Action Alert!

all for the nuclear option, raise your hands

By Diogenes (articles ) | Aug 01, 2005

The nuclear threat delivered:

If they were to eliminate all those [priests] who were homosexually oriented, the number would be so staggering that it would be like an atomic bomb; it would do the same damage to the church's operation.

And again:

Kim Sue Lia Perkes, an avowed lesbian, was Bishop O'Brien's last press liaison. She joked in a recent interview that, "If it weren't for the gay clergy in Phoenix, there wouldn't be any clergy in Phoenix."

And yet again:

Any Vatican document that would ban or otherwise restrict gay men from entering seminaries or religious orders or later being ordained would represent a serious moral error for the Church. It would also be ruinous to the Church at a time of drastically reduced vocations.

Paralyzed with horror yet? Neither am I.

For the sake of argument, let's accept the predictions of the Cassandras at their direst face value, viz., that eliminating gay priests would empty the rectories. Further, let's pretend that we, the faithful, had a say in the matter. Finally, let's oversimplify by reducing the options to two:

Plan A. The Status Quo: Priestly formation -- and parish life generally -- continues as it has been and is presently.

Plan B. The Nuclear Option: After the holocaust, only one priest remains per diocese. For the next fifteen years (i.e., until the effects of the reform kick in), you have to drive 35 miles every Sunday and Holy Day to an outdoor football stadium, where you have a bad view of a valid and licit Mass served by unbuggered altar boys, and hear a scarcely audible but orthodox homily, delivered by an ancient priest in a nearly unintelligible Vietnamese accent.

As for your sunny Uncle D, not only would he go for Plan B like a shot, he'd give almost anything to be able to make the choice in the first place. What about you, folks?

Wing Attack Plan R

Sound Off! supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 69 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: John J Plick - Aug. 07, 2005 1:12 PM ET USA

    Whether we sleep on a bed of nails at night or use silk sheets, we, the laity have a RIGHT to reasonable priests...

  • Posted by: - Aug. 06, 2005 2:12 AM ET USA

    Neither option is acceptable-or practicable. We do have some choice. Some of us already make the sacrifices necessary to make such a choice. Namy must remain in so-so parishes adn strive to do our part to support any shred of Catholicism that remains--and pray for God's intervention. This life is NOT about our comfort--this is the same error we are criticizing others for. We are called to "go therefore..." The command was not given only to priests.

  • Posted by: Fr. William - Aug. 04, 2005 11:09 PM ET USA

    Great updated blog, Diogenes. I especially enjoyed the use of the Dr. Strangelove graphic of Major Kong riding the H-bomb. My earlier post from June (see below) still holds. Plan B, with all due charity, of course.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 04, 2005 3:17 PM ET USA

    As God loves all sinners and cherishes some measure of mercy being extended to even the worst of them, I would give them 72 hours warning to "get out of town" prior to "dropping the bomb."

  • Posted by: Michaelus - Aug. 03, 2005 11:13 AM ET USA

    "Celibate" homosexuals? They are all celibate - celibate means unmarried. Chaste is another matter - and if a homosexual is chaste and leads a virtuous life who the devil apart from that man's confessor would have any idea that man has some homosexual interests? If a man announces he "is gay" meaning he wants to sodomize me or my son or someone similar - that itself is a damnable action.

  • Posted by: fisherman129 - Aug. 03, 2005 10:32 AM ET USA

    How very sad the thought police of CNS won't allow any disagreeing opinions to be published.... like this one, for example... I tried a measured response yesterday.... it disappeared in the fog of homophobia. Will this one disappear too.... probably!

  • Posted by: Vincit omnia amor - Aug. 02, 2005 9:47 PM ET USA

    what an active thread! a bottom line argument (among other sound arguments) can be made that a celibate hetero is giving up a good (marriage) whereas a homosexual is not offering up such a good. Am not supporting a witch hunt, BUT, as experience shows, homosexuals should NOT be admitted to the priesthood. All things being equal, homosexuality is so disordered that the struggle for chastity is usually much more difficult then those dealing with their fallen "heterosexuality."

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 9:43 PM ET USA

    EBIM: I too have known gay priests!! They have either left the priesthood or have been named in lawsuits! Unfortunately, these priests harmed many people (Not only by pedophilia, but also by their obvious disregard / lack of respect for the Magisterium.) I am all for the nuclear option. A smaller, leaner, more orthodox Church with good, heterosexual, celibate men as faithful priests is what we need.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 02, 2005 9:32 PM ET USA

    Here, here, cephas!

  • Posted by: a son of Mary - Aug. 02, 2005 7:20 PM ET USA

    i have read each comment. i'm dumbfounded. Why? because I would like to think we can go nuclear and get results. How about this for an alternative? What if we Pray Them Out? What if we all demanded our priests to be holy men? What if we demanded they pray the Holy Rosary with us? What if we made them lead Eucharistic adoration? What if we asked our priests to say the Chaplet of Divine Mercy with us? Can anyone resist this? Can we strengthen those who are weak and invite the bad to leave?

  • Posted by: cephas - Aug. 02, 2005 6:26 PM ET USA

    EBM: Pedophilia, as the press describes the problem, is not actually the problem in most cases; it's homosexuality. Pedophilia is usually heterosexual with a child(mother's intoxicated boyfriend with her 7 year old daughter). The Church scandal has usually involved priests with aqdolescent boys, which is a variety of homosexuality engaged in by about 1/3 of male homosexuals.Caring programs for homosexuals(such as Courage) are greatly needed as well as prayers, but seminary should be off limits.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 02, 2005 6:15 PM ET USA

    EMB, IMHO, the ones screeching vitrolic judgement are the ones making charges of homophobia against those who demure at ordaining men who, the CCC says, have an orientation that is objectively disordered (2358). Since, as Aquinas claims, Grace builds on nature, ordaining gay men continues to strike me as tempting God. Saying this makes no judgment about the personal sanctity of any particular priest -- gay or straight. Nor does it imply that the only (or most) sinful priests are gay.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 4:52 PM ET USA

    Never, in my 70 years, have I heard so many professing to be Catholic, screech such vitrolic judgement on those they don't even know! Since when has homsexuality been proven to be the cause of pedophilia? I, too, know priests who may be gay. They are good, loving, compassionate men. I also know heterosexual priests who have denied their celibacy and therefore their vows. (I'm not talking about a temporary fall from grace, I'm talking a lifesty'le). I'll take a celibate homosexual anyday!

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 4:39 PM ET USA

    If a man is truly a good, faithful, celibate priest, then I should have no way of knowing what his "sexual preferences" are. Problem is, most people who self-identify as "gay" don't see that as a problem, despite the Church's teaching that same-sex attraction is intrinsically disordered. We all have an inclination towards some sin(s)...those who recognize it for what it is fight against it, aren't proud of it, and don't wish to be given any special status based on their tendency to that sin.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 4:38 PM ET USA

    Those who fear the aftermath of a devastating 50% doughnut hole in the clerical ranks should direct their energies and efforts to building Benedictine Monasteries as foretold by Alasdair MacIntyre in After Virtue. Reading William L. Miller's A Canticle for Liebowitz would help as well.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 02, 2005 4:00 PM ET USA

    One more thing, hUMPTY dUMPTY. The Donatists railed against Catholic orthodoxy. It was Saint Augustine who railed against the Manicheans.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 02, 2005 3:57 PM ET USA

    fisherman, I too know holy priests with a gay orientation. It has been my experience, however, that such priest are the exceptions that prove the rule. To wit: It is extremely risky and unwise to ordain men with a gay orientation.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 02, 2005 3:55 PM ET USA

    hUMPTY dUMPTY, no one is claiming a la the Donatists, that the sinful behavior of priests, be they gay or straight, of itself, invalidates any of the sacerdotal acts of such priests. It has been my experience, however, that priests guilty of sexual sins are very often the same priests who celebrate the Sacraments in illicit and, sometimes, invalid ways. This would indicate that people extremely untrustworthy on one commandment are probably untrustworthy on all of them.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 3:08 PM ET USA

    5....4....3....2....1.....Detonate!!!!!!! I think I know where that old Vietnamese priest is in our diocese, down on 2nd st.......

  • Posted by: Eleazar - Aug. 02, 2005 12:31 PM ET USA

    Thirdson, here’s a Plan 1 The Vatican issues a clear unequivocal statement-homosexual conduct is incompatible with religious life. 2 The clergy is given an opportunity to consider the statement. Those who cannot honor their vow of celibacy are given an opportunity to resign-no questions asked. 3 Detailed background investigations are conducted on all remaining clergy. Anyone found to be engaged in homosexual activity is publicly removed. If criminal activity is found, it is reported.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 11:19 AM ET USA

    Is there any data clearly establishing that homosexual orientation equals abuser activity? Celibacy is a gift, not an orientation. Abuse of power comes in all forms; heterosexual and homosexual, married and single. There are some very sad folk on your link, in need of seeking grace.

  • Posted by: fisherman129 - Aug. 02, 2005 11:13 AM ET USA

    How all this homophobia saddens me... I know a number of gay priests who are celebate, wonderfully pastoral men, beloved by their congregations. They are not openly gay either. Jesus works thru their ministry in wonderful ways. Don't you people know any good gay priests - or is this more about ideology than factuality?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 10:19 AM ET USA

    Sounds like we have a bunch of Donatists railing against the Manicheans. WWJD?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 9:49 AM ET USA

    The prophetic wisdom of Pope John XXIII is now vindicated. Plan B - better now than later. Did Pope Benedict have this in mind when he called for a smaller but more loyal Church?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 02, 2005 5:05 AM ET USA

    I don't approve of either option, and therefore wouldn't accept either. I've never learned how to drive, am the only practicing Catholic in my household and public transportation is time-consuming and inconveniently located around here. I'd allow married men to be ordained diocesan priests; ordain women as permanent deacons on the same terms as men; reduce average parish size to 500 members (not families); and strongly encourage vocations to consecrated life for people of all adult ages.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 11:11 PM ET USA

    God created Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve. We were born with free will and we shall have to answer to God how we used that free will. A homosexual lifestyle is a self serving & morally deficient lifestyle that is not in Gods plan for us. We have no room in our church for deviant behavior in ANY form. But, we must Pray for those persons who have lost communication with the Lord. Let’s go with Option B. Nuke-em! Keep the Faith and may God Bless Us All.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 01, 2005 11:03 PM ET USA

    To Fr. Mike, what you say is is true, but as the CCC reminds us, whatever it's origin and even though, in itself, it is not sinful, a homosexual orientation is objectively disordered (2358). Celibacy is a gift of Grace, but, as Aquinas maintains, Grace builds on nature. Thus, ordaining gays might be considered tempting God, much as letting a recovering alcholic work as a bar tender would be. Christian compassion is not the same as rank foolhardiness.

  • Posted by: Duns Scotus - Aug. 01, 2005 10:53 PM ET USA

    To Skip, remember there are far fewer gays than straights. Even using Kinsey's discredited 10% figure as the percentage of gays in the general population and assuming 1/4 of pedophiles are gay, the percentage of gay pedophiles is 2.5 times larger than their percentage in the general population. So, while it's true that, all things being equal, pedophiles are more likely to be straights than gays, it's also true that, all things being equal, gays are more likely than straights to be pedophiles.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 10:26 PM ET USA

    "..and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." Jesus did not quaily this statement with an "unless a bunch of fags become priests"; therefore, I have to go with option A. Eventually the Holy Spirit will awaken the Vatican and then the problem will be solved. Until then pray and find a good orthodox parish for worship. In the meantime re-read Mr. Blue.

  • Posted by: opraem - Aug. 01, 2005 10:21 PM ET USA

    i wouldn't get too hopeful for plan 'b.' enforcement would require the us bishops to act as shepherds of their flock. many of them are of the gay persuasion, as well. their track record is outstanding (!!!). $1 billion plus to pay for, protect and promote serial child rape; effective implementation of 'ex corde' at catholic institutions; teaching of authentic catholic doctrine; need i go on? pray that benedict wields a new broom and soon.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 10:09 PM ET USA

    'They' have their own plan; and an unblievable world-wide network! Twenty years ago, I overheard a fellow seminarian bragging about his weekend, and the postcard from a Monsignor who reflected on his 'race horse' legs. 'They' had flown this seminarian to a party-orgy for homosexual bishops and priests; those who have studied in Rome have similar stories of the Roman Curia. The majority of the homosexual clergy are not celibate. God have mercy on them and our church. 'Maranatha' -Plan B.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 9:39 PM ET USA

    I strongly agree with verum res! After I had discerned a vocation to religious life, I joined a religious order and almost immediately discovered that the men I entered with, were all gay. There was a "gay subculture" and eventually I just got sick of the gay undertones in this life. This type of institutional life is very close and it simply does not work in a gay environment. One in this initial group is now a priest. But...gays can be healed if they repent and sin no more! So can anyone else.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 9:14 PM ET USA

    Nuke 'em! It may be already too late for the Church in America as far as material loss but Nuke 'em anyway. All these lawsuits and all this money that could have been used properly. I almost sound like Judas when I feel concerned about the money lost. What I mean is the spiritual attack. What is needed is real sorrow and remorse for what evil that has been done to the Church by sinners. Come back like Peter; don't despair like Judas. Sin no more and avoid near occasions of sin. Nuke 'em!

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 9:10 PM ET USA

    Sometimes I wonder if Christians really understand their faith. Participating in homosexual behavior is a sin. I don't believe people are born gay, but is it's a response which occurs at an early age to people who are: (a) very sensitive in nature; and (b) have had a significantly negative experience to them in childhood. They are not to be hated, maligned, ignored, or ostracized, but their acting on their homosexual nature should also not be supported. The nuclear option is anti-Christian.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 9:01 PM ET USA

    With the ageing and waning of the priesthood, we need every priest we have to administer the sacraments. Unless, of course, you beieve that Christ's injunction was "Feed some of my lambs. Feed some of my sheep."

  • Posted by: Vincit omnia amor - Aug. 01, 2005 8:02 PM ET USA

    bring it on! can't wait for the doc. it'll take courage. prayers will be needed. but certainly "B" beats "A" btw, where does Di come up with these pics!? :)

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:58 PM ET USA

    The Holy Spirit is with the Church "on earth". We have the Church Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ established. Did we not hear & assimilate the Word: leave the darnel, that is MY problem, I will fix it when I am ready, not when YOU (that means US - including me, Diogenes and all the nuclear supporters!) want to fix it. Have we so quickly forgotten the message of our late Holy Father - there is spiritual growth and opportunity for sanctity in midst of suffering and angst?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:26 PM ET USA

    Option B.Yes! We are enabling priests to continue to live and act out their sinful sexual behavior. Causing them to seek the good help, that is available, could free them of this behaviour. There are numerous people who have left this lifestyle behind. Dismissing or not allowing them to become a priest in the first place would help them by not enabling them to continue this lifestyle. Yes, we must sacrifice. Are we up to the challenge or will we bury our heads and live in our comfort zone?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:24 PM ET USA

    Plan B is my vote. Your Holiness, let's get on with it! The sooner we can do this, the sooner the Church will heal!

  • Posted by: Athelstan - Aug. 01, 2005 7:07 PM ET USA

    If only we could! I suspect that "decimate" is the precisely correct term, i.e. about every tenth priest would be defrocked for homosexuality. For the otherwise heterodox, I'm afraid the percentage would be much greater. Nevertheless, unless and until the bad apples are removed, their rot will continue to ruin the Church.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:07 PM ET USA

    What ever happened to our belief in the charism of celibacy? So many people treat the topic of celibacy as a curse rather than as a gift. If one is truly celibate, orientation is not an issue. If one is not celibate, orientation won't matter. There are actually more womanizers than actively gay priests, yet that doesn't seem to draw attention. As a spiritual director, I see many people embrace celibacy and thrive -- making great gifts of themselves to others. Condemn less,pray more. Please!

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:02 PM ET USA

    would we next seek to rid the church of pharasaical hypocrites who dispense judgement from behind silly stage-names?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 7:00 PM ET USA

    For all you homophobic nazis ou there I would point out that ALL priests take a vow of celibacy and as long as that vow is kept then gays who may be priests are following the Catechism of the Catholic Church to the letter. That would be that homosexual persons (generally) are called to chastity. By the way, every scientific study ever done on pedophilia show that the majority of sexual child abuse is done by straight (often married) men! Your ignorance and hatred is frightening!

  • Posted by: visions - Aug. 01, 2005 6:58 PM ET USA

    Could that screaming gentlemen be Slim Pickens from Dr Strangelove and how I learned to Love The Bomb? What a world!

  • Posted by: peace with justice - Aug. 01, 2005 6:46 PM ET USA

    Nuke em. If the Bishops are faithful bishops, & the priests are faithful priests, and we pray like faithful sheep -- God will be our faithful God and vocations will flourish. Meanwhile, what's a drive to be with our Lord?

  • Posted by: Skip - Aug. 01, 2005 6:40 PM ET USA

    For me, the nuclear option has already occured (by ignoring the present state of affairs of our lame churches in our city/diocese). We already drive 100 miles EACH WAY on Sunday to get a decent another State! It is very difficult for us to do this with 5 children under 10 years of age......and our 3 year old with health problems. But we do it, for the sake our kids and their salvation. So, we are used to it anyway. No biggie. Bring on the nukes!

  • Posted by: Gil125 - Aug. 01, 2005 6:40 PM ET USA

    I agree with Diogenes and all the previous posters. Including, alas, thirdson. I stopped cheering for Pope Benedict when he appointed my archbishop to his old job---and started praying for him.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 6:39 PM ET USA

    Just think, every well trained reverent liturgical musician and singer will be at that Mass! Everyone who comes will have been purged of indifference. Glory and Praise to the Almighty will blow across this land like a new Pentecost. If the entire visible Church on earth can grow out of the original Pentecost - think what a new Pentecost will do! Maybe we have fewer priests because we are supposed to have fewer Catholics. Ever think of that?

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 6:28 PM ET USA

    Wouldn't the nuclear option offend all those "cafeteria Catholics" who think they represent the better instincts of better people everywhere? Too bad for them! Whatever happened to the "hard sayings" of Jesus? The Lavender Mafia is bold and explicit enough to defend their ideology and give detailed descriptions of their behavior on the worldwide web, in full view of everyone. How much longer do we have to "tolerate" their outright hostility and perversion in the name of Christian "charity?"

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 4:18 PM ET USA

    Drop the bomb!

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 1:10 PM ET USA

    I am still waiting to hear the details of exactly how we are going to rid the Church of this blight. Does anybody have a "real" plan? When Pope Benedict XVI appointed Archb. Levada to the CDF I realized that any plan developed to rid the presbyterate of homosexuals will quickly be sidetracked. We watched Levada's fancy dancing in San Francisco. I don't have such a plan and Diogenes, you don't either. I pray that Almighty God has one.

  • Posted by: Gertrude - Aug. 01, 2005 12:21 PM ET USA

    Nuke em. Whatever it takes, however long it takes, the lavender boys will be rooted out, and our Church will be restored to Her former beauty.

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 10:21 AM ET USA

    Lord Have Mercy! Give us "Option B"! And of course, I concur with "Eleazar" below! :-)

  • Posted by: - Aug. 01, 2005 9:25 AM ET USA


  • Posted by: Fr. William - Jun. 06, 2005 2:22 PM ET USA

    Plan B. Nuke 'em. I'm already pastor of three parishes. We priests that are left after the nuclear option would continue to focus, by God's Grace, on living the three munera: sanctify, teach, govern.. with the emphasis of time/energy on the sanctifying (Sacraments, Sacrament preparation, sacramentals, Divine Office, prayer) & the teaching (the Teachings of Christ & HIs Church), & try to delegate the governing as much as is right & possible. Solid vocations will then flourish. Semper Fi.

  • Posted by: Eleazar - Jun. 06, 2005 12:59 PM ET USA

    I concur with Verum Res...this has to be broader than homosexuality...every blotch of heterodoxy must be scrubbed clean. I also believe that it needs to start from the top down...a few, very public removals of dissenting bishops will see all the rats desert. Let the Inquisition begin!

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 12:34 PM ET USA

    What, precisely, is this "nuclear option," Uncle D.? Ridding the Church of this cancer is necessary but how would it be done? There are the obvious homosexuals but what about the rest of them who thrive like an undetected malginancy in the body of the Church. Perhaps our churches might again return to the theology of the Church Militant, singing "Onward, Christrian Soldiers!" When the laity finds the courage to speak and act as warriors like those at war we won't need a nuclear option.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 12:17 PM ET USA

    I once read a member of the L. Mafia decry the VERY notion of Plan B because "guys would just lie about it," as if they aren't now. Of course, the prohibition/removal of homosexuals from the priesthood will never happen, and the best and only strategy is to find the normal priests and find one's spiritual sustenance there.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 11:48 AM ET USA

    My parish is blessed with a fine, orthodox priest. But about 50% of the other priests in the diocese are lacking in commitment to the magisterium. There is no easy answer. If the bishop sent a heterodox priest to my parish I think I would hang in there, and attempt to change the situation by prayer and commitment to the faith.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 11:26 AM ET USA

    The Church needs plan B. Of course, if there is only one priest, it would be the Bishop and better that he walk or ride a bike to the stadium. We now drive 25 miles every Sunday, and we must pass 50 "Catholic" Churches on the way including the one that is a 5 minute walk from our house. Catholics need to profess with their feet and they need to keep their wallets closed except for certified, orthodox expenses, not one penny more.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 10:26 AM ET USA

    In my neighborhood, the young VietNamese priests have solid _American_ accents, and are just as orthodox as their elders. Here, at our missionary parish, we have two very holy priests serving three parishes. And any missionary priest who comes to our parish has preached a very powerful orthodox homily.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 9:50 AM ET USA

    Plan B! Where do I send the letter requesting this?

  • Posted by: Ignacio177 - Jun. 06, 2005 9:33 AM ET USA

    The consequencies of the plan B option would not be as bad as you say. In 6 to 10 years all thoses who presently have a priestly calling but have not entered the sem because of the maricones would have entered and have begun to be ordained. Plus the pastoral work level would increase for the already ordained in the States to Latin American levels. Here it is common to say 2 o 3 masses on weekdays and weekends 3 -5. There would be no need for private Mass chapels. Go ahead make my day...

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 8:37 AM ET USA

    B ! Vocations would skyrocket, the faithful would be energized, and the strays would be less likely to identify themselves as "Catholic" just because their grandparents were.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 8:18 AM ET USA

    Plan B! But it has to include more than just the homosexuals. The nuclear option needs to include ANY priest who doesn't believe the definitive, traditional teachings of the Church. I'll take nearly unintelligble over heretical any day.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 8:10 AM ET USA

    Let it be done!

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 8:04 AM ET USA

    Considering the "Sesame Street" homilies, the performances of the liturgical dance ensemble, "Albigensia" and the music by the "Chittister Five", that I have endured, I'll drive the thiry-five miles. As it is now, my wife and I often drive 14 miles to the Tritentine mass on rotating Sundays simply for a breath of reverence. However, watch out for the hype and the slander from the Left...they secretly believe that everyone is as perverted as they are.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 7:11 AM ET USA

    Vocations are down precisely because of the Lavender mafia. Purging them from active ministry would be difficult and problematic. Homosexual acts could be cause to end their ministry, but homosexual persuasion is another story. It would be like a witch hunt. Purging every single one from seminaries is the key, and never allowing another homosexual to enter the priesthood again. Vocations would go up dramatically. All we have to do is look at the orthodox seminaries in the U.S.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 06, 2005 5:06 AM ET USA

    I, for one, am sick and tired of this moral blackmail; it's a drug we are addicted to. The demonic forces have given us a narcotic which makes us sick, and we’ve become so dependant on it that we’re convinced we will die without it. If we have leaders that would rather trust in sin than in Divine Providence, then the inmates are in charge. Knowing something of the system, I am convinced that if we build it RIGHT they will come. When will start trusting our faith? It works better that way...