Reports of LGBT Scandals Waiting in the Wings – Scots Clergy Concerned…

Background…

From time to time, concerned clergy and teachers contact us with information about various scandals of which they are personally aware, or have witnessed.   They are keen for Catholic Truth to make these scandals public, but that is not always possible.  When I have written to bishops in the past, reporting information about, for example, priests engaged in affairs with women, I have been astonished at their replies:  they initially tell me that they will investigate the allegations and then write a second time to tell me that their investigation showed that there was no cause for concern.  Their “investigation” – in each and every case that springs to mind right now – consisted of asking the culprit-priest if there were any truth in these claims and then accepting his word for it that there is no truth in the allegations.  DUH!  Just as well none of these bishops applied for the Police Force. 

Then, too, some years ago, when we exposed information about priests who had been recognised in a “gay” bar in Glasgow city centre – which we had investigated ourselves, in one case employing a Private Investigator (thanks to a generous donor who wanted to know the facts) – we were punished for our trouble.  Note, when we rang to politely confront the names we had been given, we made clear that we didn’t want to publish anyone’s name; instead, we hoped for a reassurance that each priest (and one teacher) realised that frequenting such a place was scandalous, and that would be an end to it.  The majority offered that reassurance but then launched a hate campaign which – were I to publish the details here – would take a couple of hours (and then some), and perhaps result in moi being invited to appear in the starring role in a “film based on a true story…”    I’m really not the Hollywood type, as those of you who know me well will testify.  I heard that! 

In fact, most, if not all of the priests named in our reports back then, left the priestly ministry thereafter.  Not cause and effect, as some of them would have us believe.  Indeed, we just would not have had the room to publish all the information which poured out AFTER they’d left – and there was some very seedy information indeed, which poured out long after our reports.   

Update…

As with the first batch of names given to us “back in the day” by a worried priest in the Archdiocese of Glasgow, so, now, more clergy are coming forward to express deep concerns about the way a group of young men, some, if not all,  generally understood to be of a homosexual disposition, meet regularly at the presbytery of a young Glasgow priest.  At this stage, I’m not prepared to offer any more identifying information but, putting this information together with the fact that a number of children attending  Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Glasgow are being permitted to return to school this summer dressed as the opposite sex, names changed on the school register, then, clearly, the clergy informing us of their serious concerns, definitely have a point.  The Archbishop and his minions in the Scottish Catholic Education Service need to spend a little time reflecting on Christ’s warning to those who lead children astray:  “… he that shall scandalise one of these little ones who believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6)

Any priest, therefore, or Catholic teacher, who fails to communicate – age appropriately – the teaching of the Church on homosexuality, had better learn to swim.  For the teaching of the Church is clear:  homosexual acts are “acts of grave depravity” and “under no circumstances can they be approved” (Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2357)

Action Plan…

Firstly, pray for all concerned – that’s a given.

Secondly, there’s no point in my unworthy self writing to the Archbishop of Glasgow – same old, same old. 

Thirdly… However, YOU might be able to reach the part of the Archbishop’s conscience that I’ve never managed to reach.  Remember, my clergy sources are confident that the Archbishop knows about these regular meetings.  If you think it’s worth a try (just don’t hold your breath) here are the contact details taken from the website of the Archdiocese of Glasgow:

Archbishop Philip Tartaglia,
196 Clyde Street,
Glasgow,
G1 4JY
Phone: +44 (0)141 226 5898
Email: info@rcag.org.uk   

 

 

 

 

52 responses

  1. Is this group of homosexually inclined men meeting together in order to encourage each other to live chastely? And is this priest meeting with them to give them pastoral care to help them to be chaste? Groups like these exist such as those organised by the Courage Apostolate. This would not be scandalous, unless the preist was using this group as a cover to get access to vulnerable young men.

    Is the purpose of this group to dissent from Church teaching and to encourage each other to commit sins against sixth commandment ? If this is the case then it is gravely scandalous that a priest should facilitate this kind of group, and the members of this group are vulnerable to exploitation, especially if they are young.

    • Miles Immaculatae,

      I’m afraid I laugh a hollow laugh every time I hear this notion that those suffering from a particular temptation would get help from others suffering the same temptation to not indulge the temptation. Crackers.

      What if those of us with a particular weakness in the area of charity, arranged a “Gossip Group” to see if we could help one another to be more charitable. As I say, crackers.

      We are taught to avoid temptation – not set up a group to meet regularly with like-minded people to… er… encourage one another not to commit that particular sin.

      To the best of my knowledge, this is a weekly social occasion.

        • Miles,

          That’s an interesting question. I remember reading an article written by a SSPX priest about AA. It said that if there was no alternative then it would be permissible, but it’s far from ideal.

          I don’t think you compare AA to these groups like Courage. Alcoholism is an addiction, whereas groups like this are about personal sins of impurity. There must be a far greater temptation to descend into impurity when meeting with others of the same inclination and talking about the inclination.

        • Miles Immaculatae,

          Do you approve of “support groups” like Courage? I used to think Courage was a good thing but changed my mind and stopped advertising them because, on reflection, it seems obvious that attending such groups may well be a dangerous occasion of sin, and we must always avoid those.

          • I personally wouldn’t discourage someone from attending a Courage group if they felt it helped them to live a holy life. Just because the members of the group share the same inclination does not per se mean that they will experience physical attraction to each other. If however an attendee was attracted to another member of the group then it probably would be wise for them to not attend. Most men are attracted to women, but not to every single woman. If men were sexually interested in every woman they saw then would it not be an occasion of sin for them to be around women? Would we not have to segregate male and female seating in Church just as Muslims do in their mosques?

              • Miles Immaculatae,

                No, you’ve not misbehaved. A few comments went into moderation and since I’ve been away from my computer for a long time today, I’m only now seeing them to release. Just another case of the Wonders (and Mysteries) of WordPress, so think nothing of it…

            • Miles Immaculatae,

              It’s not about them always experiencing the attraction to every male but the danger is there.

              It’s interesting to note that often married men and priests, concerned to remain faithful, ARE careful around women, although not to the extent of segregating them in church – that would mean the women would end up paying the collection 😀

      • I agree. I don’t see why people with same-sex attraction issues should have special groups, even so-called ‘orthodox’ ones. They could easily provide occasions of sin. Alcoholics / Narcotics Anonymous is different in that it deals with people affected by chemical dependency.

  2. No, this group is not to uphold the church’s teaching. If it’s the same group I’m thinking of, there has been rumours about the priest and lay members of the group for years.

    • Whistleblower,

      I must say I was very surprised to hear about this group because I haven’t known about this priest for years – quite the reverse; I had presumed, having once met him, some years ago, prior to his ordination, that he was a sound priest. So, “sad and disappointed” sums up my own reaction to being given this information.

  3. I’m sensing that you don’t want names of people or even the parish involved being mentioned, so I won’t do that.

    However, the headline is a bit misleading because it’s not a case of scandals “waiting in the wings” – there are people who are already scandalised at this regular gathering in a Glasgow presbytery with a young priest and young men.

    You may all remember the scandal reported in the Daily Record, it was quite similar to this, a social occasion
    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/parishioners-angered-church-response-objections-9806913

    The word on the street is that the young man involved in the above incident is also one of those attending these regular gatherings in another Glasgow parish.

    If that is the case, then the judgment of the priest organising this latest social is deeply flawed.

    From what I know of this situation, you are right to ask for prayers for all concerned.

    • Interested Party,

      When you say “the word on the street is – ” it makes me think that this group is quite well known about in the diocese. Is that what you mean?

      • Fidelis,

        I mean that those who know about these things, especially among the clergy, know about this little “dinner party”, for want of a better term.

        There’s concern about one young man in particular who attends, but since the editor has made it clear she doesn’t want details given out, I won’t say any more. It’s enough just to know that there are priests who are aware of this but don’t feel able to raise the matter with the archbishop.

        • Interested Party,

          Thank you for your restraint! Let me explain, briefly, why there is really no point in giving out identifying features…

          Nobody cares.

          I explained this in our 50th anniversary edition, focusing on our future plans, by answering the question of whether or not we would continue to name names if and when necessary, to expose scandals. Essentially, the answer is that we would not allow ourselves to be intimidated by the nasty hate campaign which followed our expose of the extent of homosexuality within the Church in Scotland, but neither would we automatically repeat such an expose because our rationale was somewhat misguided, optimistically so… We’d hoped that our fellow Catholics would rise up in protest on discovering the double-living of their clergy (priceless given the apathy) and also shock the “culprits” into reflecting on their spiritual danger (hilarious given their manifest lack of faith).

          As I’ve already explained in my introduction, when we ran some reports on the extent of homosexuality within the Church in Scotland, there was a bitter and nasty reaction from those who featured – all of whom are no longer active in the priestly ministry, and one of whom is still – as far as I know – working in an Anglican parish south of the border.

          The fact is, the majority of Catholics don’t really care if their priest is actively sexual (ask them and they will argue for married priests, and decry “homophobia”) and the same goes for teachers who are known to be homosexual, even as they are given Church approval to teach in Catholic schools, including primary schools.

          So, our publicity on this occasion, such as it is, is aimed at the bishops; unless the Scottish Bishops wish to follow their American brothers into salacious headlines – if not prison – then they will start caring, and, hopefully, acting to end the scandals of which they are already aware and which we are hereby confirming.

          We are certainly not going to be contacting the little “dinner party” group (to steal your term) – that’s for sure.

          Makes me wonder though: when I met the young priest (who hosts said “dinner parties”) during his seminary years, he was in the company of another seminarian, also now ordained Not suggesting guilt by association – of course not – but one cannot help wondering… about… things… can one?

          • The nobody cares but a few is so true . I personally myself like Social Media. At the Moment am Banned again from Twitter 5th Time so al have to go to the Library go on one of their PCs and get another account as my IP address and Emails to them are used up . I like to know especially what my so called Enemies can post . The recent ban being put out by Twitter to someone who said ” Love your Enemies ” for which he was suspended for Hate Speech .😷Personally this time I wasn’t banned for The BS word of Homophobia but of the Equally BS word Islamaphobia of which the 2 ( Pardon the Pun ) are more or less Bedfellows which in itself is also Queer that of course is more or less on Social Media I think . The reason I mention Twitter Ed is that the First time Twitter Banned me it was ( according to them of course) hate speech towards Homosexuality. Now comes the interesting part . The Perverts tried but failed to get my Home Address their
            efforts for this was obviously not to send me a Christmas Card but to Dox me the Internet term to let the other 1000s out there know where you live so as the least that they can do is Harrass me and anyone related to me . Now comes another part . One of the Homosexuals got in touch with a Twitter Football Team Account which had over 5000 Followers and said I quote ” we have to get this Bas—rd John Smith Banned from Celtic Park as he says he is a Celtic Fan and we don’t want His Kind at Celtic Park ” of course here I have put in an alias. Was I scared of course I was as I had previous of losing a Home and £ 1000s because foolishly i stood up to Drug Dealers and thought that the Police would at least give me SOME backing,that in itself was a very big mistake. Does that mean that I wouldn’t tell if a Priest was in a Heterosexual or worse still a Homosexual relationship Yes i would tell . The reason being and most of us know on here that Homosexual Men who are Catholic Priests anyhow only as far as am concerned became Priests for an easy life and access to other likewise men . I have a different feeling towards Heterosexual Priests who are caught by the Cassock Chasers both Catholic and non Catholic Women. Am sure you know what I mean there as we being of the same generation have seen such behaviour down through the Years. So you take Care Yourself and God Bless.

            • FOOF,

              “love thine enemies” is now classed as “hate speech” on Twitter?! Priceless. I really have heard it all now.

              Keep cool, though, and try not to get banned. You can do more good by speaking the truth calmly than – shall we say – otherwise!

              I repeat – keep cool… Or, as we say in Glasgow – keep the heid!

          • Editor,

            I’m afraid first on the list of “nobody cares” is precisely the bishops. They think they are immune to the small fry (or, as the disgraced Cardinal Mahony used to refer to us, “People of no influence”) and can do as they please, playing their homosexual stonewall/shell game to the hilt.

            So it will take the state – who would it be, the Advocate of Scotland? Scotland Yard? – to bring these criminals down, when they investigate the cases of abuse inevitably committed by the homosexual clergy (including homosexual bishops).

            • I doubt Very much if it will be Scotland Yard or any Policeman who would investigate Homosexuals. Just last week ( al try and find a link ) I noticed somewhere lots of them at some horrible Homosexual Pride Thing . O and they weren’t their Policing It although all were dressed in their Uniforms and it wasn’t the Village People going to the YMCA

            • RCA Victor,

              What you say about the bishops is certainly true these days; I can recall, though, a time when they worried about bad publicity. My clergy-sources kept me amused with examples of that.

              However, now that we have Pope Francis, the closest we’ve ever had to an atheist-pope, they’re relaxed. They forget that the God who will judge them and decide their eternal fate is no… atheist 😀

              And he did warn us all, bishops included, to stand ready for we do not know the day nor the hour when death will come for us… Pope Francis won’t be able to help them then, she said menacingly…

              Of course, you are right about the possibility of criminal investigations – that would certainly scare the socks off the bishops. Scotland Yard is in England, silly beggar, so it won’t be those detectives on the case, simply Police Scotland. OR if the SNP get their way and we’re restored to EU membership, it may be that someone comes for them brandishing an EU Arrest Warrant.

              Whatever …

                • Priceless!

                  Apparently, it has been built on a piece of land where there used to be an inn / pub, where travellers en route to Scotland would stop for a rest for themselves and their horses, to eat etc.

                  That was the first ever explanation I was told, but when I tried to find it online, I got a million other answers for why Scotland Yard is in England. I suppose the nationalists would argue that the bad old English stole it from Edinburgh City Centre and set it down in London 😀

  4. Editor,

    I’m afraid I laugh a hollow laugh every time I hear this notion that those suffering from a particular temptation would get help from others suffering the same temptation to not indulge the temptation.

    This reminds me of a “support group” established by now-retired Abp. Pilarczyk in Cincinnati (a Bernardin protege – need I say more?), called “CRYSM”: “Catholics Respecting Youth in Sexual Minorities.” CRYSM was for homosexual high school students, but it immediately became a lightning rod for parent protests and was eventually cancelled. I myself wrote a couple of satires against it in my old newsletter, including a take-off on “The Night Before Christmas” called “The Night Before CRYSM-mas.”

    +Pilarczyk’s justification for this group, when challenged, was “What am I supposed to do, let them suffer?” – as if crying on each other’s shoulders (hopefully nothing more intimate) would alleviate their suffering, instead of informing them without compromise that they must, according to the Church, remain chaste or suffer eternal damnation.

    But this “support group” never opened a catechism, as far as I am aware, and most probably consisted of homosexual students sharing their stories of “persecution” due to their disorder. A typical liberal diversion and a rationalization of sin via emotionalism and self-pity. Not to mention the promotion of a victim mentality – the favorite fall-back position of liberals.

    Speaking of parent protests, why aren’t there parishioner protests about this scandal?

  5. RCA Victor,

    I remember thinking the same about the groups advertised in the “Catholic” press to support “Divorced and Separated Catholics” – and again laughed a hollow laugh when I read about new “partnerships” arising out of such “support”. It’s basic common sense to avoid, not court (so to speak!) temptation.

    As for your concluding question – this is not a formal group, simply a group of friends meeting at the presbytery so the parishioners are unlikely to know about it – not that they’d bother if they did know, based on the current culture of “acceptance” which is now more or less embedded in the minds of Catholics regarding just about any grave sexual sin. Dipping into the collection plate is a different matter, as we saw with the Galloway priest who was convicted of that crime in 2015, but anything sexual – as long as it’s between “consenting adults” (albeit without God’s consent), not a problem, these days.

      • I think some people can start with good intentions, but the temptations become too much. It’s dangerous, in my opinion.

        • Yes, that’s a good point. We all have good intentions but we also all have original sin. We sometimes think to ourselves that there are certain sins we would never commit, but I heard a priest once say that there is no sin under the sun that any of us wouldn’t commit were it not for the grace of God.

        • Petrus,

          That would be my fear, also. It’s only this particular sin that seems to be singled out for special attention, with support groups and “safe spaces” in schools etc. That is what makes me very concerned that this attitude helps the LGBT activists to argue that there is really nothing wrong with their desires, but it will take time to be fully accepted, hence the need for support.

      • I meant to say I remember years ago this came up about Enid Blyton. They said that because one of her characters was a Golliwog she must have been racist. But the Golliwog was a popular toy in her day.

        • I have to smile about the attitude to golliwogs. I have a beautiful knitted one made at a local (black) women’s craft centre in South Africa! And no it wasn’t just for tourists, the maker was delighted when I admired it and bought it for my granddaughter.

          • Elizabeth,

            Oddly enough, only a few days ago I was visiting a home where there are young children and, as I was leaving, I spotted a “golliwog” among the toys. When I expressed surprise, and warned of the danger of being accused of “racism”, the mother said that her toddler daughter had spotted it in a toy shop and appropriated it. The shop-keeper explained that, as long as she called it by the new name (which I can’t remember, at this moment!) and didn’t refer to it as a “golliwog” it would be fine.

            The craziness just keeps getting crazier!

    • And rightly, so I personally always thought there was actually something Queer about Noddy but not now The LGBTQ2WXYZ Mob have at last after nearly 60 years proved I was wrong. Really in Truth this whole BS is one of these days coming home to roost . It’s at Boling point in the States as am sure Victor well knows . This Antifa mob is going to run into the Right Crowd and there will be no holding back . Just to show how ridiculous this rotten to The Core PC Lot are out of control the Animal Rights don’t want the Rats Killed off in the Homeless downtown Dump of a Democrat City ,or as I call them Atheistic Marxist in Lost Angeles and no it’s not a spelling mistake.

  6. I looked up Courage on the internet to find our about it and then went through to the Great Britain chapters. I was interested to know that there is only one in England (London) and the rest are in Scotland. I’m not sure if that is significant, but I thought it worth mentioning.
    https://couragerc.org/courage-result/?cat=358

    There is also a branch called Encourage for the family of those who have same sex attraction, so it looks like it is quite a helpful organisation.

    • I think Courage is overall a good organisation with good intentions. Not all of their apostolate is done through group meetings and their chaplains sometimes give pastoral care on an individual basis. I think this is acceptable as long as the priest chaplain who gives this pastoral care does not have homosexual inclinations himself.

    • The group in London has been around the longest. Unfortunately it was run by a layperson who was unbalanced but thankfully he was dismissed from his position by the diocese of Westminster. I met him personally, he was a charismatic Catholic and had very strange ideas. He ran a ‘cuddle therapy’ retreat for men with homosexual tendencies. It seemed to me that he was using his position to get access to vulnerable young men under the appearance of helping them to be chaste. For this reason I think it is highly improper for a priest with homosexual inclinations to be involved in the pastoral care of persons with similar inclinations. There used to be a group in Manchester as well but it seems to have disbanded. The groups in Scotland are new. I know one of the priests who are involved in running it. He is selective about who he gives pastoral care to. Only certain persons are invited to speak with him, other people have been turned away. To me this is extremely suspicious. What criteria does he use to decide who deserves help from Courage?

  7. I’ve long meant to read Goodbye, Good Men by Michael S. Rose, about the homosexual culture in seminaries. I’ve now made a start on it and – well – what can I say? After reading the first few chapters, including an account of a totally disgraceful discernment weekend in a seminary in England, the thought uppermost in my mind was this: no WONDER all the Scottish seminaries – except the Scots College in Rome – have closed. And goodness only knows what is going on in the Rome College.

    Little wonder Father Despard’s suspension continues. The last thing the Scottish Bishops want right now is a priest who knows where all the skeletons are buried.

    • Editor,

      Don’t let your disgust go as far as M. Rose did, though (I know you won’t) – he attends a sedevacantist parish locally.

      • O, that’s very disappointing. It is so surprising, too, because normally a clear-thinking person doesn’t fall into that particular brand of Protestantism.

        Thank you for the information – it will make me read his commentary twice as carefully.

        • This area is full of sects – no unity (just like the modern Church…..), everyone has their own “solutions” to the crisis, everyone knows better than everyone else.

          • RCA Victor,

            “everyone knows better than everyone else…”

            Speaking to a man after Mass on Sunday, whom I (wrongly) thought might be tempted towards sedevacantism, I made the point that NONE of us knows better than the Church and to check out our duty in this regard (papacy/valid elections etc) we only need to ask for a copy of our “contract”. Nothing there that says any lay person has a duty to decide who is pope – not our job.

            After my lecture, to which he listened humbly, he informed me that he had actually COME to our Mass FROM a sedevacantist set-up. He knew instinctively that this was not right. I really must learn to keep quiet more…

  8. RCA Victor,

    I do wish Lifesitenews writers wouldn’t keep referring to JPII as SAINT and not just when they name him. Note “the saint observed that…”

    So disappointing, not to say irritating. You’d think that, given how long it took them to come to admit that it was not only “OK” but right and important to identify the modernist popes as at the heart of the crisis in the Church, they’d at least be careful not to tie themselves down in such a way that, later, when these “canonisations” are re-examined and some (like JPII, no doubt) set aside, they don’t look totally foolish, if not gullible. They see only the strong line which he rightfully took on “life” issues while ignoring the fact that he failed – big time – to do his papal duty by disciplining dissenting priests and bishops. How often do we need to repeat the fact that even atheists oppose abortion and euthanasia – it’s not the hallmark of someone holding the papal office.

    As for that 88 year old archbishop – well, you know what they say: there’s no fool like an old fool, and you don’t get much older than 88 (although in his case, we hope he does get older, to give him time to repent and retract his heresy.)

    In summary – I agree. With clergy this these, who needs Freemasons? You are right. Again…

    • LifeSiteNews are Neo-Catholic. They give an impression of being Traditional because they are serious about the moral law. However, the crisis in the Church is not merely moral, but doctrinal and liturgical. They forget this, and they have a tendency to obsess over sexual issues. In the history of the Church we have had debauch playboy popes like Alexander VI. But at least they didn’t try to change doctrine or liturgy. A chaste Pope who advances modernism, like John Paul II, is in my opinion a greater danger to souls. This is why Michael Voris got it completely the wrong way around when he refused to criticise Pope Francis on doctrinal grounds, but claimed it is okay to criticise him on moral grounds, e.g. McCarrick scandal. Michael Voris betrayed his unhealthy Neo-Catholic obsession with sex when he smeared the SSPX by claiming they were harbouring sexual predators. That was a new low for him.

      The SSPX alone attest to the tripartite nature of the Crisis in the Church. I am very suspicious of these Neo-Catholics. Do they think the crisis in the Church will be over once we have rid her of impure priests and bishops? The crisis wouldn’t be over because we would still have the Novus Ordo and conciliar doctrines of ecumenism, collegiality, and religious liberty. You never hear neo-Catholics condemning these things. All they’re interested in is sexual scandal. I would say that the doctrinal and liturgical crisis has led to the moral crisis, but for neo-Catholics it’s the other way around.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: