An Absolutely Critical Juncture

CC: Julia Duin , Matt Abbott , Michael S. Rose , benedictxvi@vatican.va, Cardinal Avery Dulles , Archbishop Charles J. Chaput

Don't be too worried about me, or my "lack of faith" - although the hope issue might have merit - we'll see about that after Nov. 29th - the supposed release date of this ABSOLUTELY PIVOTAL document from Rome.

The reason that the document is SO CRITICAL, is that it will be the first time that "homosexual priests" have been mentioned in a public document in the history of the Church!

My greatest fear, and I don't think I am alone in this, is that the document will allow men with same sex attraction, i.e. homosexuals into the priesthood with only certain blaring exclusions. In other words, if you don't tell anyone that you are gay (i.e. if you continue to maintain THE SECRET at all costs!), and if you refrain from homosexual sex for a "certain" amount of time (even if you have already had it!), then we will ordain you; and once ordained for life we will NOT dismiss you, or restrict you, or penalize you, even if we find out that you are in fact, or in practice, homosexual or gay.

And that would be ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS, INDEFENSIBLE and COMPLETELY, MORALLY WRONG! It would solidify the LOGICAL IMPASSE, the DOUBLE MORAL STANDARD, and the HYPOCRITICAL TEACHING that I have been "screaming" about for years - albeit in forced silence.

It would make it very difficult, if not impossible, for me as a former engineer to accept that this instruction from the Vatican, and supposedly approved by the Pope himself - the Vicar of Jesus Christ, would in fact be the "fullness of truth in faith and morals" And yet, it is a Dogma of the Faith that the Pope can NOT error in the transmission/teaching of the truth in faith and morals. The integrity of the institution of the Church as the true guardian and teacher of the fullness of Truth throughout the ages depends upon that Dogma. Thus, any incongruity between the two "truths" (truth/Truth) would be the fatal logical impasse for me, as I hope to anyone.

So yes PRAY! But not for just me, PRAY FOR THE CHURCH at this ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL JUNCTURE - an extraordinary point in time which will define whether the Church truly is THE institution of Truth, or not.

If I am in error, then I ask, beg or challenge, any bishop in the entire world to show me, or more correctly, to publicly and clearly teach all of us about the universal morality, the goodness, the prudence, the wisdom, and the wonderful example and model of ordaining homosexual men as priests and bishops. Their universal and continued silence on this moral issue will not answer the moral question - even if an incorrect answer, which was never explicitly stated but only manifested by their actions in ordaining these men, has now been publicly revealed.

1. I have not lost my faith in God, although I find it increasingly difficult to carry this cross alone and in, heretofore, forced silence.

2. My discouragement comes from a genuine dismay that after bringing this problem conclusively before the highest levels of our Church, before a Vatican tribunal established by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, before the Pope himself who must make a decision in this case, I am still not able to receive an answer to the simple, but extraordinarily important, one might even say pivotal question in the life of the Church: Is it moral, is it good, proper, prudent and wise to ordain homosexual men as priests and bishops? (Regardless of whether they are physically homosexually active or not, or whether they ever have been physically homosexually active or not, because homosexual men will always be sexual and sexually active - mentally, emotionally and socially - whether they ever have, or had, physical sex with another man or not.)

3. My despair comes from the fact that no matter how much pressure (the truth) is placed upon the Church, at its highest levels, there is an unwillingness to honestly and comprehensively address and correct the homosexual problem in the priesthood and episcopacy.

4. My fear is that I may now be compelled to do what I passionately do not want to do - break through the silence.

5. There are those who are now strongly advocating the ONLY method that seems to be effective in solving this moral tragedy of homosexual priests and bishops - the massive public exposure of the problem and its true extent.

Numerous appeals to the conscience and obligations of the bishops, and priests, don 't work - they refuse to answer the question about the morality of the issue, instead referring to policies, practices, procedures and instructions.

Books on the scandal don't work - they seemingly haven't changed the hearts and minds of anyone in authority, nor the reality of the situation.

Lawsuits don't work - there are still the statute of limitations in all but one state; they primarily deal with illegal abuse of minors; they have almost all been settled out of court without any public incriminating evidence; and horribly they have been paid for with money from the victims (us) with no lasting effect upon the real perpetrators - the homosexual priests and, more significantly, the homosexual bishops, or the homosexually tolerant bishops, who have supported those priests in their continued ministry for years (albeit now in a ministry excluding contact with "children").

No bishop has lost his job/money, no chancellor has lost his job, no vicar general has lost his job, no seminary rectory has lost his job - with just a few, very rare exceptions - and all due to public exposure.

6. Unless this problem is solved soon, my faith "in the institution of the church as the teacher, model and guide to the fullness of truth in faith and morals" is dead.

Solved = 1) Clear and public teaching about the gross immorality of ordaining homosexual men as priests and bishops with Scripture, Tradition and integral moral teaching to back it up - this could come from any bishop since truth is universal, but ideally it would come from the Pope. 2) Canon Law that prohibits the ordination of homosexual men (men with same sex attraction) with severe consequences for those who violate that law. 3) Prohibition of those who are homosexual priests from holding any office within the Church - certainly not the office of cardinal, active bishop, chancellor, vicar general, seminary rector, vocations director, or pastor of a parish.

7. It is granted that Christ didn't come to solve the problems of the world, but He did come to proclaim the fullness of truth in faith and morals (his testimony before Pilate) - a mission he then entrusted primarily to his Apostles, bishops and priests giving them the Gift of the Holy Spirit to make them fearless and faithful in its accurate and full proclamation. If that mission is not fulfilled through time, then Christ's mission is not fulfilled through time.

8. What would Peter THINK, and more importantly DO if James and John betrayed, either deliberately or in error, the revealed truth, and their mission to proclaim it to the ends of the world, by ordaining homosexual men as priests or bishops? As Prince of the Apostles, he would quickly confront the error - probably in the often-times politically incorrect, public and forceful model/example of Our Lord - and immediately correct the wrong and egregious teaching, example and profession of these two bishops to the totally correct and full teaching, example and profession of the true faith.

9. If James and John were to betray the faith by ordaining homosexual men as priests or bishops, then certainly there would be much more than the PERSONAL SIN(S) of these two bishops at stake here. The integrity, the accuracy and the fullness of the faith in its transmission through time would also, AND MUCH MORE CRITICALLY, be at stake here! Our Lord has preserved his Vicar, Peter and his direct successors, from such an error in the transmission of the fullness of the truth in faith and morals.

It would be his duty, his responsibility, his Calling, his Charism of the Holy Spirit, to not only correct the sin of his two, or more, bishops, but MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY to correct the error of their example, their profession of the faith and, even if it was never explicitly stated but only manifested or demonstrated by their actions, their incorrect teaching about the morality of ordaining such men.

10. I am more than willing to suffer with Christ and his saints - to be banished, persecuted, abandoned, falsely accused, vilified, to live in poverty for the sake of the Kingdom, .... In the words of Christ: "His will be done!"

However, HIS WILL MUST BE DONE! His Will must eventually be accomplished! That is the whole point here. That is the point and duty of our lives here - to know, love and serve Him in this life, all according to His will. Not the will, or unjust commands, of bishops who have betrayed, either deliberately or in horrendous error, the fullness of the truth in faith and morals. I am willing to suffer for Christ's Will, but not the errant will of these bishops who have so distorted or altered or diminished the full proclamation of the moral truth. The only reason I have been quiet for so long, is to allow them ample opportunity to "do the right thing" about this moral crisis.

If I am in error, then I ask, beg, challenge, any bishop in the entire world to show me, or more correctly, to publicly and clearly teach all of us about the universal morality, the goodness, the prudence, the wisdom, and the wonderful example and model of ordaining homosexual men as priests and bishops. Their universal and continued silence on this moral issue will not answer the question - even if an incorrect answer, which was never explicitly stated but only manifested by their actions in ordaining these men, has now been publicly revealed.

7. Faith is a supernatural virtue. As a priest once told me, you cannot lose that faith unless you sin against it. By trying with my whole heart, mind, soul, and strength to do the right thing here, I have certainly not sinned, nor intended to sin. Even though the bishops might not like my repeatedly and forcefully asking the moral question which I, as a priest, or as a Catholic, or as a simple human being created by God, have a right to be answered by our moral leaders entrusted with the fullness of the truth in faith and morals, I have not sinned in asking it, or in demanding an answer to the most critical and fundamental question in all of this homosexual scandal:

Is it moral, your Excellencies, to ordain homosexual men as priests and bishops?

In fact, I am baffled that absolutely everyone is not demanding the answer from their priests and bishops.

I can think of no more pressing or urgent question to be answered given the worldwide scandal of homosexual abuse, and by clear inference, the first-time public revelation of so many homosexual men in the priesthood. What about all the homosexual priests who would NEVER abuse a child, or an under eighteen-year-old teenager (because it is illegal) but who would enjoy many secret, intimate homosexual relationships, even non-sexual ones, with other men more age appropriate? What about their living situations with other men in their rectories? http://rcf.org/docs/celibacy.htm

What about our teaching that the priest is "another Christ" who should be the model, guide and teacher of full, honest and transparent truth in moral life? Are we now to present the homosexual “other Christ” who must preach what he cannot live, teach what he cannot inherently comprehend, or, even worse, a man who covertly understands the truth but does not believe or teach the fullness of the faith?

11. This is not the government or some large corporation we are talking about, it is the Church. It should be the very center of our lives. If our Church can't, or won't, give us the fullness of the truth in faith and morals, if our Church is not the example of Christ's moral life and the source of the fullness of truth that Christ handed on to us - and I'm not talking about in its individual members or leaders - but in its universal and enduring proclamation of the faith, then something is terribly, horribly amiss and urgently, critically needs to be corrected.

I know these posts are long, but there is a reason.

First, this post is based on an email that was sent to Pope Benedict XVI, Archbishop Charles Chaput, and Cardinal Avery Dulles. (Among the many others who received blind copies.)

I concede that this post is a bit pre-emptive as far as the actual "instruction" goes, but here are some critical thoughts nonetheless:

They, or the pope, are quickly, publicly and actively working on the answer to the now public homosexual priest and bishop problem. ?

Well, no he/they are not. They are only working (quasi-publicly) on one aspect of the problem - the gay seminarian problem. The Vatican's Congregation for Catholic Education is supposedly working (for a VERY long time now) on an answer to the question: CAN homosexual men be ordained. And they are carefully "nuancing", per history, the answer to THAT question.

The answer is vitally important because it should lay the foundation for a much more thorough and permanent solution to the moral problem of homosexual priests and bishops.

But, there is a huge difference between CAN and SHOULD.

We all know what the bishops CAN do. They can disobey Vatican directives without consequence to themselves; they can ordain many homosexual men to the priesthood without anyone knowing about it; they can place those homosexual priests into positions of power and authority without anyone questioning it; they can (until December of 2002) cover-up the illegal, egregious homosexual rape and abuse of teenage minors without serious reprecussions; they can brutally silence anyone from talking about the OTHER VERY large and festering issues and problems of a homosexuality rampant within the priesthood; and, of course, they can act like they don't know what everyone is talking about in the first place - what homosexual priests and bishops?

And ALL OF THAT means that the church is completely vulnerable and exposed to the potentially deviant agenda of homosexualty!

http://www.cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm?task=singledisplay&recnum=2791

But they, NOT ONE OF THEM, have EVER answered the basic, fundamental and critical question for a moral leader and a moral example and a moral teacher to answer: But, is it MORAL to do what you obviously CAN do, and have been doing? SHOULD they have been doing it?

You might say in return: 'Well, obviously, if they say it is OK to let some "non-active", or "non-deeply rooted" homosexual men be seminarians, then, obviously, it is moral to ordain them as priests and, please never forget, as bishops - thus as archbishops, cardinals and even pope, because there is nothing in canon law, or clear church teaching to prevent that succession.'

But, I say that that is the OBVIOUS connection they so craftily want you to make without forcing them to ever answer the REAL question in all of this - which they have ALL refused to answer. (Again, there is a big difference between CAN versus SHOULD i.e. there is a critical difference between CAN we make homosexual priests and bishops versus SHOULD we morally be stockpiling all these homosexual priests and bishops - afterall this is a lifelong appointment.)

Take the opposite statement for a moment, that it is FIRMLY NOT OK - NO EXCEPTIONS to let them be seminarians, and thus priests and bishops.

(Some think that statement is the "clear" and present Vatican policy as evidenced from one carefully written line of a never publicly released document in 1961 http://www.rcf.org/docs/1961DocFound.html , - the secret, not public, document's key line as far as homosexuality is concerned was the following:

"Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers."

Please note that it is a carefully nunanced sentence which does not necessarily mean that homosexuals themselves should not be ordained, but only those who are "afflicted" with "evil tendencies" to homosexuality and pederasty.

and from a reply to an un-named bishop's question: http://catholiccitizens.org/platform/platformview.asp?c=3514 , http://www.cathnews.com/news/212/38.html ,

or better, http://www.mgr.org/homopriest.html which is the actual letter - "asking us to clarify the possibility that men with homosexual tendencies be able (CAN) to receive priestly ordination.")

Does the answer or "policy", (not a clear, papal teaching) that it is NOT OK to let them be seminarians mean that it is not MORAL to ordain them? Not necessarily - because the question does not ask about the morality of the issue. The "policy" could mean that it is a good, prudent, wise, exemplary and moral decision to ordain them (outrageous - that's why they can't/won't publicly say it), but that there are practical reasons for not doing so - i.e. unfortunately, there are some conservative Catholics with lots of money who really would not like homosexual men representing Jesus Christ, so we will appease those Catholics for a while, as a practical not moral necessity, until homosexuality becomes more accepted publicly, and then we will quietly change our policy, or better yet just ignore it - all without ever answering the real MORAL question.

And of course, they CAN do that, and what they have already been doing, without actually answering that critical moral question of SHOULD, because it is all done in SECRET, anyway.

As I have said repeatedly, the morality of our Catholic faith is not defined by (secret) policies, procedures, practices or instructions, but by clear, public MORAL teaching about the fullness of MORAL TRUTH!

It also seems you missed the VERY IMPORTANT exception clause in the upcoming document:

“… if you don't tell anyone that you are gay (i.e. if you continue to maintain THE SECRET at all costs!), and if you refrain from homosexual sex for a "certain" amount of time (even if you have already had it!), then we will ordain you;"

"and once ordained for life we will NOT dismiss you, or restrict you, or penalize you, even if we find out that you are in fact, or in practice, homosexual or gay.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-gaypriests12nov12,0,4492481.story?coll=la-home-headlines

As for Pope Benedict XVI, may God powerfully bless him!

The only person who can solve this, is Pope Benedict XVI.

If I had spent the last 23 years of my life personally reviewing the horrendous homosexual abuse cases in the Church (well before we the public knew they even existed), then I would make it the most urgent and pressing work of the Papacy which, ultimately, God had chosen me for, to solve it.

I personally, as a priest who has lost so much in this quest, can't wait to finally see that Truth after 2,000 years in the waiting.

Oh, you say it is only an "instruction", it has no "real" papal authority, it is not a "dogmatic" teaching.... I can see it all coming.

Why has it been so difficult to get an honest, clear and complete answer from our Church???

That "why" has also never been answered. And there are no "good" answers to that one, only horrible excuses.

Another new freeper! Welcome to Free Republic!

It's always wonderful to see new catholics in the forum. Are you and 'Lord let me see' both priests? Diocesan or religious?

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I think he wants the Lord to let him see the REMOVAL and/or DISMISSAL of seminarians, priests and bishops who claim or administer Christ's affairs as if attraction to men is consistent with the nature of the priesthood.

Yes, I understood his comments but thank you for the clarification. The problem of homosexuals in the priesthood is not new. It's been around for centuries. Nor is it unique to the Cathoic Church. Statistics support the fact that other denominations also deal with this issue. The difference is that, unlike the past when it may have seemed a local issue, we live in a time of rapid and open communications. The MSM detest the moral absolutes taught by the Catholic Church and have happily exposed the problem for all the world to see.

Now this may seem like an odd comment but I ask your indulgence for a minute or two. As Catholics, we believe our church to be the one founded by Jesus Christ. He promised that not even the gates of hell would prevail against His church. When the media launched their attack on the Catholic Church, it felt as if the gates of hell had opened, did it not? We were shocked and repulsed at the thought of priests molesting young boys. We viewed them for what they are - a blight on holy mother Church. The media were unrelenting, lifting each rock, stone and pebble in their search for child molesting priests. From their reporting, the average individual had the impression that all Cathoic priests were potential molesters. I recall reading about a young mother who pulled her child away from a priest when he bent over to pat him on the head. Good and faithful priests could not walk down the street in clericals without being glared at. How much pain they must have felt. In their personal agony, how many of them reflected on Christ who was spat upon.

After rebounding from the news, it occured to me that the Catholic Church was indeed blessed. Here was the Holy Spirit in action, working through the media sifting out the most reprobate priests. The cleansing process had begun. We all waited for the Holy Father to take direct action but none came. The Vatican was not indifferent to the problems and there was one woking behind the scenes to fend off the blows.

In March of this year, JPII was too ill to lead the Stations of the Cross on Good Friday. That task fell to Cardinal Ratzinger. What would normally pass as a day of prayer and reflection, caught the media's attention once again. At the Ninth Station - Jesus Falls for the Third Time, the Cardinal offered this reflection. It was immediately picked up and transmitted by the mainstream media.

MEDITATION

What can the third fall of Jesus under the Cross say to us? We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in his own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! All this is present in his Passion. His betrayal by his disciples, their unworthy reception of his Body and Blood, is certainly the greatest suffering endured by the Redeemer; it pierces his heart. We can only call to him from the depths of our hearts: Kyrie eleison – Lord, save us (cf. Mt 8: 25).

One month later, the Holy Spirit acted again. Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI.

What seems like an overwhelming and painful burden for us to bear is nothing more than the blink of an eye in the 2000 year history of our Church. Not only has the media failed in its attempt to take down the Catholic Church, it has actually assisted in her renewal.

Two years ago, the media focued the world's attention like a laser beam, on the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. This year, the same media provided the most extensive coverage of any pope's funeral! Even Al Jazeera provided live coverage in the Middle East. They provided the same phenomenal service for the Papal Conclave. Did we not cry tears of joy and shout with glee, when white smoke emerged from the chimney, the red curtains were drawn back and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger stepped forth, a "humble servant in the Lord's vinyard".

That was only 7 months ago!

You are both new to this forum and have missed the daily postings on the activities of our Holy Father. We draw great comfort, strength and consolation in his activities, but especially in his communications to the world at large and especially his beloved church. Only today, I posted a thread on how Benedict XVI has begun to assess the bishops, and calling to task those who are struggling or failing.

Pope grades bishops - The Italians Pass, the Austrians Flunk, the Brazilians...

I happen to reside in a diocese, 'shepherded' by one of the most left wing bishops in the US. When my pastor died, he was replaced by a youthful priest who is "light in the loafers". One year later, he was assigned a recently ordained priest, as associate pastor. Judging by their glances, it was obvious they shared the same proclivity. I prayed to God for help in being objective and turning a blind eye. It wasn't until small but subtle changes were introduced to the parish that I decided to take action. Thanks to the many catholic freepers in this forum, we have been better educated in our faith and knowledge of church regulations. That enabled me to pinpoint liturgical abuse and address it with the pastor and the diocese. I scored one victory but was soon confronted with more abuses. There were no others in this parish willing to assist me with this task, so I left. Finding another parish was equally daunting, as this diocese is filled with homosexual priests.

You, like so many of us, may have wondered how these bishops were appointed. It took a while but I was able to find this source.

Still Proud Of Bishops He Gave U.S. .

Apologies for this lengthy post. It is challenging to fill you in on how far this forum has come in its understanding of our Church and its leaders.

As a Catholic christian, and especially a priest, I would ask you to join your prayers to ours, not only for the Holy Father and the good priests but also for those shepherds who have led so many sheep astray. We have cause to rejoice in the promise given by our Lord that His Church would prevail against evil. Meanwhile we watch our protestant brethren tackle the divisions within their own faith communities, following the elevation of an openly gay man as bishop.

Pax et Bonum,

NYer

Why has it been so difficult to get an honest, clear and complete answer from our Church???

For 25 years, we had a Pope who was given to indirect and wordy but ambiguous statements, and who was reluctant to exercise his authority vis the bishops, whom he seemed to regard universally as his equals. JPII was not unorthodox and certainly accepted traditional moral teaching and I think tried, through things like the Catechism, to restate and clarify it. However, partly because he was so enormously prolific and seemed to be incapable of producing anything that was short and left no room for "nuance," it was very easy for interested parties to ignore him or twist his words and even silences to fit their agenda. BXVI has a completely different style, and I think that the words emanating from the Vatican will be much less ambiguous in the future.

When JPII started out, we all had great hopes for him. I don't know how old you are, but I am in my 50s and I can tell you that the Church seemed to have gone totally insane by the time JPII was elected. I was living in SF, to top it off, where things were completely out of control and the whole thing seemed like an evil dream. He started out fairly firmly, but it seems to me that after the assassination attempt, his style changed and he somehow seemed to lose interest in Church governance, preferring to devote himself to producing vast quantities of writing restating the Faith and also becoming a public face for the Church. Whatever one may think about the merits of this, the fact that it went on so long let a lot of really evil people, aware that nobody was going to call them to account, get really established, particularly in the US, which always seemed to be a little far from the mind of JPII.

I think this will change, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. It's frustrating, because it seems like we've all been waiting for way too long. But I do think that our new Pope is going to leave much less room for doubt than his predecessor. I pray for his safety every day, in fact, because you know there are probably a lot of entrenched clerical evil-doers in the Vatican and associated with it who are not happy with him.

Incidentally, I thought homosexuality was always considered intrinsically disordered, and it was my understanding that a man who presented himself as a candidate for the priesthood could not have any "disabilities" such as this. In other words, it was in the same category as not having any hands, or some other physical defect that would have disqualified one from the priesthood. For this reason, I can't understand why there is any debate about this, except, of course, that the Church has accepted the definitions of the APA (American Psychiatric Association) as its moral guideline, and the APA thinks homosexuality is not a disorder. Time to kick Freud out (although Freud also thought it was a disorder) and get back to Church teaching.

Whatever one may think about the merits of this, the fact that it went on so long let a lot of really evil people, aware that nobody was going to call them to account, get really established, particularly in the US, which always seemed to be a little far from the mind of JPII.

About one year into the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, a news story surfaced regarding JPII's inaction. Wish I had saved the link! The author indicated that in Poland, during WWII, certain priests and bishops were accused of being homosexuals. This was a tactical ploy intended to besmirch their outspokeness against communism. The author suggested that JPII, recalling these incidents, connected these assertions to the present situation. Suddenly, the irrational made sense. Do you recall this story?

But I do think that our new Pope is going to leave much less room for doubt than his predecessor.

When the media announced last month that the Vatican was about to issue a document denying homosexuals acceptance to the seminaries, a tremendous sense of relief swept over us in the forum, while the media was aghast at such a prospect. "Witch hunt", they proclaimed. The following week, the supposed contents of that document began to leak out. John Allen over at National Catholic Reporter, had it on good authority that there were 'conditions', like proving the candidate had been celibate for at least 3 years. Here in the forum, we all groaned while the media ran with this scintillating news. At the time, I recall wondering if this wasn't some sort of Vatican 'trial balloon', and redoubled my prayers. Then this story surfaced last Saturday, immediately dispelling John Allen's delusions. We don't have long to wait; the 'Instruction' will be issued within days. Given what we have witnessed from Benedict XVI since his election to the papacy, we should approach this moment with confidence and reassurance. He is a man of action. I have to laugh at the number of reporters who initially labeled him an 'interim' pope.

I pray for his safety every day, in fact, because you know there are probably a lot of entrenched clerical evil-doers in the Vatican and associated with it who are not happy with him.

His closest advisors are surprised at his silence, often followed by spontaneous announcements, like the one he made to the Brazilian bishops. Hopefully he has found a loyal 'taster' and dining companion ;-)

I don't know how old you are, but I am in my 50s

Not all of us turned into rebellious feminists and pacifists. We are most fortunate to have experienced the golden age of catholicism, pre VCII.

The problem of homosexuals in the priesthood is not new. It's been around for centuries.

That's no reason to not fight it. This priest is one of the only ones who actually sees it as a problem. Old or not, it is worse. See Atila Sinke Guimareas' book on Vatican II, Pedophilia and Homosexuality.

Nor is it unique to the Cathoic Church. Statistics support the fact that other denominations also deal with this issue.

There are no "other denominations." There is only one Church outside of which no one is saved. The Catholic Church is not a "denomination."

The difference is that, unlike the past when it may have seemed a local issue, we live in a time of rapid and open communications.

Amazing how the Church was able to hold things together a lot better when communication was slower. Probably had something to do with faith. You'd think a Pope could clean things up a lot faster if he had the guts to do something manly about the problems using today's communication technology.

The MSM detest the moral absolutes taught by the Catholic Church and have happily exposed the problem for all the world to see.

After basically encouraging it. Just look at the signs of the times. Also, the bishops and many priests and some Popes detest the moral absolutes taught by the Catholic Church. Hence the inaction and the mushy language.

No. Pope St. Pius V stated that the "fifth" mark of the Church is persecution. It is natural for the Church to be at odds with the World, the Flesh and the Devil.

We were shocked and repulsed at the thought of priests molesting young boys.

Amazing how Malachi Martin was naming names years ago and all the neos dismissed him with the dogma turned cliche' "Jesus promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail." The neos have yet to be shocked and repulsed at the connivance of the Vatican in protecting these vile, perverted men.

We viewed them for what they are - a blight on holy mother Church.

More soft language. It's an outright assault on the spotless bride of Christ. Designed not to topple the Church, just to remove as many members as possible. The Church isn't the victim of such an attack, it's those who left or will not enter as a result of that attack that are the victims.

The media were unrelenting, lifting each rock, stone and pebble in their search for child molesting priests.

Good for the vile media. They are better bishops than the ones appointed by JPII. It's a disgrace that it got to the point where the "moral outrage" of the media puts them apparently in judgment of the Church.

Cleansing? Boy are you in for a surprise. This is just another part of the chastisement. It's a two if not three pronged attack. The bishops and criminal and delinquent priests attack the Church from within and the media attack on the outside. The bishops ultimately want the Church to go bankrupt financially as well as morally. That way it can more easily become the one world religion warned about by St. Pius X. One more word on this: Kenosis.

We all waited for the Holy Father to take direct action but none came.

Again, naivete' the Holy Father knew about this and we all waited for decades. He did nothing. NOTHING. I hope he was saved at the end, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out he's burning in Hell for his malfeasance.

The Vatican was not indifferent to the problems and there was one woking behind the scenes to fend off the blows.

Yeah, the old "behind the scenes" excuse. Giving Card. Law a cushy position was part of that great strategy. It sounds like a great story but that's all it is.

On Cardinal Ratzinger's "Meditation" There are a lot of questions and no answers. From an Augustinian who doesn't live the words of his founder: "ACT as if everything depends on you and Pray as if everything depends on God." No actions. Just words. Ratzinger had the power to make a lot of things better. He didn't act. He has total power (on paper at least) Will he use it? He doesn't have a long time to dilly dally.

One month later, the Holy Spirit acted again. Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI.

Actually, the Catholic Church does not teach that the Holy Spirit selects the Pope. So, this is bogus. Don't even try to sell that.

What seems like an overwhelming and painful burden for us to bear is nothing more than the blink of an eye in the 2000 year history of our Church.

Who cares how many souls are lost? And what besides being another cliche' is that supposed to mean? All the evils of the world were no more than the biting of a piece of fruit in the Garden and look what Christ had to do to redeem us. This attitude is a variant of the Protestant "once saved always saved."

Not only has the media failed in its attempt to take down the Catholic Church, it has actually assisted in her renewal.

That's like thanking a Roman Guard for the scourging. Because God uses evil to bring forth good doesn't mean we should be happy for the evil.

Obviously media coverage is the measure of success in the Church. How many souls does the media save? "Woe to the Church and the bishops when the vile media praises a Pope."

Even Al Jazeera provided live coverage in the Middle East. They provided the same phenomenal service for the Papal Conclave.

Phenomenal coverage? It's actually a very simple process. The Vatican provided the cameras and the media took it's opportunity to push for a pro-abortion, anti-God, liberal Pope. That's the equivalent of Martin Luther's "phenomenal coverage" of the Church in his "Book of Concord".

Did we not cry tears of joy and shout with glee, when white smoke emerged from the chimney, the red curtains were drawn back and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger stepped forth, a "humble servant in the Lord's vinyard".

Not especially. I for one thought, "Oh, we got a fence sitter elected." The papolators would've slobbered and fawned just the same if Cardinal Pell, or Schonborn or Arinze would've emerged. Heck, they'd have done it albeit with difficulty if Cardinal Law emerged.

We draw great comfort, strength and consolation in his activities, but especially in his communications to the world at large and especially his beloved church.

An actual physical change in what is happening in the Church is too much to ask for. However the Holy Father gives us a lot of "good feelings" if we sniff around for them.

Only today, I posted a thread on how Benedict XVI has begun to assess the bishops, and calling to task those who are struggling or failing.

Call me when we see a gigantic list of defrocked priests and a public proclamation with no ambiguous terms from the Pope. Let's see a few Cardinals with their heads on pikes. Mahoney tops the list.

I happen to reside in a diocese, 'shepherded' by one of the most left wing bishops in the US. When my pastor died, he was replaced by a youthful priest who is "light in the loafers".

I just read a court complaint yesterday from a priest who was "light in his loafers" who raped a classmate of mine. Isn't it interesting how the terminology is so playful for a vicious beast who waits like an animal for his victims and turns into a monster? Good luck to the altar boys and "altar girls" at your old parish. You have a suspected monster in your midst and it's covered up under the pleasant sounding "light in his loafers" terminology.

One year later, he was assigned a recently ordained priest, as associate pastor. Judging by their glances, it was obvious they shared the same proclivity. I prayed to God for help in being objective and turning a blind eye. It wasn't until small but subtle changes were introduced to the parish that I decided to take action.

Just wait. The Novus Ordo started with small but subtle changes.

Thanks to the many catholic freepers in this forum, we have been better educated in our faith and knowledge of church regulations.

Yep. Not thanks to the majority of recent priests, bishops and Popes.

That enabled me to pinpoint liturgical abuse and address it with the pastor and the diocese. I scored one victory but was soon confronted with more abuses. There were no others in this parish willing to assist me with this task, so I left.

In other words, Lost. Retreated.

Finding another parish was equally daunting, as this diocese is filled with homosexual priests.

"Filled" with homosexual priests? Didn't we just hear how the media makes us believe that all Catholic priests are molesters and homosexuals?

You, like so many of us, may have wondered how these bishops were appointed. It took a while but I was able to find this source. Still Proud Of Bishops He Gave U.S. .

Terrible article. Kaiser is a whack job liberal for one thing. And so it was Paul VI's fault for appointing Jadot. Why didn't JPII straighten it out? Answer: He liked what Jadot was doing. What does Jadot want in the next Pope? ""When I asked Jadot what qualities he would like to see in the next Pope, he said: 'I would like, to see a Pope who is ready to listen."

That's B16's rallying cry now.

We have cause to rejoice in the promise given by our Lord that His Church would prevail against evil.

By all means rejoice. But do it soberly and with fear and trembling. Joy is different from pleasant feelings. We can rejoice in Christ's redemptive work but that doesn't make us giddy for the Agony in the Garden or the Scourging or the rest of the Passion.

Meanwhile we watch our protestant brethren tackle the divisions within their own faith communities, following the elevation of an openly gay man as bishop.

While we have our secret gay bishops. The Protestants are lucky in only that one regard. The sooner the Great Facade falls and the real Schismatics formalize the de Facto Schism, the better.

I know these posts are long, but there is a reason. Thank you for your tolerance, and for keeping the post on track.

This is the first time I have gone public. Although very few people know the full plan, there is a continuing pressure being exerted here on the Vatican for a clear, full, public papal teaching about this egregious and pervasive problem in the Church.

Many have asked: Where in the world is Fr. Haley? How can we contact him? A better question for the bishops: What in the world is Fr. Haley doing these days?

Anyway:

The Abbott "article" is part of an unfolding strategy.

http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_10324.shtml

The explanations found here can help to explain the "surface" aspects a little better for most of the people who might read it and become overly concerned about me. Despite the tenor of the "article", this is not about me, or my faith, but is a "chess" move in a very complicated and continuing game of Truth or Dare.

There is no assumption that everyone knows what I know and have seen first hand concerning the ABSOLUTELY PERVASIVE homosexual problem - which could truly be called an invasion into the priesthood. Nor that they understand the underlying dimensions of this "trial" and its delicate maneuverings before the Vatican. (That's all still very secret!)

It has been an incredible journey, frightening and very tiresome, but it has been absolutely amazing and mind boggling to see just how far the church (small c intended) will go in order to hide and avoid the homosexual priest/bishop issue.

Anyway, it's the stuff of books - which no one will read, or of movies - which no one will believe, or of lawsuits - which affect very few, but amazingly, tragically it is NOT the stuff that is bringing about real, immediate and urgent change in the Church.

Thank you for your prayers, and for the prayers of anyone who will read this. They are ALWAYS needed. As someone said, this is a war with the devil himself.

Now, to your questions:

"What leads you to believe, based on this pope's actions to date, that he will be soft on the stance of homosexuals in the priesthood?"

The public "news" of homosexual abuse and the phenomenal public cover-up of the problem was not news to Cardinal Ratzinger. For twenty-three years as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, plus many more years as a bishop and a priest, he was well aware of the problem, as was, to a more limited extent, every bishop and cardinal in the world.

However nothing happened until there was a public exposure of the problem by the media.

Let me quote from an up-coming book:

For me this is an amazing story - not because of the Church's forcefully imposed silence on me, not because of the brutal expulsion from the priesthood, not even because of the brazen act of excommunication - the real story is the silence - that incredible, mystifying, scandalous silence of Catholics everywhere - that they are not clamoring in a furious uproar against the fatal inconsistency of homosexual priests and bishops.

These homosexual leaders, teachers, and models of our faith give witness to their own blindness, their own culpability, and their own moral confusion. And they have brought about an intolerable confusion and devastation within our Church.

That we have ever allowed these men to represent the true Man, Jesus Christ, shows how successfully they have altered the very foundations of our faith and how insidiously they have infiltrated the very structures of our Church.

The truth of their lives of hypocrisy cannot be kept hidden. The conspicuous silence and reprehensible secrecy of the Church about this moral crisis can no longer be tolerated. And the bishops who have allowed this abomination to fester and grow within our Church can no longer be allowed to lead us to moral truth.

The silence must end. The truth should not and cannot be hidden any longer.

This story begins with a resounding discord among Christians, an issue of growing controversy among people of all faiths, and a subject that presents a dreadful dilemma for the Catholic Church. It begins with a simple question:

Master, Good Teacher, Lord, is it moral and proper to ordain a homosexual man, a man with same sex attraction, to the priesthood? (There is a crucial corollary as well.)

And going directly to the preeminent mystery and festering scandal in what has been the greatest crisis to ever face the modern Church - there has been no answer. There has been no official and universal (catholic) response to this crucial question of morals.

Despite the absolutely egregious conduct of so many homosexual priests, despite the scandal and moral inconsistency of homosexual priests living with other men, despite the obvious discomfort growing within the ranks of the heterosexual priesthood, despite the moral confusion and disparity of so many bishops on this subject, despite the perplexity of so many of the catholic faithful, there has been no official and universal proclamation of the faith about the morality of the problem - the growing presence of homosexual men in the priesthood and episcopacy.

That question is truly the gauge of the affliction permeating the very heart and soul of the Roman Catholic Church.

For you see, and it must be clearly understood, the real issue in the Catholic Church has not yet emerged into public view - and the institutional church with a small "i" and "c" is constantly "thanking God" for that. As long as the public and the media find no story in homosexuality itself, their secret is safe.

The initial outrage at the news of the horrendous sexual abuse of teenage boys at the hands of priests will slowly pass from the forefront of people's thoughts. Even the shocking revelations of episcopal cover-up, their gross violations of trust, the presence of despicable silence agreements, and the meretricious legal maneuverings of high priced lawyers, not to mention the astronomical price tag of these "failures," will all seemingly be forgiven and forgotten by the Christian faithful, so ready to be "Christ-like" in their response to this outrage.

Even now the bishops are quick to put the "scandal of the last years" behind them and to move on, very happy to have preserved their positions of "leadership" in our Church. They now tell us that they have "provided a safe environment" in which catholic young people can worship, and can join in the activities of the catholic community without fear. We can all be happy.

Never mind that they were the ones who created the problem in the first place. Never mind that they were the ones who so desperately fought, and still desperately fight, to keep it sealed in court documents and secret church records. Never mind that the revelations of their crimes never came as the result of their sincere sorrow and confession, but only as the result of their unexpected public exposure and shame. Never mind that the sexual offenders were priests and bishops who were repeatedly allowed to commit their crimes. Most of all, never mind that we are still a very long way from knowing the full story and the complete facts about what has truly been happening in our church. And, even more importantly, WHY it was ever allowed to happen in the first place.

I couldn't agree more with these words of Pope Benedict XVI:

"I did not draw back’, St. Paul says in Miletus to the pastors of the Church of Ephesus, ‘from the task of proclaiming to you the whole counsel of God’ (Acts 20:27). It is true that we bishops must act with discretion. Nevertheless, this prudence must not prevent us from presenting the Word of God in all its clarity, including those things that are heard less willingly or that consistently provoke reactions of protest and derision."

"Catholic teaching offered in an incomplete manner is a contradiction of itself and cannot be fruitful in the long term."

It is now his challenge to live by what he preaches - to give us the clear and full moral teaching about the morality of homosexual men serving as priests and bishops.

It can't be "don't ask, don't tell."

You are right it SHOULDN'T BE, but it has been more correctly:

-- "Don't ask, Don't Tell, Won't Expel" --

And there is no reason to believe that this "instruction" will significantly change that.

Let me quote another, "the REAL question is this: Why does anybody believe that the (homosexual?) bishops, seminary rectors and vocation directors, will listen to this directive when they have paid lip service but ultimately ignored everything else handed down by the Holy See that runs contrary to their agenda?"

"The problem of homosexuals in the priesthood is not new. It's been around for centuries."

Perhaps, but what IS NEW is the public revelation of the problem and its magnitude!

The real moral travesty we are dealing with, sorry NOT dealing with, in the Church is homosexuality. It’s not ALL about the “children” – what an incredibly effective, but extremely deceptive and diverting, public relations ploy.

I can remember seven years ago pouring over extensive homosexual pornography - from priests/pastors who are still functioning and still not identified publicly - with several detectives in ----- and ------- counties. Only some of the material involved rather young males and I remember asking the same question: how old do you think they are? Based on their physical erections, there were all clearly post-pubescent, (this was not pedophilia; these were not children) but it was difficult to say if they were fifteen, sixteen or just very young looking eighteen-year-olds. And since there is no legal law prohibiting the viewing or possession of homosexual (or heterosexual pornography) among adults, there was nothing that they, as police officers, could do. Even though they were men of character and honor, they were not officially concerned with the moral law.

But, even though they could not begin an investigation, or expose this hidden priestly scandal, the bishop(s) sure could have, and should have, but did not! They should have removed them from their office as pastors/leaders and placed them under the supervision of those, including the laity, who would know about their heretofore hidden sexual orientation. Instead they have resorted to, and are still resorting to, hiding, silencing and avoiding the real moral issue in order to protect themselves and the false reputation of these impostors who have been so embraced by the church (small c intended).

In fact, until about seven years ago, and since 2002 for the general public, I/we didn't know FOR SURE that there were so many homosexual men in the priesthood around the entire world. I always thought the rumors about gay priests were just anti-Catholic detractors running rampant. Now, remarkably, in just the space of a few years, in fact, currently month to month, we hear more bishops, heads of religious orders, and more and more priests themselves talking about the "many wonderful and excellent priests in the church who have a gay orientation, that are chaste (maybe, but certainly not modest, prudent, nor exemplary models of moral life and behavior) and celibate (what ever "that" is since they don't want to marry women), and are very effective ministers of the Gospel" (senza a few critical Inspired Revelations like Romans, Chapter 1 - which makes them, the priests – our moral leaders - the premiere cafeteria Catholics), said Bishop William Skylstad, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And, of course, he did not identify any of these “wonderful” gay priests by name - their identities, the offices they hold, and the actual numbers are still a very big secret. Why?

-- There is a lot more to sexuality than just sex.

-- And there is a lot more to homosexuality than just sex.

"When the media launched their attack on the Catholic Church ..."

Having had significant contact with the media, here are a few comments: (and I know that many may find this hard to believe)

1) They are in the "business" of public information. Which means that their business objectives and perspectives will influence their “view”, or slant, of the facts. However, the "facts are the facts", and they are VERY aware of the potential for libel lawsuits, and thus, usually, check and re-check their facts very carefully.

2) Whatever the "motives" of the media, I find the hidden actions of the bishops much more sinister and culpable than the media's "unrelenting" search for child molesting priests!

I believe the media have performed a invaluable service in bringing this problem to light. We would not have the correction of the "homosexual abuse of minors problem" if it had not been for the media's exposure. (The bishop's "consciences" did not correct the problem)

3) I have read this forum for years. And I routinely read almost every article written throughout the world about this issue.

I agree with you all about your hope in Pope Benedict XVI. I pray for him fervently by name every day as I offer the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ and His Perfect Sacrifice of Love to His Father,

and that is why this is AN ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL JUNCTURE.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.