As part of his progressive agenda, Francis will soon be adding sins against the ecology to the Catholic catechism. Catholics are taught they must successfully obey the Ten Commandments and church rules in order to possibly merit Heaven. Christians are certainly commanded to be good stewards of the Lord’s gifts, which include this planet and its resources, but Catholics are not stewards/servants because they are not trusting in Jesus Christ as there Savior by faith alone. Instead, they are seeking to establish their own righteousness (Romans 10:3). How will Francis roll out his guidelines on ecological sins? Will throwing gum wrappers on the street be a “venial” sin and disposing of four old tires in the woods a “mortal” sin?
After months of pleading from outraged Buffalo parishioners, pope Francis finally relented and tapped bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn to look into allegations that bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo had repeatedly covered-up for abusive priests. But a former altar boy has recently sued DiMarzio himself for abuse. Responding to the allegations against DiMarzio, the pope stated that he wants the matter “cleared up quickly.” Throughout this double-decade of scandal, the RCC has consistently put its predatory priests and bishops first and victims last by seeking the “quick fix.”
The Catholic church teaches that at mass its priests transform bread wafers and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ and that the congregants receive special graces by consuming the Jesus wafer that help them merit their salvation. But recent research (see here) reveals that only 31% of Catholics believe priests actually change bread wafers and wine into Jesus, an amazing statistic! Whether they believe in transubstantiation or not, these lost Catholics are attempting to merit their salvation rather than trusting in Jesus Christ as their Savior by faith alone.
Pope Francis guilefully lifted the ban on communion for remarried divorcees via two footnotes in his 2016 Amoris Laetitia encyclical, leaving it up to the discretion of the administering priest. As liberal bishops and priests continue to roll out Francis’ novel teaching, conservatives and traditionalists rant and rail.
Christians should not be concerned about society’s approval. The Gospel will offend. However, much of society’s aversion is due to some evangelicals’ outspoken support of President Trump and Republican politics (see Jerry Falwell, Jr., Robert Jeffress, Franklin Graham, etc.) rather than for proclaiming the Gospel.
Bad Shepherds: The Dark Years in Which the Faithful Thrived While Bishops Did the Devil’s Work
By Rod Bennett
Sophia Institute Press, 2018, 148 pages
with qualifications noted below.
Conservative Catholics are in an impossible pickle of a situation. They have always boasted of their church being led by an infallible pope, incapable of leading the church into doctrinal error. However, the current pope, Francis, and his progressive allies have guilefully overturned several cherished doctrines in their quest to make the church more relevant and appealing in an increasingly secularized world.
Since loyalty to the papacy is one of the prime beliefs of conservative Catholics, schism and even public criticism of Francis are not viable options for most. What to do? The consensus among conservative Catholic spokespersons is to uphold traditional church teaching, ignore Francis’ novelties, and hope the next pope is from the same mold as Wojtyla and Ratzinger.
In this short book, conservative Catholic writer, Rod Bennett, examines several periods in church history when popes or prelates were far from “exemplary.” His thinly-veiled, bottom-line message: the Catholic laity remained faithful to the church’s teachings despite challenges from wayward popes and prelates in the past and they must remain faithful despite Francis’ heterodox reforms.
The historical episodes Bennett examines include:
The spread of the Arianism heresy (denial of the divinity of Christ and the Trinity) in the fourth century.
The church’s preoccupation with the temporal throughout the Dark Ages (5th-10th centuries).
The 14th century blunders and the negative consequences of a deadly plague, i.e., the Avignon Papacy/Great Western Schism and the Black Death.
The church’s arrogant and counterproductive mishandling of the Protestant “challenge” in the 16th century.
The French church’s compromise with the 18th-century “Enlightenment” humanists which affected the rest of the church.
Bennett’s examination of the corruption of popes, bishops, priests, and Catholic monarchs during these episodes is objective only to a point. In one jaw-dropping example, he portrays Catholic Mary I of England (aka “Bloody Mary”) as a kind and benevolent monarch in contrast to her Protestant successor, Elizabeth I. Not hardly.
Nevertheless, the biased history is definitely NOT the takeaway from this book. Rather, “Bad Shepherds” is important because it’s another example of how conservative Catholics currently feel compelled to assuage their like-minded fellow members in the face of Francis’ doctrine-challenging heterodoxy. The idea of a conservative Catholic publishing house issuing a book about some of the church’s most scandalous historical episodes would have been unthinkable only seven years ago before Francis’ tenure began. This is a book borne of sheer desperation.
The message of this book is how to help keep conservative Catholicism afloat despite the current challenges. As with all Catholic books, the focus is on the legalistic and institutional oyster shell rather than on the pearl of great price; the Gospel of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.
Recommended only for evangelicals associated with outreach ministries to Catholics and/or evangelicals who are curious about Catholicism’s current papal “crisis.”
Why Government Can’t Save You: An Alternative to Political Activism
By John MacArthur
Word Publishing, 2000, 192 pages
Readers of this blog know one of my pet peeves is “Christian nationalism.” The Puritans came to this continent beginning in 1620 determined to set up a theocracy in which faith and government were inseparably intertwined. It’s hard to fault them because church-state symbiosis had been the model since Christianity was made the state religion of the Roman Empire in 380 AD. The Puritans set the stage for the very popular notion, preached from pulpits for 400 years, that Colonial America, followed by the American nation, were in a unique, covenant relationship with God akin to God’s covenant relationship with Israel recorded in the Old Testament. Bible passages meant strictly for ancient Israel were regularly misapplied to the United States. What resulted were abuses and attitudes that were contrary to the Gospel and Gospel outreach. It was taken for granted by most that America was a “Christian nation” regardless of the spiritual condition of individual souls.
Alarmed by the increasing secularization of the nation in the 1960s and 70s, evangelicals took up the battle cry to stem the tide. Baptist pastor, Jerry Falwell, vowed to “lead the nation back to the moral stance that made America great.” In the push to fight the culture battles and defend morality and “Judeo-Christian principles” via the political process, the church’s focus on the Gospel was relegated to the back burner. Falwell and others eagerly embraced conservative religious unbelievers as allies in the fight against advancing secularism, thus promoting religious ecumenism. The politically-liberal lost were increasingly perceived as “the enemy” rather than as a mission field. The idea of government becoming some kind of cultural savior took hold in the minds of many. Believers were tempted to support America’s “civil religion” in which the bond of national citizenry and shared belief in a nebulous “supreme being” took precedence over the exclusively genuine Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I recently heard about this book via some negative comments from a discernment ministry apologist who still strongly believes in the notion of America as a “Christian nation.” In “Why Government Can’t Save You,” Pastor John MacArthur responds to churches and individual evangelicals caught up in culture/morality battles. MacArthur reminds believers, with examples from the Old and New Testaments, that, yes, we should be model citizens, although our primary citizenship is in Heaven and that our focus should be on the Gospel and evangelization rather than on promoting nationalism and legislating morality.
Political Involvement: a Christian Perspective
Our Responsibility to Authority
The Biblical Purpose of Government
Our Tax Obligation
Jesus’ Lesson on Tax Exemptions
Supporting Our Leaders: How and Why
Daniel’s Uncompromising Civil Service
Paul’s Example Before Worldly Authorities
How to Live in a Pagan Culture
Appendix: Citizenship in Heaven: a Sermon by Charles Spurgeon (this excellent sermon can be found online here)
The book’s message of limited political engagement for believers runs counter to the historical and still very popular notion of America being a “Christian nation,” however, nineteen years after this book was published, with America becoming that much more secularized, there are more believers who are willing to concede that the Falwellian crusade to “reclaim America for Jesus” was wrong-headed and that the focus should now be on the Gospel and Gospel outreach.
My homemade advertisement above is satirical, but there’s some truth mixed in.
Here’s an observation from one of the older brothers in the pews:
Hipster, mega-church pastors and worship team leaders are trying SO HARD to be culturally “relevant” and cutting-edge cool that it’s becoming ridiculous, pathetic, and even pitiable. Skinny jeans with “pre-manufactured” holes in the knees matched with $100 swag haircuts have become de rigueur, bonus points for tatoos. What’s next?
“Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” – Romans 12:2
Only four months ago, in early December, I was celebrating the conclusion of my Fall 2018 leaf removal campaign. See here. With the large number of oak trees in our yard and the surrounding neighbors’ yards, I usually end up hauling 50+ tarp-loads of leaves to the curb every November. There’s obviously not any yard work to be done during the Winter months – December thru March – up here in Rochester, New York, with the cold temperatures and an almost-constant blanket of snow. But the oak trees continue to drop branches and twigs on the lawn when the Winter winds blow. And the heavy accumulation of snow on the lawn for four months often results in what we call, “snow mold,” a type of white-ish fungus that ends up killing the grass if unattended.
So, every Spring, I must go outside with my flexible, metal rake and rake our entire half-acre lawn to clean out all the debris and dead grass and break up any patches of snow mold. I was able to get out there for the first time on Saturday, March 16th. Argh, raking is VERY hard work, especially the first outing when your muscles aren’t use to it. I ended up raking about a third of the back lawn that day, and twenty-four hours later, I felt like I had been hit by a Mack truck! As of this writing, I’ve raked about 33% of the entire lawn.
It’s really rough on the grass when you’re repeatedly dragging a metal rake through it. While you are removing twigs, acorns, leaves, thatch, and other debris, you’re also pulling at the grass itself, removing the dead grass, but also dislodging some of the healthy grass. If the grass had feelings and a mouth it would constantly be yelling, “Ouch!,” as you continued to drag that unsympathetic rake through it over and over. As “traumatic” as the raking must be for the grass, the end result is very positive. With much of the clutter removed, the remaining grass and the soil beneath it have abundantly more access to air, sunshine, and moisture, making for a healthier, more vibrant lawn. Have you guessed where this post is heading yet? I’m guessing you probably have.
As with many of life’s challenges and circumstances, we can make a few spiritual analogies when it comes to Spring raking. The Lord often uses circumstances and events in our lives to clean out the clutter, distractions, and temptations. He prunes away the dead branches in our lives. It’s painful and disconcerting at the time, but the end result is we’re more receptive to His Word and His leading and closer and more reliant on Him. So when the “raking” comes into your life, and it will surely come, resist the temptation to be bitter and resentful. Use the opportunity to “lean in” even closer to your Father who loves you and desires the very best for you.
“My son, do not despise the Lord’s discipline or be weary of his reproof, for the Lord reproves him whom he loves, as a father the son in whom he delights.” – Proverbs 3:11-12
“It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.” – Hebrews 12:7-11
I took the above enlarged photo with my iPhone through the windshield of my car as I was driving home from work last week. I was driving around 60 mph at the time and took the photo with one hand. Definitely don’t try this at home! Forgive the poor quality. Yes, I even photoshopped it as best I could.
Okay, so what about that “Jesus Saves” billboard in the photo?
Rochester, New York sits smack dab in the middle of the anti-Bible Belt. Ninety-five percent of the people here are either Roman Catholics, mainline (modernist) “Protestants,” or atheists/agnostics. We certainly don’t see a lot of “Jesus Saves” signs around here.
The huge “Jesus Saves” billboard sits aside Route 490 eastbound near the city center. It’s been there for a couple of months. Route 490 is the major east-west expressway in our county. Average daily traffic (ADT) on 490 at this location is about 100,000 cars per day. That’s A LOT of people reading “Jesus Saves” each day.
The Lord uses many people and things to draw souls to Him. I pray He uses this billboard on 490 to get people thinking about salvation in Christ. The smaller print on the billboard references John 3:16 and says it’s sponsored by The Shepherds Fold Church in Scottsville, New York. I checked the church’s website and I see it’s Pentecostal and teaches the prosperity gospel. Argh! Definitely not a church I would recommend. But I do pray the Lord uses the mammoth sign to get passing motorists to think about Him.
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” – John 3:16
Postscript: I remember before I accepted Jesus that I used to scoff at any “Jesus Saves” signs that I saw. My buddies and I would always be tempted to append “…Green Stamps” to any “Jesus Saves” signs or posters we encountered. If you’re younger than, say, fifty, I’m confident you have no idea what S&H Green Stamps were.
Vatican I: The Council and the Making of the Ultramontane Church
By John W. O’Malley
Belknap Press, 2018, 320 pages
Some of my recent readings about the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility prompted me to download the ebook version of this very interesting book.
In the 19th-century, as monarchies were being overturned throughout Europe in favor of constitutional democracies, pope Pius IX hung on desperately to the Papal States, an area of about 16,000 sq. mi. in the central region of the Italian Peninsula. As the alleged “Vicar of Christ,” the pope claimed authority over both the temporal and spiritual worlds and the Papal States were symbolic of his theoretical jurisdiction over all nations.
As the political and military supporters of Italian national unification began making inroads into the Papal States, the pope called upon France and Austria to defend his territory. He retaliated against the “revolutionaries” the only way he could, by issuing the “Syllabus of Errors” in 1864, which condemned all forms of constitutional government, freedom of religion, and other “modern errors.”
But many Catholics of the era reacted to the post-Enlightenment upheavals by desiring a return to an ultra-pious religiosity which would be embodied by an authoritarian pope; authoritarian at least in spiritual matters. Debates over papal infallibility began raging throughout Catholic Europe with the Jesuits taking the lead in the campaign for furthering papal supremacy. Pius IX saw the opportunity to balance his increasingly precarious temporal situation with regards to the Papal States with increased “spiritual” prerogatives and called the Vatican Council (1869-1870) mainly to define the dogma of papal infallibility. Much/most of the impetus for declaring the pope infallible was in reaction to the loss of the Papal States; the Risorgimento may have seized the pope’s kingdom, but he was still their infallible, spiritual sovereign.
Contemporary Catholics who take the doctrine of infallibility for granted 150 years later should definitely read this book. Many of the prelates of the preconciliar church thought of the hierarchy in much more collegial terms and saw the pope as a symbolic figure among equals. A sizable minority of the bishops who attended the council strongly opposed papal infallibility. The pope and his allies used various means at their disposal to influence the prelates. “On 13 July 1870, a preliminary vote on the section on infallibility was held in a general congregation: 451 voted simply in favour (placet), 88 against (non placet), and 62 in favour but on condition of some amendment (placet iuxta modum)” – from Wikipedia. The opponents of the dogma absented themselves from the final vote rather than publicly oppose the pope. The credulous faithful would be surprised to learn from this book and the example of Vatican I that Vatican spirituality was/is often a matter of cutthroat politics and cloakroom deals.
Italian unification forces besieged Rome and seized the city in September, 1870, ending papal temporal rule in Italy until dictator Benito Mussolini ceded Vatican City to the papacy as an independent state in 1929 in return for recognition of the fascist regime.
The doctrine of papal infallibility claims the pope teaches without error on matters of faith and morals only when he speaks “ex cathedra,” formally from the chair of St. Peter in his alleged capacity as the supreme teacher of the church. However, Catholic theologians can agree on only three occasions when a pope defined dogma infallibly: the immaculate conception of Mary (1854), papal infallibility (1870), and the assumption of Mary (1950).
“Ultramontane” literally means “on the other side of the mountains from the point of view of the speaker.” In France, the term became popular as a reference to “the man beyond the mountains,” i.e. the pope. Ultramontanists were Catholics who desired an increased degree of authority for the pope including the declaration of infallibility as a dogma.
The author of this book is a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest and professor of theology at Georgetown University, but I give him credit for his objectivity. Conservative Catholic apologists operate from a pollyannaish viewpoint with regards to their church’s history, but O’Malley doesn’t sugar coat it.
Catholic apologists boast that their church is the only religious institution that’s led by an infallible leader. They claim that the Holy Spirit would never allow a pope to lead the church into doctrinal error. It’s quite interesting, then, that the current pope, Francis, has undermined doctrines held to be infallible by previous popes including the ban on communion for remarried divorcees, the ban on intercommunion with Protestants, and the licitness of capital punishment, much to the chagrin of conservative Catholics.
Most everyone is familiar with the bogus “Shroud of Turin,” the alleged burial shroud of Jesus displayed at the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy. But few are aware of the extremely large number of other purported “relics” throughout Roman Catholicism. Catholics define relics as the body parts or personal effects of canonized “saints” and even the alleged body parts and personal effects of Jesus Christ, including his infant foreskin and crib!
Catholics of yesteryear made difficult pilgrimages to often faraway churches that displayed a relic in hopes of receiving answers to prayer, physical healings, or indulgences from time spent suffering in purgatory. Unscrupulous relics merchants made fortunes hand-over-fist during the Middle Ages as churches competed against each other for a chance to attract pilgrims and their money. Given the proliferation of these faux artifacts, multiple churches boasted of having the same exact relics. One might think such pilgrimages are a thing of the past, but news sources still report on Catholics thronging to traveling exhibits of relics in the U.S. and Canada.
A short time ago, I was reading a book about the First Vatican Council (1869-70), which mentioned the exhibit of Jesus’ alleged seamless tunic:
“In 1844, in response to critics of a large and well-publicized group of German pilgrims that converged on Trier to view and venerate the famous relic there – the robe supposedly worn by Christ just before his crucifixion…” – p.71, “Vatican I: The Council and the Making of the Ultramontane Church,” by John W. O’Malley
Hmm. Interesting. I’ve heard about many of Romanism’s bogus relics before, but not this seamless tunic. We read about Jesus’ seamless tunic in Scripture:
“23 When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom, 24 so they said to one another, ‘Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.’ This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, ‘They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.’ So the soldiers did these things.” – John 19:23-24
The history of the tunic of Trier, Germany goes back no farther than 1196 when it was first displayed at the High Cathedral of Saint Peter in that city. Church officials claimed the tunic had been originally recovered by Roman Emperor Constantine’s mother, Helen, on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 326-28. Many other such relics are attributed to Helen’s trip. She would have needed a modern Hong Kong ocean container vessel to transport all the artifacts back to Rome that are credited to her.
The previous reference to the event at Trier in 1844 led me to some interesting historical information. Following the anti-religious excesses of the Enlightenment, many European Catholics welcomed a return to pious religious superstition including pilgrimages to churches with relics. Such pilgrimages were the “rock concerts” of their day and emotions ran high. The tunic at Trier was displayed to the public only at lengthy intervals, so when the bishop of Trier, Wilhelm Arnoldi, announced in 1844 that the tunic would be put on display for public viewing, a half-a-million excited German Catholics responded by thronging to the city for a chance to catch a glimpse of the “holy” relic. The 19th-century religious “be-in” was of Woodstock-like proportions. The “happening” was subsequently exploited for political purposes. Catholic author and activist, Joseph Gorres, “portrayed the event as a manifestation of the collective power of Catholics in Germany, a warning to the Prussian state not to take that power lightly” (p.71, “Vatican I: The Council and the Making of the Ultramontane Church”). In reaction to the religious mass hysteria and excesses of the fervent pilgrims at Trier, less superstitious, sober German Catholics founded a more stoic sect called the New Catholics (see link below).
Beginning in 1959, the Catholics of Trier began inviting the Protestants of the area to join them in the Pilgrimage of the Holy Robe. The bogus “seamless tunic” of Trier is now promoted as an ecumenical symbol for the eventual reunification of all Protestants with the Catholic church. To date, the seamless tunic has not undergone scientific testing to verify its age.
Postscript: While visiting Germany and our German daughter-in-law and grandson at their home near Ramstein AFB in 2007, my wife and I were contemplating a few side-trips. Our son’s German father-in-law suggested we visit the city of Trier, about 70 miles away, although he didn’t elaborate on why Trier would be a good destination. With our rented car, we set out for the city not knowing what to expect. When we arrived at the outskirts, it didn’t look like much. I wondered out loud somewhat frustratingly why he had directed us there? Fortunately, I soon spotted a sign pointing to the city center and drove in that direction. Wow! Were we ever surprised! The center of the city was FILLED with ancient Roman buildings and ruins! We learned later that Trier served as the capital of the northern territories of the Western Roman Empire for over 400 years. In our walk through the city center, we saw the exterior of the High Cathedral of Saint Peter, where the alleged tunic is stored, but I had no desire to go inside.
Nineteenth-century and early-twentieth-century Protestant literature included many convent escape narratives written by ex-nuns that testified of rampant abuse (emotional, physical, sexual) within Catholic convents. Catholic spokespersons of the past (and even in the present, see here) dismissed the accounts as “Puritan porn.” It’s quite ironic, isn’t it, to now see pope Francis acknowledging the abuse (although he didn’t mention nun-on-nun abuse)?
I believe the number of states that are now investigating the Catholic church for sexual abuse and cover-up currently stands at fourteen. In some of those states, like Texas, Catholic dioceses are preemptively releasing the names of abusive priests in an effort to feign proaction. Why didn’t the bishops release the names of predatory priests a year ago? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question. The nation was outraged when the state of Pennsylvania released the name of 300 abusive priests last August, but subsequent revelations in other states are becoming, ho-hum, routine as this scandal tsunami continues.
Several PC Catholic bishops publicly criticized the students of Covington Catholic High School for facing off with Native American activists several weeks ago. Lawyers for the students see dollar $ign$.
Back in parochial school, we were taught Christopher Columbus/Cristoforo Colombo was a great Catholic hero. We weren’t told about the forced baptisms, persecution, and enslavement of indigenous natives that was par for the course in Catholic expeditionary efforts.
Francis once again promoted Catholicism’s ecumenical-interfaith agenda by reaching out to Muslim religious leaders on a recent visit to the UAE. During his stay, Francis repeated the Catholic teaching that Muslims and Catholics are together “God’s children” and that both worship the same God.
In light of the current scandal tsunami, many Catholics are finding it increasingly troublesome to sit in a pew and listen to a priest instruct them on morality. Pray that many of these troubled Catholics will accept Jesus Christ as their Savior and leave the RCC.
“Gay Priests and the Self-Loathing of the Catholic Church”
By Andrew Sullivan
New York Magazine, January 21-February 3, 2019, pp. 18-25, 82-83
I was an altar boy from 5th through 8th grade and served at masses at our parish church on Saturdays, Sundays, and weekdays. In my capacity as an altar boy, I regularly interacted with the pastor priest and his revolving cadre of assistant priests. I was certainly not an expert on human behavior at that young age, but I observed that the priests conducted themselves strangely, quite unlike the other adult men in my life like my father, my uncles and the adult men in my neighborhood. Those priests seemed uncomfortable in their own skins. Looking back at the situation now, I believe I was interacting with some very troubled men and was in a dangerous situation.
I don’t have much use for secular magazines at this stage of my life, but as I was walking through the aisles of Wegman’s supermarket last week, I noticed this current issue of “New York” magazine in the magazine rack with its provocative article title and cover photo and bought it.
“Gay Priests and the Self-Loathing of the Catholic Church” turned out to be a very interesting and informative article on the topic of the very large percentage of gay men in the Catholic priesthood. The author puts the percentage of gay priests at around 30 to 40 percent for parish priests and as many as 60 percent for priests of religious orders.
The current pedophile priests and cover-up scandal tsunami has opened up a can of worms for the American Catholic church and is prodding the laity and outsiders to ask questions that have rarely been asked before, such as:
Why is there such a high percentage of homosexual men in the ranks of the Catholic priesthood? (see next question)
Is there a correlation between Catholicism’s rule of clerical celibacy and the high percentage of homosexuals in the ranks of priests? (obviously)
What correlations can be drawn between the high percentage of homosexual priests and sexually abusive priests whose victims have mostly been boys? (definitely not a PC question)
Catholic sociologist, Richard Sipe, asked these very questions twenty-years ago, but his research was ignored.
The author of this article has done a good deal of research as well. The unofficial history of the Catholic priesthood is thick with accounts of relationships between fellow clerics (the author cites famous Catholics, John Henry Newman, Henri Nouwen, Francis Spellman, and pope Benedict XVI) and also with accounts of prelates and priests who preyed upon underlings and trusting members of the laity. Cover-ups were not only a matter of “protecting” the church’s reputation, but also, in recent times, an I-won’t-tell-on you-if-you don’t-tell-on-me grand conspiracy.
Given the magnitude of the abusive priests and cover-up scandal, we can anticipate many more fact-finding examinations of the connection between Roman Catholicism’s mandatory rule of clerical celibacy and homosexuality. Magazine articles such as this one are only the vanguard of what’s to come.
The piece isn’t without its biases. Author Sullivan is a gay Catholic layman, journalist, and LGBTQ activist and his goals with this article are to unmask the reality of the large percentage of homosexual men in the priesthood and to add his voice to those of other activists who are prodding the RCC to accept homosexuality as a natural orientation. It’s more than ironic that a religious institution that teaches merited salvation is run to a great degree by homosexual men.
Catholic friend, God’s Word proclaims there is no longer any need for priests or perpetual sacrifice for sin. Jesus is not on Catholic altars in the hands of sinful men. God the Son, Jesus Christ, came down and paid the penalty for sin on the cross and offers forgiveness of sin and eternal life to all those who repent of their sin and accept Him as their Savior by faith alone. Will you accept Jesus as your Savior? Pray to Him today! Then, come out of Roman Catholicism and ask the Lord to lead you to an evangelical church in your area that preaches God’s Word without compromise.
“And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” – Hebrews 10:11-14