Homosexual-friendly priest named rector at Santa Clara University

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ignatius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Ignatius

Guest
Homosexual-friendly priest named rector at Santa Clara University, will be religious superior of 40 fellow Jesuits on campus
By Gibbons J. Cooney
Special to California Catholic Daily

On March 22, Santa Clara University announced that Fr. Michael Zampelli, S.J., had been named the new rector to the Jesuit community of Santa Clara University. Zampelli was appointed by Fr. General Adolfo Nicolás, S.J., the superior general of the Society of Jesus in Rome.

“As rector of the second-largest Jesuit community in the California province of Jesuits, Zampelli will serve as the religious superior for his 40 fellow Jesuits on campus,” said a university news release. “His role is to support and serve them in living their personal, communal, and apostolic lives as Jesuits.”
Click to expand...
Here is the full story: calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=58203019-d5c7-4e15-bae9-b756160f5fca
 
I’m a homosexual friendly catholic and I pray that all catholics will be homosexual friendly too, as I’m positive Jesus is.

I definitely love those people because they are children of God, I just despise the sin as much as I despise my own sins.

My point is, I didn’t like this “homosexual friendly” label to describe the “homosexual ACTIVITY friendly” priest.

Yeah yeah, semantics.
 
I am more of the belief that the Church is more in danger from what is inside her walls then outside of it.

I do not believe this priest works for Christ nor the Church. And if the Church keeps these types within her walls, then we might as well hand over the Church to satan now and be done with it.

No wonder I am on anti-depressants.
 
aicirt said:
Wrote to him. Thanks for the link. Sometimes I really do wonder what they’re thinking.
Click to expand...
I didn’t see an email or postal address. Can you pm me the contact info? I’d also like to write him and respectfully express my great dismay and concern about this appointment.
 
Ignatius said:
I didn’t see an email or postal address. Can you pm me the contact info? I’d also like to write him and respectfully express my great dismay and concern about this appointment.
Click to expand...
Scroll up to the site given before and click on it. For some reason, I can’t copy and paste it here. Once you get the site, scroll all the way down to the bottom and you’ll see in small print “Contact us”. His name is Father General Adolfo Nicolas.
 
kyria
*
I am more of the belief that the Church is more in danger from what is inside her walls then outside of it.*

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them…. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit…. Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers.’” Matthew (7:15-23)

I think we will always have these people drawn inside the Church to remake it in their image and likeness … because Satan knows better than anyone the principle of divide and conquer. These priests are Satan’s dupes. Pray for them!

The appalling thing is that the Jesuits are supposedly under the auspices of the pope himself, answerable only to him. So what is their answer?
 
Hate the sin, love the sinner.
That said, I would be more concerned with his views on moral relativity. It is entirely possible for homosexuals to be moral chaste life - just as it is for every other college student to live a moral chaste life. Unfortunately the vast majority of both don’t - the question is weather or not the Priest condones the sin.

I listened to more than one homily that openly questioned weather or not premarital sex was a serious sin. In one case the Priest said there was a difference between making love with your girlfriend, and F’ing in the back seat of a Chevy. In another (much more attended mass) the priest simply said that he would not say premarital sex (in a relationship) was a mortal sin. Those same priests also reached out to other people in recurring sin (and I expect in similar ways.

To be honest, I understand why they did it. You have to have an audience to give the message to. Ultimately they may have saved more souls than lost, but how many turned down a dark path after those Homilies I will never know.
 
The problem with the Catholic Church is that it has been Protestantized … in other words, Balkanized. There are so many warring factions that it’s a wonder anyone any more pays any attention to the bishops and the pope.

The sex scandals are never ending, and it’s almost always a clergyman at the heart of them. I wonder why anyone wants to be a Catholic today, unless he or she has found a priest who will affirm the candidate’s perverse reading of the gospels.

Yet people are still drawn to the Church, because even though it seems that Satan sits on our episcopal thrones, it is really our merciful and mighty Jesus Christ. 👍
 
chain said:
In one case the Priest said there was a difference between making love with your girlfriend, and F’ing in the back seat of a Chevy.
Click to expand...
That priest actually used such crude language? Because if so, that in itself says a lot about him and his views.
 
I am pretty sure that was a direct quote - of something I heard in 1987 (it made quite an impression). It legitimazted my moral relavatism. At that point I was celibate - but had no real desire to wait till marriage, just to wait for a good relationship. I hate getting specific, but I am pretty sure the priest was the Diocese youth director at the time, and it was on a Diocesan retreat. I was on the Diocesan youth resource team and a counselor at the retreat. Perhaps it was simply the state of the Church at the time.

The priest was trying to outreach to kids who he knew (correctly or incorrectly) were already sexually active. Telling them NO would not work, but only drive them away from the Church. Instead he (and other priest - about 8 years latter, different diocese, but same religious order) trying to change the focus to Love - and in doing so also focused on love rather than marriage as the bond necessary for sexuality. It also gave them wiggle room on homosexual relationships (teen/college and homosexuals were targets of their outreach ministries).

Their outreach ministry was very influential in my formation (I attended their order’s masses from 16 to about 30). I understand why they did what they did - but sometimes their message was not the whole truth - just what their congregation would accept. Only once do I recall the them standing up to the moral relativism of their congregation - and that was a mass the lectures refused to read the readings. Very rare that the Priest has to read the Sunday readings because the lectures did not like the message.
 
chain said:
I am pretty sure that was a direct quote - of something I heard in 1987 (it made quite an impression). It legitimazted my moral relavatism. At that point I was celibate - but had no real desire to wait till marriage, just to wait for a good relationship. I hate getting specific, but I am pretty sure the priest was the Diocese youth director at the time, and it was on a Diocesan retreat. I was on the Diocesan youth resource team and a counselor at the retreat. Perhaps it was simply the state of the Church at the time.

The priest was trying to outreach to kids who he knew (correctly or incorrectly) were already sexually active. Telling them NO would not work, but only drive them away from the Church. Instead he (and other priest - about 8 years latter, different diocese, but same religious order) trying to change the focus to Love - and in doing so also focused on love rather than marriage as the bond necessary for sexuality. It also gave them wiggle room on homosexual relationships (teen/college and homosexuals were targets of their outreach ministries).

Their outreach ministry was very influential in my formation (I attended their order’s masses from 16 to about 30). I understand why they did what they did - but sometimes their message was not the whole truth - just what their congregation would accept. Only once do I recall the them standing up to the moral relativism of their congregation - and that was a mass the lectures refused to read the readings. Very rare that the Priest has to read the Sunday readings because the lectures did not like the message.
Click to expand...
Shame on the priests and shame on their community.
Hope you have since found faithful, truthful priests in your life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top