Categories
Uncategorized

A GAY MAN SAYS THAT GAY MEN SHOULD NOT BE ORDAINED PRIESTS.

20190102_132253.jpg

I am the sort of man the Catholic Church says shouldn’t be a priest.

532a4c31bac82.image
MATTSON

I experience what the Vatican calls “deep-seated homosexual tendencies,” which, according to the Church, make me an unsuitable candidate for the priesthood. The 2005 Vatican instruction on the question of homosexuality and the priesthood states this clearly: “The Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’” This teaching wasn’t new. In 1961, the Vatican declared that men with homosexual inclinations couldn’t be ordained. Seminarians who “sinned gravely against the sixth commandment with a person of the same or opposite sex” were to be “dismissed immediately.”
I take no offense at this teaching. In fact, I agree with it. I’m convinced that if the Church had heeded its own counsel from 1961 and 2005, we wouldn’t be reeling from the shocking headlines of today: “St. John’s Seminary Shakeup Amid Probe Into Sexual Misconduct”; “Victims recount sexual abuse horrors in Chilean seminary”; “Honduran Seminarians Allege Widespread Homosexual Misconduct”; “Vatican cops bust drug-fueled gay orgy at home of cardinal’s aide”; “Man Says Cardinal McCarrick, His ‘Uncle Ted,’ Sexually Abused Him.” Most of the horrific abuse detailed in the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report involved adolescent boys and young men. This isn’t pedophilia.
What unites all of these scandals is homosexuality in our seminaries and the priesthood: the result of the Church ignoring its own clear directives. If it is serious about ending the sex scandals, the Church needs to admit it has a homosexual priest problem and stop ordaining men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. The first “Uncle Ted” scandal was “Uncle Ted” becoming a priest.
I broach the subject with trepidation. I am convinced that most homosexual priests are good and holy men. One example of many I know is a priest who serves as a hospital chaplain. He regularly accompanies families through the pain of physical trauma, illness, and the death of loved ones. He has a special charism for men dying with AIDS, which I’m certain comes from his love for others with deep-seated homosexual tendencies like him. He has helped many of them reconcile with Christ before death.
So I agree with Bishop Barron’s warning about the dangers of scapegoating people who share my attraction to men. But recognizing the overwhelming role that homosexuality has played in so many of our past and present scandals is not scapegoating. It’s the Church confronting the truth.
Archbishop Charles Chaput, commenting on the 2005 document, wrote, “While persistent homosexual tendencies never preclude personal holiness—homosexuals and heterosexuals have the same Christian call to chastity, according to their state of life—they do make the vocation of effective priestly service that much more difficult.” From my personal experience, I believe there are many reasons why this is the case, but here I will focus only on two, directly connected with unchastity.
The first reason is that men with homosexual tendencies find it particularly difficult to live out the demands of chastity. The vast majority of scandals in the Church since 2002 involve homosexual priests profoundly failing in chastity. This is no surprise to me. Chastity, I’m convinced (and the evidence bears this out), is much harder for men with a homosexual inclination than for others.

9781621640721

Fr. James Lloyd, C.S.P., a priest with a PhD in psychology from NYU, has worked with homosexual men (including priests) for more than 30 years as a clinical psychologist. On the subject of chastity and homosexual priests, he says, “It is clear enough from clinical evidence that the psychic energy needed to contain homosexual drives is far greater than that needed by the straying heterosexual.”
Like many same-sex attracted men, I have at times compulsively engaged in risky anonymous behavior with other men. If I had been a priest, my sin would have been compounded by committing a horrible abuse against someone for whom I should have been a spiritual father. Fr. Lloyd’s insight is invaluable here: “The compulsion dimension attendant upon the SSA [same-sex attracted] personality cannot be ignored. Too long has the Church turned away as if nothing were happening. We can no longer blink at the obvious … Whenever there is a doubt about any candidate for the priesthood, the doubt must be resolved in favor of the Church!” If the Church wants to avoid sex scandals, it must stop ordaining the sorts of men who have the hardest time remaining chaste.
The second problem is directly connected with the first. If a priest isn’t abiding by the Church’s teaching in his own life, he won’t teach his parishioners to follow a teaching he doesn’t believe applies to him. Thus, a grave problem with homosexual priests is the high number of them who don’t agree with the Church’s teaching on sexual morality and covertly (or overtly) undermine this teaching, both in the pulpit and in the confessional.
A story from my own journey in chastity is instructive. Soon after re-entering the Church in 2009, I sinned by having an anonymous sexual encounter with a man. Filled with remorse, I went to confession the next day, and shockingly, the priest (a stranger to me) told me that having sex with a man wasn’t sinful. Instead, he urged me to go find a boyfriend, saying, “the Church will change.” Later, when I discussed this priest with those who knew him, I was told it was widely acknowledged that this priest was homosexual himself. In his 1991 book Gay Priests, Dr. James Wolf interviewed 101 priests. All of them said they disagreed with Church teaching on sexual morality; only 9 percent of them said they would tell a layman like me to refrain from having sex with a man. Those men should never have been ordained.
I readily acknowledge that the priests I describe above do not reflect all homosexual priests. The 2005 Vatican document does make an exception for those who may have had a “transitory” homosexuality—men who were able to overcome the grave wounds of same-sex temptations through counseling, hard work, prayer, and honest self-reflection, and thus are good candidates for the priesthood. Yet I think these men are rare.
Because the sex scandals of the Church are overwhelmingly homosexual, the Church can no longer risk ordaining men with homosexual inclinations in the hopes that those inclinations turn out to be transitory. The Church needs mature men, confident in their identity and ready to be spiritual fathers. I love the Church, but I’m not the sort of man the Church needs as a priest. The Norms for Priestly Ordination, published in 1993 by the USCCB, reveal this to me: “In order to talk about a person as mature, his sexual instinct must have overcome two immature tendencies, narcissism and homosexuality, and must have arrived at heterosexuality.”
What would the American Church look like today if our bishops had taken seriously the directives of 1961, 1993, and 2005? We can’t answer that question, but we can look to our future, and listen to the words of Pope Francis about admitting homosexual men to seminary: “If you have even the slightest doubt, it’s better not to let them enter.” Let us pray that the bishops here in America and around the world heed his wise counsel.
Daniel C. Mattson is the author of Why I Don’t Call Myself Gay: How I Reclaimed My Sexual Reality and Found Peace.

PAT SAYS:

The above article is certainly challenging.

But it is not my approach to the subject.

I believe that Roman Catholicism has got it very wrong on the whole area of human sexuality – and homosexuality in particular.

I expressed my full views on this area in a book I published called A SEXUAL LIFE – A SPIRITUAL LIFE which is available on Amazon and Kindle.

41T73QSVE7L._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_

I do not believe in the RC requirement for celibacy among all its priests. I think that celibacy should be optional.

However, as long as the RC Church requires celibacy men who want to be sexually active, in any way should not join the priesthood and lead double lives and lives that are lies.

To me this is spiritual and religious schizophrenia.

And all kinds of schizophrenia lead to various forms of neurosis and psychosis.

We see this set out in the lives of the Maynooth Gang – unbridled sex, assault, rape etc.

Most of us have some neurosis but many priests are psychotics.

Men who want to be sexually active and want to be priests should avoid the RC Church completely by either joining other churches or by becoming independent priests and ministers.

I have been an independent priest and bishop for 33 years this year – and when I went independent I discovered the freedom of sons and daughters of God.

Within the institution I was an oppressed and repressed prisoner.

As Christians we do believe in chastity – but chastity and the teachings of the RC Church are not the same thing.

We are all entitled to enjoy our sexuality but we are not allowed to use our sexuality in ways that are about the using or abusing of others.

We should use our sexuality in ways that make us – and others – better people.

And of course there is nothing wrong with pleasure.

 

 

88 replies on “A GAY MAN SAYS THAT GAY MEN SHOULD NOT BE ORDAINED PRIESTS.”

I hope and pray that David Dyksy gets the strength to report his attackers to the police and that they are brought to justice.
I pray that he finds healing from the trauma and violation he suffered.
That such a heinous crime was perpetrated in Ireland’s national seminary – and that the perpetrators are (still?) seminarians – is too shocking for words.
It is a clear sign that this excuse for a seminary needs to be closed and those who have staffed, presided, overseen it, perhaps, even removed from Ministry.
I hope that David eventually is strong enough to face down his attackers and those who may have mishandled his complaints.
He will have the support of all decent priests and people of the Church.

Liked by 1 person

Can you stop repeating this myth and leave David Dyksy alone. Pat has done more than enough harm to him.
I’m glad David got the blog taken down last time.

Like

An excellent blog /comment on the variable procreative impulse. The reality of our sexual
evolvement continues to manifest in many variable ways, showing the reality of the broad spectrum of humanoid evolvement.
In complete contrast, and contrary to all scientific objective evidence, an institution based on dubious historical and objective analysis, bases controversial evidence of its “God given” primacy and claims of requirements of human behaviour on disputed biblical texts and subsequent interpretations by long dead “scholars.”.
No prizes for guessing what institution I refer to.
I don’t ask your agreement, but do you understand?
MMM

Like

1.58am: MMM – Would you be talking about the Catholic Church! Just wondering. I notice the time you wrote your piece – were you recovering after your local booze up? Nothing new in your revelations except to reiterate ad nauseam your detestation for that institution that dare not speak its’ name!

Like

Who the heck doesn’t detest this morally foul institution? Not even Jesus could approve it. (And we know how tender-hearted he was.)
I am not thinking here of the Roman Catholic Church, but of those wh… .😆

Like

The ex Armagh Seminarian who abused David Dysky must be face the Courts. Mullaney and his regime who willingly concealed this criminal offence must also face the courts.

Like

Oh God, another usual trite gay cliched response.

There is no self-hate in this man. Only a man who is honest and seeks the truth.

Like

Pat, You must be respected for your decision to be true to yourself and the way you wanted to live your life. You left the RC priesthood because you were not prepared to live a lie as a sexually active gay man in a celibate priesthood and Church which teaches that homosexual acts are gravely sinful.

I agree with your assessment that many actively gay RC priests are psychotic. Psychosis is a condition whereby thoughts and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality.

The object of the human possible intellect is truth. If the possible intellect has been habituated to lie it does constant violence to its very nature and the consequence is its inability to be able to differentiate delusion from objective reality. Lies and deceit are rampant among the Episcopacy and clerical body as a result of the huge numbers of gay men in each. Some estimate that up to 50% of American bishops are gay. These figures could be extrapolated to the Irish bishops and clergy. See link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/mccarrick-is-tip-of-the-iceberg-polish-priest-who-warned-of-gay-bishops-5-y

It is logical that a sexually active gay priest or bishop will not only think that the Church is wrong with regard to homosexual acts, but could also be wrong regarding its moral teaching in other areas such as abortion, divorce, pre-marital sex, masturbation, etc. Hence why we currently have such a massive rebellion against Catholic teaching and failure to uphold its eternal truths among many cardinals, bishops and priests.

The dichotomy is so strong between what an actively gay priest is meant to believe and teach and what he subjectively believes and lives that psychosis can be the sad outcome. Their entire lives turn into a constant act and lie. It is a sad way to live. They do a terrible injustice to lay Catholics who want to be taught the truths of the Church which they believe and love.

Any sexually active gay priest who has no intention of adhering to Catholic tenets should leave the priesthood for the good of the long suffering laity.

Like

A very good post. I did not actually leave but was pyshed out. As it happened it led to my sorting myself out through counselling etc. O felix culpa?

Like

Pat did not leave the Church because of his sexuality you complete fool. He was SACKED for his disobedience- major difference. Can we Stick to facts please.

Like

10:02 – Pat de facto volitionally left the Church when he was validly but illicitly ordained a bishop, which happened because of his disagreement with Church teaching. He knew the consequences.

Like

9.36: I agree with your arguments and are well expressed. The Church, sadly, has presented a teaching about sexual morality that has brought unbearable guilt to many and thwarted our view on the noble gift of sexuality. While it upholds dogmatic teachings on sexuality, some of which are very inspiring and worthwhe, nonetheless the hypocrisy of many within the Church is destroying people’s beliefs, trust and belonging. You suggest that all sexually active gay priests leave. That’s the challenge. However, when we talk about a more people led church , what do we do when we find many of them in irregular relationships, broken marriages,active gay lives, men and women? I merely as this question because I know many such people and I would love their involvement in a parish community. I’m talking about good human beings who have been through real life learning experiences and I believe they would enrich our Christian communities. Is this a step too far? I am a priest and am neither neurotic or psychotic, so my doctor tells me!!

Like

People who aren’t qualified to make mental health diagnoses have no business doing so. Apart from any thing else, people who aren’t qualified spouting baseless opinions about the mental health of others stigmatizes mental health issues for everyone. Schizophrenia isn’t a split personality, as Pat seems to imply, which goes to show he has no business making mental health diagnoses for anyone.

Like

Most of us have a neurosis but many priests are psychotic, so says Pat. We know your neurosis and psychotic episodes. While I may struggle at a very human level with my broken humanity, I am not neurotic and certainly not psychotic. When I was under severe personal difficulties for a myriad of reasons, I sought professional therapy and was certified as “normal”, my difficulties being the “burnout” syndrome after many family losses, unresolced gruef and some very difficult parish challenges over a number of years. I came through it all thank God. The two retired priests with me have never demonstrated a psychosis or an obvious neurosis in all my ten years with them. They are reasonably good and balanced men, loved and respected by all, are men of prayer and still generous with their time – both in their mid to late 80’s. Pat, your generalised judgments are often very wrong. Since priests are first and foremost human beings, we are subject to the usual vagaries, eccentricities and brokenness of life as any one else. I accept that our way of life if not lived as humanly and spiritually (Christ like) as possible we can fall into disarray psychologically, spiritually and emotionally. However, the vast majority of guys I know are most definitely not “psychotic”. Yes, we struggle and are challenged, but we try to stay normal.

Like

I accept your points. I think most of us have some neurosis. It comes from living life. Do you not think that all these scandalous bishops and priests we read aboud daily are very nuerotic/psychotic? Eg McCarrick?

Like

Not a self hating gay 7:34. A gay man with a point of view. Why do u have to be so negative? Whilst I may not agree with him, it is a well articulated point of view. There is nothing wrong with a reasoned argument and it is pathetic to dismiss someone as a self hating gay. All you do is show up your own prejudices. My beef is that the RC institution says one thing and does another. How can they preach one thing to the faithful and do the complete opposite. This institution is well past its sell by date. From many of the comments on this blog over recent times it would appear that some are quite content for the RC institution to continue to carry on in its hypocritical way or are quite happy to turn a blind eye.

Like

9.36. You are clearly another gay who hates himself. You are spouting utter rubbish. Bishop Pat did not leave the RC Church because he was gay. He left because his Bishop was a power mad idiot who could not cope with being questioned or challenged.
Your other point about gay priests thinking that the Church could be wrong about other moral teachings such as abortion is utter bolloks. What’s up with you man? Get a grip!

Like

Your very comment proves my post 09:47.
I was expecting such hatred and the usual calumnies.
The sooner the Church is rid of all your kind, the better.

Like

‘…all your kind…’? 😕
Wow! 😲
You as a Christian meant to say ‘my brothers and sisters’, didn’t you? 😆

Like

Show me the priest or bishop who is not gay / has homosexual inclinations ! When I meet a priest, or a bishop, I assume (and believe that I am right in that assumption) that he will be gay. He might well be celibate, but his inclinations are homosexual. I’m always right. My GayDar for bishops and priests is well tuned ! But, actually, I couldn’t care less if they are gay. I just want them to be decent, good, and holy men. What they do with their little bits in privacy, I don’t care about. As long as it is consensual and not abusive. And as long as they aren’t telling us all the next morning from the pulpit about how to live our lives in the area of sexuality and relationships, and being hypocritical. Other than that, I’m cool about it. And, I reckon God is too – he/she has much more important things to worry about than our loins and genitals and what silly things we get up to with them.

Like

@10:59
When did you last hear a homily from a bishop or a priest upbrading people with same-sex attraction?
There is the odd foray into this area, such as the Dublin-based friar who presented a sermon on this topic, some years ago, an event which, of itself, raises questions.

Like

9.47: An apolgia pro Pat and very misguided. There is another side to this saga in Pat’s life. He is responsible for his defection as much as others were. So let’s not be choosy about the bits that suit Pat’s agenda.

Like

I asked C B Daly not to push me into an independent ministery as there was no question of my leaving the priesthood.

He kept pushing. The rest is history.

Like

Hi Pat. Your info about Gaynooth appears to have all dried up. Are we right to believe that all is good there now and it is a happy, cleansed and holy seminary? No word on Deacon gorgeous being ordained to the Holy Priesthood?

Like

No. Maynooth is as bad as ever. Gorgeous is holed up in Limbo in a Dublin presbytery. They can do nothing with him as he knows so much. Meanwhile he has his monthly visits to Paris and his other priest friends.

Like

Just a couple of responses to the thoughtful post at 09:36. Firstly, in over forty years as a gay Catholic adult, I have very rarely met a gay priest who challenged the Church’s teaching on sexuality – though aspects of his private life may well have been a challenge to him but not known to others. Far more common is the syndrome often exposed on this blog of promiscuous gay priests demanding in public unflinching obedience to the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics. The very few heterosexual priests around – unless they are attached to the Ordinariate where they reserve the right to do their own thing regardless – tend to be far more thoughtful and compassionate; Bishop Kieron Conry, whatever his personal issues, being a case in point. Secondly after a lifetime attempting to square a circle, I reject the whole gallimaufry of the Church’s line on sexual ethics as nonsense. It has nothing to do with truth and integrity and everything to do with power and control. Since Paul VI’s disastrous folly with Humanae Vitae, most Catholics know that and that’s how they live. It’s the clergy who maintain the lie, and the results are there for all to see.

Like

One idea from my post that I do remember clearly is that Mattison, like the institutional Church, seems to perceive homosexuality not just as an objective disorder (in philosophical terms), but as a pathological disorder, too: without literally saying so, Mattison believes that homosexuality impels gay men to act out their sexual desires, especially when these become urges. In other words, ‘homosexuality, as a pathology, is effectively an addiction,…to sex…’, leaving gay men helpless and, therefore, unable to exercise the moral self-discipline necessary for priesthood. But this jars with his subsequent admission that he knows not just one or two good gay priests, but, in fact, ‘many’ such men.
As I said in my previous post, I can think more readily of reasons other than his homosexuality that would disqualify Mattison from the priesthood, not least among them his inability to construct a logical argument.

Like

I notice on the internet other WordPress blogs have experienced the loss of longer comments. Maybe a good idea to save comments before posting?

Like

Pat, I think that the blog piece today is instructive. So much talk is about change and perceived future change, but the fact remains that so many leading clergymen throughout the church over the past 60/70 years have acted against their own church teaching and those birds will have to come home to roost someday. At the moment, we are only seeing some of their negative effects. In fact, so far has the corruption gone that sometimes it seems only a schism and another and another will sort it out. And it’s not about homosexuality essentially, it is about appalling decisions made consistently by key players at all levels in the formation of new priests according to their own personal prejudices and interests.

Like

Successive magisteria, over many centuries, have acted against the bedrock commandment, love of neighbour.

It isn’t just individuals who have rejected morally valid teaching; the Church herself, as an institution, has done so, too.

Don’t be surprised when a child begins to imitate its mother’s behaviour.

Like

Brave article hi. I suppose gay laypeople can be tolerated being sexually active but gay priests can’t
Is it that sex taints sacraments. Adam and Eve were saved and redeemed in Jesus. The Trinity is far more intimate than human sexuality. Is the Trinity gay bi or what. Orientation is not the issue but the respect one shows to others. Someone who is ashamed of their identity is aashamed of the God who made them. I wonder if God made a mistake but

Like

When sexual activity becomes sexual promiscuity (especially if this turns non-consensual as well), it is, hi, just as intolerable among gay non-clerics as it undoubtedly should be among priests, whether gay or straight. (There is, of couse, the addition that priests vow to be celibate, making hypocrisy here draw even stronger criticism. And rightly so.)
God made everyone, but not lust. This quality is all our own, whatever our sexuality, and a natural progression of gluttony as commonly understood.
In the ancient world, homosexual practice was morally prohibited, by Christians, because it was believed to issue from lust. This misconception is clear from Romans, where Paul writes on the subject and condemns the behaviour of those men and women, so consumed by sexual passion, that they turn to sexual acts with their own gender to satisfy their desires.
No, the Trinity ain’t gay, bi, or straight. All three orientations require SEXUAL attraction to make them valid sexualities. As the Trinity aren’t provided with fully functioning, corporeal genitalia, then they can’t copulate.
Er, in so far as we know, hi.😆

Like

@1:20pm – The Trinity don’t need “provided” with ANYTHING you theologically illiterate prize pillock 😂. It is the Trinity who provide/create EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE.

Like

10:32
You’re a gay, sexualĺy active, but illiterate Roman Catholic priest, aren’t you?😅
Sorry: I don’t mean to laugh at you. But you are LAUGHABLE, aren’t you?

Like

I am gay and well into my fifth decade now. When I was younger I was very sexually active, and it wasn’t unusual for me to clock up a dozen random sexual encounters in a day. The sheer number of my sexual partners indicates that they couldn’t all possibly have identified as gay, and I often saw the mark left by a removed wedding ring. The myth of gay promiscuity like that mentioned in this article is nonsense. Many a ‘straight’ man is promiscuous… with both women and men, and the veneer of respectable married life is often just that.
I have also seen a statistic (sorry I can’t remember the source so really cannot say how reliable this is) that as much as 10% of children are not fathered by the man they consider dad.
Chastity? Very rare indeed.

Liked by 1 person

Speak for yourself. Straight men don’t routinely have a dozen sexual encounters daily. The married men who commit adultery with men are not straight in case you are citing them as an example of straight behaviour.
A few years ago I got very fit and hot and after joining Grindr and Fabguys I had sex with 32 different men over a couple of months. All strangers and I only got to know the name of one of them. I’ve put all that behind and confessed it. I’d say my experience is typical of the gay apps.
I was also on Tinder seeking women. Most of the women there were seeking a relationship and not looking for mindless sex with a succession of strangers.

Like

The straight men I know would love to have no strings attached sex with a succession of women, as you say most women are looking for something more meaningful. Gay Men are promiscuous because of the availability of other men.

Like

Wow! Twelve a day, or 84 on an average week. Some of them must have been repeats.
No wonder +Amy can’t control them, Bp Pat, if that’s an example.

Like

Some days I only clocked up six or seven, though. But I didn’t really go in for repeats that I can remember, that was something I went for about a decade later. In the middle of those two times I was a novice in an order and didn’t have sex once! So being promiscuous does not equate to not being able to control yourself, but I do take your point about bishops not being able to control their priests!

Like

12 a day for a gay isn’t that remarkable and such a figure can be easily gained in a single visit to a gay sauna (of which there is no straight equivilent).

I’ve known gay men of very average looks, unfit and with unappealing personalities who have been with 1000+ men.

The men aren’t too fussy. On Grindr a typical conversation goes as follows:

Hi, what you into?

The usual. Any pics?

Nice.

You accom?

Ok, where will we meet?

Like

7.59: A good question Maggie! Since you are not a relationship person, you ask innocent questions. {I’m serious}.You should try to engage in a life-giving encounter with a real, living, human being other than these anonymous, meaningless and life-less connections you make on this blog. All emptiness, thus your permanent angst…

Like

Oh, we need some light relief. What’s happened to Dean Kennedy ? Bring him back, please. He amused us. There was always something to divert us from the daily grind. Not Grindr. Just the daily slog.

Like

In the 90s, I’m sure many people will remember a religious sister, Sr Wendy Beckett, talking enthusiastically about art on the television when she wasn’t living as a hermit in a caravan in Norfolk. She died just after Christmas aged 88.
In her obituary, I read this: “Despite her old-fashioned garb, her views on Catholicism were anything but traditional. In private – and occasionally in public – she would question the church’s strict code on sexual ethics as a distraction from the real business of bringing people to God, whatever their gender, chosen method of contraception or orientation.”
It’s a viewpoint with which I have considerable sympathy.

Liked by 1 person

Sister Wendy often enjoyed a glass of Champagne and they used the health excuse to send her to another Convent in rural Norfolk. In other words send her into obscurity and get her away from presenting TV programmes and hogging the limelight. She was eccentric and did possess radical views on Catholicism. The hierarchy loathed her because of her popularity in media circles in which she often mixed and socialised – hence her being partial to champagne.

Like

Yo Bisho Buck,
Could you have a little word in wee Jamie McConnell’s ear and ask him to explain his identity as the poor soul even has lost that bit now!
Wiser eatan fruit!
He’s now pro-life, Jesus he’s a buckin ejit!

Like

At some point in the formation of every one of the priests who can’t or won’t remain celibate it has been discerned by others that God was calling him to priesthood. This can mean one or several of:
1. God doesn’t exist.
2. The formators had it wrong.
3. The candidate was lying or mistaken about his own predisposition to a celibate life.
4. They were right and God was calling them but doesn’t want a celibate priesthood.

Like

Well, for the first thousand or so years of Christianity, God was happy with both a celibate AND married and clergy.

Unfortunately, what God has joined together man (well, clerical man) often puts asunder. (Just ask God on love and enemy.😆)

Like

7:57

Celibacy is not inherent to RC priesthood, anymore than it was to Jewish priesthood. (Ask John the Baptist’s old man, Zechariah.😆)

Like

I see Papa Francesco has sent the US bishops a long letter:

Click to access francis-lettera-washington-traduzione-inglese-20190103.pdf

He tells them off ! They are not going to be happy.

And, wait for it, they will want to find a suitable scapegoat for all this trouble, and where will they look ? Yes, you got it in one. THE GAYS. They will turn their wrath on homosexuals in the Church, priests and lay, and will put the blame for all that has happened at their door. Wait for it. It’s not going to be pretty.

Like

Ah! Sure they won’t get away, these days, with blaming anyone but themselves and their clericalist culture.
Gay people are now too well organised, more assertive, and much more media savvy (and with more of the media in support of them) than any branch of the now discredited and disgraced Roman Cathoilc episcopacy.😆

Like

If you visit the Catholic Church in Calvin’s birthplace Noyon, you’ll find a little plaque telling visitors that he was expelled for sodomy.

Like

Those who sexually assaulted David Dysky are been protected by Michael Mullaney and Michael Collins. Tom Surlis has no involvement in the concealment.

Like

Mullaney and Collins destroyed all material relating to the Dysky case. Its amazing what a paper shredder can do especially with witness statements.

Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s