From The "Francis Effect Department" - Baltimore Catholic Review Shills For "Gay Coming Out"

Since the heresy known as the interim relatio was allowed to be published from the SinNod two weeks ago, we've been seeing increasingly blatant advocacy for dissent from supposedly Catholic institutions.

The following article is from the Catholic Review, the official publication of the Archdiocese of Baltimore.  I need to reemphasize that it comes from an official Catholic publication for one could easily be confused into thinking it's from a "New Ways" newsletter or even the Gay Blade.  It's in the October 23rd online issue and the link is http://www.catholicreview.org/article/home/st-matthew-broaches-topic-of-coming-out-for-parents-gay-catholics

We urge all to contact Archbishop William E. Lori, as well as the staff of the Review.  Point out that they offer false consolation to those struggling with same-sex attractions.  We wish to point them towards repentance, salvation and healing.  In no way do we want to affirm them as they engage in mortally sinful acts nor do we wish to approve of their family members as they misguidedly affirm such sin - such affirmation would be its own mortal sin.  With the release of this article they failed utterly in their mission as Catholic journalists to proclaim Christ to the world.

I trust that they will have the good sense (unless the Francis Effect is more advanced than I suspect) to pull that article and issue a retraction.  I will reproduce it below so you can see just what was allowed to be printed in a Catholic newspaper.  You may also wish to contact this St. Matthew's parish and urge them to once again be a truly Catholic institution as opposed to a glorified dating service for gays.

And now, the article.

St. Matthew broaches topic of ‘coming out’ for parents, gay Catholics

October 24, 2014

By Maria Wiering

mwiering@CatholicReview.org

“Coming out is a journey for the whole family,” a Catholic mother of a gay son said Oct. 12.

She and her husband shared their family’s story at St. Matthew Parish in Northwood as part of a nine-person panel discussion called “When a Family Member Comes Out.”

Moderated by Father Joseph L. Muth Jr., pastor of St. Matthew and Blessed Sacrament in Baltimore, the panel included three gay Catholics, two sets of parents of gay adult children, and a pastoral counselor from Loyola University of Maryland.

Each panelist shared his or her experience, including how coming out as gay affected their relationship with family members and the Catholic Church.

About 50 people attended the two-hour event, which included a question-and-answer session. Attendees asked for advice on personal situations, including navigating conversations with family members.

“People find themselves in a confusing place because they have a faith that allows them to be strong in the face of adversity, but they sometimes have a church that’s been challenging them about how they should see their family members who are gay,” said Father Muth in an interview after the event.

The panel discussion coincided with National Coming Out Day, Oct. 11. It was an extension of LEAD, St. Matthew’s LGBT ministry. The 3-year-old organization hosts monthly meetings. Its members have marched twice in Baltimore’s Pride Parade.

Relationships vary

Panelists candidly described realizing they or their children were gay and initially fearing the judgment of others, especially people at their churches. Some panelists maintained strong family relationships. Others, such as John, felt rejected and hurt. A gay Catholic and St. Matthew parishioner who asked his last name not be printed, John shared his experience of feeling shunned by his Catholic parents, who insisted on years of therapy. He spent time in seminary, and also participated in Courage, an apostolate for gay Catholics that focuses on helping its members live celibately.

Over the years, John’s relationship with his parents has repeatedly frozen and thawed, he said. At times they refused to allow him to use “we” or “our” to refer to his then boyfriend, now legal husband; other times they met the two for dinner.

“To live with that tension, it’s incredibly difficult,” he said.

“No matter the amount of fuss you put up, it’s not going to change that they’re gay or lesbian,” John added, speaking to parents of gay children. “There’s a hyper-focus on (being) gay as the worst sin. That’s hard to shake off. For me, it’s been a process.”

A welcoming approach?

The panel was held in the middle of the 11-day Synod of Bishops on the family in Rome, where topics included pastoral responses to gay relationships. Midterm and final reports suggested disagreement among bishops over the kind of welcome gay Catholics should receive in the church.

Despite the church’s insistence that its marriage teaching will not change, several panelists stated support for church sanctioning of gay marriage. All three of the gay panelists were civilly married to same-sex partners. Several explicitly rejected Catholic teaching that marriage is reserved for a one-man-one-woman relationship, and that all non-married Catholics, including those who are gay, are “called” to celibacy.

Father Muth said that he’s spoken with people who feel positive about the synod’s potential outcomes on homosexuality.

“The church teaching may or may not change at some point down the road – that’s not something I can do anything about – but the initial step to people who have felt rejected and put aside for many years is to create an atmosphere of welcome,” he said.

That atmosphere also encourages gay Catholics to tell their stories, he said.

“I think through that storytelling, people begin to see how hurt people have been and how they’ve turned away from the church,” he said. “With the church’s whole emphasis on this new evangelization, this is a real opportunity to reverse the attitude – to have a more welcoming, compassionate, listening attitude, to tell people they can be included.”

Bending Over Backwards To Justify Pope's Kissing The Hand of Gay Activist Priest

For some background, please review this.

Did I say "bending over backwards"?  There might have been other choices like "comparing apples to oranges" or "lousy scriptural interpretation" or just "contortions of logic".  That just about sums up Simcha Fisher's piece in yesterday's National Catholic Register blog.

She desperately tried to compare the Pope's actions with De Paolis and St. Francis' actions with the sinful priest.  There are differences between the two accounts to render Fisher's comparison to be an "apples to oranges" comparison.

• The story indicates that St. Francis, in an infirm condition, was brought rather unwillingly to the priest.  The Holy Father was quite willing to be so engaged.
• St. Francis had no canonical authority over that priest.  The Holy Father most certainly does have authority over De Paolis (and every other priest for that matter).  Thus St. Francis had no binding responsibility to address the priest's problems.  The Holy Father has solemn responsibility over all his priest-sons.  To insinuate that it was appropriate for the Pope to (try to) imitate St. Francis in this matter is to deliberately disregard their very different roles and responsibilities to the Church.
• St. Francis never pretended the scandal didn't exist.  The Holy Father has given all appearances of pretending that there is nothing wrong about De Paolis's decades of in-your-face dissidence and promotion of mortal sin.

She then tries to liken the Pope's actions to that of the father of the prodigal son.  She goes so far as to claim, "Francis is speaking and acting precisely like the prodigal son's father".  No.  Not by a long shot.  Why not review Luke 15:11-32?  The choice of translations isn't particularly important.  Note that the boy's father never went on a search for him.  It wasn't until the father saw the son making the gesture of returning that he went out to greet him.  Also note that the boy acknowledged his sin and publicly repented.  De Paolis promoted heinous sin for decades in flagrant manners; did he repent at least as openly as he dissented?  Remember that he sinned not only against papal authority but against the Church, leading many into sin and probably even eternal damnation by his words and examples.

Did Jesus eat and associate with public sinners?  Yes.  Did He ever invite them to join Him as He preached and worked miracles if they had not repented?  Of course not.  Why should that now be presumed to be oakie-doakie today?

Another ADW Pastor Has Dissented From Church Teaching On Homosexuality

This past Tuesday I alerted my readers to the public disregard of Church teaching on homosexuality by the pastor of St John Vianney Church in Prince Frederick MD.  That post elicited quite a few comments, some of them with additional information regarding other problems.   I particularly want to thank the anonymous commenter of 7/5, 9:52PM.  He/she put forth a number of websites, including this one: http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.com/2009/10/30/proequality-clergy-greatly-outnumber-the-antigay-variety-in-washington-dc/

Granted it is a liberal site, but I've no reason to doubt its accuracy as to its main subject matter: the so-called "Declaration of Religious Support for Marriage Equality".  The names of the signers are arranged alphabetically.  Signing this document is Msgr Jameson, rector of the Cathedral of St Matthew the Apostle.  Consider that this cathedral is the seat of the Archbishop of Washington: that is, Cardinal Wuerl.

How much more of this pestilence will make its stench known?  To be honest, if it exists we need to know about it so let it come to light.  When it does, though, will the Cardinal move to eradicate the mess?  Both of these priests exercise pastoral ministries at present.  Let us pray that corrective action is undertaken immediately to mitigate any future spiritual damage.

Catholic Pastor In Southern Maryland Publicly Condones Homosexual Acts

We rightly warn of wolves in sheep's clothing.  True enough, but there is a greater danger - wolves in shepherd's clothing!  Can this describe Father Peter Daly, pastor of St. John Vianney Parish in Prince Frederick Maryland?  His own words have made plain that his influence is a danger to those placed in his care.

The Not-At-All Catholic Reporter published an article of Father's, entitled, "Catholic Church Should Support Boy Scouts' Decision on Sexual Orientation".  The first part of the article is a lame attempt to cajole us into thinking that the Boy Scouts will remain the healthy, morally-straight organization that it once was.  After all that meandering, Father lets loose with can only be called moral poison.  I will quote the pertinent segment below, leaving out only the paragraph breaks.

"Three times in my 27 years as a priest, I have had to sit across the room from young men who tried to commit suicide because they were gay. Three times, I have heard their anguish as they told me that their church regarded them as "intrinsically disordered" and their love as seriously immoral. Three times I have had to hear them say that part of the reason for their despair was our preaching.  Conservative Catholic theologians would no doubt demand that I condemn all homosexual acts as immoral. They would want pastors to insist that all gay boys must learn to carry their unique cross of perpetual life-long chastity, a burden we would never dream of imposing on heterosexuals. They would want me to say that all gay acts are evil and all inclinations are intrinsically disordered.  Well, let them say it. Let them say it to those boys who tried to commit suicide. Let them say it to the frightened little Scout who is still figuring out himself."

Let's unpack this mess, shall we?  We'll do this, "bullet style".

• Three times, I have heard their anguish as they told me that their church regarded them as "intrinsically disordered" and their love as seriously immoral.  Father, did you remind them that the Church doesn't consider them - as persons - disordered, but rather their homosexual inclinations?  Moreover, their "love" is not true love at all.  If you have confirmed any of them in their confusion, you have done them gross disservice and may well be confirming on the path to eternal perdition.
• Conservative Catholic theologians would no doubt demand that I condemn all homosexual acts as immoral.  Well, not so much "conservative" as much as "Faithful to the moral teachings handed down by Jesus Christ Himself through the Church's teaching magisterium".  It's a mouthful, but we get the point.  And yes, Father!  It IS the teaching of Holy Mother Church that all homosexual ACTS are immoral.  Notice that it's the ACTS, not PERSONS, lest there be silly attempts to conflate the two.  You will not be permitted to get away with it!  At any rate, the "theologians" don't demand that you condemn these acts.  That charge is laid upon you by virtue of the Sacrament of Holy Orders.  You are called to proclaim the Gospel, to call sinners to repentance and to administer the Sacraments.  Without all these elements, the unfortunate homosexual will find him/herself bereft of the graces needed to conquer these disordered inclinations.  Father, knock off this politically correct schtick and administer some real help and compassion to these souls in your care.
• They would want me to say that all gay acts are evil and all inclinations are intrinsically disordered.  Well, let them say it. Let them say it to those boys who tried to commit suicide. Let them say it to the frightened little Scout who is still figuring out himself.  There are four sentences here.  In the first sentence, let's substitute for the word "they" and rightly put in its place Jesus Christ Himself, for that is His teaching as revealed through His church.  So in the first sentence, Father properly states what is his solemn duty as an ordained Catholic priest.  In the following sentences, Father declares that he is abdicating his duty to proclaim the truth and to do all he can to save the immortal souls of those afflicted with homosexual inclinations.  God help him if he doesn't reconsider the error of his current disposition for in addition to his own salvation, he imperils that of many others in his path.

The Cardinal Newman Society points out that this is not the first time that Father has coddled those who engage in self-destructive behaviors.  This past year he gave scandal to gay students at Catholic University of America, instead of true compassion.

Of course all this begs the question, "Should Father Daly continue in his post while he is still of a mindset to lead confused souls to destruction?"   We should at least contact the Archdiocese of Washington and petition for his removal, if only for his own salvation.  The chancery has demonstrated its ability to move with extreme alacrity when it so desires; witness the speed with which they threw Father Marcel Guarnizo under the bus.  Granted, Father Guarnizo's case was a bit different.  Father Guarnizo acted in complete obedience to the Magisterium; he just happened to ruffle the feathers of the DC-area gay community and the latter simply got noisy.  Father Daly, on the other hand, is thumbing his nose at the Magisterium.  Will the DC chancery find the spinal fortitude and moral clarity to deal with him appropriately?