An Italian priest has said he thinks the next Pope being gay would be “wonderful.” I think he meant to say “faaaabulous” but maybe he’s not hep to the lingo and all.
The priest, Don Andrea Gallo, looks older than Stonehenge and less healthy than Abe Vigoda so I’m pretty sure we won’t be hearing from him too much longer. But here’s what he said and please take note of the link the priest makes between homosexuality and pedophilia:
Don Andrea Gallo, a religious LGBT advocate in Italy, has said a homosexual pope would be ‘wonderful’.
‘A homosexual pope would be a wonderful thing,’ he told Italy’s Radio 24. ‘There is equality of the children of God. It is the essence of the Gospel, we are all sons and daughters of God.’
Gallo added: ‘A homosexual priest should be free to express his or her identity and her sexuality, otherwise it represses and becomes pedophilia.’
Uhm. I thought there was no linkage between homosexuality and pedophilia. He seems to think so. And the Gay Star News reported it without throwing a flag on the play.
And also, please take notice he referred to priests as him or her. Kinda’ telling, huh?
Well, if you were interested in investigating those rumors about a gay cabal secretly running the Church, Fr. Gallo would seem like a good place to start for info. I guess someone forgot to tell Fr. Gallo the first rule of gay cabal is that what happens at gay cabal stays at gay cabal. So it’s kinda’ like Vegas but with more glitter. And the showgirls are a little hairier.
Hey, CMR is all for actively gay priests to be loud and proud and not repressed about it. That’ll save us all from having to read the Vatileaks report.
March 8, 2013 at 7:41 am
This guy should be disciplined by his bishop. Until the clergy are held accountable for what comes out of their mouths and the liturgical abuses they perpetuate what hope do we have of clarifying Church teachings????
March 8, 2013 at 12:56 pm
Where's the Inquisition when you need it? This guy needs an auto-de-fe!
March 8, 2013 at 1:56 pm
Gallo added: ‘A homosexual priest should be free to express his or her identity and her sexuality, otherwise it represses and becomes pedophilia.’
Homosexuals make-up, roughly, 1-3% of the human population but they make-up, roughly, 33% of those committing sex crimes against children; that is, homosexuals are vastly over-represented in sex crimes against children.
And as for the closet conspiracies involving the deformation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?
Scratch a liturgical liberal and reveal a clerical queer.
March 8, 2013 at 4:51 pm
First of all, we are all equal. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
Second of all, his comments seem to be consistent with independent information coming from the clergy abuse lawsuits. Ephebophilia (I think I got that right..pederastry nonetheless) represents some 90% of the sexual abuse. So he is correct in stating homosexuality is a problem.
Third,can we stop definiing ourselves by sexual activity. THis has gotten silly. A celibate is celibate. Those who arent – arent. But I do NOT want to be introduced to friends as a heterosexual. I have a name and other interests.
March 8, 2013 at 7:48 pm
Vomit inducing. Vomit indurre.
+JMJ,
~Theo
March 8, 2013 at 9:57 pm
You may not be Spartacus, but I love you. 🙂
March 8, 2013 at 11:24 pm
I'm with Scotju — I miss the Inquisition.
March 9, 2013 at 4:50 am
Sorry to crash your Catholic party but technically how is the Pope any type of sexual. Homo or hetero. I believe from what I know of Catholicism unless things have changed is that priests on up are celibate, giving up their sexuality for the works of Christ after the admonition of Paul. Is that a correct assumption. So thus he can neither be homo- nor hetero-. Although in reality, as it is part of nature, they will have a sexuality, they have given this up. So they cannot be so defined.
Ephebophilia would be incorrect. Philia means brotherly, plutonic, nonsexual love. Epheboerasty would be the correct term if you HAD to bring it up.
Also homosexuality IS NOT the problem with epheberasty. Although it is unlikely that is any form of love. It is probably more like prison sex. You have only other guys or in this case only boys in which you have close constant contact and being unable to suppress your urges mistakes happen. Then you try to cover your sins and you no longer have the Spirit of God with you. That is why Paul advised that those who could not be celibate marry. Personally I don't believe he was advising people to become PERMANENTLY celibate but that's why I'm not Catholic or even Protestant. If you cannot abide the "Priesthood," its time to get out. There is no shame.
March 9, 2013 at 2:02 pm
Actually by the rules of Greek word-formation "epheberasty" would be correct; the -o is only necessary to bridge the stem "epheb-" to "philia". And you presumably meant "Platonic" love, unless of course you were attempting to claim that Hades, AKA "Plouton the Wealthy", was somehow a model of philia. I see no evidence for this theory in either the poets nor the little of Greek religious or mystery composition that has survived.
However, "philia" forms the root of the names of a great number of sexual fetishes, e.g. "hematemesophilia"—a fetish for coughing up blood. Yes someone ought to teach psychologists proper Greek but that hasn't happened.
For the rest: there is, actually, shame, in abandoning an oath. Paul's people and ours ("according to the flesh"), both, said that the oathbreaker is less than human—hence the significance of God's question to Job regarding Leviathan. "Will he make a covenant with you?" is rhetorical for "That thing is not a man, man gives and keeps his word."
And Paul was indeed advising people to be permanently celibate—why else was his alternative a permanent condition? And "keep celibate only when enacting rituals" or "keep continence periodically" were not outside his vocabulary, if they were what he meant; almost all priesthoods of his era, including the Jewish one, had that practice.
And if homosexuality is not the problem with epheberasty—in the context here under discussion, i.e. the abuse scandal—then why were 90% of the victims male? There are a lot of women involved in Church activities, I don't know where you got the idea priests only spend time with other dudes. If these guys had wanted girls, they could have girls. They did not, because they were homosexuals.
March 9, 2013 at 5:38 pm
Whether it is homosexual or not, it is predatory, immoral sexual exploitation of youth…by priests who are disordered, disoriented and seeking to gratify and fulfill their own needs at the expense of another, to exercise power over a weaker, hungry boy who needs a father, mentor and role model not a sexual relationship with a sick individual.
Same-sex attracted priests are mostly fatherless, wounded people and are not able to be role models in the church or in Scouting. Their desires come from pain, anger and unhealed wounds of their childhood. Dr. Joseph Nicolosi's most recent book, Shame and Attachment Loss, gives the psychological foundation for homo-bi-etc. sexuality and glimpses of how it is healed in therapy.
Love, not sexual relations, and understanding, a faithful witness, as Scripture calls it, is the healing, redeeming answer.
March 9, 2013 at 8:17 pm
These little bits about "faaaaabulous" and about how this priest is going to die soon (don't think this notion is exactly lamented in the post) lack charity and honestly, are just a little immature. Oh yes, let's all laugh; all gay men are super-femme pseudowomen singing "faaaaabulous" at the top of their pretty little gay lungs. And let's make jokes about how old and frail this HUMAN BEING is (not to mention his priesthood).
These people may have wrong ideas, even dangerously wrong ones, but that doesn't merit insulting them like a teenager, or bringing out tired stereotypes.
March 10, 2013 at 1:54 pm
Every person who claims someone else lacks "charity" seems to think it is a synonym for "conventional good manners". It is not. Chasing moneychangers from the temple with a stick was an act of charity.
Concern troll is concerned.
March 10, 2013 at 3:12 pm
"Love the sinner, hate the sin". A popular refrain when speaking of homosexuals. Always left out however, is the responsibility to repent and sin no more.
March 10, 2013 at 9:51 pm
"Scratch a liturgical liberal and reveal a clerical queer."
Most cogent line E-V-E-R.
March 11, 2013 at 6:57 pm
There's no existing thing as "sin" without a sinner. So, I don't know what "love the sinner, hate the sin" is supposed to mean exactly in the real world. The highest "love" or "charity" is to pray, work for the conversion of the sinner. This includes "admonishment," which in some cases must be public if the sinner is public about his sin, like immoral politicians who steal taxpayer money to fund abortion, contraception, and sodomite "unions.".
March 12, 2013 at 3:50 am
That is what "love the sinner, hate the sin" means, anonymous—to continue to work for the conversion and redemption of the sinner, regardless of your opprobrium of what they've done.