A new exposé on homosexuality in the Vatican is coming out next week. What can we expect?

  Photo by Josh Applegate on Unsplash

A new book claiming to expose what the author alleges is hypocrisy from leaders of the Catholic Church over issues of homosexuality will be published next week, coinciding with the start of a much-anticipated Vatican summit to discuss the church’s ongoing problems in addressing clerical sexual abuse—leading some to worry that gay priests will be blamed for the crisis.

According to a press release from its publisher, Bloomsbury, In The Closet of the Vatican, by the French journalist Frédéric Martel, “exposes the rot at the heart of the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church today.” Mr. Martel, also a sociologist, is reported to have spent four years conducting more than 1,500 interviews, including conversations with 41 cardinals and dozens of priests and other Vatican officials. That is according to the British journal The Tablet, which also says that the book claims 80 percent of priests working at the Vatican are gay, though not necessarily sexually active.

Advertisement

The central thesis of the 576-page book, according to the press release, is that “the more a prelate is homophobic, the more likely it is that he is himself gay.”

An excerpt of the French edition of the book was published in the French magazine Le Point on Feb. 13. According to that article, Mr. Martel explores attacks against Pope Francis, whom Le Point calls the “hero” of the book, but spends much more time looking at the papacies and aides of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

The central thesis of the 576-page book, according to the press release, is that “the more a prelate is homophobic, the more likely it is that he is himself gay.”

In previous decades, a number of high-ranking Catholic officials have been at the forefront of the battle against same-sex marriage and other L.G.B.T. rights. But Pope Francis has tried to strike a more welcoming tone in recent years, upholding church doctrine on sexuality and marriage but urging the church to be less judgemental in how it approaches the L.G.B.T. community.

The Rev. James Alison, a British priest and theologian who has written extensively about sexuality and the priesthood, told America that when it comes to gay priests, “what really makes a difference is honesty.”

Father Alison, who was interviewed several times by Mr. Martel for the book, said that a system that prevents priests from being honest about their own sexuality creates conditions susceptible to scandal. Officially, gay men are barred from the priesthood, a teaching upheld as recently as 2016 by Pope Francis. But critics say the ban does not really work but instead effectively pushes gay men who still wish to be priests into the closet.

“That there is a large number of gay priests [working at the Vatican] should be neither here nor there,” he said. “The fact is that they’re in the closet in one way or another and therefore they are liable to blackmail. That’s the problem.”

Father Alison said that kind of secrecy can lead to some bishops and priests living double lives, a phenomenon that Pope Francis has repeatedly condemned, and this contributes to the financial and sexual abuse scandals that have rocked the church in recent decades.

 

In the Closet of the Vatican is due to be released in eight languages and in 20 countries on Feb. 21, the same day that the heads of bishops’ conferences from around the world begin a four-day meeting with Pope Francis in Rome, where they are expected to discuss best practices about fighting child sexual abuse.

That release date has some people concerned.

James Martin, S.J., an editor at large for America, whose essay “The Challenges and Gifts of the Homosexual Priest” was published in 2000, said he is disappointed.

"Sadly, the timing of the book’s publication makes it inevitable that the conversation around it will conflate the question of gay priests with sex abuse,” Father Martin said, adding that early reports describe the book as having “an almost impenetrable layer of gossip."

Sean Larsen, a theologian and the managing editor of the online academic journal Syndicate, said that he sees in the early reception of the book a Rorschach test on issues of homosexuality.

"Sadly, the timing of the book’s publication makes it inevitable that the conversation around it will conflate the question of gay priests with sex abuse.”

“I do have the fear about the equivocation of pedophilia and sex abuse with homosexuality, but that equivocation only works if you see homosexuality as a problem or a scandal” to begin with, Mr. Larsen said.

Experts in the United States have said sexual orientation does not correlate with the sexual abuse of minors. While a few bishops have in recent months suggested the church look more closely at any link between a high proportion of gay priests and abuse, several high-ranking church leaders, including Pope Francis, have said a clericalist culture was to blame.

For his part, Father Alison said the secrecy required of many gay priests can make them “incapable of looking at what is going on around them,” even if they have never engaged in abusive behavior themselves.

“That’s where the book is really helpful. It points out just how mendacious the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ world is and how it sets all those involved up to be unable to deal with the truth,” he said. Referring to any priests whose behavior goes against what is expected of them, Father Alison said, “They merely need to feel blackmailable.”

As for how to “solve” the cultural challenge, Father Alison said that in theory, the fix is simple.

“It will happen when young people entering the priesthood are able to be honest about who they are and bishops are able to be honest about who they are ordaining,” he said. “At the moment, neither is possible.”

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Bev Ceccanti
5 months ago

This article calls to mind a comment I remember from' Judge Judy', i.e.,'Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining'. I'm one of the chumps in the pew who never imagined the extent of homosexual activity among those sworn to celibacy. But my eyes are wide open now. These guys have been living a sordid lifestyle while persecuting those who are true to their vows. I will never support a diocese, or a ministry, or an order that singles out homosexuals for a special ministry. What about the poor Catholic men and women who have been abandoned by their spouses at a young age, and are then called to celibacy till their rightful spouses have passed away? I refuse to feel sorry for self absorbed narcissistic men who have chosen for themselves a convenient sexual opportunity on the Catholic dime. We are called not to put ourselves into situations of temptation of serious sin, Divine Tradition trumps Social 'Science' in the Catholic Church and those with homosexual orientation should not be accepted in seminaries any more than heterosexual priests should be housed with heterosexual nuns. The pedophile problem will be taken care of by legal authorities, but it is up to the Church to remove homosexual priests from persistent temptation if those priests don't take responsibility on their own and remove themselves. . And may God bless all of those who carry burdens without allowing their identities to be consumed by them.

Will Nier
5 months ago

maybe those with heterosexual tendencies should also not be accepted for priesthood; how can they be trusted

Bev Ceccanti
5 months ago

Will Nier: One would assume they wouldn't be living with women.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

When we ordain women Priests it is quite likely they will share rectories with male priest. This is fine because most rectories have private bedrooms with private bathrooms and showers and bedroom doors that can lock, rather like living in a hotel.

Lisa M
5 months ago

That's it exactly Bev!

Tim Donovan
5 months ago

I'm a Catholic who's gay, and as I was growing up, I was fairly frequently taunted by my peers by being called the hurtful terms "sissy" and "faggot." Three points: I was taunted by people who correctly assumed that I was homosexual, although I didn't publicly reveal my orientation until I was 3 2 (I'm now 56). However, I did have feelings of lust but also strong emotional attachment to my best friend, "John" (not his real name) and when I was 19 (in 1981) I did tell him in private, "I love you." He was straight, and i certainly had no expectation of. our friendship developing into a sexual relationship. " John" made it clear that he didn't want me to express my feelings for him even privately (again, I hadn't publicly revealed my orientation yet, and expected no more from "John" than the continuation of our friendship). Finally, it wasn't only Catholics who taunted me with offensive, hurtful terms, but people of various faiths, including those who didn't attend any church. There is a ministry for Catholics called Courage for people with same-sex attraction. This ministry has a position which affirms authentic Church teaching regarding the immorality of gay sex, and of course sex outside of marriage (the union of one man and one woman) for straight people as well. Courage is a ministry which offers a community for those who recognize their sexual orientation and provides prayer and friendship as its goal. Courage does not attempt to change a person's sexual orientation. Dignity is a group of Catholics that has gay men and women who believe that same-sex relationships are moral. Consequently, Dignity is not supported as a valid ministry by orthodox Catholic clergy and laity. I must say I'm relieved that Courage doesn't attempt to change a gay person's sexual orientation. Although I have often found being gay to be difficult, I certainly have never been sexually attracted to women. Finally, according to an article in a publication by New Ways Ministry on May 26, 2018 (which essentially condones same-sex relationships, if I understand the information on their website), Pope Francis "affirmed a gay man's sexual identity as created by God" but at the same time warned "against gay men entering the priesthood." Although I believe that a gay man might be a good priest, I do believe that Pope Francis has a valid concern about gay men entering the seminary.

Bev Ceccanti
5 months ago

Tim Donovan: Thank you for enlightening me. I would, of course, support the Courage ministry.

Colin Jory
5 months ago

That's thoughtful and enlightening, Tim. However, as I understand it, Pope Francis, if one reads his fine print, hasn't put an absolute bar on the same-sex attracted being admitted to the priesthood. Rather, he stands by the established Church policy, which is that young men who are that way inclined can be admitted if they are have all the general qualities indicative of a genuine priestly vocation; are resolved on chastity; do not seem to be unduly impaired in their ability to remain chaste by contravening habits or psychological factors; and -- I think this is implied -- are not obviously, scandalously homosexually inclined (camp).

Eddy LeRoque
5 months ago

Dear Beverage Chianti. I truly feel sorry for you that you need to watch Judge Judy. "as a chump in the pew", you never realized there are sinners around you? Pick a sin any sin. Sin requires free will. You do know St Paul had a "demon" and was friends of a Greek body builder.? 1 Timothy 4:8 and 1 Timothy 1:15
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Do us all a favor and drop the pious puritan routine. I can give you hair raising stories on "godly" John Knox, Martin Luther and John Calvin

Antony P.
4 months 4 weeks ago

@Eddy LeRouque. Before you ask others to “drop” this or that, perhaps you could drop the condension ... just a thought...

Antony P.
4 months 4 weeks ago

Well said, Bev.

Colin Jory
5 months ago

A pertinent fact not reported here, but reported elsewhere and apparently part of the advance publicity information for Martel's book, is that Martel is himself homosexual. His claim that 80% of the Vatican clergy are homosexual sounds to me like a glutton fantasising about a banquet.

John Mack
5 months ago

Here we go again. facts are not facts, well conducted studies are an offense to the willfully blind and should never be published. It's all the media's and book writers' fault.

Jay Kay
5 months ago

Not really. It falls more into the category of "it takes one to know one." Most Catholics in the pews have been in denial, completely fooled. That, in spite of all kinds of evidence for years. Most Catholics still can't recognize a gay man, despite the fact that most of them know at least one if they know more than 2 or 3 priests.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

The problem won't be fixed until we start ordaining women called to priesthood and to every other level of ministry in our church.

Between the new Yorker article recently and this one, it is clear that women don't count at all, to either these writers, or to any of our priests or hierarchy and big part of that lack of concern is that our church's hierarchy is made up of men who aren't attracted to women and therefore have no use or respect for them as equally valuable.

I would not be shocked that seventy percent of clerics in the Vatican are gay since most of the hatred of women seems to always come straight from Rome. Also, there was Frontline documentary which had video of priests and bishops even dancing almost naked but they were taken by a priest and the room was too dark to see which bishops the two were or Frontline blurred the party footage somewhat. It was revolting!

Sexism has been proven, not merely opined, to lead directly to child and teen sexual abuse as well as to the abuse of women.

I have often wondered if our current Pope and the last two Pope's before him were not gay.

It would explain our current misogyny above all other priorities stand and why even though neither Jesus or the original twelve ever wrote or stated they were against women being priests, or bishops, or cardinals, or Pope's, or presbyters (and some women were) or deacons or apostles, that our Pope's insist it is a subject that can never be discussed. Why? Because women will blow the cover off the big fat continuous Roman Gay Party.

How long are we going to continue to allow these sinful men, sinful on account of their clear unjust treatment of women and children, continue on this path? When is it going to be enough wrong for us to demand real justice and a righteous based set of laws for all of our members.

Shame on these men and shame on us lay people for letting this happen for centuries!

lurline jennings
5 months ago

Your suggestions mirror the Episcopal Church in the US and the Anglican Church of England. This transition in these churches has caused many of the traditional members to leave and go to the Roman Rite. Allowing women clergy at any level would destroy Mother Church. Like Humpty Dumpty it could never be put back together again.
There is a place for both men and women in the church. The church defines where each can function and lists the requirements. Look at some videos of ordinations of women in the churches in England and the United States. A woman dressed in a Miter and Cope is not a pretty sight. It is nothing more than a divisive move creating a more unstable church. How anyone can state hatred of women by male clergy is common I would urge those to review the devotions to the Holy Mother. When you celebrate the life of the Queen of Heaven, you can't hate her daughters.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

Nothing in your statement has any basis in fact or biblical support.

There is nothing ugly in seeing Episcopal women in clerical garb or wearing a miter.

Episcopal parishes led by women priests do as well as those run by men. The Episcopalian church has gained more ex Catholics than we have gained ex Episcopalians. The largest reason Episcopalians and Anglicans have lost members has been due to the openly married gay bishops, one in particular who later divorced, and also due to the lowest birth rates compared to other churches.

The majority of Catholics want women priests and bishops and that majority would be much greater if we had not already lost most of our western membership due to our stubbornness to keep on hating women and putting them in demeaning roles.

Loving Mary does not equate to loving women if you are just using your profile of Mary as only worthwhile because she was a mother.

Women and men equally have same value as parents and in all other roles, including ministry and includimg ordained ministry.

Jesus had no problem with narrow minded people leaving if they were against his commands to love God first and treat and love all others the same. This leaves no room for discrimination against women. Sexism is sin and leads to sin and our church has proven that better than anyone else.

You clearly have problems with women and that is sad but hate is hate and when you or our leaders treat women differently or less than men you are guilty of the sin of hating your sisters.

Will Nier
5 months ago

correct and also not until we start ordaining homosexual men and women who are also called to Priesthood and the Order of Deacons.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

Thanks. I have no problem with homosexual people being ordained priests, or married priests, as long as women are being ordained priests first before married men are given priestly ordination as a matter of justice. I will never support full gender segregation. I do think that gay people need to be willing to commit to lifelong relationships just like strait people. But I don't see why these relationships can't be equally respected and their families equally welcomed in our church.

As for permanent deacons, this is a ministry that needs to go right back into hibernation and never come out again. It was taken out of hibernation fifty years ago to make rich, white, western, married men feel more important than poor laypeople and all women. Proof of this is the fact that, globally, for at least the last forty years, and still now, this ministry has consisted of over ninety percent white, fairly wealthy, married, western men. This is proof of sexism, clericalism, racism, ethnic and wealth and class bias being supported, ongoing, by this ministry that has no reason to exist, in the modern age since no parish has ever failed due to the lack of a permanent deacon.

Since trained lay women and men have been doing all the sacramental and other ministries deacons have been doing, and legitimately, with bishop's approval, in countries that could not afford these expensive, sixty thousand or more, a year, per diocese, deacon programs we can demand an end to this harmful ministry. Also the parishes that have had trained lay people to do these ministries instead of deacons are often more active parishes and healthier parishes.

So I am for dumping the harmful diaconate altogether. We need to start making the choices that build rather than break down parishes. We need to face the facts about what that really entails, even if it upsets rich white men, we must do this for the sake of our future.

Crystal Watson
5 months ago

I agree. Most Catholics do also - 59% want women to be priests. But the pope is a sexist who won't even allow us to be deacons.

Tim O'Leary
5 months ago

Crystal - what do you mean "us." You're not even Catholic and you don't even care for the Church. Many protestant churches allow women to be clergy so you have many choices. Here's the thing. It is infallible teaching that only men can be priests. So, if some bishop attempted to ordain a woman, it would be a forgery. She could try to celebrate mass but the bread and wine would still be bread and wine at the end of the event, just like in the protestant churches.

Mark M
5 months ago

The problem won’t be fixed until Siamese cats can be ordained, no wait, not until German shepherds can be ordained; no wait, wait...not until married Texas longhorns can be ordained. That’s it, Longhorns. Then it will all get better.

Kathy Glaser
4 months 4 weeks ago

Nora, your response is very well written and I agree with you.

John Stevens
4 months 4 weeks ago

"The problem won't be fixed until we start ordaining women called to priesthood and to every other level of ministry in our church."
Firstly, women cannot be ordained as priests, precisely because they are not men. Even if some in the Magisterium did so, the ordinations would not be valid, as the Church has not the power to do so, nor the ability to change objective reality.
Secondly, there is simply no relationship between such a heretical move, and a solution to this problem. Women simply commit different sexual sins. One need only look to the huge number of women giving birth out of wedlock to recognize this as fact.
"I would not be shocked that seventy percent of clerics in the Vatican are gay since most of the hatred of women seems to always come straight from Rome. "
The Church does not hate women. They do recognize the truth: that God created us male or female, and that the differences in the sexes is by design, to fulfill God's purpose and end. That this opposes the lies of modernism is something that heretics and schismatics define as hate, but in truth, it is love of the highest order: the truth that sets you free from the kind of ideological possession that so many suffer from.
"It would explain our current misogyny"
Speak for yourself. The Church is not misogynistic. It is your doctrine of radical equality that is misogynistic. Even some feminists are beginning to realize that.
"why even though neither Jesus or the original twelve ever wrote or stated they were against women being priests"
Jesus did not need to say, explicitly, something that obvious. Indeed, there is a whole lot he didn't explicitly forbid. That he did not forbid a thing explicitly, however, does not mean it is allowed. He never explicitly forbid bestiality or pedophilia, either. He did not need to, as such things were already covered by the Law.
We know what he intended by looking at what he did. He chose only men for his Apostles, ordained only men, reaffirmed and upheld the Law (which allowed only men to be priests). Furthermore, we can know that the priesthood is reserved to men by unaided human reason. One need merely consider the end result of sending women into ISIS controlled territory to preach the Good News.
The simple fact is that the Church has no power to ordain women, as women are simply not the proper matter for the sacrament.
"that our Pope's insist it is a subject that can never be discussed. Why?"
Because the question is settled, authoritatively and infallibly.
It seems that you want to start your own Church, or join one that fits your beliefs. I would remind you that there is a special circle of Hell reserved for schismatics. The humble, faithful Catholic gives religious assent to the teachings of Holy Mother Church. It would seem your besetting sin is pride. The sure cure for that is regular doses of humility.
"How long are we going to continue to allow these sinful men, sinful on account of their clear unjust treatment of women and children, continue on this path?"
The Church as always had sinful men in the Magisterium, and in the pews, along with sinful women as well. One of the proofs of the truth of Catholicism is that Holy Mother Church continues to teach the truth, regardless of social pressure, the evils of modern philosophies, the sins and sinful nature of her priests, and the pride and other sins of the laity.
It's miraculous, all things considered.

John Mack
5 months ago

A blanket exclusuon of ordaining gay priests is hardly loving the sinner but not the sin when an ordained homosexual vows to be celibate and keeps that vow. It use to be a joke in Ireland that liberal bishops have relations with women, conservative bishops with boys. As pointed out in the article, it is the pretense, the lying that is the problem, not homosexuals committed to the vow of celibacy. But it is the church that imposes that pretense and pushes people to lie.

Will Nier
5 months ago

very well said and I say that because I happen to know two excellent clergy in the RC Church who are homosexual and keep their vows. They even publicly stated so.

Bev Ceccanti
5 months ago

John Mack: It has nothing to do with not loving the sinner . It has to do with not putting a person in a situation that would require extraordinary self discipline to refrain from mortal sin. It is not loving to put someone in that position. Do you think heterosexual priests and nuns should be housed together? I think not.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

Yes I do believe nuns, brothers, and priests should be housed together.

Jesus tells us we are a family. In what family do the sisters and brothers live in different buildings. As it is there are many monasteries and convents that opposite sex religious and non religious stay in due to retreats or renting the rooms to make travel cheaper. Most of these rooms have their own private baths and showers. There is nothing that can happen at night that can't happen in the daytime when two people decide to do it.

Housed together or apart a person either cares enough about their vows to keep them or they don't.

Bev Ceccanti
4 months 3 weeks ago

Nora: You are touting the idea of seminarians and novitiates , young men and women religious( who have taken vows of chastity), living together. Passion is a gift to be directed toward the Will of God. To deliberately put people of vows, especially the vows of Ordination, who have attraction to each other, in that long term situation is to deny they have passion. If they have no passion, they have no fire to redirect to their holy journey. You apparently put no value on vows, which include ALL of one's life. It includes not wasting time on inappropriate distractions even if genital sex is avoided.. None other than Satan is The Father of Lies..

Bev Ceccanti
4 months 3 weeks ago

duplicate

Robert Lewis
4 months 4 weeks ago

Actually, many Benedictine monasteries and convents WERE conjoined with houses of religious of the opposite sex. Abbesses once presided over monasteries, as well as convents. I myself know of a monastery in New Mexico that is also a convent. Sexual temptations are part of human nature, and sequestration of one sex apart from the other is not the way to deal with them.

John Stevens
4 months 4 weeks ago

"A blanket exclusuon of ordaining gay priests is hardly loving the sinner but not the sin when an ordained homosexual vows to be celibate and keeps that vow."
That really makes no sense at all.
Firstly, love does not require that the Church ordain everybody who wants to be ordained. Indeed, a big part of the discernment process is discovering if the man who wants to be ordained should be ordained. Many men are rejected for cause, and should be.
Secondly, same sex attraction is itself objectively disordered. This is not a sin in and of itself, but men with objectively disordered desires are simply not fit for the priesthood. One should not ordain a kleptomaniac, an objectophiliac or a zoophile to the priesthood, nor someone who has any other kind of disordered desire, regardless of their willingness to take a vow.
You do not put an alcoholic in charge of a distillery, even if he vows to never drink again. Remember, we should avoid the near occasions of sin.
"As pointed out in the article, it is the pretense, the lying that is the problem, not homosexuals committed to the vow of celibacy."
Sorry, but the objectively disordered desire is indeed a problem. The article is simply wrong.
"But it is the church that imposes that pretense and pushes people to lie."
The Church imposes no such pretense, and it is the person who lies who is responsible for that lie. If you suffer from same sex attraction, you should simply be honest about that, and accept that you are not fit to be ordained.
The fundamental error you make is in equating a properly ordered desire with an objectively disordered one. That one has disordered desires does not make one a sinner, but it does make one unfit for the priesthood.

Will Nier
5 months ago

The problem is not with having a homosexual or heterosexual priest. The problem is one of UNFAITHFULNESS. We are seeing the same thing evidenced by the high divorce rate within today's society.

Crystal Watson
5 months ago

The problem is not that there are gay priests. The problem is that a significant percentage of both straight and gay priests don't take the vow of celibacy seriously. Allow men and women, straight and gay, celibate and married, all to be priests and these acting-out problems will go away.

Nora Bolcon
5 months ago

Amen! Along with our hallucinated vocation crisis. Truth is we have never ever had a vocation crisis but we have had an intentionally mis-titled misogyny crises for centuries.

Jay Kay
5 months ago

We don't have a clergy shortage. We have a building surplus.

JulieinSeattle .
5 months ago

Christ never said a word about homosexuality, and yet, no amount of ink spilled or arguments endured seems to quench the appetite of some Christians (regardless of denomination) for categorizing and judging their fellow human beings based on their gender and sexuality. The Catholic Church is hardly alone in being consumed alive by sexual controversies and crimes, but we're certainly in the lead right now. If we spent one tenth the energy focusing on the Great Commandment, recorded in Mark 12:30-31, I'd be more hopeful about the future of Christianity. As it is, I comfort myself that the Church and the faith are eternal, and the Lord who said: "Let the one among you who is guiltless cast the first stone..." will return.

JOHN GRONDELSKI
5 months ago

What to expect?
Fr. Martin and company will be busy pretending that the evidence does not show what the evidence shows; that the vast majority of sex abuse cases involve teenage boys but that has nothing to do with homosexuality, please move on; and that the problem is "clericalism" in the priesthood. Jesuits will announce the problem is "complex" (synonym for we refuse to see what's in front of our eyes because we don't like the conclusions we should draw) and we will face one major effort of obfuscation. All of this was obvious in 2002, when this moral sludge first washed up, and decades before. But instead of producing men for the priesthood, we produced "wounded healers" engaged in navel gazing and explaining away Catholic sexual ethics.

Mister Mckee
5 months ago

The author of this article just couldn't resist going there with his tongue in cheek title, right?
I saw no mention of how this allegedly "sociological research" is going to be peer-reviewed.
Based on excerpts seen thus far, it doesn't look like the author has added anything to the "science" he proclaims to represent that wasn't already known from the tawdry pen of a Neapolitan hustler last year:
https://nypost.com/2018/03/07/gay-escort-outs-nearly-40-catholic-priests-in-vatican-dossier/

In the meantime, much better (i.e. less smuttier with fewer sensationalistic soundbytes!) reading comes from the Netherlands:
https://www.advocate.com/religion/2019/2/13/gay-priests-pope-dont-blame-us-sexual-abuse
If only other FIRST WORLD gay clergy had the cojones:
https://www.homopastor.nl/assets/files/WKHP%20letter%20to%20Pope%20Francis.pdf

Jay Kay
5 months ago

It's not the orientation. It's the blackmail and secrecy--and the lying.
That's the issue.

Christopher Minch
5 months ago

The further and further we get away from the Gospels and critical exegesis of the Bible and the more and more we depend on the current theological trends that are mainly a reaction to current world views the more we will get this very wrong in this Church. I again point to the readings of this week:

From the New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)

Genesis: 1: 27 God created mankind in his image;
in the image of God he created them;
male and female* he created them.

Note: *[1:27] Male and female: as God provided the plants with seeds (vv. 11, 12) and commanded the animals to be fertile and multiply (v. 22), so God gives sexuality to human beings as their means to continue in existence.

Let's be real clear about the original verse: not one word about whether men or women or heterosexuality or homosexuality is uttered here by God or by devine inspiration. We may presume that they are all created in God's image or the distinction would have been made at that point as clearly other distinctions were made. We are not talking here about just about physical matters but spiritual matters also. Jesus further made distinctions about sexuality and those who would be his disciples. He gave no preference to celibacy. And to those who have stated nor did he talk about homosexuality. And I am quite certain that he would have known about homosexuality and could have made the distinctions if Jesus would have wanted to. Jesus' main concern was bringing about the Kingdom of God in theirs and our midst. This constant us vs them and divisions and so forth is undermining the Catholic Church and a lot of these discussions here. Do I think we should have comments, opinions and discussion, sure we should but lets not be disagreeable/unkind about this and be respectful of other people and of whom we are talking about.

Let me remind you what St. Paul said to the Galatians Chapter 5:
18 But if you are guided by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity, licentiousness,
20 idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, rivalry, jealousy, outbursts of fury, acts of selfishness, dissensions, factions, occasions of envy,* drinking bouts, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 In contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness,
23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.
(I didn't add the notes to this but invite you to open your bible and look them up.)
God bless you all, :-)!

Crystal Watson
5 months ago

There's an article on the book in The New York Times by Frank Bruni - The Vatican’s Gay Overlords

Christopher Minch
5 months ago

I invite everyone who are still looking at this article to see Fr. Richard Rohr's meditation on Jesus Christ from yesterday:

https://email.cac.org/t/ViewEmail/d/1EF7D408E27719E72540EF23F30FEDED/14E881E3E2CE167BC67FD2F38AC4859C

Tim O'Leary
5 months ago

As this CNN article (linked below) shows, Frederic Martel has just made stuff up. He got the 80% ("everybody does it, so I cannot be that bad" excuse) from a gay priest who was defrocked after gay sex porn was found on his computer. Frédéric Martel is also a gay advocate, and his self-excusing assumption is that nearly everybody is secretly like them, especially the orthodox. Like the Virginia blackface abortionists and the date raping MeToo Democrats, this confabulated "exposé" is another self-inflicted wound of ideologues far removed from morality and faith. The general population has 2-5% self-identifying on polls as homosexual. It is conceivably 10-20% in the clergy, which is bad enough to cause deceit and enabling.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/europe/vatican-book-analysis/index.html

Bev Ceccanti
5 months ago

Tim: Thank you for the info.

Andrew Wolfe
5 months ago

Given that the article says "gay priests" are "forced" to lead double lives, I guess that we are talking about priests who do not practice chastity. Do I blame them for sinning while presenting a celibate lifestyle? Yes.
A majority of what we are vaguely calling "sex abuse," or sometimes "pedophilia," is neither. 80% of victims are post-pubescent males preyed on by adult male priests. If they are not blameworthy, who is? Do I blame priests who dishonestly present celibacy while committing predatory mortal sins on vulnerable young men, causing them severe psychological damage? You bet I do.

Crystal Watson
5 months ago

The dishonesty is what bothers me. The dishonesty of the priests who aren't celibate and the dishonesty of the Pope/Vatican that knows this and refuses to make celibacy oprional for financial and optics reasons. The whole church system seems to be built on lies - lies about sex abuse, lies about money, lies about theology.

James M.
5 months ago

““I do have the fear about the equivocation of pedophilia and sex abuse with homosexuality, but that equivocation only works if you see homosexuality as a problem or a scandal” to begin with, Mr. Larsen said.”

To confuse the concepts and words “equivocation” and “equation” is begging for trouble, Not everyone confuses “refute” and “deny”, “sex” and “gender”, or “celibacy”, “chastity”, “continence”. If someone speaking on behalf of the Church cannot make these rather semantic distinctions, then for pity’s sake, find someone who can.

These distinctions really matter. One is being neither a pedant nor a language Nazi. These words denote different things - that is why they are used. To confuse them can have serious results - for instance, confusing celibacy with continence confuses “never having married”, with “the virtue of temperance as applied to sexual matters”. Celibacy is totally compatible with being an active serial paedophile; it is not a virtue, but the state, for men, of not having married. So celibacy will not prevent even a single act of paedophilia. The virtue of continence, would. And continence is never mentioned,

To confuse such different things as celibacy and continence would be, is, pastorally catastrophic. A previous generation would have had a sufficient command of English, Latin, and Catholic moral theology not to make these sophomoric blunders. There is no possible excuse for members of the episcopate not to be crystal-clear on these matters. If they cannot be careful with language and semantics, how can they be expected to avoid confusion of thought and of language when dealing with the Church’s teaching ? The Arian crisis blew up, with catastrophic effect, over the absence or presence of an iota - imprecision of language and neglect of accurate distinctions can have equally deplorable effects.

Homosexuality *is* a problem. Christians are called to holiness, self-denial, repentance, conversion - not to self-indulgence. Whatever is in us - bar nothing - that keeps us from full communion with Christ, must go - no matter what the cost. This is Christianity 101. It is in St Mark 8.34:

“34Then Jesus called the crowd to Him along with His disciples, and He told them, “If anyone wants to come after Me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. 35For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and for the gospel will save it.

Because self-denial and dying to self in this area can be a severe and long struggle, Catholics ought to be supporting each other - not casting each other off.

Phillip Stone
5 months ago

Repeating something which is contrafactual does not make it true.

Anybody who has permitted themselves to commit mortal sin discovers it is easier to do it a second time, then a third and then whenever. Think murder or robbery.
Particularly in male homosexuals, the first time is crucial.
After that, usually if connected to a group whose subculture is defined by being able, ready and willing, the frequency of sex acts multiplies and the acts are done with strangers more and more.
Then the satisfaction, the thrill, the pleasure becomes more and more difficult to obtain and more and more perverted and abominable acts are committed and repeated to obtain the missing satisfaction. Sex becomes an obsession and the mind can hardly concentrate on anything else.
Many people would be horrified if I posted a list of the things I am talking about, and I will not but may be found on the internet by a careful choice of words in Google.

A very recent research survey published by a Catholic cleric asserts that there is indeed a connection between male-male sex habituation and child molestation.

Many child molesters are not homosexual, many homosexuals molest children and it has ever been so.
Just to be sure, Masters and Johnson' depiction of human sexuality is just as fake as man-made global warming or alien abduction.

Mickey James
5 months ago

This has been a big topic of the day. You detailed discuss on it. godaddy 99 rupees domain service will give you best inform about that.

Advertisement

The latest from america

From left, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., respond to remarks by President Donald Trump after his call for the four Democratic congresswomen to go back to their "broken" countries, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, July 15, 2019. All are American citizens and three of the four were born in the U.S.
The Editors: These comments need to be called out as racist, xenophobic and sexist.
The EditorsJuly 16, 2019
People wait to apply for asylum in the United States along the border on July 16 in Tijuana, Mexico. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)
“It is contrary to American and Christian values to attempt to prevent people from migrating here when they are fleeing to save their lives and to find safety for their families,” Cardinal DiNardo said.
Kevin ClarkeJuly 16, 2019
During her lifetime, poetry turned into a vocation that helped Marie Ponsot achieve her true essence.
Benjamin IvryJuly 16, 2019
A coalition of Catholic organizations will gather on July 18 in front of the U.S. Capitol to protest the treatment of immigrant children at the border.