Tuesday, 30 May 2017

GAY PRIEST / SEMINARIAN LOVERS




Many gay men who enter the priesthood now find their gay lover both in the seminary and in the diocese where they both serve.

We have heard a lot this past year about the promiscuous gay seminarians of places like Maynooth.

But that is by no means the whole story.

Other gay men in the seminary and priesthood are not promiscuous at all and confine themselves to one gay seminarian / priest lover.

Personally I have no problem with this at all. How could I?

The only time this becomes a problem for me is when they sexually active / partnered gay priests condemn homosexuality from the pulpit or give other gay men a hard time in the Confessional for being gay.

And believe me this does happen. I have spoken to a number of gay lay men and women who were condemned for their lifestyle in the Confessional by sexually active gay priests or who had to sit in the pew and listen to a homophobic homily from an actively gay priest.

Image result for cardinal keith o brien
SEXUALLY ACTIVE GAY CARDINAL O'BRIEN WHO CONDEMNED HOMOSEXUALITY

This is wrong because it is hypocrisy. It is double standards. 

As far as I am concerned what is good for the clerical gander is good for the lay gander too.

There are serving priests in every diocese in Ireland who are also partners. Sometimes the bishop knows about it and sometimes he doesn't.

Most bishops decide not to confront these gay priest partners as long as their relationship is kept secret and no scandal erupts. 

I once had a visit from a parish priest of Westminster diocese in England who decided he could no longer live a "double life" and went to confess his situation to Cardinal Basil Hume.

Cardinal Hume reacted to his announcement by ordering tea and biscuits and by having a long, rambling conversation about everything under the sun.

When Hume was leaving the priest to the door of Archbishop's House, he squeezed the PP's arm tightly and said: "You will be discreet, Father, will you not"?

Cardinal Hume's "turning a blind eye" strategy was based on the old Irish saying: "If you see a pig with two heads - say nothing". 

Of course Cardinal Hume had been an English Benedictine and had no doubt learned that a great number of his fellow monks were of "the antique disposition" and were in relationships with each other and others.

Image result for gay priests

In many cases the bishops turn a blind eye for other reasons:

1. Because they are of the gay disposition themselves.

2. Because the seminarians / priests involved are handsome and appeal to the bishop's eyes.

3. Because if are not in a relationship with a priest themselves they have been in the past.


Have you ever noticed that very often bishop's priest secretaries are better looking young priests?



Only yesterday someone emailed me to tell me of two gay priest relationships in one prominent rural Irish diocese. That relationship started in the seminary and will continue in the diocese. 


Sometimes in dioceses groups of gay priests gather together in "mutual admiration societies". They meet regularly in each other presbyteries and often go on holidays as a group - sometimes to well known gay resorts. 

I have heard of these relationships in dioceses like Dublin, Meath, Down and Connor, Galway, Ferns etc. Dublin being a large diocese has its fair share of active gay priests.


The strange about all of this is that the official teaching of the Catholic Church and it's catechism.

MASTURBATION:

"By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. .......masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action".

HOMOSEXUALITY:

"Homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. Homosexual persons are called to chastity. 


Its hard to reconcile these teachings in a Church that:

1. Is full of sexually active bishops and priests - from Rome right across the world.

2. Seminaries in which seminarians have a better sex life than the ordinary man and woman in the street.

3. Dioceses all over Ireland and the world where priests have better sex lives than their parishioners.

4. The fact that the Catholic priesthood is fast becoming a gay profession.












63 comments:

  1. Are there any sexually active gay priests in the Derry diocese Pat? Would Donal Giro alllow it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are. I think Donal would.

      I did write to him some time ago about a heterosexual priest and a lady where there were other serious issues involved. His response was pathetic.

      Delete
  2. I have no problem with a priest or student having an appropriate sexual relationship. What I do have a problem with is having them sign the celibacy promise prior to ordination while the world and it's mother know this is not the case. This is an insult to God and Church

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those signing and those receiving signatures know the reality. But the paperwork is kept right.

      Delete
    2. I understand your point Sean, but what option do they have? Yes of course they can leave the Roman Catholic Church and join another denomination, but for most that is not really an option? It is far from ideal, but it seems to me that when a teaching is nonsense it is appropriate to ignore it. To use the example Pat used above, anyone who masturbates and who then presents themselves for Communion without having gone to Confession (and confessed with all the usual conditions for absolutions) is a hypocrite since officially they are saying to the world they are in a state of grace. But does anyone really believe that is true? I don't think so (well, maybe a few knuckle-draggers think it's true...). And so it is with priests or seminarians who have appropriate sexual relationships - I'm not at all inclined to be too caught up on whether it is hypocritical as I think nonsensical teaching binds them. I do not think at all that it is an insult to God and the Church, while it is certainly not the ideal.

      Much of the Church's teaching on these matters comes from a certain strain of Thomist thought which is illogical and does not stand up to scrutiny (e.g. acts having a purpose independent of the actor etc.)

      TRS

      Delete
    3. Gay men and women, the few who go, are still being refused absolution in the Confessional !

      Delete
    4. Yes, that is a different matter altogether. If any priest is involved in such a relationship and denying absolution, then that is hypocrisy of the highest order. I was referring to priests in such relationships who do not condemn those in same sex relationships and act with mercy - in that case, then I do not consider the alleged hypocrisy to be worth getting worked up about. Just because a teaching appears in an official Church document does not mean it is true.

      TRS

      Delete
    5. MournemanMichael30 May 2017 at 16:18

      TRS, I find a strange illogicality when you appear to think it okay for an RC cleric, priest or seminarian, to be in 'an appropriate sexual relationship', yet it is hypocritical for someone who has masturbated to receive communion without having confessed and received absolution.
      MMM

      Delete
    6. TRS 12.27 I understand where you are coming from. Problem with the nudge and wink mentality is that it leaves people open to abuse blackmail and manipulation and indeed bullying.

      Delete
    7. MMM, the point was rhetorical as indicated by the question which followed the statement. The point I am making is that if we take Sean's point that it is hypocritical for a priest to be in a relationship when his status as a priest indicates that he is celibate, then using the same logic we must conclude that one who masturbates and then receives communion etc etc is similarly hypocritical. I reject both contentions since I believe that the celibacy rule is wrong, that Church teaching on same-sex relations is based on false premises and that the Church teaching on masturbation is based on an absurd and profoundly damaging Thomist world view of sexuality.

      And accordingly, simply because one disagrees with Church teaching, does not require one to leave the institution - loyal dissent from within is a permissible position where that dissent is expressed in a practical dissent from the Church's inadequate moral teaching.

      Sean, I take the point you make and agree it is not ideal. But I am inclined to leave that to the individual priest etc to decide for himself, rather than impose on his conscience a particular course of action or condemn them as hypocrites without looking at the specifics.

      Interestingly, when we have cases of good priests who have been involved in such relationships, such as Fr Rosbotham in Mayo, the reaction of the parish community has been overwhelming positive.

      TRS

      Delete
    8. MourneManMichael30 May 2017 at 19:43

      Thank you TRS. I think we are in full agreement about the RC church's 'absurd and profoundly damaging Thomist world view of sexuality.'
      MMM

      Delete
    9. Actually joining another denomination is not an option for gay priests who want one relationship
      The majority of churches are very anti-gay on paper and the practice depends on the bishop. In reality only certain pockets of the Anglican communion are 'affirming'.
      The candidate for orders is also far from guaranteed acceptance from individual churches or laypeople and the more evangelical the church the more homosexuals are outlawed.

      Delete
  3. Pat any updates from the Gardaí about your complaints?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Investigations are live. Like all investigations they are slow.

      Delete
  4. There is a young priest in my diocese who has two partners. One is another priest of the diocese and the other is a former Dublin seminarian. All three were in Maynooth together. It seems that some of our priests are Islamic when it comes to sex. They can have four "wives". I will send the names to you by email.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Be aware, Pat, that some of the names you might be given are the victims of malicious gossip and poisoned pens. There is no doubt there are some priests living unworthy lives; but you have a responsibility to truth, to ensure that you are not the dupe of some vicious slanderer, who has it in for an innocent priest. As a lay person of 60+, I can honestly say that I have never heard a homophobic sermon in Church. Never heard the subject mentioned ever. Though I agree it is wrong for a man to condemn in others what he is doing himself.

      Delete
    2. Homophobic Bible readings do appear in Church services. Jesus' appalling references to Sodom and his dreadful approval of the cruel marriage system of his time. Men married little girls who gave no consent and Jesus banned them from divorcing. He want as far as to say a woman who divorces her husband and marries another is an adulteress. It is not just about opposition to gay sexual rights. Jesus would be too bigoted to consider a committed relationship between an unmarried man and a woman to be equal to a married relationship. He would call it evil even though the fact remains that cohabitees can be better together and more committed without marriage.

      Delete
    3. Jesus mentions Sodom in the context of hospitality?

      In fact the direct teachings of Jesus say very little about sex.

      And he was the son of an "unmarried mother"?

      Delete
    4. More than that, the sin of Sodom was not concerned with homosexuality. The condemnation of Sodom was very clearly a condemnation of gang rape of (angelic) visitors. A condemnation of homosexual rape is no more a condemnation of homosexuality than a condemnation of heterosexual rape is a condemnation of heterosexuality.

      So when Jesus mentions Sodom he very definitely does not have homosexuality in mind.

      TRS

      Delete
    5. Pat give Jesus a break. Homosexuality expressed in a sexual act is sin. And really, having a go at His Mother. Cheap shots.

      Delete
    6. I do not agree that homosexuality expressed in a sexual act is always a sin.

      I was not having a go at St. Mary.

      It's a biblical fact.

      Delete
    7. Biblical fact? Thats a bit ironic. Mary is the Mother of God. That is unless you think Jesus was not God?
      Sodom was destroyed because if sexual depravity. Thats a biblical fact.

      Delete
    8. I fully believe Jesus is God.

      I believe St. Mary is the mother of Jesus who is fully God and man.

      The story of Sodom is the biblical story of the destruction of a city where the male population raped visitors.

      The sin in the story is the rape and the inhospitality.

      Delete
    9. Ok so we are agreed that Mary is the Mother of God.
      Your interpretation of the bible says that the story is rape and inhospitablity . My interpretation is differentis that sexual perversion is a sin.

      Delete
    10. Do you really think that two people living together for life in a loving, exclusive and committed relationship who express their love physically to each other is a PERVERSION?

      I know that Jesus would not see it that way.

      Delete
    11. @14:01, which specific part of the text of Genesis 19 leads you to your conclusion? What is your interpretation based on?

      TRS

      Delete
    12. How do you KNOW Jesus would see it that way? Do yourself a favor and read what he says about sin instead of making it up to suit yourself.

      Delete
    13. Where does Jesus himself say homosexuality is a sin?

      Delete
    14. He condemns sexual promiscuity as one of those evil things that come from within the human heart rendering a person unclean. He forbade lust during the Sermon on the Mount threatening the lustful with the fires of hell. Are you trying to tell us that the Lord's proscriptions in these matters apply only to heterosexual men in their relations with women? The problem in Maynooth, with Fr X, etc., etc., is homosexual lust and rampant sexual activities that that are contrary to the life of a baptised person - never mind a priest.

      Delete
    15. Lust is a loaded word. Why not use a less tendentious one such as sexual desire.

      Sexual desire is not per se sinful any more than emotions in general are. The preferred expression is that all of these are pre-moral entities. Jesus no more condemned what we mean today by sexual desire than he condemned any emotion on the entire gamut.

      Delete
    16. @19:31, what has any of that got to do with Pat's question? From what I can see, Pat isn't disputing any of what you have said. He asked where does Jesus himself say that homosexuality is a sin?

      Delete
    17. There is nothing wrong with sexual desire. It is not a sin to have desires. Neither is it a sin to be a homosexual.

      What the Lord condemns is giving free reign to those desires - the sin of lust. Yes - lust is a "loaded" word and I make no apologies for using it. That is what the Lord called it and it applies to both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

      The homosexuality generally referred to in this blog concerns sexual activity in Grindr etc by the ordained and those preparing for ordination. That is absolutely reprehensible and in no way can such behaviour be justified among the ministers of God.

      Even were celibacy not a requirement, the behaviour of Fr X and co would still be gravely immoral and a great scandal to the faithful.

      Delete
  5. I think we know all about some Priests and their gay sexual exploits. All we have to do is read the disgusting antics of Fr X who was on this blog bragging about - nothing but a filthy animal and dirty mouth along with it. Shouldn't be in the Church let alone running a Parish. Disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nor should you be in the Church...with all of that hatred and venom spewing from your post.

      Delete
    2. Don't be taken in Magna Carta, @13:12 rejoiced to read all the salacious detail of the mythical Fr X story! S/he's living for the next instalment!

      Delete
    3. Fr X is a scumbag. That is a simple truth.

      Delete
    4. Your a fine one to be talking about hatred and venom, pot and kettle spring to mind. Hypocrite.

      Delete
    5. 15.09 I totally agree. He deserves to catch something nasty the way he's been carrying on. He didn't display any remorse or shame for his filthy behaviour.

      Delete
    6. Who is this Fr X and why hasn't he been named?

      Delete
    7. What has Amy Martin done about this? Hopefully by now Fr X has been removed from Armagh and from the Priesthood. I remember how it caused such rage and an outcry on here at the time. Let's hope he was run out of town, wouldn't want THAT even near my teenage Sons as he seems to have a preference for teenagers.

      Delete
    8. 18 year old men are at the age of consent.

      Some of them like the older man.

      Delete
    9. People like you just endorse and justify Fr X's promiscuity. Being at the age of consent doesn't necessarily make it right.

      Delete
    10. Maybe Amy doesn't know who it is? Does this Fr X really exist? I'm doubtful.

      Delete
    11. In which case, Margaret Carter, neither should you be in the Church with the venom and hate you regularly spew at people on here.

      Delete
    12. I am a 19 year old gay man from Belfast who is into older. I have no interest in anyone under 50. I like 59 - 80.

      Delete
    13. You really are blind to your own faults, aren't you Mags?

      Delete
    14. @15.15
      "You're a fine one.. "is the correct form.

      Delete
    15. Yet again I use the term your instead of you're to rile you, you keep falling for it idiot lol.

      Delete
    16. 00:38, huuuuuuh?!😯😯😯

      Delete
    17. I don't recall the poster being riled. He said "You're a fine one" and boy,was he right!

      Delete
  6. I think the real problem with catholic sexual ethics is its natural law theory. Most reasonable catholics consider the church's sexual ethics unreasonable and unpersuasive (humanae vitae, gay relationships, premarital sex, and so on). The church developed a view of human sexuality in light of natural law and then found texts in the bible to back up the argument. Furhtermore, catholic sexual ethics in my mind is a patriarchal doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maynooth update

    ***********************

    Rev. Aidan Gallagher [Tuam] has stopped his ordination going ahead this weekend. Story unfolding this evening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's sudden.

      Keep us informed.

      Tough decision.

      Delete
    2. interesting. I have a story that will develop from this as well. (rc_2016eire)

      Delete
    3. Who isn't going to be ordained?

      Delete
  8. He was in the same year as Puck and Gorgeous and was Ordained Deacon with them in Gaynooth.

    ReplyDelete
  9. He's the size of a wee Hippo that lad is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a nasty and shallow comment.

      Delete
    2. Pat won't allow nasty comments about himself or his mates. But everyone else is fair game. Total hypocrisy from pat.

      Delete
  10. I wonder if this is connected to the cat fight that went on in the corridors of Gaynooth last week.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Keith O'Brien is not the only cleric to have condemned gays in the recent past.

    In August 2015 Fr Terence Crotty OP the Master of Students condemned gays at a public Mass. A guy called Patrick Donovan attended that Mass and objected to the priest's remarks. Shortly afterwards the order's headman in Ireland issued a public apology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pity grotty Crotty wasn't sent into permanent exile like O'Brien.

      Delete