This is just bad. All the way around.
You know it's bad when CBS is suddenly concerned about priests' fidelity to their vows. You know it's bad when a sodomite is hanging out at a "gay" bar, engaging in nearly anonymous deviant behavior. You know it's bad when that same sodomite claims that same conduct with priests conflicted with his religious an moral values. You know it's bad when the spiritual father's response to vow-breaking priests sin is "professional guidance" rather than a Lenten call for all of us to repentance. It's just bad. All the way around.
Read the rest of the story here.
Send this article to a friend
ATLANTA -- CBS Atlanta is breaking news about salacious sex charges in the Catholic Church. Two priests in the Atlanta Archdiocese have been removed from their parishes after engaging in homosexual relationships. Dale Chappell, the man who said these two priests conspired to "use him for sex," provided text messages and pictures that document 5 years of inappropriate relationships, concealed behind closed doors in Atlanta's Catholic church. Chappell said he was the victim of the two priests' conspiracy, a plan that did the unthinkable: to break the priests' vows to God, and the church. "I know they do not have good character, I can tell you that. Because they are liars. They are chronic liars, and they duped me not once, but twice," When he found out, Chappell said he ended the relationship because it conflicted with his religious and moral values.
Read the rest of the story here.
Send this article to a friend
Posted by Michael Hirsh at 3/11/2010 8:25 AM 
Categories: Homosexual,Catholicism,Archbishop Wilton Daniel Gregory,Roman Catholic
Categories: Homosexual,Catholicism,Archbishop Wilton Daniel Gregory,Roman Catholic
Kyrie, eléison.
Reply to this
Appealing to religious and moral objections by the accuser in this story is ludicrous, when considering the length of the alleged relationship with those he is accusing of conspiring to use him sexually. That is exactly what happens when people frequent places that are often the venue for anonymous sexual activities, the mutual using of each other for immediate gratification.
What is even sadder, according to the alleged response of the local Church spokesperson , is that it is indicative of the false premise so prevalent in those in positions of authority in the Church, namely that they constantly appeal to the promise of celibacy the delinquent ministers break. This reduces the perception and response to this reoccurring disorder and debauchery to a mere “keeping your promise”. Well the issue is much deeper that keeping a promise; it goes to the very core of what a priest is called to be, a father. This is testified to by the noun the faithful use to identify and speak to their priests.
If a man is called to fatherhood, and ordained to exercise that mission for the Church, then his masculinity needs to be well established, not only the physical sense, but also in the psychological and spiritual life of the candidate. A healthy male “I” awareness must be presupposed if a man is to be father. Unfortunately, for too long the fatherly identity of the priesthood has been either down-played or replaced by other, secondary aspects of the life a priest is called to live in service. While this is not true everywhere, fore there is a renewal in the evaluation and formation of candidates to the priesthood in a number of dioceses, the avoidance of issues regarding arrested development of masculine identity, in the best of cases, and the outright licentiousness that has had such scandalous consequences in the Church, at worse, seems to linger. In the latter situation, no less a saint than Ignatius of Loyola, insists that we must vigorously go against the attitudes that turn a blind eye to the obvious.
I pray that we are close to the day that those in charge of the admittance of candidates to our seminary will see this self-evident reality and responds to it with vigor and joy.
Reply to this
Missed this report and kinda glad I did. Ugh!
Five years is a long time to be "duped." Guess he wasn't too smart...
Reply to this