You're so obsessed with homosexuals. Be honest John. Are you gay? It's supposedly not a sin since you're celibate, so you can admit it. You have to be gay yourself to be thinking about them so much. Even if you don't admit it, I suspect sometime in the future you will either come out of the closet or be involuntarily found out . A self loathing, repressed, closeted homosexual is almost always the case when one who's supposedly a "religious" priest or minister is so obsessed with them. It's the most common scenario. Common John, admit that you're gay. Who are we to judge ?
The Church (both its lay people and its priests) is to speak to the issues of our time. If you are going to tell me that homosexuality is not an issue of our time, then, well, I'm not sure what to say to you. It is an issue, and it is one that younger people are talking about a lot. St. John the Baptist went and told Herod he couldn't marry his sister in law because that was happening. Archbishop Romero spoke the Truth to power, St. John Paul II spoke the truth to Communists - it is what we do - we preach the Truth, particularly surrounding the topics that people are struggling about and asking questions about at the time. It is also highly ironic that you are seeking to somehow degrade me by calling me "gay"...it is sad that you don't see the irony in your accusation
I didn't "call" you "gay". Given the evidence we have of a great many priests and ministers who have your same obsession and condemnation of gay people, I (and many others) highly suspect you're most probably closeted.Yes, of course the Church is to speak to "the issues of our time". Notice the word "issues" is plural. Now that same sex marriage is the law of the land, seems to me there are a GREAT MANY other issues you should be tackling full force where you may actually be successful and be a force for good, rather than still be on this one gay issue where you're most probably sure to fail and be a force for evil. Notice your blog since you've returned from your vacation. The majority of your postings are still on the same sex marriage issue. Whether you wish to acknowledge it or not, you're definitely abnormally obsessed .I also saw your flippant "transition" comment, which tells me your now after gender dysphoric people as well. Again, abnormally suspicious.You said this : "somehow degrade me by calling me 'gay' "If the Church teaches us that the state of being gay in itself isn't a sin if one is celibate (as I assume you are), why would you consider being gay yourself, as a celibate priest, "degrading"? Have you any idea how you revealed yourself when you wrote that? You inadvertently provide evidence over and over that you have hatred and disrespect in your heart for those who are gay, celibate or not. That's a much greater sin than any loving gay marriage in this country. Calling it "degrading" if someone suspects you may be gay yourself as a celibate priest , is not in accordance with Church teaching about homosexuality. Your own continuous degradation of gay people (and possibly yourself , if you're a closeted gay priest ) has no place in heaven. I, like most Catholics, think God will surely find a place for same sex love since Jesus made it clear that loving God is the first greatest commandment, and loving each other is his second.
So you DO think gays are second class citizens! Here you pretty much admit it by accusing the anonymous user of "degrading" you by calling you gay. So in other words, gay people are really a detestable degrading form of life, eh? Nice.
The accusation of "homophobia" against Fr. Hollowell falls pretty flat: he's more than happy to work closely with homosexuals who are opposed to the gay "marriage" movement and its horrific, manipulative abuses."It is also highly ironic that you are seeking to somehow degrade me by calling me "gay"...it is sad that you don't see the irony in your accusation"It's not really irony. These people are very comfortable outing gays who are opposed to their movement (as they did, e.g., with Breitbart). They are comfortable harassing, humiliating, bullying, and intimidating other gays into silence. They are comfortable with public indecency. They are comfortable with shutting down orphanages out of mindless spite. They are even comfortable with killing people, like when their shills attempted to shoot up the FRC headquarters in DC back in 2012. They have demonstrated the brutality of their methods in concert with the evil of their ideals time and time and time again in the past decade.Nope, not irony at all -- they are just liars, and like all liars, they serve the father of lies.
I gave other replies to John's reply but am being censored ...he's not accepting them.
You clearly think you labeling me "gay" is an insult to me, which tells me a lot about you
"Clearly"? Are you also a mind reader through the internet? Are you able to comprehend words correctly? Read what I wrote again.If you came out as a gay celibate priest (as many of us think you are just from your behavior) I would be happy for you. I would support you as I fully support all gay people. I'm one of the majority of Catholics who are happy to do so in not just good, but excellent conscience with God. :) So for me , there was no intent to degrade or insult. On the contrary.Your behavior and words in reference to gay people and transgender people is suspect and obsessive. Often , not in line with Church teaching at all. Saying that someone who suspects (notice the word suspects) that you most probably are a closeted gay celibate priest from YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR is to you "degrading" and now an "insult" just further proves that your own personal completely negative and bigoted feelings for gay people is what motivates you. I highly suspect Church "teaching" is just a convenient cover for you, as we have seen with countless other closeted and finally outed gay Catholic clergy in the past and present.Furthermore, you actually go AGAINST Church teaching when you call being a celibate gay priest "degrading" and an "insult". As far as I know, it isn't a sin to be gay if one is celibate....even if one is a priest.
While you're at it, draft a petition to ban abortion and divorce as well.
The majority of Americans , the VAST majority of young people, AND the majority of Catholics SUPPORT same sex marriage , which has now officially been declared, since June 26th, 2015..... the LAW of the LAND.There are 321 MILLION Americans in this country ! 100k.....200k......or even 500k BIGOTS signing some stupid, idiotic, useless, "petition" isn't going to change the LAW of the LAND , LOLYou're all so pathetic, so ignorant, and making such complete fools of yourself. Your hateful disgusting bigotry has been and will always be rejected in America.And as far as religions go, your behavior is just pushing young people further and further away from wanting anything to do with you....which, in the long run, will really make you disappear from the American scene completely. Just look at all the empty pews and the gray hair in your Church on Sunday.
1) The pews are full. 2) The vast majority of Germans supported Hitler. I am unimpressed by "the vast majority" throughout history
Comparing marriage equality supporters to Nazis...that didn't take long!
The pews may be full in your particular area, but certainly not in the majority of Churches in the USA...hence the selling of many of them due to the shortage of priests and people in the pews.You really do live in your own little secluded bubble. Sad
Anonymous, who are you, and where do you hail?
Mr. John Hollowell, I understand that there are certain premises in Catholic theology that make reconciling "God's law" and Civil Law difficult. However, the Church lives in a pluralistic country in a pluralistic world. The greatest threat to the Church, I think, comes when it tries to force its own theology on others - particularly when doing so means denying, limiting, or eliminating personal freedom when such personal freedom does not represent a denial, limitation or elimination of someone else's "rights."Many Catholics see the unfairness and the cruelty of the Church's teaching in regard to its persecution of homosexuals and their equality, and have left the Church as a matter of conscience. Myself included. To us, there are foundational principles that the Church is ignoring in order to protect certain theological claims for which it has no evidence or justification. We realize that the Church cannot very well admit the possibility of error on any matter, when to do so would cause people to doubt its teachings. People want certainty, and the Church has been the preeminent purveyor of certainty, if nothing else. The Church cannot afford to admit that it does not know what it , in fact, does not know. But this is true of most religious organizations in this country, of course, that state absolute "Truth" There is very little humility and next to no honesty. Such organizations can flourish nonetheless in a pluralistic society, provided they do not try to impose its questionable dogmas as law on the people. People are not nearly as against the Church as the Church is against the people. It is a shame that there has been such a betrayal. The great Cardinal Mundelein himself wrote: "The trouble with us in the past is that we were too often drawn into an alliance with the wrong side" (address to the Holy Name Society, January 2, 1938). Perhaps you should have Cardinal Mundelein's quote engraved on a door somewhere in your Church.
Of course we live in a pluralistic society, and so I have every right to work to see that our country upholds, as first principles, the first principles that the Church posits to be key to a flourishing society. You have the right, in our pluralistic society, to advocate for things which you feel should be first principles. We've done a terrible job of advocating what we hold to be key first principles as Catholics, and that's why we're here. I'm not giving up though, and in our pluralistic society you have every right to continue working for what you feel we should have as first principles.
Oh yes. We can see how Massachusetts stopped "flourishing" for over 10 years now. Goodness gracious...the lack of flourishing in that state since gay marriage has been...well....one might say...not even noticeable. I wonder...how can it be that Massachusetts is still existing when it isn't "flourishing" what with all those gay marriages all over the place? LOL Silly silly Fr Hollowell. You better go over to Massachusetts and tell them they aren't "flourishing". Let's see how well they take the news , haha
Denying persons a human right, without justification, a right that is afforded to all other citizens, is an act of bigotry. Believing that right should be denied is a bigoted thought. What Jesus might have done 2000 years ago is irrelevant. If I were a Christian and I did not want to think of Jesus as a bigot, I would have the same mindset 90 year old President Jimmy Carter has and my grandparents have ; I would believe that Jesus was a man of his time, just like Thomas Jefferson was a man we should admire today though he owned slaves. Also, I could choose to believe that Jesus ordained only men because only men were available or or offered. I would also believe that if Jesus were around today, and on the Supreme Court, he would have voted in favor of gays being given the right to marry. That to do otherwise would mean that all of God's children are not equal in His eyes. Denying them the right to love and marry is tantamount to denying them the right to life. There's no way around it.
We are still, even after the SCOTUS decision, denying people "the right to marry" because there are polygamists who want to marry whom we deny, there are polyamorous folks who want to get married in groups of 8 whom we are denying "the right to marry" we deny people "the right to marry" if they don't fall in certain age windows...we do it all over the place.
Not true. The "official" Church is still. Bigoted priests like you are still. But the majority of Catholics know better and we aren't following you.We'd rather follow Jesus ....oh , and the law of the land :)God bless !!!
So you think that the Bible is the standard for a "one man, one woman marriage" and therefore your protest? I'm not certain that you've actually thoroughly read the scriptures. Throughout those scriptures, polygamy is the standard practice, as it is still is in much of the Middle East. It's a cultural thing. Of course, interestingly, slavery is the standard biblical practice as well. Also, marriage was not a great interest of the Church until the 12 century. Celibacy was considered a higher form of life and preferable to marriage, taking Jesus as an example. Read St Paul, who in effect , said marriage was a last resort and for those who were unable to control their sexual urges. For centuries, marriage was happily left as a civil matter. Marriages were often arranged without love and very often without the two parties even knowing each other as people, and was a contract agreed upon by two families that involved security, property , and possession.....among other things mutually agreed. In fact, the Church only developed the sacramental understanding of matrimony in medieval times, and declared it as such only in 1184. Before that, no "sacrament" of matrimony at all, just a civil contract.Fast forward to 2015, suddenly the Church ignores these facts and says it has ALWAYS had the absolute "definition of marriage" as if that one "definition" has been securely in place since the beginning, which history tells us, without question has not.Worse yet, the Church insists that "definition" on other citizens who may or may not even be Christian. Quite interesting, don't you think?
things being defined at Councils and through papal teaching and so forth does not mean it wasn't treated as law prior to that point
No, "the Bible" is probably not his "standard," since he's not a Protestant. Don't let your ignorance stop you from talking, though.
I see. So you and the minority of Catholics make up your own BS without the Bible as your standard when convenient , and the Bible is only your standard when convenient. I see. That explains the bigotry quite well. Thanks for making it clear.
AH yes.Catholics just carrying on with the tradition of persecuting and violently abusing gay people. Only now you can't kill and burn them anymore like you used to.In 1232, Pope Gregory IX established the Roman Inquisition which investigated claims of "sodomite acts" when, in 1451, Pope Nicholas V enabled it to prosecute men who practice "sodomy". Handed over to authorities, those condemned were burned.The most hateful pope was Pius V who burned gays when they were captured. Including gay priests. So where was your Catechism saying how much you "respect" gay people then? He even wanted to burn adulterers but the population resisted this. Just as we are now resisting you from taking away their civil right to marriage. Thank God, we won over you on June 26thThe text of the decree by "St." Pius V can be seen here on You Tubehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5OyeuMrZ78
Yes, if you judge the Faith by the actions of some of its leaders (Peter, Judas Iscariot, Fr. Hollowell, etc.) then you will be sorely disappointed. It is the number one reason people hate the Church - it doesn't seem to produce perfect people...although Christ never said it would produce perfect people
The majority of Catholics dismissed the Fr Hollowell's long ago. Just look at the polls. :) Not following bigots , we'd rather follow Jesus. :)
Thanks Father for posting this link. I have not seen the petition until this post.
The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies and lists hate groups—organizations that "attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics."You and your church should be on that list. I'm hoping and praying that will happen
That would certainly make us officially haters, and finally settle the question for all eternity - we would thus be condemned to being ACTUAL haters, and not just "haters in theory"