Aquinas College webpage. The April 4th apology by Sr. Mary Sarah is still up. There is nothing about protecting Sr. Jane’s safety or any support from Bishop Jerkis.

    The Charlotte Observer also has nothing to report about any sort of support of Sr. Jane by the Bishop. They do have an interesting piece about a homily on Sunday by Fr Timothy Reid of St Ann Catholic Church []. Interesting that a secular newspaper has taken to reporting on a “Sunday homily or sermon.”

    In my opinion, the LifeSite News piece was a clever manipulation in order to make Bishop Jerkis look presentable. It is a piece of propaganda to assuage those who want to support their Bishop. This way the Bishop doesn’t have to really do anything. And if he eventually gets around to making some sort of statement, it will be too late and everyone will have moved past it. The deviants won this one. The deviants won this one. The RC Church has once again capitulated to evil and sold out the faithful to the evil one.</br.

  12. I just can’t get those paragraph breaks right. Would you please post how to do that? I tried to follow the instructions from the com box of an earlier post but it doesn’t seem to be working. Please forgive me.

  13. @fRED
    What I do when I want to put in a paragraph break, is hit the ENTER key.
    Then when it goes to the next line, put in a period.
    (Like I just did.)
    Seems to work.
    God bless,

  14. Please don’t call Bishop Jugis Bishop Jerkis. Let’s give it some time for him to issue a statement as Life Site news indicated. Patience is not my strong suit, but being judgmental is.

    I must be getting old and sentimental.

  15. The Bishop finally surfaces and speaks (did he see his shadow?-does this mean two more weeks of winter?):
    If you look carefully, you will note that in his official statement, Bishop Jug did not not offer any support for Sr. Jane. So the supposed leak to LifeSiteNews was apparently a facade to cover for his Excellency.
    The Bishop’s posturing is nothing. He doesn’t fool the Progressives nor the atheists nor the disappointed and frustrated trads. He’s only playing the ignorant sheep. So Sad.
    And nothing further from Sr. Mary Sarah at Aquinas College; Sr Jane is still under the bus. It appears Sr Mary Sarah’s main interest is damage control so that the college’s growth plans aren’t derailed by potential students thinking that the school is TOO trad. Oh yes, you are hip Sister Mary Sarah. Both you and Bishop J should be ashamed at failing to stand up for the faith. The resignations of you both would be a relief for all sides.

  16. As I read the various commentaries, it seems like Sister mixed solid Catholic doctrine with questionable conclusions from the medical and social sciences. Even if she is completely in the wrong we treat her like a human being, a consecrated person, and a sister with whom we relate to The Lord. If Sister is entirely wrong we owe her the same respect. Right or wrong, we owe every gay person respect. It is not up to us to condemn any individual, and so we do not try to slaughter any one with principles.

  17. And the Church Militant trudges on… Be Not Afraid, we know the end of the story, remember the sheep and the goats will be separated. Come Lord Jesus come!

  18. If Sister is entirely wrong we owe her the same respect. Right or wrong, we owe every gay person respect.

    What does that mean when you get down to brass tacks? That homosexual men who work for an institution and pledged to advance the educational mission of that institution are not subject to an absurd campaign of vilification, treated to evasion drills by the authorities under whose aegis they work, and silenced and disciplined for doing their jobs?? When does this ever happen? When does it happen as a consequence of the sexual disorders of such men?

    Given the context, this school’s addle-pated constituency is going to interpret that as a franchise for any school employee to live in manifest defiance of the Catholic ethic. This has already happened at Catholic schools who have canned employees who participated in burlesque ‘marriage’ ceremonies.

  19. “And the Church Militant trudges on”

    Actually I think the Church Militant passed out in a coma quite some time ago and the Church Mushy is dancing around in her place. Optimism based upon Christ redeeming the complete hash we make of things at the end of History I find to be poor solace when contemplating the sorry state of the Church currently.

Comments are closed.