Leading biographer makes clear: Newman was neither gay nor a dissenter [CC]

[Catholic_Press]

Responding to recent insinuations in the British press that Cardinal John Henry Newman was gay and was an intellectual forefather of today’s dissenters from Catholic teaching, Father Ian Ker, the author of the definitive biography of Newman, says that there is “irrefutable evidence of Newman’s heterosexuality.” The idea that Newman was a homosexual because of his friendship with Ambrose St. John comes from “the twentieth century, when the concept of friendship died.”

More…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

there is “irrefutable evidence of Newman’s heterosexuality.”

Short of proof that Newman had a sexual affair with a woman, I’m not exactly sure what could be “irrefutable evidence” of his heterosexuality.

 

[Brickmaker]

What, a homosexual can’t be a saint?

Does anyone really believe that of the 10,000+ saints within the Church not one was homosexual??

 

[Petergee]

Short of proof that Newman had a sexual affair with a woman, I’m not exactly sure what could be “irrefutable evidence” of his heterosexuality.

Your comment says more about you and the sad state into which modern Western society’s mindset has fallen, than it does about Blessed-elect Cd Newman. Do you have to know of sexual activity by yourself or anyone you know to be sure that he is heterosexual?

 

[Petergee]

What, a homosexual can’t be a saint?

Nobody said that.

Does anyone really believe that of the 10,000+ saints within the Church not one was homosexual??

Nobody said that either. Certainly it’s impossible to be a saint and to be “gay” (i.e. to endorse the idea of identifying and defining one’s identity by the fact that one is subject to temptations to sexual activity with persons of the same sex.)

Your comments seem typical of the way that the “gay” lobby and its fellow-travellers twist everything said about homosexuality by Catholics to try to make it appear that Catholics “hate” homosexuals.

 

[barb_finnegan]

Nobody said that. Nobody said that either. Certainly it’s impossible to be a saint and to be “gay” (i.e. to endorse the idea of identifying and defining one’s identity by the fact that one is subject to temptations to sexual activity with persons of the same sex.)

Your comments seem typical of the way that the “gay” lobby and its fellow-travellers twist everything said about homosexuality by Catholics to try to make it appear that Catholics “hate” homosexuals.

Amen to that-especially your last paragraph!

I am soooo tired of the homosexual lobby trying to force its immoral agenda down our throats! They have conveniently forgotten what St. Paul says about the impure not inheriting the Kingdom of Heaven!

And bravo to Father Ker for saying what he did in defense of soon-to-Blessed Newman!

The Western culture of today has lost all sense of friendship-why does everything have to have ‘sex’ in front of it? What is so wrong about two men having a friendship with one another?

 

[Darryl1958]

Amen to that-especially your last paragraph!

I am soooo tired of the homosexual lobby trying to force its immoral agenda down our throats! They have conveniently forgotten what St. Paul says about the impure not inheriting the Kingdom of Heaven!

And bravo to Father Ker for saying what he did in defense of soon-to-Blessed Newman!

The Western culture of today has lost all sense of friendship-why does everything have to have ‘sex’ in front of it? What is so wrong about two men having a friendship with one another?

It follows the pattern of the gay lobby speaking of the friendship between David and jonathan in the bible as a sexual relation.

 

[Brickmaker]

Nobody said that. Nobody said that either. Certainly it’s impossible to be a saint and to be “gay” (i.e. to endorse the idea of identifying and defining one’s identity by the fact that one is subject to temptations to sexual activity with persons of the same sex.)

Your comments seem typical of the way that the “gay” lobby and its fellow-travellers twist everything said about homosexuality by Catholics to try to make it appear that Catholics “hate” homosexuals.

Say what? Can nobody read for comprehension anymore?? The amount of exercise people get from jumping to conclusions around here is phenomenal.

My wife of almost 35 years will be shocked to read that I’m accused of being a member of the gay lobby or a fellow traveller, so if your conscience gets the better of you and you want to apologize, direct it to her.

I was commenting on the sad fact that someone finds it necessary to defend Newman against a charge of being homosexual as if being homosexual per se was an insurmountable obstacle to sainthood.

And I said nothing about ‘gay,’ by the way - I said ‘homosexual’, as in a sexual orientation, not a lifestyle. And it’s certainly NOT impossible to be a saint and to be homosexual.

Catechism: 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

 

[Dale_M]

Short of proof that Newman had a sexual affair with a woman, I’m not exactly sure what could be “irrefutable evidence” of his heterosexuality.

Yes, and even that wouldn’t rule out bisexuality. I went to the source article in The Times, but Fr. Ker doesn’t say there what the evidence for his claim is - he just refers readers to his book.

But he does make a good point. If Church authorities had any suspicion that Newman and St. John were romantically involved, its unlikely the co-burial would have been allowed.

 

[Darryl1958]

Say what? Can nobody read for comprehension anymore?? The amount of exercise people get from jumping to conclusions around here is phenomenal.

My wife of almost 35 years will be shocked to read that I’m accused of being a member of the gay lobby or a fellow traveller, so if your conscience gets the better of you and you want to apologize, direct it to her.

I was commenting on the sad fact that someone finds it necessary to defend Newman against a charge of being homosexual as if being homosexual per se was an insurmountable obstacle to sainthood.

Maybe if it was you being reported to be a homosexual, maybe at least your wife would appreciate someone defending your marriage against such a charge.

 

[Petergee]

Say what? Can nobody read for comprehension anymore?? The amount of exercise people get from jumping to conclusions around here is phenomenal.

My wife of almost 35 years will be shocked to read that I’m accused of being a member of the gay lobby or a fellow traveller, so if your conscience gets the better of you and you want to apologize, direct it to her.

Nobody accused you of anything. I said only that “Your comments seem typical of the way that …”
It’;s quite bizarre that you accuse OTHERS of jumping to conclusions immediately after taking two massive leaps yourself. And now you’ve made another huge leap.

I was commenting on the sad fact that someone finds it necessary to defend Newman against a charge of being homosexual as if being homosexual per se was an insurmountable obstacle to sainthood.

And I said nothing about ‘gay,’ by the way - I said ‘homosexual’, as in a sexual orientation, not a lifestyle.

The article says “gay” which refers to the lifestyle.

And it’s certainly NOT impossible to be a saint and to be homosexual.

I repeat, nobody here said it was. Get off your high horse.

 

[Brickmaker]

Nobody accused you of anything. I said only that “Your comments seem typical of the way that …”

If I said that your (hypothetical) comments seem typical of the way that, say, socialists and their fellow travellers twist the truth, would you think I was accusing you of being a socialist. Come on, now, be honest. And your attack on me came immediately after a more blatant one on NewEnglandPries(t)

Your comment says more about you and the sad state into which modern Western society’s mindset has fallen, than it does about Blessed-elect Cd Newman.

 

[Brickmaker]

Maybe if it was you being reported to be a homosexual, maybe at least your wife would appreciate someone defending your marriage against such a charge.

My marriage and I can easily be ‘defended’ against such a ‘charge’ as, unlike Newman, I am alive and more than capable of producing evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately, as NewEnglandPries(t) noted, producing “irrefutable evidence” of Newman’s heterosexuality is considerably more difficult.