Same-Sex Attraction = No Ordination

In 2002 in the wake of revelations over the horrendous sex abuse scandals, Fr. Andrew Baker from the Diocese of Allentown, on the staff of the Congregation for Bishops in Rome penned an article for America Magazine, the Jesuits' mouthpiece. You won't be surprised to know that this was accompanied by another article defending the ordination of homosexuals. Where do the bishops stand on this issue today? Many still consider homosexuality no impediment to ordination. Have any spoken out about the scandal of Archbishop Weakland's new book? I'm not aware of any. I fear the scandal is far from over, that it has simply gone underground while the "safe touch" programs give the appearance of the bishops taking strong action.

ORDINATION AND SAME SEX ATTRACTION

AMERICA MAGAZINE, SEPTEMBER 30, 2002

Every bishop possesses the sacred duty of discerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders. St. Paul’s advice to Timothy is fitting for all bishops, especially today: “Do not lay hands too readily on anyone” (1 Tim. 5: 22). The church’s life and the way it manifests itself as the sacrament of salvation for the entire world leans inextricably on the shoulders of her priests. The supernatural “health,” one could say, of the church depends heavily on the fitness of candidates for ordination.

In the aftermath of the scandal of clerical sexual abuse of minors, the church and society have focused partly on the role of homosexuality. The question has arisen as to whether or not it is advisable for a bishop to admit a man with predominantly homosexual tendencies, or what some call “same sex attraction” (S.S.A.), to the seminary and/or present him for holy orders.

Thanks to a recent Circular Letter in 1997 from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments concerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders, some guidance and assistance from the Holy See have already been given in order to tackle the thorny and difficult issue of suitability.

The letter says that a vocation is based on “a moral certitude that is founded upon positive reasons regarding the suitability of the candidate.” Next, it mentions the fundamental reason not to admit a candidate to holy orders. The document says: “Admission may not take place if there exists a prudent doubt regarding the candidate’s suitability (Canon 1052 §3 with Canon 1030). By ‘prudent doubt’ is meant a doubt founded upon facts that are objective and duly verified.” Later, the congregation advises that it would seem “more appropriate to dismiss a doubtful candidate” than to lament the sadness and scandal of a cleric abandoning the ministry.....

It would seem that if there are firmly established facts, both from an objective psychological evaluation and an examination in the external forum of past and present behavior and choices, that a man does indeed suffer from S.S.A. as an “exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” (Catechism, No. 2357), then he should not be admitted to holy orders, and his presence in the seminary would not only give him false hope but it may, in fact, hinder the needed therapy and healing that might come from appropriate psychological and spiritual care. It may be that a man could be healed of such a disorder and then he could be considered for admission to the seminary and possibly to Holy Orders, but not while being afflicted with the disorder.

The Pauline exhortation not to “lay hands too readily on anyone” is a heavy responsibility for any bishop; but if a candidate’s suitability is scrutinized with prudence, the act of “laying on of hands” will bear abundant fruit in the lives of those who will be touched by the ministry of a priest. Read the complete article.

Archbishop Weakland: Out of the Closet

Surprise, surprise...Rembert Weakland was one of the most scandalous Catholic leaders in the United States when he was serving as Archbishop of Milwaukee. In 2002 when he retired, he was intent on covering up his homosexuality by essentially paying a $450,000 out-of-court bribe to his same-sex lover in order to prevent evidence in open court. But the cat was out of the bag so this new revelation is simply the final affirmation of what everyone knows already.

Like many narcissistic homosexuals, Weakland probably covets attention. And it will be so much more fun to be openly participating in the gay community: welcomed by Dignity, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, and other dissenting Catholics who enjoy playing Church. Besides, in the U.S. sodomy is politically correct and ever-more-popular among the brainwashed "tolerant" so coming out will probably spur sales of his upcoming autobiography. He may even think of the book-signings as opportunities to make new friends.

One interesting coincedence I can't help noting is Weakland's announcement takes place at the same time a transvestite is positioned to win American Idol. Reality is so much more interesting than fiction -- who needs to read books anymore? Perhaps the bishop and the idol can sing together: "All things gay and bi-sexual all lustiness great and small, all things S&M and lesbian, the evil one loves them all."

Keep in mind several things about Weakland. In Milwaukee he promoted dissent and sexual deviancy and was the enemy of orthodoxy. He endorsed the most graphic sex education for children and demonized parents who protested. He destroyed the beautiful historic cathedral and when Rome intervened with a stop order, he blasted ahead to finish the carnage. Dissent, scandal, and wreckovation are the hallmarks of a disordered life. This is his evil legacy and, instead of repenting of it, he moves to a new level of scandal shouting it from the rooftops or at least from the bookstores.

Now think back to 2002 and the Dallas meeting when the bishops diverted attention from their own irresponsible, even criminal, enabling of homosexual abuse. Throwing up a smokescreen, they told us the problem was really not homosexuality but parent and family sex abusers. And so they mandated fingerprinting for all lay volunteers and a one-strike-and-you're-out policy for abusive priests while exempting themselves. They developed VIRTUS which "trains" those working with children to look for abuse among straights who are the real problem while telling them homosexual abuse is a "myth" despite the fact that homosexuals commit almost 40% of child abuse while representing only about 2% of the population.

It has all been very convenient for Archbishop Weakland and other homosexual bishops. How many more are hiding behind their pectoral crosses? According to the John Jay study two thirds of the bishops engaged in moving the abusers around, lying to parents, and covering-up. How many did that because they are themselves homosexuals who empathized with the victimizers rather than the victims?

Weakland should never have been a priest; he certainly should never have been a bishop. He was one of Cardinal Bernardin's boys so many of whom have spent their careers (one can hardly describe them as "vocations") destroying the faith. This latest scandal emphasizes once again how sorely needed are Canon Laws that ban homosexuals from the priesthood and from any positions of authority in the Church. Rembert Weakland was a victimizer who enabled the rape of children and the rape of the faith. It will be many years before the damage he did in Milwaukee can be undone. Pray for him; he has much for which to answer and this latest episode just adds to his burden of guilt. Get thee to a monastery, Archbishop Weakland.

MORE ARTICLES

Disgraced Archbishop Weakland Admits His Homosexuality

A 2002 article by E. Michael Jones, a modern prophet whose writing is almost always spot on

More on the Lavendar Archbishop

Author Michael Rose on Weakland's Coming Out

Weakland comes out of the closet

Miscellaneous Articles on the Homosexual Problem

Here are a variety of articles relating to the homosexual problem in the Church. It's interesting to note that there is no instruction on homosexuals in the priesthood that rises to the level of Canon Law. Why not? The statement of a Congregation simply does not have the weight equal to the seriousness of the problem. Pray that Holy Mother Church will address the fullness of truth by declaring unequivocally in Canon Law that homosexuals may not be ordained and those who are presently in the clergy may not hold positions of authority.

Openly Homosexual Phoenix Priest Who Endorsed "Naked Boys Singing" Movie Excommunicated

Homosexuals Not Permitted in Any Seminaries

On Priesthood and Those With Homosexual Tendencies
Instruction From Congregation for Catholic Education

Notable Articles, Documents, and Quotes on the Church Abuse Crisis

Missing Priests: Fr. John Nesbella

The Letter below appeared in the New Oxford Review in April 2005. The priest who wrote it, Fr. John Nesbella, was a sex abuse survivor who sued his attacker and the Diocese of Altoona which precipitated his suspension. But I sympathize because it's pretty clear that whistleblower priests are unlikely to receive justice through the Church courts. Bishop Adamec is notorious for coddling homosexuals as well as for his personally lavish lifestyle. The Wanderer ran a four-part exposé on the Diocese back in the '90 but bishops have a way of outlasting their critics. They will, of course, answer in the end, but justice may be a long time coming.

The Influential Homosexual Element in the Priesthood Continues to Carry On

Every time I hear the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church blamed on pedophile priests, I cringe, because the facts tell us it has little to do with pedophilia. When the media exposed this problem in 2002, it was very painful, but it was the opportunity for the Church to be cleansed of this filth, and for her leaders to be redeemed. But the cover-up of the actual problem continues.

How do I know?

First, the John Jay Report commissioned by the U.S. Bishops to gather data about the abuse irrefutably confirmed that over 80 percent of the sexual abuse cases were due to homosexual priests. To quote Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist: "The John Jay report has clearly revealed that the crisis in the Church is not one of pedophilia but of homosexuality. The primary victims have not been children but adolescent males."

Second, I have seen it with my own eyes. When I went to seminary in 1996 to study for the priesthood, I was shocked to find so many blatant homosexual seminarians, teachers, and clergy. I was 34 years old and had been away from the Church for nearly a decade. In all my prodigal decadence I had never seen anything like it. It was like getting hit between the eyes with a two-by-four. What had happened to the Church? Homosexuals and heretics had seized control of certain seminaries and were corrupting the priesthood from the ground up. As I became more involved with the clergy, I came to realize that dissident homosexuals had infiltrated nearly every diocese, and that our leaders were doing nothing about it. Anyone who reported or fought this problem was persecuted and marginalized. Needless to say, my life has been a living hell because I am nothing more than an orthodox Catholic who loves Christ's Church and wants to see this cancer removed from the Body of Christ.

So far, over $700 million has been awarded to victims of clerical abuse. Given the John Jay Report, simple math shows nearly half a billion in damages paid out because of homosexual priests. Yet the media and those who know better continue to spin the myth that the scandal has nothing to do with homosexuality. That's a lie and a cover-up. The Protecting God's Children program implemented by certain bishops carries the brand name VIRTUS, and was developed by a group known as The National Catholic Risk Retention Group Inc. Everyone from the grandmother volunteering to help out with the lunch line to the parish gardener is forced to pay for background checks every three years as well as sit through long politically correct seminars that misrepresent the problem. Presenters of VIRTUS emphasize that the problem is pedophilia and repeatedly stress throughout the "training" that the Church scandal is not a homosexual problem.

The influential homosexual element continues to carry on in the Church. God help someone to find the courage to expose this continuing cover-up so that the Church can be purified of this abomination — before it's too late.


Fr. John K. Nesbella
Prince of Peace Parish
No. Cambria, Pennsylvania


More here.

And this article from The Washington Times (November 2004) links the Fr. Haley scandal in Arlington with Altoona Bishop Joseph Adamec's handling of homosexual priests.

From The Wanderer see this also.

From the Tribune Democrat April 2006 see Citing anti-gay stance, outspoken priest quits

Speedy Chancery "Justice"

Back in the '80s when Fr. Tom Doyle warned the bishops of the huge sex abuse scandal brewing, they simply would not listen. In fact, Doyle, who was on the fast track for advancement, saw his promising career train suddenly grind to a halt. Some big cases hit the streets: Gilbert Gauthe in Lafayette, LA and Rudy Kos in Dallas, TX, but the bishops' policy of secrecy and cover-up worked for another decade or so before the Boston Globe blew the lid off. The extent of the mostly homosexual abuse of youngters enabled and covered-up by ecclesial Judases covered Holy Mother Church in slime. And most of the guilty bishops continue along their merry ways with hardly a nickel's loss in their collection baskets.

Well, the bishops may be slow to act on child sex abuse and dissent, but they are lightening quick when it comes to going after the REAL SCANDALS. The Diocese of Rockville Center was Johnny-on-the-spot to discipline the pastor in the video below. After watching it, I'm sure you'll be relieved that Fr. Fidelis has been declawed and tamed by the ever-vigilant sheriff (oops...I mean bishop) William Murphy. What a demonstration of manly action to preserve the people of his diocese. Offer your chaplet for him today.

N.B. Thanks to blogger friend Robert Kumpel where I first found this video.

A Humble Proposal for Solving the Homosexual Problem in the Church

When Bishop John Keating was alive Fr. Haley took the homosexual problem to him as his shepherd. At that point he had lived in a rectory with a priest who was physically involved with another and the walls of the rectory were thin. Initially, Bishop Keating offered him the door, but Bishop Keating was a fatherly man who loved his spiritual sons. To illustrate, once a year (I think between Christmas and New Year's), he set aside the entire week for his priests. Everyone was encouraged to make an appointment. It wasn't compulsory, but many priests welcomed the opportunity and went. The bishop usually gave his visitors a gift. One priest I know, who has family in another state, said the bishop sometimes gave him an airline ticket so he could fly home.

Bishop Keating offered something very important to Fr. Haley. He listened when Father asked the forbidden question. Bishop Keating and Fr. Haley began to meet regularly to talk about the homosexual problem in the diocese. Presumably, those meetings caused Bishop Keating to ask the question in Rome the day he died, "What can I do about my homosexual priest problem?"

Why such a question? Doesn't a bishop have total control? Not if he's honest and does things by the book. There is nothing in Canon Law about homosexual priests. There are canons about relations with women, but not about men in relationships with other men.

What is needed?

No one is suggesting that every homosexual priest be thrown out on his heels, particularly those who are struggling to be chaste both physically and mentally.

One possible solution, however, is to add two Canon Laws: one that clearly states homosexuals may not be ordained, and a second that says, if a homosexual is ordained and discovered later, he may not occupy a position of authority as a pastor or a bishop.

Why? Because that's exactly how we ended up with a homosexual cabal in the Church which led to the sex abuse crisis. In many places soliciting homosexualls for the priesthood was (and may still be) the norm. At least a dozen bishops have resigned or been removed for abusing boys and how many others are living in secret in their chanceries like homosexual priests in their rectories?

Homosexual clerics in positions of leadership enable homosexuality. It's been suggested that the reason some dioceses have not fought more vigorously for pro-life and against the gay agenda is because so many bishops are homosexual and vulnerable to the threat of "being outed." As gay marriage becomes more likely in the United States, how many homosexual clergy will lead the fight against it?

The Church must take action on this. It isn't enough to have pastoral letters or diocesan policies that may or may not be followed. Writing legislation into the Code of Canon Law would eliminate ambiguity and offer a real solution to the homosexual problem.