Quantcast
Channel: Joseph Sciambra: How Our Lord Jesus Christ Saved Me From Homosexuality, Pornography, and the Occult
Viewing all 1292 articles
Browse latest View live

How the Synod Pronouncement on Homosexuality Will Effect Catholic Gay Outreach

$
0
0


“So then we must let the words of Jesus stand in all their severity and ruggedness. Any mitigation, however well intentioned, is an attack on His moral mission.” ~ Rudolph Schnackenburg (As quoted by Fr. Benedict Groeschel in his Introduction to “The Truth About Homosexuality: The Cry of the Faithful” by Fr. John F. Harvey.)

The recent Vatican Synod on the family, marriage, and homosexuality made some rather interesting statements regarding the current problem of same-sex attraction and gay marriage. (see an earlier blog: http://www.josephsciambra.com/2014/10/family-synod-statement-on-homosexuality.html) For the most part, I found the document troubling in this particular area. Although, I am not a theologian, I do have some experience in this subject: both as a former gay man and as a Catholic missionary to the gay community – both here in San Francisco and on the World Wide Web. In that capacity, I find that the vast majority of active homosexuals consciously eschew anything which might curtail their supposed freedoms, i.e. the open and free ability to publicly express their sexuality, and instinctively latch on to anything which they see as supportive. In my own former life, I devoured the works of ex-Catholic lesbian scholar Camille Paglia who praised gay men as “heroic;” while on the “Christian” intellectual front, I loved John Boswell’s pseudo-historical study “Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe.” Regardless of their inaccuracies, I sought out these academics, books, and harbingers of gay exceptionalism, because as a newly initiated homosexual, I wanted to somehow fuse my new found religion with that of my old (a borderline heretical Catholic education that openly espoused everything from abortion to Liberation Theology.) In the end, I gave Jesus Christ up completely, as I honestly knew that it could never really happen. With that in mind, the Synod statement is open to wide variation in interpretations. For instance, after the release of the statement, Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, a pro-gay “Catholic” ministry that was officially condemned by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1999, said: “I think what we’re seeing is a crack in the ice that we have been waiting for, for a very long time. It's a sign of a first step.” Most distressingly, he continued: “I think the change in language starts a chain reaction: A change in language will bring a change in pastoral practice which will bring about a change in teaching.”
On the surface, this gross misunderstanding can be sloughed off as the bewildered machinations of a militant homosexual, but, to me, and to many others in the Church, it does matter – what he, and many like him – think. For, these are the people that the statement is supposedly targeting. Yet, even though the intention is extremely noble, the effect is dangerous. For instance, sorrowfully, I am still fielding numerous questions and distortions concerning the now famous “Who am I to judge” remark from Pope Francis. While I am not faulting the Holy Father for this accurate and charitable answer to a very specific question posed by a reporter, however, it does speak directly to the caution which must always accompany any outreach to the gay community: no matter how unplanned or spontaneous; but, especially with regards to written statements. This attentiveness must be practiced because of the gay mind-set; which few from outside the homosexual world understand, is extremely susceptible to manipulation and a kind-of megalithic group-think. To be extremely brief, as homosexuals, the vast majority of us were severely wounded as children, either through a neglectful or absent parent or stemming from abuse by an older authority figure. As we grow older, unless healed, we carry all that with us into adulthood. Consequently, in gay males, we are inherently distrustful of father figures, but, at the same time, also deeply long for their love and approval. The Catholic Church, with its male-only hierarchy and larger than life head (the Pope) endlessly revolts and fascinates gay men. We want the Church, which stands in for our birth-fathers, to accept us, but only on our own terms.
Going forward, the quote so expertly sourced by Fr. Groeschel in his superb Forward to “The Truth About Homosexuality” is so very important: the Catholic teachings with regards to homosexuality are indeed challenging, most notably for those who suffer with the condition, but, they are also the words of Christ – as handed down to us through the Apostles and the Magisterium of the Church; and, they are precisely what our gay brothers and sisters need to hear. As someone who talks, and is among them, on a daily basis, they are literally inundated with people, ministries, outreaches, faith-communities, and organizations which want to endlessly support them in their every life choice – not matter how detrimental those choices may be to their body, mind, and spirit. What they lack, and this is specifically why they are drawn to the work God has given me, is someone that challenges them. Because, when I engage them, they couldn’t care less about my former life in pornography, as most have done more sexually adventurous things than I during the 20 years since I left the business, but are totally enthralled by the fact that I no longer have sex; or even masturbate. It’s the unfiltered Truth of Catholicism that is captivating. It doesn’t have to be repackaged or made pastorally sensitive. And, this is what the Church must always be – a lone voice of Truth amidst a cacophony of screams. 




Neil Patrick Harris Pens Tragic Story of Sexually Confused Boy

$
0
0

Neil Patrick Harris, like many gay celebrities before him, (see earlier blogs on Michael Sam and Alan Cumming) has revealed a lot about his life in a new autobiography, that, strangely enough, does much to bolster the argument that homosexuality is not an inborn condition. For example, several times, Harris described how unhappy he was as a boy with both his appearance and his lack of attractiveness to those of the opposite sex; though, these recollections are always veiled with a thin layer of humor; for instance, he wrote of himself: “physically you are thirteen going on nine.” But, since his early childhood, while almost ritualistically applying and removing makeup before a stage performance of the gay favorite “The Wizard of Oz,” he poetically explains the emotional and psychological transformation (“…the glorious illusion of performance.”) which took place while taking on another character. For, him, there is solace in that world of make-believe and fantasy. Therefore, what emerges in the book is a rather sad tale of a small and thin “nerdy” young boy, who enjoys dressing up, putting on stage make-up, and loves musical theater, that never really found, or became secure in, his masculinity. Even as a teenager, Harris remembered: “Your actual sexual identity at this time is a mystery, even to you. Especially to you. It’s not that you’re suppressing anything; you haven’t even evolved to that point. You’re not aware of anything.” Yet, slowly, primarily through his early involvement with Hollywood and the entertainment business, he is exposed to gays and homosexuality, then, it’s not so much a discovery of his sexuality, but a succumbing to what he thinks he is: “The ‘truth’ about a person’s sexual preference is often revealed through a long journey of tiny steps, and acceptance is one of the last ones. It’s an individual story for every person. There are unique personal prejudices in everyone, created by our families, our social circles, and mostly by ourselves. It’s tough to confront those things that you are afraid of in yourself. In your case it will take time. Time, and experience. Looking around and witnessing others living their lives. Interacting with free spirits more comfortable with themselves than you are.
But you will get there.”



Guest Blog: The Great Gay Divide

$
0
0

Imagine this Conversation


Mother: You hurt him.
Father: I didn’t touch him.
Mother: True, you didn’t touch him. You hardly ever touched him—I mean, embraced him, ushered him along, encouraged him. 
Father: I never hit him.
Mother: But you still injured him. You didn’t touch him when you should have, in the way you should have—
Father: So, I made him gay.—Is that where you’re going with this?
Mother: Something did.
Father: Something did what?
Mother: Made him gay.
Father: You think I did?
Mother: I don’t know what to think.
(pause)
Father: What do you want from me?
Mother: Just, just give him a chance. You seem more closed than open to him.
Father: You’ve babied him enough for two people.
Mother: He’s my son…And he’s your son too.
Father: He doesn’t talk to me. 
Mother: Why is that?—Why doesn’t he talk to you?—I’ll tell you why. Because you didn’t speak to him. I don’t mean you didn’t tell him your opinions or give orders or correct him. I mean speak with him—about yourself, or your feelings, about life, or how you felt about him.
Father: So, what do you want me to say?
Mother: I want you to have a relationship with your son.
Father: (ruefully) My gay son.
Mother: Our gay son.
Father: I don’t approve.
Mother: Of him?
Father: Of him being gay.
Mother: It’s who he is.
Father: I didn’t raise him to be gay.
Mother: You hardly raised him at all.
Father: Listen, what I did—
Mother: Was fail to love him.
Father: You’re hard on me, woman.
Mother: Now you know how your son feels. 
Father: How’s that?
Mother: Alienated. 
Father: He feels gay, he said so.
Mother: He’s alienated. From you…and because of you.


Imagine this Conversation  


Priest: The psychological dynamic does not excuse immoral behavior.
Psychologist: I think the dynamic needs to be understood.
Priest: Homosexual activity is inherently disordered.
Psychologist: Wrong?
Priest: Yes, wrong.
Psychologist: Then say so—plainly. You don’t help understanding if you mince words here.
Priest: Ok, ok. Wrong.
Psychologist: What about the homosexual inclination?
Priest: What about it?
Psychologist: Is it wrong?
Priest: Is it wrong?
Psychologist: Well, is it? Because it seems like your Church says it isn’t.
Priest: The Catechism says it’s disordered.
Psychologist: Does that mean wrong?           
Priest: Well, I’m not a moral theologian—
Psychologist: I thought we agreed to speak plainly. Is it wrong—a homosexual inclination?
Priest: I guess it is.
Psychologist: You guess? That’s all you got—a guess?
Priest: Well, if you want to follow a line of reasoning that the Church lays out, then the inclination is wrong. It’s wrong because it is directed to a wrong behavior. What inclines toward what is wrong is itself wrong.
Psychologist: You think so?
Priest: I think that’s a logical outcome. What’s wrong is wrong. What inclines to something wrong is also thereby wrong.
Psychologist: Shall we call you Thomas Aquinas?
Priest: Ha ha. Far from it. I’m more of a sinner, and a good deal thinner…But now let me ask you something. What did you mean when you said ‘the dynamic needs to be better understood’?
Psychologist: It does.
Priest: You know the Catechism says that very thing.
Psychologist: I did read that.
Priest: Nice to know you pay attention to the Church.
Psychologist: More than you know. But I get in trouble if I do—on this very point.
Priest: Trouble?—with whom?
Psychologist: My profession.
Priest: What do you mean?
Psychologist: The psychological profession. It does not share your ‘Aquinas point’ about the homosexual inclination being wrong. It’s all about homosexual orientation being good and supportable.
Priest: And you agree with that?
Psychologist: Well I think it’s complicated.
Priest: Well, if the shoe isn’t on the other foot! ‘Don’t mince words’. ‘Speak plainly’. Somebody just said that to me.
Psychologist: All right. All right. Easy does it. I get it.
Priest: Then, give it—I mean, an answer. Agree or not?
Psychologist: Agree with what?
Priest: With what your profession says about the so-called goodness of a homosexual inclination?
Psychologist: Anyone listening?
Priest: Just you and me.
Psychologist: It’s not good.
Priest: Hater! Homophobe! Villain!
Psychologist: Funny. But in some quarters I could lose my license for saying that.
Priest: And that would be a bad thing?
Psychologist: Of course it would.  Think about it. My perspective lines up with your ‘Aquinas perspective’. And you guys—Church—need all the help you can get.
Priest: Yes, we do.
Psychologist: Actually, I have thought for some time that what psychology—decent psychology—can say to the Church is ‘stick to your guns’. You do the morality. We’ll do the psychology. And the classical insight from psychology here is that many a son—who can be characterized as sensitive, without detriment to his maleness—experiences a father wound. This is a wound that results from the father withholding or otherwise failing to show sufficient love to him. The wound has the boy feeing radically insecure about himself—as a male person. What’s more, he’s drawn to males. But this attraction to males is not something he controls. It’s not naturally occurring. It has him, has the boy in its grasp. That’s why it’s a psychological matter. He needs to be free of its grip on him.
Priest: I’m having a little trouble following all that.
Psychologist: It’s really nothing new.  It’s just been buried.
Priest: Buried where?
Psychologist: Buried since 1973 when the American Psychiatric Association dropped homosexuality from its book of disorders.
Priest: You mean, homosexuality was a psychological disorder?
Psychologist: Once upon a time.
Priest: And it’s not now?
Psychologist: I’ve already told you I consider it to be so.
Priest: But why the change? Some new evidence show up then in 1973?
Psychologist: The only thing that changed in 1973 was the political climate. 
Priest: In the psychological profession?         
Psychologist: Yes, indeed.
Priest: So, a diagnosis was reversed?—One day homosexuality was a disorder and the next day it wasn’t?
Psychologist: As they say in Church, ‘Amen’.

[Conversations to be continued.]



HIV: The Continuing Gay Epidemic

John Grisham Shares His Bizarre Views on Child Porn

$
0
0

Renowned American author John Grisham recently shared his bizarre views concerning those convicted of child porn possession when he spoke with “The Telegraph” in the UK, he said:
“We have prisons now filled with guys my age. Sixty-year-old white men in prison who've never harmed anybody, would never touch a child. But they got online one night and started surfing around, probably had too much to drink or whatever, and pushed the wrong buttons, went too far and got into child porn. His drinking was out of control, and he went to a website. It was labeled 'sixteen year old wannabee hookers or something like that'. And it said '16-year-old girls'. So he went there. Downloaded some stuff - it was 16 year old girls who looked 30. He shouldn't ’a done it. It was stupid, but it wasn't 10-year-old boys. He didn't touch anything. And God, a week later there was a knock on the door: ‘FBI!’ and it was sting set up by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to catch people - sex offenders - and he went to prison for three years. There's so many of them now. There's so many 'sex offenders' - that's what they're called - that they put them in the same prison. Like they're a bunch of perverts, or something; thousands of ’em. We've gone nuts with this incarceration.”
With regards to the relationship between child pornography and child molestation, the opinions of Mr. Grisham are extremely naive, or highly deluded. According to several studies, there is a very distinct link between those who view child porn and child sexual abuse:

“Child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia.”
Seto, Michael C.; Cantor, James M.; Blanchard, Ray
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol 115(3), Aug 2006, 610-615.
“This study investigated whether being charged with a child pornography offense is a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia, as represented by an index of phallometrically assessed sexual arousal to children. The sample of 685 male patients was referred between 1995 and 2004 for a sexological assessment of their sexual interests and behavior. As a group, child pornography offenders showed greater sexual arousal to children than to adults and differed from groups of sex offenders against children, sex offenders against adults, and general sexology patients. The results suggest child pornography offending is a stronger diagnostic indicator of pedophilia than is sexually offending against child victims.”

“From Fantasy to Reality: The Link Between Viewing Child Pornography and Molesting Children.”
Kim, Candice
Child Sexual Exploitation Update - Volume 1, Number 3, 2004.
“...studies demonstrate that those who collect and disseminate child pornography are likely to molest an actual child. According to the United States Postal Inspection Service, at least 80% of purchasers of child pornography are active abusers and nearly 40% of the child pornographers investigated over the past several years have sexually molested children in the past. In a 2000 study issued by the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 76% of offenders convicted of internet-related crimes against children admitted to contact sex crimes with children previously undetected by law enforcement and had an average of 30.5 child sex victims each.”

“A Profile of Pedophilia: Definition, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes, and Forensic Issues.”
Hall, Ryan MD, and Hall, Richard MD; Mayo Clinic.
“…76% of individuals who were arrested for Internet child pornography had molested a child.”



A Synod Mistranslation and How the Church Can Address the Problem of Homosexuality

$
0
0
Original text of the “Relatio post disceptationem” (in Italian) concerning the question of a possible Catholic approach to homosexuality:
50. “Le persone omosessuali hanno doti e qualità da offrire alla comunità cristiana: siamo in grado di accogliere queste persone, garantendo loro uno spazio di fraternità nelle nostre comunità? Spesso esse desiderano incontrare una Chiesa che sia casa accogliente per loro. Le nostre comunità sono in grado di esserlo accettando e valutando il loro orientamento sessuale, senza compromettere la dottrina cattolica su famiglia e matrimonio?”
And the English translation provided by the Vatican:
50. “Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community. Are we capable of providing for these people, guaranteeing [...] them [...] a place of fellowship in our communities? Oftentimes, they want to encounter a Church which offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of this, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?”
Originally, the Italian word “valutando” was translated as “valuing.” More accurately, the word means “evaluating.”
While I think the questions being asked in the “Relatio” are certainly noble and charitable ones, as a former gay man, I can relate with a great amount of certainty that: those who earnestly embrace and hold onto their gay identity will not be able to conform their lives with the teachings of the Church; in effect – they will demand that the Church must compromise, or radically change her position on homosexuality. Why?
Blessedly, I just got to attend a lecture by our own Bishop Robert Vasa (Diocese of Santa Rosa) on St. John Paul’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor.” One section of the text that interested me the most was:
“the man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly — and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being — must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter him with all his own self; he must ‘appropriate’ and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. If this profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deeper wonder at himself.”
The first part of this citation expertly expresses everything that is the foundation of the gay lifestyle: “immediate,” “partial,” “superficial,” and “illusionary.” In the homosexual world, all that are drawn there seek a solution to the interior question of oneself: a somewhat unconscious attraction to the quick solution of salivation through sex. I found this fact often grossly and obliviously apparent in the gay male penchant for quick encounters within a public bathroom stall or amongst a clump of trees at the edge of a park. But, the rush was merely a bandage across a gaping wound – never really healing much of anything; just providing a short reprieve from the constant inner disquiet. And, even that instant of succor is an illusion based solely on the surface. This extreme swerve towards meaningless superficiality was one of the first things that struck me about the gay community: epitomized by the constant obsession with the top/bottom ratio, penis size, and the minuscule details surrounding the various lives of pop-singers and movie-stars. It was a fantasy world based on a gay social construct of false sexual freedom and a feigned sense of gay happiness. But, always lurking within this imaginary world was the constant fear that it would all be pulled away – symbolized by the gay paranoia concerning Christians, conservatives, and a few hyped-up incidents of homophobia. In reality, it was all masking the true terror surrounding the continuing epidemic of AIDS.
In the end, what disappointed and frustrated me most about being gay was all of this: its transitory grasp on happiness, its shallowness, and its reliance upon illusion. Yet, it was all I knew. Moving outside of those four walls, even though it all seemed to be crashing about me, frightened me – even more than the thought of contracting HIV. For the most part, I saw no other alternative. I was distant from my family, all my friends were either gay or gay sympathizers; and I had been away from the Church for so long that its existence never crossed my mind. I thought I was alone.
Another very important passage from “Veritatis Splendor,” covered by Bishop Vasa in his talk, was: “Those who live ‘by the flesh’ experience God’s laws as a burden, and indeed as a denial or at least a restriction on their own freedom.” This completely describes the gay mind-set; for, the body is at the center of gay living: the beautiful male body has become the new god; the idol to which we all bow down in front of. This came crashing into my reality, during a very early experience in the Castro District of San Francisco: I was in a bar, getting hit on by a cadre of older men; many were white-haired, heavily wrinkled, and flabby; my friends and I, all in our late teens and early-twenties, kept pushing them off and refusing their free drinks. Suddenly, a handsome and exceedingly muscular man entered the place; it was if Moses walked by as the crowds parted like the Red Sea. The man then took his choice of seats and proceeded to be adored and fawned over by every young thing there. Looking back, it was sickly Darwinian, a sort of survival of the fittest, reverting Man back to the animal world: the one with the biggest horns, brightest feathers, or largest testicles got all the attention. Then, because I was young, I accepted it. When I got older, and was prematurely wasted and burned out as I neared thirty: I understood that the body was the only means of gay expression – deprived of it – you were literally without a prayer.
Consequently, for any Catholic outreach to the gay community to be successful: there must be true change of heart inside of the gay person: a realization that God made them for more than this; that they are more than just a desire for the same-sex; that they are truly wanted and Loved by God - for themselves. And, herein lays the opportunity with the Synod: to hold out a welcoming hand to those, who like me didn’t know where else to go. But, once they walk through the door, they must be presented with the Truth – as I surely was by a kindly, but uncompromising priest. But, it only worked because I wanted it. I was tired, and I was willing to accept what the Church now requested of me. Before, anything even remotely Christian always smacked of prejudice and intransitivity. But, God had brought me low, and I knew that I needed Him.
For those who reach this place, blessedly, the Catholic Church already has an outreach for these men and women: Courage. If the Synod really wants to embrace, and Save, our lost brothers and sisters: the Bishops need to provide for a Courage chapter, or more than one, in every Diocese; educate the local parish priests about Courage and what the Church actually teaches regarding homosexuality; and then apply those teachings to everything from Sunday homilies to spiritual direction. Most importantly, we must pray. Pray for those lost inside the lie of homosexuality; pray that their eyes be opened; and that they may then know the Truth. 



62% of American Catholics Approve of Gay Marriage

$
0
0

According to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, the vast majority of Catholics agree with the Supreme Court action which allowed gay marriage to go forward in several states. A whopping 62% of Catholics approved; this number was only exceeded by Non-Evangelical Protestants who approved by 65%; by contrast, just 24% of Evangelical white Protestants approved.
The Church has been repeatedly clear on this point; most notably in “Consideration Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Person” (2003) from The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which heavily quoted from “The Catechism of the Catholic Church:”
“There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts ‘close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.’
Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts ‘as a serious depravity... (cf. Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.
Nonetheless, according to the teaching of the Church, men and women with homosexual tendencies ‘must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.’ They are called, like other Christians, to live the virtue of chastity. The homosexual inclination is however ‘objectively disordered’ and homosexual practices are ‘sins gravely contrary to chastity.’”



Pope Francis Opens the Doors to Gays, Prostitutes, and Perverts

$
0
0
My favorite part of the Pope’s closing address at the Synod on the Family:
“It is the Church that is not afraid to eat and drink with prostitutes and publicans. The Church that has the doors wide open to receive the needy, the penitent, and not only the just or those who believe they are perfect! The Church that is not ashamed of the fallen brother and pretends not to see him, but on the contrary feels involved and almost obliged to lift him up and to encourage him to take up the journey again and accompany him toward a definitive encounter with her Spouse, in the heavenly Jerusalem.”
What I like most about this passage is the inclusion of the word “ashamed.” Wow! The Church should not be ashamed of Her fallen brothers; it brings tears to my eyes. Because, when I left the gay lifestyle, I was filled with so much shame; I was ashamed of myself; of what I had done; I was ashamed to confess these awful things to the priest; and, afterwards, I was still ashamed - I couldn’t let that shame go. I was so unhappy, that at one point, a priest told me to go back to the Castro; only, curtail your activity. I thought, the Church doesn’t want me gay; and it doesn’t want me chaste either. 
As dear as the Courage apostolate became, in a sense, I felt as if us ex-gays, or prospective ex-gays, were being forced into the catacombs. The first meeting location in San Francisco was a dungeon-like bunker at the Cathedral. Those early get-togethers back in 1999 and 2000, were, for me, sort of a bizarre clandestine type gathering that were hidden on a weekday night: we would arrive, the poor persecuted priest would come in, often a rather traditionally-minded man who served on the periphery of the diocese, a bit shunned by his fellow priests, and quietly ridiculed by them - because he was deluded to think that the Church could convert the gays, then, everyone would sullenly drift back into the darkness of the city.
Yet, like these good and holy priests of Courage, Pope Francis has not given up on us. He invites the lowest of the low. And, he invites the entire Church to openly embrace those that have fallen so far from all that is good. And, this is the Church -  “who is not afraid to roll up her sleeves to pour oil and wine on people’s wound…” As such, this is a grueling, dirty, and messy endeavor. This does not mean a blind acceptance of all that the world tries to pass off as the true source from which happiness and contentment may be found; i.e. homosexuality. On the contrary, what the Pope directs us towards is not something passive; not a lazy sort of liberal egalitarianism epitomized by those who thoughtlessly bow to the “born this way” mantra. What it requires is the complete trust and obedience of the faithful: a willingness to seek and accept the Truth; and then, the bravery to love others enough so that they too may one day understand. 




The Triumph of Pope John Paul and Cardinal Ratziner Over the Homosexual Lie

$
0
0
First Edition of The Catechism...
The interim report from the Vatican Synod on the Family caused much controversy, and, interestingly enough, much excitement in the gay media; the much-read “Advocate” opened with the headline - “Vatican Document: Value Gay People's 'Gifts and Qualities' - The church should recognize positive aspects of same-sex relationships, the document says.” Yet, many in the Curia were far from enthused. Discussing the interim report from the Synod, Cardinal Raymond Burke stated: “The document lacks a proper foundation in the sacred Scriptures and the perennial and rich teaching of the Church regarding holy matrimony. It also does not reflect a proper theological anthropology, with its reference to the natural law. The effect which the document has already had upon Catholics, non-Catholics and people of good will has been disastrous. The document, not without reason, gives the impression that the Catholic Church is abandoning the apostolic faith regarding marriage.”
After much discussion, what finally emerged from the Synod, regarding homosexuality and the question of gay marriage, had little do with the vague and open statements found with the interim report: 
“The pastoral care of people with homosexual orientation some families live the experience of having family members with a homosexual orientation. In this regard, we have examined pastoral care which is appropriate to deal with this situation by referring to what the Church teaches: ‘There is no foundation whatsoever to assimilate or to establish even remotely analogous, including same-sex unions and the plan of God for marriage and the family.’ ‘Nevertheless, men and women with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. In their regard should be avoided every sign of unjust discrimination.’” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons.)”
Gone are all the references to gay “gifts;” gone are “valuing” and “accepting” the homosexual orientation; and gone is the “valuable support” provided by same-sex unions. Instead, the Bishops redacted verbatim from “The Catechism of the Catholic Church” and from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons;” both of which were overseen by the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) under St. John Paul. And, herein resides the great power of the Catholic Church: for it continually lokks towards Tradition and the Magisterium for guidance. Such as, back in 1994, the first edition of “The Catechism” arrived in the US. Unbeknownst to me, 1994 would be a seminal year in my life: I would finally graduate from UC Berkeley, my idol and one-time debauchery partner Joey Stefano died of an overdose, and I decided to do another porn movie after a couple of years hiatus. That year marked a sort of beginning of the end for me: I was 25, no longer the cute young thing, and I had been away from the attention of the Castro long enough to really start craving it all over again. 
Five years later, I would desperately crack open “The Catechism.” Little did I know, it was the first edition; so what? Well, even to my warped and uneducated mind, the line: “They [homosexuals] do not choose their homosexual condition…” did not ring true to me. Was I born this way? Is my gayness inevitable? If so, how will I ever get away from this?” Far from comforting, I became a little desperate. Through the Grace of God, the bright-green second edition fell into my hands. There, I read: “This inclination, which is objectively disordered…” Now, as seemingly harsh as the language had become, this made sense. Okay, I had a disorder. And, a disorder can be fixed; it can be healed. This offered Hope. 
Wisely, the Synod Bishops went back to the two great Catholic minds of the 20th Century. With both voices, we experience the resolute Truth of the Church: that the homosexual lifestyle can never be accepted; but that the homosexual person suffering from same-sex attraction must never be marginalized; they should be thought of as children of God. Again, in the end - the Church has triumphed. 

Unofficial translation of the interim report:

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons:

Earlier blog: “Cardinal Ratzinger and the Catechism: How the Future Pope Saved Millions From Confusion and Moral Destruction”



A Break from Blogging...

$
0
0
I will be traveling to Southern California this week. Blessings to you all. 


2014 Central and Southern California Outreach Roadtrip

Guest Blog: The Great Gay Divide; Part II

$
0
0
Imagine this Conversation


Monsignor (Msgr): She was quite distressed.
Priest: You spoke with her?
Msgr: I listened.
Priest: And you think I can help her?
Msgr: I think you can help me to help her.
Priest: How may I help you?
Msgr: What do you know of her son?
Priest: I haven’t seen him since his high school graduation. That’s a number of years ago. He’s out of college now and living in the city.
Msgr: Ahh, the city. The lure of the city. Can anything good come from the city?
Priest: Monsignor, if he’s in the city he’s probably immersed in the gay subculture.
Msgr: Yes, I imagine he is.
Priest: Which means his mother’s distress is warranted.
Msgr: Yes, I suppose it is. But I wish to help her as much as I can. And here I have a question for you. The mother has deep misgivings about her husband—about his relationship or lack thereof with the son. She worries that the boy is gay because the father was emotionally unavailable if not hostile toward him. What do you think of that?
Priest: I think there could be something to it.
Msgr: I think the poor woman thinks like that, but then she makes things worse.
Priest: Monsignor, I wouldn’t dismiss her perspective out of hand. There may be something to it.
Msgr: As a matter of fact, I don’t dismiss what she is saying. But I wondered what you would say. For that matter, what would your friend say?
Priest: My friend the psychologist?
Msgr: Yes. He.
Priest: Monsignor, I don’t know what he’d say in this case.
Msgr: But you speak to him about these things, don’t you?
Priest: Yes, in general.
Msgr: And what does he say in general?
Priest: He would probably say there’s a correlation between two facts in an individual’s life: having an emotionally cold father and having homosexual experience.
Msgr: ‘Correlation’.—That’s a psychological word. 
Priest: It’s a preferred word in scientific circles.
Msgr: It’s not the same as causation.
Priest: Correct. But in real life the two things aren’t far apart—the emotionless father and the gay son.
Msgr: They’re far enough apart for my purposes.
Priest: Which are?
Msgr: To relieve the woman’s distress. I think parents need to be reassured that they don’t cause their children to be gay. And this mother needs to know that her husband is not the reason why her son is gay.
Priest: Even if the father was emotionally abusive?
Msgr: ‘Abusive’?—That’s a strong word.
Priest: Ok. ‘Neglectful’.
Msgr: That’s rather tame.
Priest: Then how do you name it?
Msgr: I’m just being temperate in my choice of words. I advise the same. I’ve seen this family over the years. I would call it ‘profound neglect’. The father neglected the boy emotionally. Out of habit. Not intentionally. He appears to have been the same way toward his wife too. But whereas she’s an adult and could cope with him, the boy was vulnerable and could not. But for the mother’s concern, the boy’s revolt could be worse. In any case, it’s a sad state of affairs.
Priest: Sad—yes. But is the father off the hook for alienating his son like that?
Msgr: Many a wound originates in the family. But we can’t say there was intentionality there. The father’s aloofness was likely not intentional. And, let’s be clear, it doesn’t explain the boy’s homosexuality.
Priest: I’d say it’s connected to it.
Msgr: But it doesn’t explain it.
Priest: Well then, what does?
Msgr: Good question, Father. Of course, if it’s causation you’re inquiring about, let’s not forget our training here. Remember what we were taught about human freedom and volition?
Priest: In morality class?
Msgr: Where else? 

[Conversations to be continued.]





Cartoon Network Show Features Animated Gay Kiss

$
0
0

The Cartoon Network series “Clarence” recently featured a gay kiss by two male characters: the scene appeared during a vignette featuring a woman waiting for her blind date at a restaurant; an attractive man walks through the door; the woman notices him; another man enters – the two men kiss and they leave together. On the surface, this seems rather harmless, but it does send the message that homosexuality is now nothing out of the ordinary; reminds me of the loathsome video for the Carley Rae Jepsen single “Call Me Maybe” which used the same tired old joke; that one was aimed at teens, this one goes after those who are much younger.
FYI: Cartoon Network is owned by Turner Broadcasting which in turn is a division of Time Warner. As of 2013, Cartoon Network is available in approximately 98,671,000 pay television households (86.4% of households with television) in the United States. Interestingly, Cartoon Network has, during its history, broadcast most of the Warner Brothers animated shorts originally created between the 1920s and the 1960s, including Bugs Bunny, but censored individual scenes as well as entire cartoons which depicted discharge of gunfire, alcohol ingestion, tobacco, ethnic stereotypes, and politically incorrect humor. Time Warner also owns the heavily gay-friendly CNN. 



85% of Young Catholics in the US Think Homosexuality is Okay!

$
0
0

Fully 85% of self-identified Catholics ages 18-29 said in a 2014 Pew Research Center survey that homosexuality should be accepted by society, compared with just 13% who said it should be discouraged. Older age groups are less likely to favor acceptance. But even among Catholics ages 65 and older, 57% say that homosexuality should be accepted
Some of these differences may correlate with the frequency of church attendance. The Pew research has found that older Catholics attend Mass more frequently than do their younger counterparts, and that Catholics who attend Mass at least weekly are more likely to say that homosexuality should be discouraged than those who do not. But even among churchgoing Catholics of all ages – that is, those who attend Mass at least weekly – roughly twice as many say homosexuality should be accepted (60%) as say it should be discouraged (31%).
Similarly, despite the church’s continued opposition to same-sex marriage, most U.S. Catholics (57%) favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally wed, according to aggregated 2014 Pew Research surveys. And again, younger Catholics are particularly likely to express this view. Three-quarters of Catholic adults under 30 support legal same-sex marriage, compared with 53% of Catholics ages 30 and older (including just 38% of those 65 and older).

Authors note: Far too many Catholics disregard such surveys and toss them aside as meaningless; however, I think they are vitally important – for, they give us insight into what has gone so terribly wrong in the American parochial school system and the failure of Catholic catechesis. Because, if Catholic children had been probably catechized, these numbers (85%) would not be so overwhelming; and, the lack of church attendance by this age group goes part and parcel with their more liberal moral ideas; it’s a collapse on all levels; as, the spiritual life goes (the Sacraments, church attendance, devotionals) so does basic standards of virtue. For instance, as a product of the 1970s and 80s post Vatican II era, I can honestly testify that after 12 years of Catholic school – I knew relatively nothing; not a single prayer – and, therefore, how could I have learned anything about Catholic life. Sadly, in some sectors, little has changed. At the recent San Francisco Gay Pride Parade, I was approached by several cadres of bubbly laughing teen girls who proudly gave me the names of the various Catholic schools they attended; for the most part, these kids were thoroughly good-hearted, but, nevertheless, horribly clueless.  



7 Steps to Freedom from Porn

$
0
0
“And he cried out, saying: Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me. And they that went before, rebuked him, that he should hold his peace: but he cried out much more: Son of David, have mercy on me.” (Luke 18:38-9)
1. Admit to Our Lord Jesus Christ and to yourself that you have a problem; say it out loud: go for a walk, shut the door, sit in your car – just tell Jesus that you cannot stop watching porn and you don’t know what to do.

“And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.”(I Cor. 2:3)
2. Pray: kneel down; nothing fancy – start with an act of humiliation (asking the Lord for help;) tell Him all that you are thinking, no matter how embarrassing or shameful; ask for His guidance, and Praise Him for hearing your prayers.

“Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved. For the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.” (James 5:14-6)
3. Go to Confession: (if you are a Catholic) go to the next available Confession time at your local parish, or better yet – make a private appointment to speak with a priest. If it’s been awhile, take time to meditate on the past: recall your former sins, if necessary, write them down, do not dwell on any particular sin, merely recall them, confess them, and move on.

“And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.”(Mark 26:26-8)
4. Return to Mass; preferably every Sunday and all Holy Days; if you are lax here, the probability of continued porn attachment is very high.

“And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee having one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.” (Matt 18:9)
5. Remove the source of temptation: if it’s the computer, or other handheld internet accessible devices, remove the computer from the home or move it into a public space of the house – out of the private office or bedroom; remove internet capability from phones and other devices; if you live alone – only have internet access at work and remove all home and private access.

“But this kind [demonic spirit] is not cast out but by prayer and fasting.”(Matt 17:21)
6. Fast: Start out by perhaps excluding all snacks from your daily diet, then – try missing a meal, maybe lunch. The hunger pains will soon overshadow the pangs of lust; also, offer up the discomfort of fasting for your own purification, in reparation for past sins, and for the conversion of sinners.

“Come to me, all you that labour, and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: and you shall find rest to your souls.” (Matt 11:28-9)
7. Spiritual reading: In your spare time, instead of watching television, of course – instead of surfing the internet, read a good spiritual book (lives of the Saints, Bible commentaries, classic works from the Church Doctors;) this will occupy your mind as well as feed your soul.




A Halloween in Hell

$
0
0
Castro Street Halloween; circa 1990.
In years past, before the gay exodus from the Castro, primarily due to skyrocketing real-estate prices brought on by the advent of the Silicon Dot-commers moving into nearby Noe Valley, Halloween was a sacred day in San Francisco; especially for the homosexual community. When the Gay Pride was more of a public political statement, and less of an excuse to be a sexual exhibitionist, Halloween served as the ultimate outing party for those gay men who made the long trek to the West Coast from their oppressive towns in the Midwest and the Southern US. It was a day to unashamedly dance about like your favorite glamour queen, a pink-winged fairy, or even Dorothy from “The Wizard of Oz.”
By the time I reached the Castro, in the late-1980s, the Grim Reaper of AIDS still lurked around every corner; and things had gotten a bit darker: faces were painted like bleach-skinned ghouls; vampire and devil costumes were everywhere. My much older boyfriend at the time, I was 19 years old, wanted me to dress as a boy scout. I liked the idea and agreed. That night, despite all the leather and skin, there was nothing exciting or sexy to see; for, everyone walked about with eyes filled by massively dilated pupils. The place was jam-packed, but; it was as if – no one was there. I remember it had been a rather pleasant day in the City, but I was cold. I felt like the only living soul among the dead. I wanted to leave right away.
Eschewing the festivities on Castro Street, later that night, I ended up in a Polk Street gay bar. Growing bored, my boyfriend came up with the idea of watching someone pick me up; seeing the same scenario in countless gay porn films – I said okay. It didn’t take long before a man tapped me on the shoulder. I turned around to see a figure dressed as a transvestite witch. I rolled my eyes and looked over to my friend; he nodded his approval. I knew what to do: I asked the guy to follow me into the restroom. Some minutes afterward, I reemerged with a little less of myself. The following year, the boyfriend had since dumped me, and I showed up at the Castro Halloween celebration in full bondage gear sporting plastic fangs.
Sometimes the devil takes you apart, piece by piece; sometimes, he takes a little, sometimes he takes big chunks out of you. (That strange evening, the devil took all that I had left.) By the time you are being ripped into shreds, you tend not to even notice anymore. You are blinded to it all. Even though I had grown up on the filthiest kinds of pornography, that first Halloween in the Castro still scared me a bit; for, unbeknownst to myself, there were still even darker passages to explore. But, it started to become easier. Because, once you take that first step towards evil, whether it’s clicking on to that porn site, watching that television program, or listening to that song, it’s tough to suddenly stop and turn around. This is mainly on account - that slowly – you get blinded. Soon, the sickening becomes sweet, and the heinous becomes the holy.

“The devil does not bring sinners to hell with their eyes open: he first blinds them with the malice of their own sins. Before we fall into sin, the enemy labours to blind us, that we may not see the evil we do and the ruin we bring upon ourselves by offending God.” ~ St. Alphonsus Liguori





Gay Sex Causes Cancer

$
0
0
According to the CDC, gay men are 160X more likely to contract HIV than their heterosexual counterparts. Now, to those homosexual apologists who argue that monogamy and gay marriage is the answer: Marie-Elise Parent, an associate professor at the University of Montreal School of Public Health. Conducted a research study which found that a man's risk of prostate cancer increased if he only slept with men. Having more than 20 male partners in one’s lifetime doubled the risk of prostate cancer, compared to men who never slept with another man. Men who had more than 20 male sex partners had a more than five-fold increased risk of less aggressive prostate cancer, and a 26% increased risk of more aggressive prostate cancer. The researchers speculated that this might be due to more risky sexual behaviors among gay men, or because of physical trauma to the prostate gland. In addition, a growing number of physicians and researchers are linking receptive anal sex with prostate cancer; one top California urologist recently said: “Having anal sex, especially if prolonged or frequently, can increase the chances of prostatitis or prostate irritability. This can cause a bacterial or nonbacterial infection of the prostate. This can occur from multiple pathways such as trauma to the prostate, retention of urine, or inflammation.” In turn, some studies have determined that prostatitis is linked to a higher risk of contracting prostate cancer. In addition, the same high-risk strains of HPV (human papillomavirus) that cause most cervical cancers in women are also responsible for causing anal cancer. The virus, spread through receptive anal intercourse, is estimated to be present in 65% of gay men without HIV and 95% of those who are HIV positive.  



Embracing Your Homosexuality, Porn, and Sex Additions – Like the Cross

$
0
0

On a recent outreach trip, I stopped at an old California Mission to attend Mass. I sat down just anywhere. After Mass, I knelt for a while and prayed. Then, I looked up and saw a remarkable painting of Christ Carrying His Cross; one of The Stations of the Cross. I was mesmerized: His face was so calm and serene; and, He was actually hugging the Cross; everything and everyone around Him was twisting and heaving, while, Christ, at the center of it all, remained still and at peace - even though He is truly in the midst of great suffering and physical torment. This got me thinking: should we not all embrace our Cross – no matter what it is made of? Some of us have crosses nailed with the desperation of homosexuality; others the desire for pornography and masturbation; others for illicit sex. In my own life, I spent many years trying to run away from those things, denying my feelings; running away from my thoughts. Should I have embraced them? Like the Cross.
On the same trip, a few days later, I came across a stunning painting of St. Francis; again, embracing the Cross. This gave me a great desire to pull the Cross close into my chest: a cross made of all the pain and suffering I experienced; the abuses in childhood – the porn; the same sex attraction; the death and destruction I felt as an adult. Yet, pushing that pain against my body was not accepting it, or making it all okay, but joining that pain with the eternal agony of Christ, and, henceforth, experiencing Him nearer to me. It gives it all a purpose; and the countless tears shed; and the many friends I had to see die – there deaths are no longer in vain – if we are all joined to Christ. There, we must remain – always on the Cross. Without the Cross, there is no eternal life. The biographer of St. Francis wrote: “For he [St. Francis] was ever on the Cross, shrinking from no toil and pain if only he might accomplish the Lord's will in himself and concerning himself.”
Now, I no longer run away from the Cross; I embrace it. The torments and unwanted desires are my means to salvation: if I go with them, and surrender to them – they will truly take me to hell; if I take them on, and nail it all to the Cross of Christ – He will overcome everything. Then, I will be Saved. “…ever on the Cross.”



Archbishop Charles Chaput on the American Catholic Homosexual Problem

$
0
0
“…So here’s the premise that grounds the rest of my comments tonight. On October 6 [2014], the Supreme Court declined to hear a variety of state appeals on the nature of marriage. In effect, the court has affirmed the validity of gay marriage, and I believe this creates a tipping point in American public discourse. The dismemberment of any privileged voice that biblical belief once had in our public square is just about complete.
This trend has been building for a long time. Gay marriage is only one of the many issues that have transformed our culture. But given the intimate and embodied nature of the relationship in every genuine marriage, and the traditional procreative implications it has for making or closing off a nation’s future, gay marriage has a uniquely powerful sign value.
The most disturbing thing about the debate around gay marriage is the destruction of public reason that it accomplished. Emotion and sloganeering drove the argument. And the hatred that infected the conversation came far less from so-called ‘homophobes’ than from many gay issue activists themselves. People who uphold a traditional moral architecture for sexuality, marriage and family have gone in the space of just 20 years from mainstream conviction to the media equivalent of racists and bigots.
This is impressive. It’s also profoundly dishonest and evil, but we need to acknowledge the professional excellence of the marketing that made it happen. We also need to thank God for the gift of this difficult moment, because conflict always does two things. It purifies the Church, and it clarifies the character of the enemies who hate her. Conflict is good when the issues matter. And very few issues matter as much to the course of a nation as the nature of marriage and family.
So what do we do now? Believers don’t have the luxury of pessimism. And the idea that we can retire to the safety of some modern equivalent of a monastery in the hills, isn’t practical or warranted. Our job is to be the healthy cells in a society. We need to work as long as we can, as hard as we can, to nourish the good that remains in our country – and there’s a deep well of good that does remain — and to encourage the seeds of a renewal that can only come from our young people…”
“…As to marriage and the family: I think we’d be foolish to assume that the gay marriage debate is over, even though many believe we’ve lost it – at least for now. The struggle is not over. The issue now becomes how aggressive gay issue activists will be in punishing and discriminating against those with traditional views. Tactics can easily include denying licensure and accreditation, revoking tax exemptions, imposing liability under public accommodations statutes and employment anti-discrimination acts, closing access to government contracts and grants, and other such acts. Given the bitterness driving much of gay issue activism over the past decade or more, religious freedom will be a growing area of conflict.”

Author’s note: In terms of Catholicism and the gay problem, this talk is a major milestone. For it touches on so many significant points that had yet to be fully fleshed out by a major American prelate: the significance of the homosexual issue as it relates to several other moral issues; the success of the homosexual propaganda machine in the American media and in American culture; the marginalization of dissident voices; the great need for the Church to clarify its stand on the issue; and the need to educate and inform young people. Interestingly, Chaput also said of the Recent Vatican Synod on the Family: “I was very disturbed by what happened. I think confusion is of the devil, and I think the public image that came across was one of confusion.”



One Bad Apple: Computer Giant CEO Thanks God For Making Him Gay

$
0
0

“I’m proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me…” ~ Tim Cook; CEO of Apple Computers

Following Mr. Cook’s line of reasoning; since God gave homosexuality as a gift, than that same God also bequeathed the means for gay men to express “love” to one another. To use a Freudian term: the homosexual male is most often anally fixated in his romantic aspirations. Freud labeled this immature fixation - an “inversion.” In his famous “Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis,” Freud stated that “…like the homosexuals, the sexual object has been changed…They replace the vulva, for instance, by the mouth or anus.” Yet, according to all reputable studies, the receptive partner in penetrative anal sex is 30 times more likely to be at risk from exposure to HIV than that a receptive partner in vaginal sex; consequently, the CDC estimates that only 4% of men in the United States are MSM, but the rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in the United States is more than 44 times that of other men. And, oral sex for gay men is also not a healthy option: oral-anal sex - sometimes referred to as “rimming” can spread infections like HPV, hepatitis B or E. coli. This has much to do with the ultimate design of Nature: the anal lining is thin and easily torn and damaged; the anus lacks the natural lubrication of the vagina; tissue inside the anus does not have a protective barrier of dead skin cells; the anus contains lots of bacteria (from faces) which can pass into the blood stream if tissue is damaged. Would a God that bestows upon us “gifts,” using Mr. Cook’s terminology, give us a desire that is inherently unnatural and dangerous to our very existence?

Author’s note: Personal information on Tim Cook is very difficult to come by; he self-admittedly leads a very reclusive private life; only venturing out for his obsessive visits to the gym. What little is known about his childhood, by revelations from former school mates, creates a picture of Cook as bookish with repeated descriptions as “meticulous.” He seems to have perfectly fit the homosexual category of a boy who felt physically deficit and then overcompensated; the Freudian epitome of the “anal retentive.”



Viewing all 1292 articles
Browse latest View live