Showing posts with label Fifth Columnists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fifth Columnists. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Jesuit James Martin Wins Award for Promoting the Sin That Cries Out to Heaven for Vengeance

Edit: America Magazine was beside itself. It's for the record.

New Ways Ministry is proud to announce the presentation of our Bridge Building Award to Father James Martin, SJ, in recognition of his ministry of communication which has helped to expand the dialogue on LGBT issues in the Catholic Church.

The award will be presented at a ceremony on Sunday, October 30, 2016, 2:00-5:00 p.m., at the DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel, 1726 Reisterstown Road, Pikesville, Maryland, 21208 (near Baltimore). Immediately following the presentation Fr. Martin will offer remarks. An hors d’oeuvre reception will conclude the event.

Fr. Martin serves as Editor At Large for America magazine, the national Jesuit opinion journal. In addition, he is one of the most widely recognized Catholic personalities on social media, with a Facebook following of close to half a million people. Fr. Martin has used his communication skills and channels to allow for an extensive discussion of LGBT issues among Catholics of varying ideologies.

Read further at New Ways Ministry .... AMDG

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Breaking: Soviet Romero to Be Beatified




Edit: the Reds are invading heaven now, too.  The Patron Saint of Wealth Redistribution.

Breaking: A decision regarding Archbishop Oscar Romero's beatification could be announced soon, say two reports. Both originate from Bishop Gregorio Rosa Chavez, auxiliary bishop of San Salvador, who met with Pope Francis about the canonization process on Friday, and presented with the pope with a letter from all the Salvadoran bishops regarding Monsenor Romero, the martyred archbishop of San Salvador. The first report, from Prensa Latina, is below. The second, from Radio Vaticana's German site, is here:

in German.

Monday, April 7, 2014

"Conservatives" Virtually Silent as Faithful Hound of God Arrested in the Vineyard of the Lord

Edit: you shouldn't have to wonder when a decision is made, whether or not it's being made with any justice, or even concern for Catholic teaching.  In response to a nun's frank discussion about Catholic moral teaching, some people complained, and rather than ignore them, the local bishop has decided to silence her instead, to silence the words of God Himsel and the teachings of His Church.

Sometimes, oftentimes, Catholic hierarchic, like the wicked steward in the Gospels, murder God's messengers, while turning a blind eye to and even praising those who are material supports to the crime of infanticide. 

The good are being thrown under a bus.

Rorate Caeli also said it. A religious sister of the conservative Nashville Dominicans is thrown under the bus by her superior and low and behold, there's total silence on the part of "conservative" Catholics as she's degraded and maligned not only by the world, but by her superior in religion.  Maybe they're too busy praising Aronofsky's cinematic disfigurement of the Noah story from the Bible?
[Charlotte, NC] A Dominican nun from Aquinas College outraged students at a North Carolina high school after making anti-gay remarks. 
Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, assistant professor of theology and member of the Saint Cecilia Congregation of Dominican Sisters of Nashville, Tenn., spoke during a student assembly at Charlotte Catholic High School on March 21 where students said she criticized gays and lesbians in addition to making subversive comments about single and divorced parents.
Some teachers even left the assembly in tears, the Charlotte Observer reported.
 Meanwhile, a Catholic college which might have helped remedy some of this confusion is about to close.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Conscience Instead of Penance? Who is the Atheist Eugenio Scalfari, Whom Pope Francis Wrote?


Eugenio Scalfari is former editor of the left-liberal daily, La Repubblica , who comes from an old Masonic Family, is presented by the Catholic Culture and art critic Francesco Colafemmina apposite quotes from various articles about Pope Benedict XVI.. They provide a good overview of Scalfaris' relationship to the Church, which he only perceives as an institution, with the question as to whether it exerts influence for or against his Masonic sense, while he himself is devoid of faith.

Whenever possible, Scalfari, who was and is a senator, was awarded by the Left Democratic president with the honor of a senator for life, he engages on the forefront against the Church. Pope Francis wrote him a lengthy letter exciting letter, but it contains some doubtful passages. See the post there is no absolute truth? Misunderstood letter from Pope to Eugenio Scalfari and atheists. (Coming up)

Scalfari? Who?

by Francesco Colafemmina

That one, yes exactly that Eugenio Scalfari who wrote on the 2nd December 2007 in Repubblica:

Benedict XVI. does not like relativism and that is understandable for someone who manages the absolute truth (namely his). There is nothing to say to that. Sure, the Church frequently changes her mind about sin and sinners. That is human. If you read her story, you realize that she too is immersed in relativism. This too is human.
.

Not satisfied with this superficial judgment, he expanded his comment on the 13th of January 2008 as always in Repubblica :

Apart from the obvious political and cultural insubstantiality of Pope Ratzinger, who is behaving since Regensburg today as a pupil of this or that dignitaries of his court, where he directs the rudder according to the suggestions that are given to him by those who he just consults from time to time, there is in the Church and among Catholic laity, more than ever, a deep unease. The Church of Benedict XVI., but also that of John Paul II, doesn't just work to come into line with the modern culture and modern society. That is the real issue, which should provide all those concerned with the relations engaged between the ecclesiastical society and secular society in the early 21st Century.


On the 22nd of October, 2009 in the journal Espresso he expressed himself again:

The popes also represent a phenomenon in themselves. They were very great, mediocre, vicious and exemplary. I think the last ones were John XXIII., Paul VI. and Pope Wojtyla. The current [Benedict XVI.] is a moderate theologian who can mourn his predecessors.

And on the 22nd of April, 2010 also in Espresso he makes the following considerations:

The Second Vatican Council represented the extreme attempt to consider the Christian message as a leaven, which is implanted into modern society, according to a pluralist conception of society that preserves the dignity of the people regardless of their religious beliefs. The rights and obligations of the person, his liberty, his responsibility, the moral root, the charity as opposed to selfishness and the will to power. This vision provided the hierarchy and the primacy of the institution in question. Therefore, the Second Vatican Council was initially slowed and then reinterpreted. The bishops were returned to the hierarchy, restored the balance in a sign of continuity. The five years of Benedict XVI. has been this important. The scandal of pedophile priests was appreciated by the Pope, addressed, albeit in belated severity, but he did not address the fundamental issue and has not asked the key question: Is the church the place where the message of Christ is applied or is it the institution managed on behalf of the power of the hierarchy?

On the 27th of May, 2012 he finally delivered his most definitive blow in Repubblica:

Benedict XVI. is not a great pope, though not lacking in intelligence and education. He is not an actor, but rather the opposite. Wojtyla had a great wardrobe because everything looked great on him. The wardrobe of Ratzinger, however, is campy, because the Pope is even campy, how he dresses, how he speaks, how he goes. He writes well, already, his books about Christ are read, his encyclicals are not without holes and also some of his speeches. His reassessment of Luther was surprising and some hope of progress toward modernity are contradicted by his operating decisions, of his removal of Sodano from Secretary of State and Bertone's appointment: from mediocre to bad. Bertone: is a Ruini without the intelligence and flexibility of the former vicar and former president of the Italian Episcopal Conference. The hierarchy has again become powerful, but broken into many pieces. Ecumenism is now a prematurely wilted flower. Benedict XVI. has again completely excavated the scholasticism of Thomas Aquinas with many greetings to Origen, Anselm of Canterbury and Bernard. Augustine seemed one of Ratzinger's ideals, but which Augustine? The Manichaeans, the coadjutor of Ambrose, or the author of the Confessions? Augustine was in a lot, even for Calvin, to Jansenism and Pascal. If he really wants to say something up to date, Pope Ratzinger would then initiate the beatification of Pascal, but I am aware that in the world of Bertone, the Roman Curia and the current congregations, that would really be a radical gesture towards modernity. They will never do it. The campy pontificate will continue as long as it can, but then there won't be a deluge, but a rain over a marsh full of frogs, mosquitoes and some wild ducks.


Finally, he cheered on the 17th of February after Benedict XVI. had announced his resignation:

And finally, the process of secularization of the entire West, and especially Europe and North America. None of these problems was solved by Benedict and that is the real reason that has led him to his sensational resignation. This decision has violated the sacredness of the office, it has exposed the lobbying nature of the hierarchy and has weakened the role of the Pope and strengthened those of the Conciliar Church. The Council will, from now on, be the highest authority, the conversation with modernity is likely to revive a church as a minority, which represents fewer plastered dogmas in ethics.

Text: Fides et Forma / Giuseppe Nardi
 Image: Fides et Forma
Translation: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...

Sunday, August 18, 2013

The Enemy is Within -- In the Church There is a Homosexual Takeover

Edit: We translated an article previously about Father Stefano back in April long after its appearance in Katholisches. Father is not well known in the English-speaking world, and it's our hope that he becomes so. He is currently undergoing the same kind of persecution undergone by faithful priests all over the world.

(Rome) The Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, under the baton of Riccardo Cascioli and supported by prominent sociologist and former OSCE Representative against discrimination and intolerance against Christians, Massimo Introvigne, the Archbishop of Ferrara, Bishop Luigi Negri, Radio Maria and life rights groups, led a conversation with a priest of the Diocese of Rome, Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo (born 1963) about homosexuality in the Church. The subject had been addressed by a Jewish convert about a chapter in his latest book The Devil Made ​​Himself Triune. Relativism, individualism, disobedience: dedicated to an analysis of the Catholic Church in the third millennium.

In his Christmas message to the Roman Curia, Pope Benedict XVI. delivered a withering verdict on 21 December on the gender ideology. The Pope referred to them at the same time as a threat to the faith and the Church. Levi di Gualdo denounced that gender ideology today in a commentary for Nuova Bussola Quotidiana to that theological journal Concilium, the flagship of the progressive recently with benevolent tones dedicated an entire issue (No. 4/2012). That ideology, Pope Benedict XVI. explicitly designated as anti-God. With its eleven editions in as many languages, ​​Concilium is one of the world's most influential theological forums. Given this fact, says Levi di Gualdo, only one of the full implications of that statement will not understand the importance when the Pope speaks not only of an external enemy, but also, and especially, of one within.

Don Ariel, you describe homosexuality within the Church as the "Via Crucis". Why?

The specification "within the church" is important because I have never fought against homosexuals as such. I have always treated everyone with homosexual tendencies who has approached me with the utmost respect. Some asked me for spiritual help, others came to my confessional, from which no one was sent away without absolution. My job is to manage the grace and forgiveness of God. The motives and socio-psychological influences are numerous, to entice the youth of the 21st century from a lifestyle which is "bad" or "disordered", who don't easily bear these words. I prefer the fatherly manner and prefer to speak of a "non-Christian lifestyle," as I think of the saying of the Lord: "publicans and the harlots go unto the kingdom of God" (Mt 21,32). For this reason, I write: "The homosexuals are perhaps more compatible with paradise than other types of sinners that are often tolerated by the best Catholic morality with great diplomacy. They are not for the priesthood, in the midst of a male world, consisting of men, of whom psychological balance and sexual abstinence is required, which can be reached, but is not easily accessible and not easy to maintain."

When I was ordained a priest, the bishop asked me to, "Be always be yourself". But how can you say to a homosexual priest: "Always be yourself" or maybe you can build the priesthood on a fiction, a double life? Instead of being with the Lord as the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), homosexual priests will be constantly on a self-centered Via Crucis that they will not find in the stone rolled from the empty tomb. The result is serious damage to themselves and to the Church. That's not because they are persons with homosexual tendencies, for which forgiveness, grace and salvation are not closed, but because they are not free and happy to be themselves. Therefore, the homosexual priest runs, as opposed to homosexuality laity, into serious dangers to forgiveness, for grace and salvation remain closed to him.

Why have you decided to publicly denounce this phenomenon? What goals have you set it? Some will say: Would it not have been better to spread over it a cloak of silence?

Because my divine "employer" is the Word made flesh, in order to proclaim the truth better, He assumed our human nature. The divine truth in Jesus and through Jesus takes shape in a body, has a face, gestures and facial expressions in front of the large crowds, who listened and followed after Him. The phrase, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us" (Jn 1:14), is to say, the truth is visible, even become tangible. This concreteness contained in the Gospels shows us a conduct and behavior, for example: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better if a millstone were hung around his neck in the deep sea were drowned "(Mt 18.4 to 7, Lk 9, 38-47). For this reason I explain in the first part of the book, what is charity, and that it remains incomprehensible without truth and justice. Whenever necessary, charity is to practiced, what concretely also means reflecting the doctrine and authority of the Church. Not to do so, leads to the corruption of the idea of ​​charity, in which it would be emptied of its true sense, transformed into a parody. If the Christological charity is transformed into a clerical "charity", creates a thousandfold miserable silence, ultimately the aim is really to place the actual Divine with the potentially Human.

The goal I set for myself as a man and a priest, is to be more alive, an active servant of truth, who is the Word made flesh. The harsh and direct words of Jesus against the immorality of the corrupt power of decadent Jewish priesthood of his time, took him to fail on the cross, but shortly afterwards the glory of the resurrection, because Jesus, the Word, "was God" (John 1:1) . Today, Jesus would use against the immorality of the corrupt power of a decadent Catholic clergy the same words: "brood of vipers" (Luke 3:7), "for ye are as graves" (Mt 23,27). , who, if he had come upon these branches of Sodom and Gomorrah, in which some in the Vatican have been transformed, who provoked the Pope to say: "Pray that I will not flee for fear of the wolves" (Homily of April 24, 2005). Who knows how many scourges He would administer to the modern temple dealers (Mark 11:15-19). He would probably call not only use the words of the prophet Jeremiah: "Is it in your eyes this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers?" (Jer. 7:11). Perhaps he would say: "A tavern and a brothel of robbers intoxicated by the incense of homosexuals surrounded by lace and baroque vestments". And again he'd see the Sanhedrin and the cross. And who knows how many bishops, priests and theologians would accuse Him of arrogance that would deny him any credibility, claiming that he had no right to speak: "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? "(Mt 13,55).

What are the objectives of this lobby? What mechanisms do they use?

Destruction of the Church from within, that is obvious! Some years ago I was trained as an exorcist. My bishop entrusted me with this task, although I've only exorcised twice. Compared with alleged cases of obsession I'm very skeptical. Almost all cases are mental disorders that are sent to the appropriate specialists. I was involved in a real case, however, as indicated already, and is my perception, I had not understood how much the mystery of evil intelligence is in its pure form for none of us can fight with our own powers. The devil has even tempted God incarnate (Matt. 4:1-11, Mk 1:12-13, Lk 4:1-13). To achieve its goals, Satan uses refined, superhuman skills by confusing and creating structures, in which the divine order is turned on its head, from the good to the evil and evil seems to be for the good, virtue is vice and vice virtue, sound doctrine a heresy, and heresy to sound doctrine. Hence the metastases have developed, which have infested the ecclesial body. They caused a lack of leadership at the various levels of resolve in one a Gnostic theological relativism, an exaggerated individualism and disobedience to the weakened Church, Pope and bishops. This mechanism of inversion is aimed to replace God with own's own ego. It is enough to listen to some priest-theologians in suits and ties who have created their personal egonomic Council in the post-Conciliar period and the teaching of the chairs at the pontifical universities only their own dubious teaching. Not by chance are the most commonly used formulas: "How do I mean," "I have written", "like I said."

Why do you think there is such a massive presence of men with homosexual tendencies in the sanctuary? What draws these men to the priesthood or to pay for the training in seminaries helping to give rise to these trends? Where does this alleged compatibility between the consecrated life and a homosexual personality?

In my book I talk about the homosexualization of the church that results from complex historical and social problems. I am 49 years old and think of the priests of my childhood. Before me, I see only men who are above suspicion. If there were occasional problems, it came to women, sometimes even giving up the priesthood. Nevertheless, caution is advised to beware of generalization, the clergy was healthier "back then". Society was different. No one would have acted out homosexual tendencies. To address this issue seriously, it needs honesty above all. In the book I write: "Having been shot through for long of sickly Jansenism on sexuality, as if it were the sin of all sins, we are now experiencing the recoil in the opposite direction and to account for acts and omissions, we priests can appear as the least suitable to speak credibly about sexual morality and bioethics, considering on the one hand, the numerous cases of priests who are affected by sexual disorders that incline them to be incompatible with the priesthood and the episcopate, on the other violations of human dignity, which are also within the Church."

We have created papal councils for peace and justice for the family, for the health and bioethics, but it seems as if the wolf has just put on a thicker skin, but not lost his vice. Or to put it more concretely: When I brought evidence and witnesses to Rome to show that a priest gave a group of hustlers money from the Church, I was not only removed from that basilica, but I was even had my celebret from the Diocese of Rome. And in the diocese, whose bishop is officially the Pope, the Roman Catholics of Ireland accused in an exaggerated fear for the scandal that was held up to the Church in 2010, which would have meant that the canonical punishments were not timely and not applied with sufficient rigor against those clerics, who had failed. On my entries I made at different departments of Rome, including the Secretary of State, I did not even receive a response. I mean, when I speak of the mechanisms of inversion: justice is injustice and justice is injustice.

The truth is that since the late 60s the strict equilibria were broken in the seminaries, which were based on forms of sexual repression. In just 30 years, the doctrine has been attacked and the deposit of faith called into question. Everything was relatively eccentric or subject to experiments. One need only think of the liturgy or to that, what some call the anthropological theology. Finally we came to the homosexualization of Church and the homosexualization of power. It is urgent to reassess the seminaries as quickly as possible, where the future priests are made clerics in the head, instead of Christians in the heart. Often in the seminaries, education is missing, because before you train, it is necessary to have even enjoyed a healthy and solid education. For this reason I have found myself repeatedly in the situation of getting young men, destroyed on the ground, some in the middle of a crisis of faith, because they had been cast as heterosexuals by more or less homosexual educators from seminaries, who are also obviously protecting gay seminarians. To not even to speak of certain ancient orders, which looked down from above on the "poor", "plebeian" secular clergy. What lessons life gives when the proud crash from their thrones! Today, when you enter the novitiate of certain thousand year old abbeys or some monastic Universities, you're afraid to get a sexually transmitted disease just from breathing.

To avoid having to be restrictive, certain venerable orders are so fallen, that they receive all the ones we throw out of the seminaries. It seems superfluous to mention: for serious moral reasons. This apparent reconciliation between the consecrated life and a homosexual personality arises from this precarious situation, which has produced a real coup for homosexualism. Or to put express it more frankly: some seminarians in the seminaries, religious brothers who 'spearheaded in the 70s and 80s are today bishops, and no sooner had they got it, then they have to be first surrounded with like-minded subjects who are placed systematically in all key positions in the diocese, including the seminaries, in order to correspondingly protect and reproduce," as they could euphemize the faith and homosexualize the Church.

What remedy do you propose to solve the problem?

The apostolic authority. The word "authority" is frightening because many egomaniacal theologians have confused "more collegiality" and "democracy" with authoritarianism and autocratic arbitrariness: Especially with that authoritarianism, represented with the aggressiveness of the ultra progressive groups or certain sectarian lay associations against those who do not think like them. The Church is the rightful custodian of a power that has been entrusted to Her by God and by which it decided, if necessary must make use of it to avoid any form of anarchy in its interior. An inquisitorial police state is not meant with this power, but the resolute defense of truth against error and the impertinent rebellion of people blinded by individualism. The Holy See has issued various documents and statements in this sense, but day by day I'm a new witness to its non-application. We are facing a veritable plague. Since there is no other solution but to do so, as the Gospel tells us: "If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and it is gone! For it is better for thee that one of thy members lost, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away! For it is better for thee that one of thy members lost, and not that thy whole body go into hell. (Mt 5,29-30). We, however, continue to drip a chamomile extract in the eye, as we comfort ourselves with the notion that the Church "had survived worse moments." But this is wrong, because in previous eras, the Church was attacked by forces from outside who could only hope for more or less numerous traitors inside her. Today, she is attacked but not only from the outside, but produced in their interior the evil that they consume, the risk of making her an institution consumed by sin, manufacturing the sin. In what bygone era in which anything like this happen? Not even the time of John XII., who was chosen at the age of 18 years as pope in 955, and died at 26 in a less than edifying manner.

What were the Reactions to your Advice? How did your Brothers React?

Seemingly with complete indifference. On a personal level, several prelates have been cited me who unanimously assured me that I did the truth a good service. Someone went so far as to use such flattering terms that I was embarrassed, perhaps a proof that the devil when he knocks on vanity, is always dressed in Prada red? Excellent. Specifically, however, what did this solidarity compliment forge for the dissemination of the book which they have referred to as "service to the Church"? Nothing. Although they know that I'm under the bombardment of the homosexualistic snipers, powerful Clerical-gay mafia, what they have they done to disarm them or to protect myself? Nothing. To be reduced to cattle for slaughter is part of the occupational hazards for our priests. The priesthood received by us is indelibly inscribed, because we are called to be one with the sacrificial Lamb, Christ Redeemer. Finally, whoever is a little familiar with the real essence of theology and its complex history knows that in 20 centuries, and after numerous councils in the history of the Church, only one decision was taken by a unanimous collegiality, without contradiction and without dissent: "Then leaving him, they fled" (Mark 14.50, Mt 26.54). In any case: I'll never be alone. Christ is always with me. He trusts even my hands to be living body and living blood, the visible presence in His Church and food for the people of God. I could not be happy in this life and in the future, given the fact that I am a priest of Christ and that I will be for all eternity?

I thank your Internet daily for information work that your operating on this topic by you, in which you break the wall of silence. which surrounds this epidemic drama. Christ will reward you and the Church will benefit greatly benefit by it through long suffering, piece by piece.

Interview: Roberto Marchesini / Nuova Bussola Quotidiana
 translation: Giuseppe Nardi
 Image: Fides et Forma
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMGD

Link to Katholisches...

Monday, July 22, 2013

Damian Thompson's Outraged at Father Zuhlsdorf's Condemnation of the Sin of Sodom

Edit: I've long been a critic of Damian, one whose name he bears is probably shaking his head, and I have observed the things for which he most often will raise his blade. He's not just interested in pretty lace vestments, incense and the sensual cadences of the canon sotto voce as the beeswax candles flicker in the gloom, he really does believe that those who commit the sin of sodomy in word or in mind, deserve special status and bristles venomously when he senses these dainties are portrayed as they are. The subject was an article by Father Zuhlsdorf, who usually gets the Damian lace chasuble sign of approval, where Father portrays such people perhaps as they are. Heaven forfend that a Catholic priest should condemn immorality and teach:
I've long been a fan of Fr John Zuhlsdorf for his measured defence of the traditional Mass; I know that, like many US traditionalists, he's very much opposed to the "homosexual agenda" – but nothing prepared me for the article he published today. Never have I changed my mind about someone so fast. It's a revolting piece of work, using the wicked murder of a devout Catholic lady to imply all manner of horrible things about homosexuals in general – "this is what 'they' are like, you know". (NB: when Z fisks the CNS article, the emphasis in bold type is his; his own comments are between square brackets.) Its rhetorical style reminds me of old-fashioned racist propaganda.
Link too Damian's relativizing blog...

Let's not forget, either, who the author of the slur racism was and why.

Monday, February 25, 2013

Damian Thompson’s Fangs Come Out : Celibacy

The Fourth Estate Continues its Assault on Behalf of Powers and Principalities.

Edit: noting the increasingly and unsurprising hostility of the Telegraph in recent times is interesting, especially in reading Damian Thompson’s diatribe against priestly celibacy.  The boyish, single and industrious editor is now insisting that something which has worked for centuries no longer works.  Like the most annoying heathen media personality, he’s taking a very censorious tone indeed.

We’ve noted earlier that he’s been slyly pushing the envelope on the Gomorrah front for a while.  Did Damian Thompson receive Holy Orders recently?

Thompson insists that having a married clergy was an ancient tradition of the Church, but what he fails to note is that clerical celibacy is of Apostolic origin, as Cardinal Levada himself insists.  Indeed, the Apostles, though married, took up their staffs and followed Christ, leaving their families behind.

He writes:

Yesterday, Cardinal O’Brien was in the headlines for a different reason. He has been reported to the Vatican for alleged “inappropriate acts” with three priests and one ex-priest of his diocese. The papal ambassador to Britain, Archbishop Antonio Mennini, has forwarded the allegations to Rome.

It’s important to say that the Cardinal has not been charged with an offence. But the juxtaposition of these allegations with his claim that universal celibacy is an unrealistic ideal illustrates the sexual tension that is pulling apart the Catholic priesthood. To put it bluntly, the new Pope must confront the suffocating hypocrisy of the Vatican and Bishops’ Conferences on this subject. For example, I’ve never heard a bishop acknowledge what is obvious to so many of us: that in certain large cities in the Western world, a majority of Catholic priests are gay, albeit celibate. If the Vatican were to enforce its current ruling that homosexuals per se are unsuitable for the priesthood, then it would have innumerable empty urban churches on its hands. And furious parishioners, too, since discreetly gay men often make wonderful priests. On the other hand, you don’t have to be a homophobe to wonder whether it’s healthy to have such an imbalance between the sexual instincts of priests and their flocks.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...