Priest accused of ‘anti-gay indoctrination’ for teaching Catholic view of homosexuality in class

[Elizabeth502]

A couple of points:

1. It’s not “Church teaching” that SSA can be treated if by treated you mean cured. One is certainly free to hold that opinion but its not a teaching of the Church.
2. Comparing SSA to alcoholism is an analogy which like all analogies falls short in some respects. Alcoholism is an addiction, whereas SSA is simply a sexual attraction.

It has not been my own understanding that the addictive aspects of alcoholism is the basis for comparison. Rather, alcoholism…
(1) is a disordered inclination
(2) may have some biochemical aspects to it (while not being ‘deterministic’ per se)
(3) requires serious discipline to turn from, including a permanent repudiation of temptations to reversion

I have never thought, nor has any Catholic speaker (which I have heard) on the subject ever implied/said, that “the Church teaches” that there is currently a known “cure” for SSA. The Church, however, teaches compassion first and foremost. Compassion for the individual, hope for the individual, and openness, always, to the possibility of change. Inasmuch as various long-term approaches (psychologically, pastorally) are available, it is not contrary to Church teaching to suggest hope and help.

 

[mdgspencer]

If I were this priest, I would think this criticism all-right, because the publicity will cause many people to watch the these talks. This may make these videos all the more helpful in spreading the Catholic view concerning homosexual acts.

 

[Sherry_G]

If I were this priest, I would think this criticism all-right, because the publicity will cause many people to watch the these talks. This may make these videos all the more helpful in spreading the Catholic view concerning homosexual acts.

Agreed! Encouraging for others to stand up for what Catholics believe without apology or fear of the “politically correct” main stream media whose agenda is to sensationalize and criticize all things Catholic. Many people know that this priests’ statements of our beliefs are true and correct, but most would not dare to speak about it in a public forum for fear of being shouted down, drug thru the courts and personally villified. That is shown to be the tactic of the so-called “liberal” media, which is only liberal if we agree with the popular theories which suggest that living the homosexual lifestyle is just as normal as baseball, apple pie and Chevrolets!

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

It has not been my own understanding that the addictive aspects of alcoholism is the basis for comparison. Rather, alcoholism…
(1) is a disordered inclination
(2) may have some biochemical aspects to it (while not being ‘deterministic’ per se)
(3) requires serious discipline to turn from, including a permanent repudiation of temptations to reversion

Indeed, but this thread is a discussion about what people might find offensive about what the priest said. Given that homosexuals have often been portrayed as sex maniacs, an analogy that uses an addiction might be perceived as offensive to some. But, as I noted, all analogies ultimately fall short in one area or another.

I have never thought, nor has any Catholic speaker (which I have heard) on the subject ever implied/said, that “the Church teaches” that there is currently a known “cure” for SSA. The Church, however, teaches compassion first and foremost. Compassion for the individual, hope for the individual, and openness, always, to the possibility of change. Inasmuch as various long-term approaches (psychologically, pastorally) are available, it is not contrary to Church teaching to suggest hope and help.

Once again, this thread contains several references to “the priest was just giving the teaching of the Church.” I simply pointed out that on this point the priest was giving his personal opinion.

 

[AugustV]

Of course, this is “hate speech” in the minds of the left. In some areas of Canada, this type of speech is forbidden. Hate speech is thought control, simply repackaged to sell it to the unwitting and well-intentioned. This is why freedom of speech is such an important right. Notice how there is no “hate speech” applicable to those who are quite insulting to the Catholic Church. I will defend anyone’s right to verbally insult me. Oh, how foolish we are to continue to place in power those who selectively restrict our freedoms under the guise of concern for the downtrodden.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Of course, this is “hate speech” in the minds of the left. In some areas of Canada, this type of speech is forbidden. Hate speech is thought control, simply repackaged to sell it to the unwitting and well-intentioned. This is why freedom of speech is such an important right. Notice how there is no “hate speech” applicable to those who are quite insulting to the Catholic Church. I will defend anyone’s right to verbally insult me. Oh, how foolish we are to continue to place in power those who selectively restrict our freedoms under the guise of concern for the downtrodden.

This is off-topic, but what you posted reminds me of what Diogenes of Sinope once said when asked what the “greatest thing in the world” was------he responded “freedom of speech.”
He was well qualified to make that statement. He was a guy who would occassionally defecate, masturbate and urinate in public and generally do outrageous, provocative things to get across his message of people living virtous lives in “accordance with nature.” That and of course, walking around in daylight with a lantern looking for a honest man.
So I get what you are saying.

 

[Rence]

According to the article, they don’t like that he said homosexual acts are an “abomination”, that SSA can be treated, that he’s against homosexual adoption, and that he compared SSA to alcoholism.

This may be part of the problem with what Farther teaches. The Church does not teach that SSA can be treated. This is not a Church teaching, it’s Father’s opinion. And how did he compare SSA to alcoholism? The Church doesn’t compare SSA to alcoholism…

Fellow Catholics would have an easier time defending him if he would stick to what the Church actually teaches.

This is a Catholic school, right? and he’s teaching a Catholic theology course, I presume, correct? If this is a Catholic theology course, I can’t see how he’s in trouble – except for the parts that the Church doesn’t hold as teachings.

 

[Corki]

This may be part of the problem with what Farther teaches. The Church does not teach that SSA can be treated. This is not a Church teaching, it’s Father’s opinion. And how did he compare SSA to alcoholism? The Church doesn’t compare SSA to alcoholism…

Fellow Catholics would have an easier time defending him if he would stick to what the Church actually teaches.

This is a Catholic school, right? and he’s teaching a Catholic theology course, I presume, correct? If this is a Catholic theology course, I can’t see how he’s in trouble – except for the parts that the Church doesn’t hold as teachings.

It’s a Catholic school. Father acutally seems to have a practice of posting his lectures on line - it’s not just this one. It looks like it’s a class in Catholic morality from to looks of the various subjects in the videos.

How does a teacher offering his opinion mean that he is “in trouble”? Most teachers offer opinions from time to time. His opinion isn’t in opposition to Church teaching, it is an area where the Church is silent. It is perfectly fine to have opinons in areas where the Church is silent.

The Church doesn’t compare SSA to alcoholism…

Actually, the Church would consider both to be disorders and that either presents dangers when expressed behaviorally.

It’s the genetic/medical community that makes a stronger comparison. The more research is released it looks like homosexuality may be a disorder for which there may be a genetic pre-disposition. The pre-disposition seems to be realized based on a variety of environmental and social influences. All of the above is also true for alcholism. (and lactose intollerance, for what it’s worth).

 

[Elizabeth502]

My comments below are addressed to all four posters:

According to the article, they don’t like that he said that SSA can be treated

This may be part of the problem with what Farther teaches. The Church does not teach that SSA can be treated. This is not a Church teaching, it’s Father’s opinion.

Indeed, but this thread is a discussion about what people might find offensive about what the priest said. Once again, this thread contains several references to "the priest was just giving the teaching of the Church." I simply pointed out that on this point the priest was giving his personal opinion.

A couple of points:

1. It’s not “Church teaching” that SSA can be treated if by treated you mean cured. One is certainly free to hold that opinion but its not a teaching of the Church.

Find it.

To all of you, please find where he says this in the videoed lectures. I have an extremely busy day today, but it was worth wasting two hours of my time to listen to the lectures, because I didn’t believe that the so-called charges against him in the gay community (quoted either accurately or inaccurately by lifesitenews) could be true. Guess who’s correct – unless I missed a section of the lectures, at which point I will stand corrected.

I am extremely well versed in this entire issue, regarding what the Church does and does not teach, and what the arguments are for secular society regarding gay “marriage” – which by the way is the vast majority of the content of these lectures. There’s not a single thing that this priest/teacher said that is out of step with what the RCC teaches. Nothing was radical, least of all was it his personal opinion.

I also visited his blog (where the videos of those lectures are continued), so unless there’s a page I missed, I still did not find the so-called statement about SSA being curable according to the official teachings of the RCC. I read all the blog comments as well. (One would especially assume to find objections to such a statement on blog commentaries, if such a statement had been made.) Yet there were no such references to any such statement. Heavily dominating the blog comments were anti-Catholic rants by one homosexual and a few others. Interesting also that clearly Fr. was allowing all the comments to stand, showing a pretty open attitude to the published vitriol, i.m.o.

So…

It would appear that we probably have another piece of inaccurate “journalism” by lifesitenews and/or more of the same distorted propaganda by the Gay Lobby (regarding the class content).

A footnote on the alcoholism comment: I was right. Whether or not one “likes” the analogy or finds it inadequate, he described in a limited way the same comparative aspects of alcoholism as I did in my earlier post here. Nothing more than that.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

This thread shows a screaming headline from a partisan group about what a partisan group posted on their website.

There is less here than meets the eye.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Find it.

To all of you, please find where he says this in the videoed lectures.

I never made any claim about what the priest said, I simply responded to a previous post in this thread. If you notice the post I quoted it stated that those things were part of Church teaching. I simply pointed out that they were not.

 

[Brendan]

With all due respect, I think it would more accurate to call them pedophil priests rather than homosexual priests. There is a difference.

THere is a difference. Pedophillia is the attraction to pre-pubecent children.

Homosexuality is the attaction to post-pubecent members of one’s own sex

Since most of the cases involved post-pubecent males, ‘homosexual’ can be correctly applied to most, but not all, cases.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I never made any claim about what the priest said, I simply responded to a previous post in this thread. If you notice the post I quoted it stated that those things were part of Church teaching. I simply pointed out that they were not.

Right, Father. But your posts seemed (to me) to assign crediblity to the information in the article itself. I think this is (just one more) lesson for all of us, self included, who have been burned before by the “information” both from lifesitenews and from the propaganda out there, that we need to verify the sources. Particularly troubling for me was the assumption of most on the thread (until then) that in fact he was some radical right-wing (mis)interpreter of Church teaching, when he is obviously no such thing. In fact, ironically, in Lecture 1, I believe, the priest in question even criticizes what he calls “radical” religious denominations who have in the past bused self-described gays to some location for an “instant” cure. He contrasts the Church’s position with that, as I recall, but naturally I’m willing to be corrected on that. It’s clear, though, that he does not subscribe to such tactics, however he worded it.

I think we should all examine the accuracy of statements in all lifesitenews articles unless we happened first to have information that verifies theirs, from a different, more trusted, source (or several verifications from many sources), prior to viewing the same LSN story.

 

[He_Man]

Meh. Don’t like what the Church says about sin, stop sinning.

Some groups are such pathetic whiners, in addition to being disordered.

 

[estesbob]

With all due respect, I think it would more accurate to call them pedophil priests rather than homosexual priests. There is a difference.

There is. And there was very little pediophilia involved in the abuse. it was almost exclusively homosexual rape of post pubsecent boys.

 

[JaredM]

It’s got to be really hard to be a gay student in a Catholic school.

 

[estesbob]

It’s got to be really hard to be a gay student in a Catholic school.

Actually attending a Catholic school is probably the best thing for a student who is tempted to engage in homosexual behavior. Rather than affirm their sin they will be given guidance that can lead to a happy and productive life and most importantly not imperil their immortal soul.

 

[Tigg]

It’s got to be really hard to be a gay student in a Catholic school.

Yes, I suppose so, if you are not open to the working of the Holy Spirit nor amendable when being challenged with Truth.