Posted on 03/29/2010 2:17:12 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
A Roman Catholic archbishop who resigned in 2002 over a sex and financial scandal involving a man has written a memoir that describes how he struggled with being gay.
Archbishop Rembert Weakland, former head of the Milwaukee archdiocese, "is up front about his homosexuality in a church that preferred to ignore gays," Publisher's Weekly wrote in a review Monday.
The book, "A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church: Memoirs of a Catholic Archbishop," is set to be released in June and is described by the publisher as a self-examination by Weakland of his "psychological, spiritual and sexual growth."
The Vatican says that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should not be ordained.
Weakland stepped down quickly after Paul Marcoux, a former Marquette University theology student, revealed in May 2002 that he was paid $450,000 to settle a sexual assault claim he made against the archbishop more than two decades earlier. The money came from the archdiocese.
Marcoux went public at the height of anger over the clergy sex abuse crisis, when Catholics and others were demanding that dioceses reveal the extent of molestation by clergy and how much had been confidentially spent to settle claims.
Weakland denied ever assaulting anyone. He apologized for concealing the payment.
In an August 1980 letter that was obtained by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Weakland said he was in emotional turmoil over Marcoux and signed the letter, "I love you."
"During the last months, I have come to know how strained I was, tense, pensive, without much joy," Weakland wrote. "I felt like the world's worst hypocrite. So gradually I came back to the importance of celibacy in my life."
The revelations rocked the Milwaukee archdiocese, which Weakland had led since 1977. But when he publicly read a letter of apology for the scandal, Milwaukee parishioners gave him a a standing ovation.
The Archdiocese of Milwaukee released a public statement last week alerting local Catholics that the book is soon to be published and that it deals in part with Weakland's relationship with Marcoux and the scandal.
"Some people will be angry about the book, others will support it," the archdiocese said.
Weakland, who has been a hero for liberal Catholics because of his work on social justice and other issues, will also address in the memoirs his failures to stop abusive priests.
In a videotaped deposition released last November, Weakland admitted returning guilty priests to active ministry without alerting parishioners or police.
Advocates for abuse victims said that Weakland's cover up of his own sexual activity was part of a pattern of secrecy that included concealing the criminal behavior of child molesters.
The archbishop did not respond Monday to an e-mail request for comment. Weakland, a Benedictine, plans to move to St. Mary's Abbey in Morristown, N.J., this summer.
U.S. Catholics have long debated whether the priesthood had become a predominantly gay vocation. Estimates vary from 25 percent to 50 percent, according to a review of research on the issue by the Rev. Donald Cozzens, author of "The Changing Face of the Priesthood."
Cozzens, a former seminary rector, said in an interview that Weakland's acknowledgment of his sexual orientation "cuts into the denial that relatively few priests or bishops are gay."
But Russell Shaw, a former spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, questioned whether the book would have much impact.
"That one controversial archbishop acknowledges what everybody's known for several years," Shaw said, "I don't think that's going to make any big difference."
you don’t know crap about me and unless its biblical insofar as qualifications for bishop which none of the priests in the catholic church meet as far as i can tell this discussion is moot
Where did she answer if her parents supported the Church and School?? Where...I must have missed it.
>> Then don’t permit men with sexual urges to become priests. Better to have fewer faithful priests than more unfaithful ones.
Easier said than done. Ask the pope. Staffing a worldwide church exclusively with celibate clerics may very well be impossible.
SnakeDoc
esp sense most catholic believers have faith that peter is the first pope of the church
and there is biblical scripture that supports that peter was married and the only documented marital status of any apostle in the gospels although it was believed only john was single out of the 12
why would any bible believing organization want it any diff?
I know what you post, which is what I used for reference.
Paul declared his celibacy outright. Peter’s mother-in-law was mentioned, and his wife was mentioned separately=. The rest are Biblically undeclared.
The dichotomy of Peter and Paul would seem to suggest that apostles could acceptably choose from celibacy or marriage. The fact that the marital status of the other apostles was not addressed seems to indicate that marital status really isn’t that big a deal either way ... certainly not a deciding factor in who should lead the church.
SnakeDoc
If you will reread my post to you, you will notice that I included the post in which GraceG answered you. I am very surprised that you missed her eloquent reply, which made quite an impression on me. I’m also surprised that you could read my comment and not notice that I specifically mentioned the number of Grace’s post. Perhaps you are not reading with very much carefulness and attention?
freep mail me privately if your curosity is getting the better of you
You’re right that the discussion is moot as it relates to you personally. I should be careful to be more generic.
we know tho that paul was a persecutor if there is such a word of the church before God descended the holy upon him so who knows what his inclinations were before that happened
It’s PASSOVER...I’m doing DINNER.
oops holy spirit
Well, then I’m sorry that you couldn’t finish your Catholic education. I went to a 2 Room Catholic school and it was FABULOUS!!
Except for the fact that Peter’s wife was long dead.
where is that in the bible?
Well, it might be better in the abstract.
In the lived reality, as they say, Catholics need priests - more than a few - to benefit from the sacraments.
I don't know if you've noticed, but the life of a solitary pastor, caring for as many as two thousand souls, with no fellow priests and no spouse, has become very, very hard.
Not that it was ever easy - but your prescription to increase radically the demands on each priest while further isolating him from his fellow priests, both through overwork and geographic distance, doesn't seem promising.
“why would any bible believing organization want it any diff?”
Different from what? The Catholic church is no different today. If you are an anglican priest and marry, and then convert, you can still become a Catholic priest.
Nothing has changed. The Apostles, some like Peter were married well before they were called. This is why Paul says that “are you married, remain married”. Yes it is true that married men were sometimes ordained. But ordained priests did not marry.
I have had my differences with the church over the last few years, so I tend to stay out of these threads. However, your comments have been so ignorant and moronic that I felt the need to chime in. How many of these gay/celibate/pedophile priests do you know personally? I have met and been friends with literally hundreds in my lifetime and I was never molested, hit on or even made to feel uncomfortable. The priests I have known were men who sacrificed their lives to the service of their communities. Most were on call 24/7 to be with their parishoners in some of the worst moments of their lives. They live lives of sacrifice and service that leaves no time for a family of their own (which is the reason for the vow of celibacy in the first place). Their reard of late has been to be branded with a scarlet P due to the actions of a statistical few. You obviously know nothing more than what the NY Times or Boston Globe has written. The same publications that you would excoriate for conservatism are spot on when it comes to Catholic priests? Please. Your “everyone knows” and “common sense should tell you” style of arguments are exactly the same kind of logic used by the mob in charge of the WH and Congress today.
“But ordained priests did not marry.”
They did in the book of acts.
>> Except for the fact that Peter’s wife was long dead.
Nonsense.
In 1 Corinthians 9:5, Paul wrote ...
(NIV) “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?”
Cephas, as I understand it, is anoter name for Peter.
SnakeDoc
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.