Sunday, 22 March 2015

Bishop Bootkoski obfuscates - kicks Patricia Jannuzzi under a second bus!

In the matter of Patricia Janunzzi the teacher put on "administrative leave" at Immaculata High School in Petterson, New Jersey, Bishop Paul Bootkoski of Metuchen has finally weighed in publicly.

Bishop Bootkoski is not being completely clear. Something is missing. Teachers are given one year contracts. Mrs. Jannuzzi's family has confirmed that she will not have a contract in September 2015. She is currently on "administrative leave." Technically speaking, Bishop Bootkoski is correct; "There has been no interruption in her pay or benefits." What he does not add is the word, "yet."

In Ontario from where I write, Catholic schools have elected Boards of Trustees and are funded from the provincial tax base. They are essentially "public" Catholic schools. Teacher unions are very strong and protective of their members. In other provinces of Canada and certainly in the United States this is not the case. Immaculata High School is essentially "private" in this case "parochial." It is in the Parish of the Immaculate Conception and is owned directly by Paul Bootkoski under the legal provision of a "corporation sole" recognised in the United States of America under Common Law. I've searched the school web page. There is no indication of a Board of Trustees or elected officials. Therefore, one can only conclude that it is part of the overall corporation sole of the Diocese of Metuchen.

This means that Bishop Bootkoski is personally responsible for the decision to not give Mrs. Jannuzzi a contract for September 2015. His treatment of Mrs. Jannuzzi is hardly that of a "Shepherd."

The issue is not only Mrs. Jannuzzi but Bishop Bootkoski's apologia!  

"We are a compassionate Catholic community committed to treating our students, faculty and parishioners with respect. We have never wavered from our traditional Catholic teachings."

His Excellency is in fact, not treating Mrs. Jannuzzi with respect. He has allowed her to be put on "leave" and she will not be rehired in September. He has not defended her against publc calumny and insults. His letter is even more testament to the lack of respect he has shown for his employee of over thirty years. Those in Metuchen are more qualified than this writer to comment on whether the Bishop has ever "wavered from traditional Catholic teachings." In the case of Mrs. Jannuzzi, however, that does not appear to be true.

'The teacher’s comments were disturbing and do not reflect the Church’s teachings of acceptance. However, she 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."

Mrs. Jannuzzi's comments appear to the right. This is the Facebook post that has caused all of this and it was on her own personal page. If she made a mistake, it was not having her settings to the most private available (a lesson for all). Those who vilified this woman have done a great injustice to her. It has been aided and abetted by her superiors at the school and the parish pastor, a Monsignor, who has in the past downplayed the filming of naked boys in the school's shower room. Now Bishop Bootkoski piles on this woman. He cannot run from the obvious. He states that Mrs. Jannuzzi's postion has not been "terminated." The Bishop is clearly being Jesuitical in his approach. It seems rather clear that she is being set up not to be "rehired!" This is evident by the Bishop's description of her comments that these comments make her unfit to be a Catholic teacher insinuating that she does not "respect" her brethren and that she has used "harsh and judgemental statements." Not only will she not be rehired by Immaculata High School in September 2015 as confirmed by her family, with this kind of public condemnation by her Bishop, he has essentially rendered her unemployable as a teacher. He has engaged in nothing less than character assassination. 

Where is his culpability in this? 

The Bishop continues:

"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."

Where is the evidence that Patricia Jannuzzi ever disrespected a student? Any comments about her which I have read, even from those who disagree with her, indicate that she was an outstanding teacher and Catholic. What is "harsh and judgmental" about standing up for marriage between one man and one woman. Does Bishop Bootkowski believe that marriage should be otherwise? or that the Catholics of Metuchen have no right to an opinion or to express it? Perhaps the Bishop needs to read the Code of Canon Law, Can. 212.3 followed quickly by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America. The good Bishop may also wish to recall the words of Our Blessed Lord as recorded in the 10th chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew:

32 Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. 33 But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. 34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household.

It is wonderful when these people quote or refer to statements by Pope Francis when it suits their agenda. It is unfortunate that they have forgotten the Pope's desire for "Mercy," but that does not seem to count for Patricia Jannuzzi.

Coming to the word "agenda;" in the close of his letter, Bishop Bootkowski takes a swipe at those of us who have been raising the alarm at what has happened here:

"We regret that certain individuals and groups are using inaccurate media reports to push their own agendas."

Perhaps we need to give a little education to Bishop Bootkoski. A little history.

I agree with him and I regret that certain individuals and groups are pushing their own agenda.

The fact is, it is an "agenda" and Lloyd Marcus at The American Thinker states quite clearly:

"Homosexual activists attempt to humiliate and politically destroy anyone who dares even criticize their agenda.  Meanwhile, the MSM (mainstream media) casts us who believe marriage should remain between one man and one woman as the aggressors, as hate-filled villains." 

“The Overhauling of Straight America” by Marshal E. Kirk and Hunter Madsen was expanded into the 1989 book, After the Ball, How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s. It is a blueprint of media and psychology manipulation for widespread public acceptance of homosexuality. One of Kirk and Madsen’s key strategies is to vilify their opponents: “We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.” 

In 1958, Willard Kleon Skousen a one-time FBI Special Agent, published The Naked Communist which highlighted the communist plan to take over America. These 45 points, most of which have already occurred, were read into the congressional record by Albert Herlong (D-FL). These particular ones stand out relating to this situation:

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

If one wishes to go back further, one need look no further than the The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita or one can always refer to Bella Dodd, a one-time leader in the American Communist Party brought back to the faith by the Grace of God and Venerable Fulton J. Sheen.

Indeed Bishop Bootkoski, there is an agenda and Catholics can only hope that you'll be enlightened to determine from whence it comes.

For more on my observations of the situation, please refer to those filed at:


Anonymous said...

Excellent report and analysis...

Br Alexis Bugnolo

Everyday For Life Canada said...

Patricia Jannuzzi's Facebook statement is a lot more spiritually faithful and courageous to Catholic teaching than the generic response of Bishop Bootkoswki. He doesn't even name her. If they can't do loyal shepherding, why don't they just resign? How sad is the state of Catholicism in the West these days.

Barona said...

One must conclude that had St. John Chrsysostom been a mere parish priest under Bp. Bootkoski, he too would have felt this prelate's wrath and been suspended from priestly ministry. But why stop at the sainted Patriarch? Why not "suspend" St. Paul and St. Jude as well? And better, yet why does not the bishop "suspend" Our Blessed Saviour for referring to the Pharisees as "vipers"?

Barona said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dorota said...

What on earth does he mean by "Church teaching of acceptance"? When did the Church promote acceptance of sodomy or marriage based on sodomy? Where in her post did the teacher contradict the teaching of Jesus Christ or the catechism? This bishop is spreading falsehood and supporting sodomy. He is promoting persecution of an innocent woman. How devastating.

Mary's Child Mariann said...

Perhaps encourage your readers to contact the Bishop? After receiving an update, I did (although just one sending him an email may be meaningless). Here's what I sent:

Your Eminence,

I have just read your statement following the "judgment of Patti Jannuzzi" by the homofascist lobby. You state, "We are a compassionate Catholic community committed to treating our students, faculty and parishioners with respect. We have never wavered from our traditional Catholic teachings." To me, this is a great statement to be followed by (just a personal recommendation)..."Therefore, while we are disturbed by Patti Jannuzzi's lack of respect in her comments, we are confident that her steadfast love of the Church and of her neighbor coupled with her excellent 30 year record as a teacher (I believe that was printed in an article that then went on to slam her) merit our forgiveness for the post in facebook. We welcome Patti's return and know that this matter is behind us."

Then, you say some odd things, " The teacher’s comments were disturbing and do not reflect the Church’s teachings of acceptance. However, she 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." That is an interesting tense...has never been...which sounds as if she will not be welcomed back after her "administrative leave," does it not?

The bottom line seems to be whether you intend to stand by a woman who has given many years of service to our Lord and His children through her teaching at the school. It appears that our Church is saying that Jesus, our Lord and Savior, would be loving and accepting to those who act on their same sex attraction (which is mortally wounding) but would not love and accept the person who said disrespectful remarks about those acting on their same sex attraction (which, I see those remarks were in a moment of frustration in response to something she read)? Really, Your Eminence? What she wrote was a sin on my list, but not mortally wounding. What we need from our shepherds is clarity on Church teaching since so many are really confused. What everyone needs is no less than the Truth, Himself. To hide behind words of mercy and not act mercifully toward a teacher and mother would be far worse than her posting on facebook. Common sense.

May God bless you, guide your thoughts and your work each day,

Kitchener Waterloo Traditional Catholic said...

Let's remember that whenever the Church has experienced a major crisis like the one we're in today - many saints are formed. Thus we shouldn't ask, "Lord, why do You permit this?" We should be preparing our answer when He asks on our judgement day, "What did you do about it with all the talents I gave you?"

Anonymous said...

To Barona -- the Epistles and Gospels to which you refer in your post above have been excised from the Novus Ordo readings, I believe. Since the Bugnini "reform", only readings that portray a 'marshmallow Jesus' (hey, dude, can't we all just get along, man?) are permitted to be proclaimed. Contrast the Gospel for this Sunday in the Novus Ordo to the Gospel in the Traditional Rite, called Passion Sunday.

Anonymous said...

The treatment of Mrs Januzzi by her school, the priest and bishop responsible for it, is deplorable, egregiously so. They are spineless and not fit for their offices. This is a "Catholic" school - but it is publicly demeaning and persecuting a teacher for doing as she has a duty to, upholding the trurh in Faith and morals. What cowards. They are not only betraying Mrs Januzzi but they are betraying Our Lord God, and scandalising many souls entrusted to their care. Have they no fear of their Master? What did Our Lord say would happen those who are ashamed of Him before the world?? Blessed Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle, ,,,

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Jannuzzi sounds like the kind of teacher Abp Cordileone needs in his school if her bishop is too cowardly to defend her.


Restore-DC-Catholicism said...

Mariann, you said "what she wrote was a sin". Really? How so? In my book what she wrote was perfectly fine.

TLM said...

I am wondering where the parishioners and parents are that are (or should be) standing by her? If I were in her parish or if I were a parent who had a child in her school, I would be trying to rally the like minded and give the Bishop a run for his money. The collection basket in that Parish would be empty, until Patricia Jannuzzi is reinstated. It is our duty to support the Church, but we can support FAITHFUL Parishes, and I don't see anything in Church teaching saying we need to support UNFAITHFUL ones. There must be more faithful Parishes in the surrounding community somewhere I would think that the parishioners of Immaculata could support support financially. I don't think Catholics need to take this lying down and THEN give money to boot.

I have learned in this area anyway that Bishops 'listen' to the collection basket as sad as that is.

TLM said...

Yes anonymous, Abp Cordileone would probably hire her in a New York second. That would mean, however, that she would have to move across country. :) I am wondering if there is any 'Catholic' school in her area that is faithful and courageous enough to hire her. A scary thought that I don't know if we want to know the answer to.

Lord have MERCY on us and send your angels to help us in this battle, and in particular, St. Michael the Archangel. This is a battle not of flesh and blood, but of principalities and powers.

Damask Rose said...

Poor woman, God bless her.

Leila@LittleCatholicBubble said...

Pope Francis agrees exactly with Mrs. Jannuzzi:

"Can everything be called a family? How … much relativism there is in the concept of the Sacrament of Marriage!” He complained: “What they are proposing is not marriage, it is an association, but it is not marriage! It is necessary to say things very clearly and we must say this!” The Holy Father condemned the “new forms, totally destructive” of marriage.

“The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” Francis said at a Mass in Manila. “These realities are increasingly under attack from powerful forces, which threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation.”

As an Argentinian cardinal in 2010, Francis described gay marriage legislation as a “clear rejection of the law of God” and “a move of the Father of Lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

RJ said...

It is becoming clearer and clearer that "acceptance" and ecumenism are applicable only to the faithless. Those of us within the Church who try to speak truth are ostracized, criticized and marginalized.
+Bootkoski in this case fails in his apostolic mission by not allowing truth, that truth which has been at the root of faith since 33AD. It offers no real hope for salvation to teach acceptance of what has already been defined as sin, and denying the truth of what has already been defined as dogma.

nazareusrex said...

Author Taylor Marshall weighed in on the men who paid out McCarrick's sex abuse lawsuits.

It was Abp. John J. Meyers who paid the 2004 payout in Newark for McCarrick. It was Bp. Bootkoski who paid out the 2007 payout in Metuchen for McCarrick. These two bishops 100% knew about McCarrick and did not follow the Zero Tolerance policy. All journalistic pressure should be placed on these two men until they crack and start explaining who they consulted (nuncios and cardinals and popes) and what they were told to do. If you want to break this story wide open, you need to break these two bishops open. If one of them cracks and says "Cardinal Sodano told us to ..." then the whole deck of cards falls down. It will unravel the USCCB and it may solve the B16 resignation mystery.

Catholic Heavyweights Demand Bishop Accountability

nazareusrex said...

McCarrick was archbishop of Washington, D.C. from 2000–06. Wuerl took over D.C. in 2006. The year before, in 2005, Bp. Paul Bootkoski of Metuchen, New Jersey secretly paid off a victim of McCarrick with diocesan funds.