GAY JESUIT SEMINARIAN SPEAKS OUT

2019-01-08_jay_pearson

Gay Jesuit candidate attacks ‘ideological militants’

Jay Pearson is as proudly and publicly “gay” as one can be.
“My name is Jay, I am a Greek Byzantine Catholic, I’m a candidate to become a Jesuit and I’m gay.”
He has a YouTube channel; and he is on Twitter and Facebook. In a decidedly awkward turn of phrase, Jay posts his social media content under the handle of “Jay of Proceeding” based on the St. Ignatius-inspired “way of proceeding.”
As a candidate for the Western Province of the Society of Jesus (though he has not stated yet whether as a future priest or future brother),

Jay has gone uber-public about all this in part to “speak out against some bishops as well as those among the ideological militants in the Church who are attempting to blame gay priests specifically and homosexuality generally for the sexual abuse crisis.” Jay vigorously attacks the “scapegoating” of homosexual clergy he believes has been perpetrated by bishops like the late Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.
Jay claims the core problem here is that these “IMs” (his term for “ideological militants”) have a “perversely persisting, fundamental lack of understanding of what ‘gay’ actually is. There are, unfortunately, those who see ‘gay’ as just a sexual perversion unto itself, and that’s wrong. And we know that’s wrong; we’ve had decades of data to prove that.”
Jay says “we know” that “gay” is “not a perversion” because such boys and girls “knew they were gay” long before puberty. “It’s just part of our diversity, it’s part of our colour, it’s part of who we are.” The real problem is that the “IMs” need “education” and “encounter” because ideological militants don’t really know Jesus Christ. Jesus Himself can “enlighten” minds. Such minds are needed for the “wheel of change” that Jay insists the Church desperately needs.
You see, Jay’s being “gay” is crucial to his freedom as imago Dei — image of God. He absolutely must let all people know he is “gay.”
“As a candidate to be a Jesuit, this is key. … [A]s a Catholic, I cannot be true to the Gospel if I am in a closet. … I cannot be true to my ministry if I am in the closet.”
This is, in fact, his “message” to bishops like Bishop Morlino and Archbishop Viganò, he says: “I am image of God, and you do not get to judge me.”

PAT SAYS

I was very impressed by what Jay said.

He did not say whether or not he intends to be celibate in the Jesuits.

Jesuits have a VOW of chastity.

I do not like Church Militant or Michael Voris.

They are nut cases.

The RC church has to get its act right on sexuality and homosexuality.

I like a lot of what Jay says.

56 thoughts on “GAY JESUIT SEMINARIAN SPEAKS OUT

  1. Pat, is this predominantly a blog that discusses gays and all things gay. Its becoming tedious

    Like

    1. Its not. In the past few days we discussed foreign priests, McQuaid and tampax, baptising babies in the womb, who would succeed in Dublin etc.

      Like

      1. 9.04: In other words, tedious, boring, inane nonsense, bottom of the barrel, stupid stuff!! And so few responses apart from the usual repeats over and over again…..caca in spades Patsy!

        Like

  2. Fly on Th Wall 12th Jan 2019 — 1:07 am

    Wonder hi is he a cleric to boost his gayness or gay to boost his clerical image and self esteem. Ya said religious should not be running state funded schools. Same with orientation keep it thfek away from religious calling The plots been lost and william twoballs is being treated as God in tharguments hi

    Like

    1. The church claimed an exemption to discrimination cases in order to ‘protect their own ethos’. It is high time the State held the church to their claimed exemption and dismissed all gay priests from teaching posts… not because I agree with it but because the Church needs to be made face up to it’s own contradictions.

      Like

    2. Maybe he is a cleric and gay to promote the kingdom of God, at 1:07 am.
      Readers are entitled to a level of literacy higher that that found in posts bearing your name.
      Vacuity isn’t just about your ‘style’ but also refers to your content. Keeping orientation out of religious calling! One might just as well recommend doing the same for ethnicity, hair colour, height. While none of these is directly relevant to a vocation, neither has any one to be swept under the carpet.

      Like

      1. Homosexuality isn’t the only cause of the abuse of seminarians and male adolescants but it’s a major cause. That’s why orientation matters.

        Aside from the abuse issue, care must be taken that a gay man is attracted to the priesthood because it’s an all-male profession, or as a way to avoiding explaining why a closeted young man does not have a girlfriend.

        Like

      2. Fly on Th Wall 12th Jan 2019 — 6:00 pm

        2.56pm go on go on hi have a cup a Tay. Maybe the reason one scribes in this fashion is to counter balance the pseudo intellectualism that proposes all, talks Shiyt vents frustration and does nothing of positive consequences for anybody hi

        Like

  3. Yes, impressive, he comes across well as an honest, thoughtful and well-rounded individual. I still think there are a host of unanswered questions – particularly the elephant in the room which is the question of celibacy. I want to wish him well.

    Like

    1. Me, me, me, I, I, I …. Jay is the archetypal narcissistic, immature, attention-seeking male who seeks homosexual relations. He should be nowhere near the priesthood. We need fully-formed MEN to minister to us, not psychologically immature homosexuals who want to draw attention to themselves and “trailblaze”. God preserve us, he needs to find another way of “serving” – if that is genuinely what his motive is! You don’t fit the criteria, Jay.

      Like

      1. The church couldn’t survive without gay priests. You have to ask why there are so many. All the gay men I know seem perfectly mature. They don’t abuse others or bully them.

        Like

      2. 2:18

        You can’t hear, but I’m laughing at your post. I’m not being rude. Really. It’s just that I find amusing people who read into others’ words suggestions that clearly aren’t there. And the more bizarre the suggestion, the deeper my bellylaugh. I have to tell you that your suggestions go way beyond bizarre.😅

        What on Earth lead you to believe that Jay was seeking gay sex (‘homosexual relations’)? Did I miss something? Was he holding ‘lube’ in one hand and a condom in the other and salivating over a pic of some naked Adonis? Tell me, please.😅😅

        And what are ‘fully formed men’? What are partly formed men, for that matter? Because your post suggests they exist.

        I’m seriously looking forward to your reply.😆

        Like

      3. @3.52 They’re all, “perfectly mature” are they! Maybe your judgement is off!!! Have you been paying attention to the “maturity” of them on this blog?!
        The reason the Church is peopled with them at present is because since the sixties seminaries have been purposely made a cold house and actually dangerous for heterosexual MEN. Clear the lot of them out! Homosexuals have MAJOR issues and are not suitable for indepth ministry to heterosexual men, women or families. Jay needs to look for another well-paying lifestyle.

        Like

    2. 6:26

      Your post is practically hysterical (all those exclamation marks). Shrill even.

      What, really, is driving you? Homo-hatred, certainly. But whence such hatred? There is a deeper issue at work here. Something profoundly, painfully personal.

      Like

      1. Magna, contrary to your preoccupation, not everyone on here is male – so the old chestnut of anyone speaking plainly about homosexuality being a repressed homosexual themselves doesn’t wash. It doesn’t matter how you try to otherwise convince yourself, homosexuals have obvious narcissistic, attention-seeking and immaturity traits.
        Your own posts over the period I have been following this blog being a case in point.

        Like

      2. Almost as shrill as you, at times, Fr Carta though you definitely have the edge on the decibels.

        Like

  4. MournemanMichael 12th Jan 2019 — 3:00 am

    Surely it matters not a whit whether an individual is hetrosexual, gay, ambivalent, in transition, or any other of the possible realities of the broad spectrum of the essence of human sexuality? Like all other evolved species on planet Earth, we human individuals possess individual characteristics from among a broad spectrum in which the ‘middle band’ is perceived as “normal.” The reality is different. Much everyday unthinking common perception, and certainly the RC institution, is locked into a very simplistic understanding of of sexuality in which the ‘commonly accepted middle ground’ is viewed as “normal.” The reality of a broad spectrum of sexuality is very different.
    It is a reality that the ‘sexual imperative’ is simply the fundamental mainspring of evolution.
    The long standing preoccupation of the RC establishment on sexual proclivities, and its subsequent pronunciations concerning what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ in this respect seems erroneously based.
    I leave it to biblical scholars more informed that I to consider how much of the institutional RC pronunciations derives from Pauline misogyny or other ‘interpretations’ misguidedly seeing celibacy as a desirable higher state of religious excellence.

    Like

  5. Paul Prior is gay to.

    Like

    1. When I saw the heading I thought the blog today was going to be about Paul.

      Like

    2. Your poor grasp of grammar highlights your Pat Mullaney faux pas

      Like

      1. Referee (self appointed) 12th Jan 2019 — 11:35 am

        Red card to the grammer police. Get a life.

        Like

    3. Paul Prior and his Panda Bear called Albert.

      Like

  6. Fair play to Jay. Although I’m more and more convinced that people’s own proclivities should be kept a private mater. That being said the Church has a long way to go in welcoming LBGT. At the minute I’d say a lot of Gay people feel about as welcome as a Catholic at a 12th night bonfire.
    Fr James Martin SJ does a lot of work in this area. I’d recommend his podcast on Spotify too: he puts people through a form of Jesuit reflection.

    Like

  7. Jay will make a great priest…if he doesn’t take a vow of obedience to mammon.😕

    Like

  8. A Jesuit candidate is not a seminarian but is in the process of applying to the society. He’s not a Jesuit.
    I don’t think he’ll last that long either, the ideological militants are fanatical about not talking about sex lol.

    Like

    1. Most J’s are gay so he will fit in well.

      Like

  9. Jay makes good but innocent points. He needs to enlighten himself on the activities of gays and non-gays in seminaries. Sadly it seems to be gays who are far more sexually active.
    Once he has enlightened himself he may come to understand that orientation is not the issue – celebacy, chastity and promiscuous behaviour is. He demonstrates himself as naive and requiring a lot more formation – specifically the type needed in the laity before becoming a candidate.

    Like

  10. Well, I could have done without the formulaic ‘coming out’ story. They are so tedious ! We all have stories to tell which have to do with how we reveal ourselves to our nearest and dearest. Most of them should be kept private !
    However, he is good on other things, if at some length. Well, he is an American, and they do know how to go on endlessly. So, let me proceed in the same style…..
    1. ‘Objectively disordered’……or whatever the phrase is that is used by the Catechism. Yes, it is absolutely demeaning, denigrating and dangerous to use such language about people. It simply legitimises the very worst in those who have a problem with the group being described, and gives them permission to act in the most discriminatory, prejudicial and violent ways. A bit like language used about Jews throughout the history of the Church really being a legitimisation of anti-Semitism and all that has brought about. Language is important. If the Church wants to express that homosexuality in some form or fashion does not fit its world view of how people should be or God wants us to be (which is demonstrably spurious anyhow, as Jay talks about in his next point), then please do so in language that takes the argument away from personalising and victimising the group and individuals about which you are talking. Loose talk costs lives !
    2. Being gay…..Jay speaks quite eloquently about how being gay / homosexual is first and foremost a description of an integral aspect of his essence of being, which is part of what defines him. He does not primarily see being gay as a description of what he does, unlike the Church which appears to have its sights fixed on a single focus in seeing and defining people by what they do with their bits / genitals / loins. The Church should see people as they are first and foremost, and only secondary as to what they do. To widen the discussion a bit, my own view is that the Church should butt out of taking an interest in the way people interact with each other physically and sexually. It has become an unhealthy obsession which does incredible damage to the inquirer and to the inquired. It sets up a guilt zone around what is one of the most wonderful God-given joys, and all the Church has done is to make it dirty and murky, all in the quest to gain control over the lives of people.
    3. Church Militant….well, first and foremost, let us call out Voris for the dead squirrel he wears on his head ! I mean, talk about disordered ! Just go bald, Michael ! Jay is absolutely spot on about the hate filled vomit that comes from CM and their desire to sell a brand that has little to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Gospel of Love. The Church should disassociate itself from CM. By refusing to do so it legitimises what it puts out. You do have to wonder what it is that drives CM in its mission. I can’t help feeling that it is driven by hate rather than love. Jay is right about the fruits that are produced, and where the fruits of love are not apparent, then it is a sure indication that the underlying drive is the opposite ….namely hate.
    4. I’ll be interested to see how Jay gets on with the SJs. From what I can make out he is in the stage of enquiring, and having some contact with the SJs, with a view to noviciate and candidacy. I admire the SJs in their development of new Jesuits; I’ve had some contact with them in this area, and have generally been impressed with the candidates they attract and the sensible way that they are formed for SJ life. They seem grounded and sane. Unlike the Dominicans prancing around in medieval habits thinking that they are witnessing to God knows what ! So, it will be interesting to see how the SJs managed Jay. I’m sure he will tell us all about it !

    Like

    1. Excellent post at 10:28. Wouldn’t it be great if this were the usual standard of contributions rather than childish vituperation? I agree that the Jesuits are the only major order engaging with the world as it is rather than recreating a medieval fantasy as the Dominicans are doing. Anybody know what’s going on with the Franciscans these days? The Benedictines are shot and the dioceses not fit for purpose. Let’s wish Jay well and give him credit for integrity and honesty which are the very qualities lacking in the clergy with the consequences there for the whole world to see.

      Like

      1. Notwithstanding all the talk about being gay (and I admire Jay for being so open and honest about it), when and if he joins the SJs he will still be required to take a vow of chastity (and by implication celibacy). What I hope is that he will be able to do that with good intention and honestly, of his own volition, fully aware of what he is undertaking and sacrificing, as well as seeing the spiritual and personal benefits that can come from that charism. I am sure this aspect of life is fully discussed in the SJ training, rather than just being something you have to undertake in order to be a Jesuit. Jay will have an option. If he wants to be a Jesuit he will undertake this transparently. If he is not able to undertake it, then he will not be a Jesuit. That is healthy and integrated. Unlike what so often happens with secular clergy, where celibacy is something undertaken in order to be a priest, and actually not something that is of itself integral to being a priest, but rather a discipline imposed by the Church over the centuries for all sorts of complicated reasons. There is an argument for removing the discipline / requirement of celibacy from the secular priesthood and allow priests to marry and have families. it strikes me that we have a rather warped and dysfunctional priesthood in the West, evidenced by what has become apparent in the last few decades. Surely allowing priests to experience love and relationships and family would be of great help to their ministry, rather than hobbling it, as has been the accepted wisdom up until now ? I think I saw somewhere that the German bishops are due to discuss celibacy for clergy in the near future. That debate needs to happen, and celibacy as a mandatory requirement removed. Oh, I’d love to hear the Church Militant on this issue ! What a load of pious, twee, and idiotic shite they will no doubt be pouring forth as a justification for mandatory celibacy.

        Like

      2. The candidate is soooo fit. I’d give him one.

        Like

      3. At least the Doms have vocations. The Js have renewed themselves out of existence.
        #willthelastjesuitpleaseswitchoffthelights

        Like

    2. Coming-out stories, which you find ‘so tedious’, are necessary to many gay folk, since the default assumption about most people is heteronormative.
      If all gay men were camp and all lesbian women butch, it would be much easier for everyone concerned; but life is rarely this straightforward. So don’t scorn coming-out stories: they are rites of passage for many today, and they take a lot of couage to tell and mean a great deal to those involved. Show respect instead.

      Like

      1. I’m not saying “don’t come out”, to your friends and family etc., but please spare the rest of us the story. I’ve heard enough of them. There is a case, you know, for restraint and keeping your personal story personal and not inflicting it on the rest of the world. I don’t really give a toss as to whether he is gay or not. I just don’t need him telling me about it so sincerely ! It’s so passé.

        Like

      2. MournemanMichael 13th Jan 2019 — 1:43 am

        Intelligent perceptive comment Magna, which regrettably the closed minds will fail to appreciate.
        MMM

        Like

    3. 12:52

      You’ve learned nothing.

      If you heard those stories, then it’s because you CHOSE to hear them: they weren’t inflicted on you.

      If anything is ‘passé’, it’s your dishonesty.

      Like

      1. Oh, calm down, Magna dear ! You do go off on one ! It can’t be good for your blood pressure. I don’t mind them gay seminarian types having their coming out moments, but please keep them to themselves. Or save them for the confessional so that they can provide wank material for the confessor. They are boring. Every young cleric seems to have a coming out moment when he finds himself. Well, my solution is just to get on with life. Keep buggering on. Life is a slog. Just be grateful for small mercies. Stop being so snowflake and me, me, me,,,,, Thank God I had the life beaten out of me by Jesuits, and learned to man up and be robust in the emotions department and save so many people from the infliction of my innermost feelings. Actually, I prefer to keep them to myself. Some of them are quite wicked and naughty ! I would not want them to know what I’m actually thinking. It would spoil the fun ! So, I say, keep it quiet, shut up, have a fixed smile, and keep the dirty and nasty thoughts to yourself. So much more fun !

        Like

    4. 6:25

      You, er, deteriorate morally with every post.

      I hate inconsistency.

      If Jesus were physically present, he’d tell you to …

      But he isn’t, so I’ll do it for him:

      Grow a pair.

      Be yourself man (if you know what that is).😆

      Like

  11. I see the Papal Preacher’s sermons / talks to the US bishops at their recent retreat are available: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1psS0uMxScLIH7JGE1ZDbJDre2zmC7hGT/view
    One of them is on celibacy. The usual sort of headings that would make a good Gregorian University lecture:
    To Be With Christ Means To Share His Celibacy For The Kingdom: 1. The prophetic dimension of priestly celibacy; 2. The missionary dimension of celibacy; 3. The spousal dimension of celibacy; 4. The charismatic dimension of celibacy; 5. Celibacy and marriage.
    I’ve speed read it, dense stuff, which just reinforces the traditional Catholic stuff on celibacy. Inspiriting ? Not ! Yawn.
    When will they learn that for the vast majority of priests the mandatory requirement of celibacy is severely damaging, because they are not called to it. By all means exhort the virtues of celibacy for those who are called to it, but for most priests its just something that they take on because they have to, and all the waffle of Ranieri simply does not help them. When will we learn ?

    Like

    1. ‘To be with Christ means to share his celibacy for the kingdom’? Did the guy really speak this self-congratulatory cliché? I guess he did, because it is deeply, and undeniably, clericalist: it implicitly presents the priestly ‘vocation’ as the highest ‘calling’ (since only priests take this vow).
      The laity (the sheep) are second class citizens (if they count at all in this idiot’s mind).

      Like

      1. 2.22: Magna, if you choose, which of course you don’t, you can be a second class citizen. I’ve never treated the people of God other than the people of God. I don’t and never have seen myself as above or better than any other person. I have always accepted and honoured the dignity of all given through baptism. The Church’s teaching and approach unfortunately doesn’t conform with my view!! I Do not act out of any narrative which places me in a higher plane. Probably if you looked beyond your own cynical, narrow world view, you might see changes in your local Church community.

        Like

    2. When did you last permit a lay person to preach a homily?

      Like

      1. 7.57: I have allowed lay people to share their understandng of the word of God frequently, either in place of a homily or as part of reflective liturgies. I have no ambiguity about my role as a preacher of God’s Word or of the primacy of a well prepared, prayerful and challenging homily. Since you don’t appear to be Church friendly, you therefore will always be negative and sneering and will fail to witness or choose not to acknowledge the life of parish communities.

        Like

      2. Why do people keep falling by feeding this Troll

        Like

    3. 9:28
      Ah, would you Christ-loyalists be without mental reservation?

      Like

  12. The headline is misleading. Jay is no more a sem than the man in the moon. Also, how could he join the SJs if he’s an Eastern Catholic? The SJs are Latin Rite and Catholics are not supposed to switch rites. This will be news to the morons who use the stupid expression “Roman Catholic”, which was invented by Anglicans

    Like

    1. 3:49
      You are seriously misinformed. Religious orders may contain Latin-rite members and Eastern-rite and Oriental-rite members. Hans Peter Kolvenbach the third-last Jesuit general is a case in point. Some members are bi-ritual, as the recently deceased scholar Archimandrite Robert Taft S.J.

      Like

  13. Cardinal Wuerl, whom Francis has left in place as Apostolic Administrator in Washington, knew in 2004 about the seminarian abuse by Cardinal McCarrick and passed it on to the Nunciature. Yet last year Wuerl said he had not heard even rumours until 2018. And Francis devotees said Vigano was a liar in revealing this.

    The caca is going to hit the papal fan.

    https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/wuerl-knew-mccarrick-abuse-allegations-in-2004-91213

    Like

    1. The Wuerl case demonstrates the ease which with bishops lie. He had his spokesman tell the press that he knew nothing about McCarrick’s abuse, despite Wuerl being involved in a settlement with a McCarrick victim. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/2019/01/10/b542cbba-1513-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6badd65c14ec

      Like

    2. L’affaire Viganò has been shown up for what it really is and comprehensively dispatched and binned.

      Like

  14. Church Militant is an extension of Michael Voris’s huge ego and somehow Voris uses it to further the lie that he is not gay. Voris get a life and let the fresh air and light enlighten the top of your head and the brain beneath it.

    Like

    1. He is a very sick man.

      Like

  15. MournemanMichael 12th Jan 2019 — 7:26 pm

    Anon@6.45: I do hope that you are not inferring that only those who have been baptised are entitled to dignity?
    MMM

    Like

    1. 7.26: MMM, re: my comment at 6.45. I believe in the uniqueness and dignity of every human being. I believe that dignity is inherent in all of us by virtue of our humanity but I believe that the sacrament of baptism enshrines and makes “holy” that dignity. It’s my belief that our inate dignity is God given and therefore compels me to treat all with respect, however difficult. Weren’t you baptised of have you revoked your baptism? Some of us unfortunately act more out of vindictiveness rather than a respect for the dignity of others. Some violate their own dignity and that of others by their violent acts of abusive behaviour.

      Like

      1. MournemanMichael 13th Jan 2019 — 1:40 am

        Thank you Anon @ 8.43 for the intelligent good sense of your first two sentences.
        It’s when you then go on to the baptismal, holy, God given tosh, that I shake my head with a sense of disbelief. Then, when you ask if I have revoked my baptism, I think through your implicit implications. Do you think that as a humanist I have to/ought to, in some public demonstrable way disclaim/renounce/cast aside that insignificant meaningless water pouring mumbo-jumbo ‘ritual’ to which I , as an infant was subjected to 75 years ago?
        I emphasise the word ‘insignificant’, for that is what I regard it as. Perhaps it is similar to the ongoing debate in this blog site in relation to the supposed “ontological change” conferred by priestly ordination. It’s all make-up utter tosh!
        Frankly there are times when words fail me, such as now!
        However, despite the limitations of your perspective, you seem caring and well motivated and I commend your integrity, and wish you well in progressing to greater understanding.
        MMM

        Like

  16. “… a VOW of chastity.
    HUH! When has that ever stopped them.

    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

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close