(English text after the Italian / Spanish text after English)

 

Theological and legal doubts about the legitimate validity of the priestly orders of homosexuals

The minimum requirements required for the validity of the sacrament of the order are: the man, the Christian, the believer, therefore the correct perception of the Catholic priesthood. The real problem is not that the personality structured on rooted homosexual tendencies has no requirements to become a priest, Obviously he doesn't have any. The problem is other and more serious: If you miss the priest requirements it becomes, that sacred ordination, In addition to being illegal, It is not that it is also disabled?

- Theology and canonical law -

.

PDF print format article

 

PDF print format

 

.

.

There is no aggregation in the world like the Catholic Church where the presence of more or less clear homosexuals is so high, nor is there similar aggregation where homosexuals, together with their narrow associates, they did a blow by entering all the "command rooms", I have been writing it for years (I refer to a old interview of mine 2013 readable WHO).

With the advent of social media Catholic self -styled blogs are proliferated where the customs of the LGBT agenda within the church is claimed, accusing those who complain about the serious problem of the high number of homosexuals within the clergy of being frustrated and repressed unresolved.

The lobby gay ecclesiastical is so powerful Impossible life to those who dared to denounce certain situations, explaining abundantly in advance of the ecclesiastical authorities how things would end. Nor should the virulent armed arm of the powerful be underestimated lobby gay ecclesiastical constituted by gay friendly, the consortium of those who, although not homosexual, protect the members of the Gay pious confraternity for them personal interests, or because moved by great career expectations, aware that gay lobbyists can favor them, or irreparably rubbing them within the diocese or the Roman Curia. Say that at the Holy See, in numerous dioceses, therefore in the universal church, It has come to a level of internal homosexualization that has exceeded all guard limit, It is not a mere imaginative hypothesis but a fact that can only be denied by those who reject the evidence of the facts.

In addition to gay friendly There are those I defined charming men, the danger of which is much higher than that of gay friendly. If in fact i gay friendly lend themselves to support the whims of the lobby gay To make benefits and prebends from it, the charming men they are those who exercise theirs charm male on members of the pious confraternity of gay ecclesiastics, creating around him an army of adorate homosexual serviles ready to act as their armed arm, good as few to attack and bite all together as a pack of hyenas under the impulse or command of theirs charming man. Then, I know charming man He manages to exercise his male seductions on a government man with latent homosexuality who enjoys a certain power within the Church, For example an diocesan bishop or a high prelate of the Roman curia, At that point the ecclesiastical career is guaranteed for him and the damage he will render to others, in particular to the fearsome "rivals" - those who are endowed with those valuable human qualities, morals, theological and pastoral that it charming men It has no - they will shave the inflicted of the white martyrdom.

It charming man, which by its nature is self -centered and ambitious, He defends himself unscrupulous through a connatured vendial-destructive instinct, capable of exercising malice with a method of scientific cruelty towards those who are endowed with that Christological priestly courage that leads them to affirm and remember what is right and what is wrong in the light of the Holy Gospel and the Catholic doctrine. Because the pure hearts, unlike the gay lobbyists, of theirs gay friendly e charming men, do not aim at everything and immediately immmedied, aim for the eternal.

 

The requirements for the validity of the sacraments are minimal, But those minimum requirements must exist

 

Those who practice sacramentary dogmatics know that this specific ground is very delicate, Last but not least because the requirements for the validity of the sacraments are really minimal. Among these lines we will limit ourselves to talking only about the sacrament of the order, Starting from a premise aimed at freeing the field immediately from the disputes of those who thought they could argue that in the texts of sacramentary dogmatic, In those of canon law and in its comments, no express and clear reference is made to those subjects of both sexual and psycho-sexual character to which I will refer in explicit terms. To dispel certain doubts and free the field of equivocal and insistent theological and legal disputes, I will bring attention to an incontrovertible data: until not many decades ago, Everything that directly or indirectly concerned human sex and sexuality had whispered transversely with euphemisms and turns of words in the texts of the magisterium, doctrine and in the Treaties of Catholic Moral, The only talking about certain themes was believed to be what inconvenient. When specialist academic àmbites were addressed themes of Catholic morality linked to human sexuality was resorted to Latin euphemisms, because the same words ordinarily and precisely used in the clinical and scientific lexicon of gynecology, of urology and andrology, they were not deemed convenient within the classrooms of ecclesiastical academies. The same confessors of the time had their own way of expressing themselves, A frasary made of vague indirect implications, taught to young pre -sides since their formation to the priesthood. This "proper" phraser of confessors served to allude without having to resort to unpronounceable terms banned from the ecclesiastical academic sphere as by the confessional, especially from public catechesis addressed to the people of God. This language was also assimilated by the Catholic faithful, In particular, from the penitents that before the confessor expressed themselves for so -called "understood" and "implications" as regards the sexual sphere, the relationships linked to it and everything that was relevant to the violations of the sixth commandment.

I will try to clarify everything with an example: it ran the year 2010 When a ninety -year -old penitent who grew up in that world not far from centuries but of a few decades, During a confession based on his memories of the past he referred to when once, in winter, finding himself alone "... leaving the house unfortunately I slipped". Son on the other era as a man and as a priest, I did not understand and I imagined that being in winter in an area where the snow falls in certain periods, leaving the house had fallen, Perhaps on a slab of ice formed by the snow in a corner not beaten by the sun, or who knows in what other way he slipped and fell. She understood that I had not understood, So he did two other delicate allusions more explicit to make me understand that he had committed a sin of adultery, for which after more than half a century he could not take off the sense of bitterness that had caused her, having always been linked by sincere love to his wife. This is to reiterate that it would not be pertinent or logical to contest that certain exhibitions to which I am clearly resorted to are not contained in an equally clear way in the texts of the magisterium, of the doctrine, of the sacramentary dogmatic, of Catholic morality and the code of canon law.

 

THE ORIGIN LESSON. THE VIRILITY OF mAN approved As an essential element for the Catholic priesthood

 

The catechism of the Catholic Church recites at n. 1577:

«It is validly receiving the sacred ordination exclusively the masculine baptized (“for“)»[1]. The Lord Jesus chose men (“men“) To form the college of twelve apostles[2], and the apostles did the same when they chose the collaborators[3] that they would be succeeded in the ministry[4]. The Bishop's College, with which the presbyters are united in the priesthood, The College of the twelve makes and update and update until the return of Christ. The Church is recognized bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible "[5].

Nobody has a right to receive the sacrament of the order. In fact, no one can attribute this office to himself. It is called by God to it[6]. Whoever believes to recognize the signs of the call of God to the ordered ministry, He must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, to which the responsibility and the right to call someone to receive orders is responsible for. Like every grace, This sacrament can only be received as an immersed gift.

Note that the Latin term Source/Resources It is a male noun of the second declination, With it, man is mainly indicated, the male, adult, Virility linked to male sex. The denial and the antithesis of Source/Resources It is also the term of Latin derivation: evil, word that indicates the deprivation of virility and also deriving from Source/Resources. In ecclesial language, To indicate men suitable for sacred orders, the term of sources try, in use in the church of the first centuries to indicate married men who were suitable to access the diaconate and the presbyterate[7]. With the run of time and the free acceptance of the obligation of celibacy that has its roots from the first apostolic era, In our lexic current this expression is used to indicate ascertained men and as such reliable for the sacred orders. The lack of psycho-physical virility therefore constitutes an insurmountable impediment to the sacred priestly ordination. Impediment known and as such sanctioned since the first centuries of the life of the Church, before which no one has the right to dispense, Given that no ecclesiastical authority can dispense from being a man, which is an essential and fundamental assumption of the ministerial priesthood.

In the year 230 Origen was consecrated priest From Teochtiso di Caesarea and by Alessandro di Jerusalemme, without the approval of the bishop Demetrio, who had canonical jurisdiction over him. Origene, The evangelical pass in which the Lord Jesus refers to the "eunuchi for the kingdom of heaven"[8], If it was evirate. This is the reason why his bishop had never wanted to consecrate him in the priestly order[9]. After that sacred ordination the bishop Demetrio, with the approval of the Supreme Pontiano Pontiff[10], the teaching faculty revokes him and deposed it from the presbyteral order[11] for the irregularity of his sacred ordination, that nothing was declared. It is known that Origen is the only one of the fathers of the church of that rich season not to have been proclaimed saint, Although imprisoned and tortured during the anti -Christian persecutions of Decio; but above all despite having been, For intellectual and speculative qualities, at a level higher than various other philosophers and theologians of that first rich and happy Christian era. The reason for obstacle to its canonization was due to the fact that in its great and precious philosophical-theological speculations it assumed the thought considered today's heretical rehabilitation[12]; The great and insurmountable impediment is all linked to its evolution.

In those early years of the Church life, in which the first great philosophical-theological speculations that preceded and gave life to the conditions and subjects then treated by the first ecumenical council of Nicea were underway in the year 325, It was not uncommon for speculative minds, Also including the Fathers of the Church, they fell into heretical thoughts, from which they then amended, This prevented their canonization or their proclamation in Fathers of the Church.

The Code of Canon Law Recalled a little further on refers in a modest and sweetened way to the fact that it cannot be ordained a priest "who has seriously and maliciously mutilated themselves or another"[13]. From this it is clear that the horrendous self-metaling of Origen was what is considered in itself worse than the heresy which can however be remedied through the recognition of voluntary or involuntary error, But a destroyed physical virility cannot be restored, if not with the use of complex surgical interventions practiced by modern surgery, even if with very uncertain results.

Relevant question: Mental castration It can also be worse than physical evolution, place that physical sexuality, With it the male virility that follows, It is a consequence of all mental, from which sexuality and physical sex cannot ignore, being physical sexuality the consequence of mental sex? It is a question that for years I have given unnecessarily to members of the episcopate, But they never replied.

Through the sacrament of the order The participation in the priesthood of Christ according to the method transmitted by the apostolic succession is conferred. The ministerial priesthood stands out of the common priesthood of the faithful who derives from baptism and confirmation. Both, «Although they differ essentially and not only of degree, However, they are ordered to each other "[14]. It is precisely and specific to the ministerial priesthood to be "a sacramental representation of Jesus Christ chief and pastor"[15]. This allows to exercise the authority of Christ in the pastoral function of preaching and government, as well as operating in persona Christi in the exercise of the sacramental ministry. Having said that, it is clarified that the first two essential conditions for the conferment, therefore for the validity of the sacrament, I am the man and the Christian.

Book IV of the Code of Canon Law, in part I who deals with the sacraments, schematizes the "irregularities and other impediments" to receive the sacrament of the order[16]. A detailed list of obvious elements follows, For example, a madman or an affection from psychic infirmity cannot be ordained a priest, the apostates, heretics and killers, who mutilated seriously and maliciously or another or attempted to take his own life, etc … (cf.. text of the canons, WHO). However, you will have to come to “Just yesterday ", or a year 2005, After around the world had been placed in the sacred priestly orders in whole armies of homosexuals in the previous decades, with results revealed over time devastating for the entire universal church, To finally see promulgated by the then Congregation for Catholic Education - competent at the time for seminars, Today he returned to being the dicastery for the clergy, as indeed had always been previously -, Unfortunately, a document remained unheeded in many training houses, in which we speak clearly and precisely About the vocational discernment criteria regarding people with homosexual tendencies in view of their admission to the seminary and sacred orders (see text WHO). In short, After for years and years he went on saying "coming out of the house I slipped", suddenly he took courage by saying without euphemisms that everything is called adultery. In the same way, we proceeded to declare without implicit that a person with clear homosexual tendencies did not require to become a priest, never and in no case.

The real problem It is not that the personality structured on rooted homosexual tendencies has no requirements to become a priest, Obviously he doesn't have any. The problem is other and more serious: If despite the lack of requirements that are fundamental and founding for the priesthood, he becomes priest becomes, that sacred ordination, In addition to being clearly illegal, It is not that by chance it is also disabled?

In addition to the "dead letter" of the different exhortations issued by the Apostolic See about the non -admission to the sacred orders of people with homosexual tendencies, there is worse: In the previous decades - but unfortunately also to this - - the sacred priestly ordinations of subjects with obvious homosexual tendencies has been proceeded, hidden behind the illusory certainty that what mattered was insurance that did not practice homosexuality. Statement made repeatedly and implemented not a few bishops and seminary rectors, that however aware of the evident deficiency of male testosterone by not a few of their seminarians, Although perfectly aware of their homosexual tendencies and aware of the dissolute life that followed to live in the various pauses-vacation outside the seminary, They thought of solving the problem by hiding behind the surreal fig leaf ... "The important thing is that they do not practice homosexuality".

It is enormous error to think that a psychological disorder may safely remain as long as he does not mute himself in physical act, Given that - as I have explained several times in my studies and books - the homosexuality practiced physically is only the tip of theiceberg of mental homosexuality. I also explained and shown that often, reduced homosexuals for self-repression to chastity, in their thinking, Acting and interacting can be much worse and more harmful to the Church of those who practice homosexuality on a physical level, Because these seconds at least show off, resulting at least in part less acidic and bad. Unlike the repressed that tend to be not only acids and bad for their very nature, but evil and cruel. A quel point, When we find ourselves in front of deeply bad people who feel perverse pleasure to hurt others by any means, Starting from the dissemination of false news, or by resorting to complaints based on falsehoods built artfully, We are faced with a problem that evaluate homosexuality, because certain subjects would be such, i.e. evil, even if they were heterosexual, Therefore, regardless of their sexual tendencies.

In the long interviews that in internal hole and in the external hole I had over my years of sacred ministry with homosexuals animated by sincere and profound Christian feelings, the phrase expressed most frequently, In tones at times dramatic imbued with profound inner suffering it was:

"… that beats me, I can not control, As far as I commit myself with all my strength to escape the opportunities ".

Homosexuality, rightly derubricated by the list of "diseases", However, it remains a very profound and complex disorder of human personality. Even if in the opinion of the experts of the New clinical order Today it is no longer cataloged as a disease, thanks to the strong pressures exerted on them by the powerful homosexualist lobby, The fact remains that they exist, even in considerable numbers, homosexuals that do not accept the drives of their libido they defined as "disorder" and "disorder", For this they ask to be helped. And the request for help, often, Already in itself it is a request for treatment that as an answer, however, a help offer deserves, also for what is rightly defined today one non-malattia.

I remember among the many a poignant interview occurred in the sacramental confession with a penitent forty -year -old who told me textual words:

"How come, Today it is even possible to take care of many forms of cancer, serious ones included if taken in time, not instead this "disease" that my soul consumes since I had just 15 year old?».

How the Holy Doctor of the Church teaches us Agostino Bishop of Hippona: "Pain exists" - So it manifests itself - "" only in good natures "[17]. The sexual drives, which with a term that has become taboo today were defined In addition to nature, they are much more controllable than those are not against nature, who tend to be uncontrollable complexity itself, or in any case very difficult to stem. And as, These expressed so far, They are not hypotheses but clinical-scientific de facto data, I ask: As could be left to the direction of our seminars and the religious novice of the rectors, of the trainers and the spiritual fathers who, albeit aware of the homosexual tendencies of many of their seminarians and novices, They thought of solving and closing the problem - with the blessing seal of their bishops and their greater superiors - through a ... "provided they do not practice homosexuality"? The whole, which in itself very serious and wicked, While knowing that these homosexuals would have been placed as "foxes inside a chicken coop" within an ecclesiastical environment of everything in the male? How could they, The bishops perfectly aware of the clear trends of certain seminarians, debut even with cynical spirit jokes - heard from myself and various other witnesses -, type: “You can't all be perfect, There are also elements with factory defect, The important thing is that they do not give scandal. However, the church, It needs manovalanza ". Yup, Then we saw it at the tragic yield of the accounts, What happened when the ambitious "laborers" in great career have done theirs blow inside the church, chasing away beating the good designers engineers and architects from the construction site. These are perhaps the conditions through which a bishop can impose his hands, recite the consecrating prayer and grease a new presturious with the sacred chrism, stating that in the Church ... there is also a need for certain laborers?

 

There is no difference between the simony orders and those that occurred for exchanges of sexual favors and consequent blackmail

 

I witness - and several times I have informed the compensation of the ecclesiastical authorities of the Holy See, with related references and evidence - about cases of Italian bishops who under the blackmail have ordered priests of the obvious homosexuals and that, Although they were aware of their bad moral conduct and the incorrigibility of their nature, If they had not ordered them priests, these would have burst into an unwary scandals, covering their diocese by mud, Given that the first to linger in homosexual practices were their trainers and several presbitals of particular importance of the diocesan presbyterio, While on certain bishops sustaining for a sort of sacred modesty. In the face of everything I asked several times to those in duty and authority: If more reconciles of the Church have declared the sacred priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations that occurred through simony have not been valid[18], that is, through merchandise of money, The more disabled are sacred ordinations and episcopal consecrations obtained through blackmail, In order to keep the sexual merimonies hidden by virtue of which it was not possible to say no to those priestly orders and episcopal consecrations? It is a bishop without freedom that orders a presturious on blackmail and under constriction, validly administer the sacrament of the order? Or perhaps we must believe that paying in money or blackmailing through the money given, it is illegal thing, therefore as this condemned even by the ecumenical councils of the Church[19], mind instead, pay or blackmail through sexual performance, dates and offers, It is to be considered what everything is legitimate for the sacramental and canonical purposes of the validity of the sacrament of the order? Having said that I ask: The gifts of grace of the Holy Spirit, They can pass and produce effect through such and sacrilegious sinful action? I repeat: These are questions aimed severally and publicly and publicly to the competent ecclesiastical authorities, who have never responded on the theological and legal merit.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church considers simony a serious sin against the first commandment, together with the action of attempting God and sacrilege. According to the current code of canon law, The renunciation of an office made for Simonia, It is not valid and the simoniaca provision of an ecclesiastical office is nothing very right; Canonical penalties are also planned, such as suspension or interdict, Against the simoniaca reception or reception of a sacrament[20].It should then be added that the subjects in question, once they are absurd to the sacred priestly order, Far from subsiding and content themselves they have followed to use their poisons to be inserted in seats of maximum importance within the dioceses, To achieve immersed ecclesiastical academic titles, to become professors of Eresiology In pontifical universities, To become diocesan bishops, apostolic nunci, some cardinals; To be sent without any merit and talent to the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy, then ending, not even forty years old, After not even five years of diplomatic service, In the most strategic key places of the Secretariat of State. This is always to reiterate the immense damage that may derive from that principle of self-destruction today in place, placed in place by people who, Like the bishop of which I told forward, they claimed: “You can't all be perfect, There are also elements with factory defect, The important thing is that they do not give scandal ". However, If the Church really needs manovalanza, It should also be remembered that in the promises that we do before the Bishop and the Assembly of the People of God we promise to keep us celibate, So Casti, i.e. renouncing sexual relationships with those wonderful creatures that are women. Or we promise perhaps not to practice homosexuality, If affected by obvious homosexual tendencies? Because in that case, According to the impious logic of certain bishops and their trainers responsible for the care of seminars, It will be good to review the Roman ritual of the sacred orders of the deacons and priests, Also inserting this new form of solemn promise:

"I promise, as homosexual, not to practice homosexuality and to keep me celibate, aware that celibacy involves chastity both with women but above all with men ".

Good, This promise is also inserted into the ritual, If we really want to be consistent. I wrote in my book of my 2010:

Consciousness cannot be put in peace limiting themselves to public and severe proclamations, then if in fact gay priests increased in proportion to the presence of bishops who reason with a latent homosexual psychology. Or to put it raw: some seminarians between the seventies and the eighties capeggiavano inside of the seminars pious confraternity, Today they are bishops, and just become such, first they are surrounded by related parties, placed more and rigor in all the key posts in the diocese, traineeships. And these subjects, that protects and reproduce each other, they ended up creating a tremendously powerful lobbies within the Church[21].

Today we cannot say that there are no clear and precise documents, for instance:

[…] the church, while deeply respecting the people in question, Those who practice homosexuality cannot admit to the seminary and sacred orders, have deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or support the so -called gay culture […]^[22]

This and other documents are however treated as a dead letter To the point that today, In several seminars more similar to gods Gay village that not to Catholic training houses, a heterosexual would not even dare to approach, I think I explained it clearly in that book of my 2011 above all recalled.

It is superfluous to explain with what pain and a sense of humiliation, During the last thirty years of the history of the Church, has witnessed the climbing at the top of certain well -known homosexuals, clear and evident, many of which today professors of Eresiology In pontifical universities, Consultors and members of dicasteries, employees in the Diplomatic Service of the Holy See, diocesan bishops, Seminary Rectors, Diocesan General Vicars and Subvia to follow …

 

"You will know the truth and the truth will make you free". MANY HOMOSEXUALS LACK OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER, Starting from freedom and truth

 

In the Gospel of the blessed apostle John the verb of God asserts:

“If you stick to my word, you will truly be my disciples; you will know the truth and the truth will set you free"[23].

Before this assertion, which in its way is also a warning, We should seriously question the inseparable bond that runs between truth, freedom and ministerial priesthood. The homosexual, within the ecclesiastical world, it cannot be free, because it cannot be itself. And who is not himself cannot know the truth and become a tool, Believing that it is possible would be like saying that man has the power to change the evil to good and to bring redeemed grace through sin. God alone can change the evil to good, which partially understandable to the human intellect, since this remains in its entirety an inexplicable mystery, enclosed precisely in the great mystery of grace. God can in fact even use a wicked action by Satan, to ensure that the supreme evil made by the prince of darkness can change by his will and for his divine intervention in great good, But man cannot, through one's fragile nature corrupt from original sin, change the supreme evil in great good, nor can, least of all, use an evil action of the devil to change it in an action of good.

Who does not know the truth because to live he must fall into hiding, then in the simply self-defensive lies, it cannot be faithful to the word, Therefore it cannot be a disciple, It can only renew the Luciferian drama of the betrayal of Judah inside the church, all thanks to the sacred imposition of the hands of certain wicked bishops, that in this way prove to be not apostles of Christ but of the the mystery of iniquity.

We know that Christ established him for men and not for the angels. Therefore, the priest, Despite having by mystery of grace a higher dignity than that of the angels of God, It can be a sinner and fall like such in more or less serious sin; it can also commit very serious sins. The fact remains that a sin, however fatal, but still accidental, committed by a sinner priest, In its form and in its profound and intimate substance it is different from those who decide instead of structuring the sacred priestly ministry on the state of sin deriving from a lack of freedom that needs to be defended with perpetual lie, thus not being able to know the truth and therefore be faithful to the word, regardless of one's sin and his human sinner nature. Act in this way and "build" one's "being a priestly" on such evil elements and perverse, It means not having the idea and the basic perception of what the Catholic priesthood really is, then structure the gift of the mystery of grace of the ministerial priesthood of Christ on the mystery of iniquity.

Treating a theme of such delicacy, We must look good from falling even involuntaryly in the errors that were typical of the donatist heresy, condemned by the Council of Carthage in the year 411. The donatists claimed that the sacraments administered by priests made unworthy by their state of sin were not valid. This heretical thought did not disappear in the fifth century, so much so that the Angelic Doctor dedicate to it 90 questions In part III of the theological sum. My question does not even ask the validity of the sacraments celebrated and administered by unworthy priests and sinners, whose validity is dogmatically and canonically out of the question. The question I intend to raise on the theological level and on the canonical one is whether the sacrament of the sacred order, received by certain particular subjects in certain particular conditions, it is really valid, Given that the sacraments require for their validity of the minimum requirements. And if these minimum requirements, in part or in the totality they were actually absent? In this case we can speak of valid priestly consecration through the sacrament of the order? O, said with a new use of the example shortly before: Why, After the sacred ordination of the famous Evarato Origen, The legitimate ecclesiastical authority has banned it from the sacred orders, while the same ecclesiastical authority, In the centuries to take place, instead covered, protected, pampered and carried out in the best way an army of mental evaded? Simple, because ecclesiastical authority has never stopped to reflect on the fact that Origen, before reaching the extreme gesture of physical self-training, For some time now he had previously moved mentally. So that, its physical castration, It is only the consequence of a mental castration accrued and occurred previously.

I repeat that the question that I put are not the sacraments, undoubtedly valid, even if celebrated and administered by unworthy priests and sinners, but the objective validity in the full substance of the sacrament of the order received by some priests without those minimum requirements required for its validity, Starting from the fundamentals of the faith. Therefore, With all due respect to those who follow to play with the fire pretending that the dogmatic problem does not exist, The sad experience he had with the large army of homosexual ecclesiastics that prevides the Church, especially at the highest levels of the hierarchy, confirms me how high it is, sometimes in the frightening proportion of 7 his 10, The number of people with clear homosexual tendencies that are undoubtedly lacking in some or all the minimum requirements required for the validity of the sacrament of the order; fundamental requirements that are precisely man, the Christian, the believer, therefore the correct substantial and formal perception of the Catholic priesthood by both the deleted and the ordinated. Or someone can perhaps deny it?

Most of these subjects They are in fact clearly heretics and proud diffusers of evils of the mold mostly pro-Filito-Luitrano, or as my Polish confrere has defined them - darius oko - affected by homoeresia:

L 'omoeresia It is a refusal of the magisterium of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. The supporters of’omoeresia do not accept that the homosexual tendency is a personality disorder. Question that homosexual acts are against natural law. The defenders of’homoeresia I am in favor of the priesthood for gays. L’omoeresia It is an ecclesiastical version of’homosexualism (cf.. WHO)

Now I will center on these two elements: The man and the believer as a fundamental and essential assumption of the sacrament of the order, therefore the absence of heresy and the full awareness of the true substantial and formal nature of the Catholic priesthood. It is obvious that a clear homosexual, of those "Beetly" ordered over the last decades, several times defined as "... it is only a little effeminate, But because it is a sensitive soul ... a mystical ... ", In fact, they are prevented from receiving the sacred order, Because the rooted homosexual tendency is to be considered pursuant to Can. 1040 A perpetual impediment - the so -called irregularity to receive orders - in the face of which no bishop and no ecclesiastical authority can grant dispensation, because this would be as if the congregation for the causes of the saints decided to dispense a candidate for canonization from holiness, what that, nowadays …

Let's say that a candidate for the sacred orders tends to give in to the sin of lust In addition to nature, fully aware of sin, Mindful of being in error and for this reason ready to seek the grace and forgiveness of God, Feeling later in the same sin, If anything, even worse than before, but returning to look for grace and forgiveness again, aware of sin and evil. First of all, A subject of this kind shows that he is endowed with a Christian consciousness, therefore of the sense of good and evil. Of course, A wise trainer and a pious confessor can evaluate how appropriate it is to bring to the sacred order a sinner who cannot correct himself; One could evaluate the opportunity to advise him that in the face of any impossibility of controlling himself, It would be advisable to wait, before being entered into the sacred priestly order. However, regardless of his sin and gravity of the same, It remains peaceful that that man is above all a man who likes women, a believer with moral consciousness capable of discerning good from evil, aware of what the Catholic priesthood is and what it involves and requires. And when he, unable to exercise brakes and controls on itself, will linger at the vice of lust In addition to nature, will be aware of evil, of the error and the fact that this does not comply with the priestly state of life.

Having for several years confessor of numerous priests, I also found myself in front of confreres who had had relationships with women in violation of their sacred promises; as I found myself in front of others that, In a more serious and dangerous way they had a stable relationship with a woman. Both the one and the other lived everything with great discomfort, sense of guilt and full awareness of one's sin, in particular the latter, Those who had the so -called "fixed lover". And I can't hide that several of these priests, for impersenable mystery of grace, while living in a state of mortal sin, In the exercise of their sacred ministry they were authentic models of priestly pity, Given the soul and heart to the best treatments of the people of God, as well as effective and precious tools of divine grace.

The person's speech with homosexual tendencies are different structured on an already rooted personality, to which the element of heresy is inevitably joined, or of the homoeresia. The homosexual aware of being such, determined to remain such, who sees the Church if the quiet refuge and the priestly order as a means of making quick career, First of all, it shows that you have a deeply spoiled consciousness, an inability to distinguish good from evil, rejecting the moral teachings of the Catholic Church a priori, of his doctrine and his magisterium; To all this he unites - as I said in the previous lines - that lack of sincerity deriving from the impossibility to be himself that he will force him to live in the lie and in the deception throughout his life. Add to this that many of these homosexuals, Far from feeling in fatal sin, intimately I am really convinced that they are not theirs in error, but the Church, judged by them guilty to indicate as evil what is in truth for them well, convinced that what the Church defines as illegal and illegitimate, since highly sinful for the eternal health of the soul, especially for the soul of a priest, In reality it is neither illegal nor illegitimate or sinful, but it is good and beautiful.

I met priests with homosexual tendencies evident that they did not hesitate to reject documents and exhortations of the Church on this matter containing the relative convictions to certain disorders, or to manipulate them in a really pathetic way; I have heard trainers of different seminars say that homosexuality cannot constitute impediment to the priesthood; I even felt priests to define homosexuality and its practice as "a natural variant of human sexuality", But above all I heard them launch fires and flames on sexual morality to say "retriva" and "repressive" carried out by the magisterium of the Church.

The culmination of aberration However, it consists of those who write and affirm that certain tendencies and sexual practices would concern "the sphere of private life of priests" (!?). To these subjects, Someone of whom he pigeons to be even a superfine canonist, I asked if far from being private affairs, Certain sexual practices of the clerics were not by chance enclosed in the very serious criminal case of carnal sacrilege. Obviously no answer was given. Above all, I asked if he and his associates really believed that a priest, In the "private life" - admitted that a priest may have a private life based on moral disorder -, could practice oral coitus, be sodomized by another man and then say in public shortly after: "Here is the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". It was before this question as dramatic as realistic that came, instead of response, An unusual reaction and all typical of gay gay: point in the heart and unable to formulate a reasonable reply the subject in question sent a delusional letter of rare violence against me to my bishop and to all members of the presbyité which I belong, complaining about my language, according to him vulgar, After calling me "serious psychiatric case" as well as "obsessed with homosexuals".

Events of this kind They touched in different ways but similar priests and theologians that we dealt with the serious phenomenon of ecclesiastical gay lobby: My Polish confrere dariusz oko, SUPPLY-EXPLARY OF THE German priest Wolfgang F. Rothe of the Archdiocese of München, was convicted of 2021 by the German Court of Cologne to a fine of 4.800 euro and a 120 days of imprisonment for having defined gay priests "cancerous ulcer" and "army of parasites inside the church" (cf.. chronicle WHO). The case has become political, Poland made itself felt and some Polish politicians did not fail to let the German judges know that it was since the years of the Nazi regime that Germany did not condemn a Polish citizen. A similar fate is touched in 2024 to the Swiss priest and theologian Manfred Hauke, publisher of the magazine Theological, guilty of having written that it is necessary to "limit homosexual cricche in the Church", condemned by Bellinzona's Pretura to a penalty of 9.450 Francs. He rejected the measure and asked to go to trial, at the end of which it was acquitted. Meantime, a German court, Shortly afterwards he imposed a penalty of 4.000 Euro following the complaint of a LGBT activist homosexual priest (cf.. chronicle, WHO). Request: What the bishops of these declared and practitioners who denounced their confreres for their confreres have done for “discrimination” e “homophobia”? They kept silent, trembling like rabbits in front of the power of the gaystapo, have been silent. If we think about it, That of these LGBT activists is a typically fascist attitude: "Stroking one to scare it one hundred", So the old fascists acted to spread fear between people. Today we are faced with real "rainbow fascists" hidden behind anti -fascism; violent and aggressive crying victims who complain of racisms and discrimination very often non -existent, In order to pursue freedom of thought and give life to crimes of opinion to condemn anyone who dares not to think that "gay is wonderful".

This is the style and way of acting certain homosexuals who bivaccia between the clergy moved by extraordinary malice. The sad truth is that those who live by their free choice in sexual disorder feeling gratified by the disorder itself, All those vices of the world cannot be cleared within the church and its clergy and its clergy, which for Catholic morality are and remain situations of serious deviation from feeling and Christian living. In a different way but substantially similar, The same character I mentioned above denounced at the Order of Psychologists Father Amedeo Cencini, Canossian presbyter, accusing him of having insulted homosexuals in his articles and conferences. The disciplinary commission examined the application and then said this opinion: "There were no hypotheses of violation of the code of ethics" (cf.. WHO e WHO). However, when someone dares to contradict certain homosexual incactivitis, or it does not give them reason, Here starts to bursts addressed to the professional order accused of defending a homophobic trembling, then accusations to the judiciary, to the magistrates, Accusations to the Italian Republic and so on ... (cf.. WHO e WHO)[24].

Needless to say, But we remember it equally: The damage that these subjects can give to the Church if placed in the priesthood, worse making a career within the clergy and ending up in key positions of government, they are truly incalculable, Because capable of using any unfair and illegal means to take out those who consider dangerous antagonists and irreducible rivals of the powerful and dangerous lobby gay. I know cases of priests to the detriment of which even judicial cases with processes without foundation based on vague clues have been mounted but only on also illications, All with mafia-intimidating style, questioning their reputation and inducing them to waste time and money to defend themselves from bizarre accusations that were then such. And when everything was resolved in a soap bubble, The affected people have not been able to rival anyone, because i clerical gay they hit the use of their serviles "useful idiots", never acting directly, Always behind the interposed person, without ever figuring.

Within the confessional I had to debate with a penitent suffering from Homoerotic drives who tried to contain as much as possible, who told me, upset, that during the sacramental confession a priest had told him:

«Expressing one's homosexuality is not a sin, Because homosexuality is in the order of nature and is a natural variant of human sexuality; And we cannot impose the homosexual to live in chastity, Why preventing a person from expressing his love affectivity would be inhuman ".

The priest in question, In addition to being clearly homosexual, He was also a trainer at a seminar, Professor of theology at a theological study and covered by his "forward -looking" bishop of all the most delicate positions. The question is therefore simple: If the sacred ordination of subjects in whom the requirement of man lacks, of the believer, In addition to the very perception of the Catholic priesthood, it must however be considered valid, In the same way we should consider the sacred orders of subjects valid that support the legitimacy of the Aryan heresy, which in various respects could be less serious than candidates for sacred orders or priests who judge homosexuality as a "natural variant of human sexuality". This is the reason why I believe it can be advanced and support a hypothesis that is anything but unfounded: The sacred orders of these people are disabled as it would be that of a heretic who decisively denies the hyposotic nature of Christ true God and true man and who once admitted in the sacred priestly order will try to spread his heresy as just as just. In one and the other case - it is the herthic Ariano or theHomoeretic - We are faced with an expression of different heresy in form but similar in substance, such as to make such irregularities a perpetual canonical impediment. I therefore repeat that a great sinner can be consecrated in a legitimate and valid way, However, not one who lacks the fundamental requirement of man and the believer and who aims to rise to the priesthood for evil and perverse purposes, Because one account is falling into serious sin, On the other hand, consider what good and just a disordered conduct and aspire to the priesthood for evil and perverse purposes.

While offering to consider disabled orders of subjects of this kind, I do not even open - given the extraordinary delicacy of the topic - the painful chapter about the validity of the episcopal consecrations of those who in a similar way are not men, they are not believers, They do not have the correct perception of the fullness of the Apostolic Priesthood; Not to mention those who, despite being a receptacle for all the worst vices, however, they reached the episcopate through blackmail and psychological terrorism exercised on the ecclesiastical authorities.

THE MYSTERY OF THE GRACE OF GOD, THE SUPPLIES GRACE AND THE SUPPLY THE CHURCH THEY ARE NEITHER A ESCAPE NOR A PANACEA

I believe we can not play on the mystery of the grace of God nor on that great "escapade", or if we prefer Panacea del grace fills he was born in supplies the church, because nothing can make up the grace of God, much less the Church, where the nature of the substance through which and on which the sacramental grace operates completely. Or to put it again with an example: An aged host in which all the matter of bread and a low quality wine and unpleasant taste in which all the matter of wine remains, Through transubstantiation, however, they become undoubtedly, in their metaphysical essence, For the supreme mystery of faith, Body and blood of Christ. But a butter biscuit and an orange drink can never become body and blood of Christ, Because that matter on which the existence of the metaphysical substance depends for divine will from divine will, place that, The precise subjects of bread and wine are transubstantiated, Not any subject of solid foods and liquid drinks.

Where the matter that gives life to the essence of the substance is missing, it can truly make up the grace of God, or it can perhaps make up the Church? And if so, why the father of the church Sant'Agostino would have lost time and precious energies to write and give us the treaty Of nature and grace? Not to mention all the subsequent speculations on the subject made by San Tommaso d'Aquino? Grace operates yes, and always works, but it works on the nature that is there, not on that nature that is not there or that is not defined, why think so, worse support it, it would mean altering and falsifying the very mystery of creation and with it that of redemption.

The mystery of the grace of God transforms, through the work entrusted to our hands, The matter of bread and wine in the body and blood of Christ, while remaining both in the visible form, to the smell and taste the external species of bread and wine, But they become really Christ and really present substantially with his body, his blood, His soul and his divinity. The grace of God, that everything can even, does not transform into metaphysical substance, In the body and blood of Christ, A butter and orange juice biscuit, because God cannot contradict himself, because "This is my bodyHe said it on the bread, ed «This is the cup of my bloodHe said it on wine. And no one can vary these accidental elements on which the metaphysical essence of the substance depends by divine will, If anything, saying ... grace fills, or worse supplies the church, Not to mention certain acid gays that has been mentioned earlier, that pursuant to an exotic ecclesiastical right, everything would like to relegate certain moral disorders to the unquestionable sphere of the private life of the priests (!?). And if in this precise speech I brought as an example the most ineffable of the mysteries donated by Christ God to his Church, l'Eucharist, It is precisely because the priest is the object and Eucharistic subject, and the priest is required In addition to nature A precise form, therefore a precise substance that arises from the mindset of his being for, by 'priestly mind; and the absence of these elements, it cannot be in any way to be suited.

The grace of God only works on what is there, not on what is not there and that there can be no; And this explains it and teaches it clearly the Parable of the Talents[25]. Through the sacred priestly order, an ontological transformation takes place and the priest takes on a new character, which is indelible and eternal. But if a priest is one and a half meter high of stature, The sanctifying and transforming grace of God cannot change it in a high coward 1.90 barefoot. Or better understood: a donkey, in the figurative sense of the term, it can also become a saint, It can also become venerated patron of the priests of the Catholic Church, but it cannot be changed in an Arab stallion, because donkey is and donkey will remain, regardless of what can be the heroicity of its virtues.

Both the hipped and the aquinate clarified without a penalty of misunderstanding the principle that Grace nature perfects but do not supply (Grace does not comply but perfects nature). And when nature is not there, starting from the nature of man, of the virile male, Request for access to the sacred priestly order, What happens, who can never ... make up? The only one who can make up is the man who has put himself in the place of God, if not worse still: instead of Satan.

I would like to conclude with a paradoxical question, But sometimes in the paradox or hyperbole there may be a lot of objectivity. This is the question: In the event that a subject, belonging hidden to a satanic sect, he wanted to become a priest in order to validly consecrate the holy Eucharist then intended for the most evil profanations, thus serving his luciferine congregation, you can, then, Talk about valid ordination? Well, someone wants to explain to me: What a difference there is between a satanist who aspires to the priesthood for evil and sacrilegious purposes and a ho homoeretic that for as many evil and sacrilegious purposes also aspires to the priesthood? I'll explain what difference there is: The Satanist at the Holy Eucharist understood as a real presence of Christ and true really believes it, while in most cases the hhomoeretics In the real presence of Christ alive and true they do not believe in it. The fact that in their speeches of everything speak they are of real presence in their speeches. The mouth of terms are filled as "banquet ... convivio ... feast of joy ... meeting of love …». To the metaphysical language they despised and at the end of transubstantiation defined as an obsolete, they prefer that Lutheran of consubstantiation, With the consequence that their eukaristic celebrations overflowing liturgical abuse and free will of all sorts, they look like Calvinist liturgies, foundation of which it is precisely the denial of the real presence, depicted by Giovanni Calvino right from standing during the words of the Last Supper. E, in doing this, the homoeretic They shy away the word "living and holy sacrifice". Distribute the Eucharist as if they were toy-omigating of zero bread, they do not deal with sacred respect for the sacred vases, do not proceed to their adequate purification, they do not promote the Eucharistic cult in any way. To this is added that many of ours aesthetic ceremonies - Because for thirty years now, finding a heterosexual in the sphere of liturgists is like looking for a needle in a haystack - they also proceeded to abolition of the platforms for the communion of the faithful, but on the other hand they set up the silver plate in their place on which to deposit the Saint Saint Zucchetto red of the bishop, far more important than the collection of Eucharistic fragments. And there is even more: I ascertained that the homoeretic bishops, through theirs homoeretic priests, They are those who teach the people of God who stand up high during Eucharistic prayer, In addition to being the proponents of the elimination of the benches with the kneeling from many churches, Replaced with cinema armchairs, Because to hit the church in the heart and de-doralize it you have to hit the Eucharist above all, Instead of following the clear Paolino warning:

[…] In the name of Jesus every knee folds in the skies, on earth and under the earth; and let every tongue declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father[26].

Here is the difference that runs between an satanist and a Homoeretic: The Satanist is a believer, l’Homoeretic no. And who wants to meditate, meditate, but do it soon and well, while the house followed to burn, while the realistic possibility of turning off the fire is increasingly distant, while the church visible it more and more like a great one Gay Village.

From the island of Patmos, 28 July 2025

 

Obtained from a previous article published the 7 July 2016

.

NOTE

[1] CIC can. 1024.

[2] See. MC 3,14-19; LC 6,12-16.

[3] See. 1 TM 3,1-13; 2 TM 1,6; Tt 1,5-9

[4] See. San Clemente Romano, Letter to the Corinthians, 42, 4: SC 167, 168-170 (Funk 1, 152); Ibid., 44, 3: SC 167, 172 (Funk 1, 156)

[5] See. John Paul II, Became. ap. Woman's dignity, 26-27: AAS 80 (1988) 1715-1720; Id., Became. ap. priestly ordination: AAS 86 (1994) 545-548; Congregation for the doctrine of faith, You. Among the most important: AAS 69 (1977) 98-116; Id., Response to doubt about the doctrine of the letter. ap. «Priestly ordination»: AAS 87 (1995) 1114.

[6] See. EB 5,4.

[7] See. Clemente's first letter, 44,2, later taken up by the dogmatic constitution The light n. 20.

[8] See. Mt 19,12: «In fact, there are Eunuchi who were born so from the mother's belly; there are some who have been made eunuchs by men, And there are others who have made themselves eunuchi for the kingdom of heaven ".

[9] See. Johannes Quasten, Patrologia. The first two centuries (II-II). Marietti, 1980.

[10] XVIII ° successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter, pontificate, year old 230-235.

[11] See. Bibliotheca Cod. 118.

[12] Apocatastase. According to Origen, At the end of the time there will be universal redemption and all creatures will be saved, including Satan. Therefore, The penalty to eternal damnation would actually have a purifying and non -definitive character. «We think that the goodness of God, through the mediation of Christ, will bring all the creatures to the same end " (Of principles, I, IV, 1-3).

[13] See. Can. 1040

[14] Vatican Council II, Cost. The light, 19.

[15] John Paul II, Is. AP. I will give you shepherds, 25-III-1992, 15, 4.

[16] See. Cann. 1024-1052.

[17] The nature of the good, 19.

[18] N.d.A. The term simonia derives from the episode narrated in the acts of the Apostles [Acts 8, 9-24] in which Simon Mago, healer, he asked the apostles, upon payment, The thaumaturgical power conferred by the Holy Spirit and therefore was consequently cursed by the blessed Apostle Peter.

[19] N.d.A. Example: The Supreme Urban Pontiff, in the year 1093, It all decreed the Simoniache ordinations except for those of the clerics who were not aware of the simony of their orders. The condemnation of simony is decreed by several councils of the Church, Starting from the Council of Calcedon of the year 451 Until the Council of Trent celebrated in the 16th century.

[20] See. can. 188

[21] See. Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo, And Satan came Trino. Relativism, individualism, disobedience. Analysis on the Third Millennium Church. Ed. Rome, 2011. Reprint: Editions The island of Patmos, Rome, 2019.

[22] Education of the Congregation for Catholic Education About the criteria of vocational discernment regarding people with homosexual tendencies in view of their admission to the seminary and sacred orders the 4 November 2005, approved by the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI the 31 August 2005.

[23] See. GV 8, 32.

[24] See. Francesco Strazza: «Between criticism and insult: I can't silent », Week News, edition of 25 November 2022.

[25] See. Mt 25, 14-30.

[26] In II, 10.

.

________________________________

THEOLOGICAL AND LEGAL DOUBTS ABOUT THE LEGITIMATE VALIDITY PRIESTLY ORDINATIONS OF HOMOSEXUALS

The minimum requirements for the validity of the Sacrament of Holy Orders are: man, Christian, believer, therefore a correct understanding of the Catholic priesthood. The real problem isn’t that a personality structured by deep-rooted homosexual tendencies lacks the qualifications to become a priest. The problem is different and more serious: if priest becomes one without the qualifications, isn’t that sacred ordination, besides being illicit, also invalid?

— Theology and Canon Law —

.

PDF Print format

 

.

There is no other organization in the world like the Catholic Church where the presence of more or less openly homosexuals is so high, nor is there a similar organization where homosexuals, together with their close associates, have staged a coup by infiltrating every “room of command”, as I have been writing for years (I refer you to an old interview of mine from 2013, which can be read HERE, in Italian only).

With the advent of social media, self-styled Catholic blogs have proliferated, claiming the acceptance of the LGBT agenda within the Church, accusing those who lament the serious problem of the high number of homosexuals within the clergy of being frustrated, repressed, and unresolved.

The ecclesiastical gay lobby is so powerful that, if necessary, it can make life impossible for those who dare to report certain situations, explaining to ecclesiastical authorities well in advance how things would end. Nor should we underestimate the virulent armed wing of the powerful ecclesiastical gay lobby, the gay-friendly, a large group of persons those who, despite not being homosexual, protect members of the pious gay fraternity for their own personal interests, or because they are driven by high career expectations, knowing that gay lobbyists can either foster them or irremediably undermine them within dioceses or the Roman Curia. To assert that within the Holy See, in numerous dioceses, and therefore in the universal Church, a level of internal homosexuality has been reached that has exceeded all safety limits is not merely a fanciful hypothesis but a fact that can only be denied by those who reject the evidence.

The charming man, who by nature is self-centered and ambitious, defends himself unscrupulously through an innate vindictive-destructive instinct, capable of exercising malice with methodical, scientific cruelty toward those endowed with that Christological priestly courage that leads them to affirm and remember what is right and what is wrong in the light of the Holy Gospel and Catholic doctrine. Because the pure of heart, unlike gay lobbyists, do not aim for the immediate, but for the eternal.

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENTS ARE MINIMUM, BUT THOSE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS MUST EXIST

Those who practice sacramental dogmatical know that this specific field is extremely delicate, not least because the requirements for the validity of the sacraments are truly minimal. In these lines, we will limit ourselves to discussing only the Sacrament of Holy Orders, starting with a premise intended to immediately clear the field from the objections of those who might claim that the texts of sacramental dogmatical, canon law, and their commentaries make no express and clear reference to those matters of a sexual or psychosexual nature to which I will refer explicitly. To dispel certain doubts and clear the field from equivocal and unfounded theological and juridical disputes, I will draw attention to an incontrovertible fact: until a few decades ago, everything directly or indirectly concerning sex and human sexuality was whispered with euphemisms in magisterial texts, doctrine, and treatises on Catholic morality; merely discussing certain topics was considered improper. When issues of Catholic morality related to human sexuality were addressed in academic circles, Latin euphemisms were used, because the same words ordinarily used clearly and precisely in the clinical and scientific lexicon of gynecology, urology, and andrology were not deemed appropriate within the classrooms of ecclesiastical academies. Confessors of the time themselves had their own way of expressing themselves, a vocabulary of vague, indirect implications, taught to young priests from the time they were trained for the priesthood. This “specific” vocabulary of confessors served to allude without resorting to unpronounceable terms banned from ecclesiastical academia and the confessional, especially from public catechesis addressed to the People of God. This language was also assimilated by the Catholic faithful, particularly penitents who, before their confessors, expressed themselves in so-called vague innuendos and “implied” but don’t clear, terms regarding sexual matters, related relationships, and everything pertaining to violations of the Sixth Commandment.

I’ll try to clarify everything with an example: it was the year 2010 when a ninety-year-old penitent who had grown up in that world not centuries distant but a few decades ago, during a confession based on her memories of the past, referred to a time, one winter, when she was alone, «… leaving the house, unfortunately, I slipped». A child of another era, both as a man and as a priest, I didn’t understand, and I imagined that, being in an area where it snows at certain times of the year, she had fallen while leaving the house, perhaps on a sheet of ice formed by the snow in a corner sheltered from the sun, or who knows how else, she slipped and fell. She realized I hadn’t understood, so she made two more delicate, more explicit allusions to make me understand that she had committed the sin of adultery, for which, more than half a century later, she couldn’t shake the bitterness it had caused her, having always been bound by sincere love to her husband. This is to reiterate that it would be neither pertinent nor logical to challenge me on the grounds that certain expositions to which I clearly refer are not equally clearly contained in the texts of the Magisterium, of doctrine, of sacramental dogmatical, of Catholic morality and of the Code of Canon Law.

ORIGEN’S LESSON: THE VIRILITY OF THE “mAN approved” AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT FOR THE CATHOLIC PRIESTHOOD

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states at n. 1577:

«Only a baptized man (for) validly receives sacred ordination[1]. The Lord Jesus chose men (men) to form the college of the twelve apostles[2], and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators[3] to succeed them in their ministry[4]. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible[5]».

No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. In fact, no one can attribute this office to himself. One is called to it by God[6]. Anyone who believes he recognizes the signs of God’s call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, which has the responsibility and the right to call someone to receive Holy Orders. Like every grace, this sacrament can only be received as an unmerited gift.

Note that the Latin term “Source/Resources“ is a masculine noun of the grammatical second declension, primarily referring to man, male, adult, or virility associated with the male sex. The negation and antithesis of “Source/Resources” is the term, also of Latin origin: “evil“, a word indicating the deprivation of virility and also deriving from “Source/Resources“. In ecclesiastical language, the term “sources try” is used to indicate men suitable for holy orders. This term was used in the early Church to indicate married men who were eligible for the diaconate and priesthood[7]. With the passage of time and the free acceptance of the obligation of celibacy, which has its roots in the early apostolic era, in our current lexicon this expression is used to indicate men of proven standing and, as such, reliable for holy orders. Lack of psycho-physical virility therefore constitutes an insurmountable impediment to priestly ordination. This impediment is well-known and established as such since the first centuries of the Church’s existence, and no one has the authority to dispense from it, given that no Ecclesiastical Authority can dispense from being a man, which is an essential and foundational prerequisite of the ministerial priesthood.

In the year 230, Origen was consecrated a priest by Theoctissus of Caesarea and Alexander of Jerusalem, without the approval of Bishop Demetrius, who had canonical jurisdiction over him. Origen, having misunderstood the Gospel passage in which the Lord Jesus refers to the «eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven»[8], had castrated himself. This was the reason why his bishop had never wanted to consecrate Priest[9]. After that sacred ordination, Bishop Demetrius, with the approval of the Supreme Pontiff Pontianus[10], revoked his teaching faculty and deposed him from the presbyteral Order[11] for the irregularity of his sacred ordination, which was declared null. It is known that Origen is the only one among the Church Fathers of that rich period not to have been proclaimed a saint, although imprisoned and tortured during the anti-Christian persecutions of Decius; but above all, despite having been, in intellectual and speculative gifts, far superior to many other philosophers and theologians of that first, rich and happy Christian era. The obstacle to his canonization was not due to the fact that in his great and valuable philosophical-theological speculations he hypothesized the thought of the apokatastasis today considered heretical[12]; the great and insurmountable obstacle is entirely linked to his castration.

In those early years of the Church’s life, during which the first great philosophical and theological speculations were underway, preceding and giving rise to the presuppositions and subjects later addressed by the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325, it was not uncommon for speculative minds, including the Church Fathers, to fall into heretical thoughts, from which they amended themselves later. This did not prevent either their canonizations or their proclamation as Church Fathers.

The Code of Canon Law cited below refers modestly and toned down to the fact that «one who has gravely and maliciously mutilated himself or another»[13] cannot be ordained a priest. From this it can be deduced that Origen’s horrendous self-mutilation was considered in itself worse than heresy, which can however be healed through the recognition of the voluntary or involuntary error, but a destroyed physical virility cannot be restored, except by resorting to complex surgical interventions performed by modern surgery, even if with very uncertain outcomes.

Pertinent question: can mental castration be even worse than physical castration, given that sexuality, in the case of the male, is expressed in the characteristics of his sex, and these are an essential part of mental sexuality, on which they also depend, due to the information and conditioning that emanate from it? Both, in fact, both physical and mental sexuality, are fused together and form a single part of the person, in this case: the male? This is a question I have been asking members of the episcopate for years, to no avail: they have never responded.

Through the Sacrament of Orders, participation in the priesthood of Christ is conferred according to the modality transmitted by apostolic succession. The ministerial priesthood is distinct from the common priesthood of the faithful, which derives from Baptism and Confirmation. Both, «although they differ essentially and not only in degree, are nevertheless ordered to one another»[14]. It is proper and specific to the ministerial priesthood to be «a sacramental representation of Jesus Christ, Head and Shepherd»[15]. This allows the exercise of Christ’s authority in the pastoral function of preaching and governance, as well as operating “in person Christi” (in the person of Christ) in the exercise of the sacramental ministry. Having said this, it is clear that the first two essential prerequisites for the conferral, and therefore for the validity of the Sacrament, the man being and the Christian.

Book IV of the Code of Canon Law, in Part I, which deals with the Sacraments, outlines the «irregularities and other impediments» to receiving the Sacrament of Orders[16]. A detailed list of obvious elements follows, for example, a madman or someone suffering from mental infirmity, apostates, heretics, and murderers, anyone who has gravely and maliciously mutilated himself or another, or has attempted to take his own life, etc., cannot be ordained a priest. However, we have to wait until “only yesterday”, that is, the year 2005, after entire armies of homosexuals had been admitted into the Holy Order of Priests throughout the world in the preceding decades, with results that proved devastating over time for the entire universal Church, to finally see the promulgation by the then Congregation for Catholic Education ― competent at the time for seminaries, but today the Dicastery for the Clergy has returned to that responsibility, as it had always been before ―, of a document that unfortunately remained a dead letter in many houses of formation, in which there is a clear and precise discussion of the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders (see text HERE). In short, after many years of claiming «I slipped while leaving the house», suddenly they took courage and declared, without euphemism, that it was all adultery. Similarly, they proceeded to declare, without any euphemism and ambiguity, that a person with obvious homosexual tendencies is not eligible to become a priest, never and under no cases.

The real problem is not that a personality structured by deep-rooted homosexual tendencies lacks the requisites to become a priest. The problem is different and more serious: if, despite lacking the fundamental and foundational requirements for the priesthood, this person becomes priest, isn’t that sacred ordination, besides being clearly illicit, also invalid?

Beyond the “dead letter” of the various exhortations issued by the Apostolic See regarding the non-admission to sacred orders of persons with homosexual tendencies, there is worse: in previous decades — but unfortunately also in the present — priestly ordinations have proceeded without a hitch, concealed behind the illusory certainty that what mattered was the assurance that they did not practice homosexuality. A statement repeatedly made and put into practice by many bishops and seminary rectors, who, although aware of the evident lack of male testosterone among many of their seminarians, and although perfectly aware of their homosexual tendencies and aware of the dissolute life they continued to live during their various vacations outside the seminary, thought they could solve the problem by hiding behind the fig leaf of the surreal… «the important thing is that they don’t practice homosexuality».

It is a huge mistake to think that a psychological disorder can easily persist as long as it does not transform into physical activity, given that — as I have explained many times in my studies and books — physically practiced homosexuality is only the tip of the iceberg of mental homosexuality. I have also explained and demonstrated that often, homosexuals reduced to chastity through self-repression, in their thinking, acting, and interacting, can be much worse and more harmful to the Church than those who practice homosexuality physically, because the latter at least vent their anger, appearing at least somewhat less acid and evil. Unlike the repressed, who by their very nature tend to be not only acis and evil, but cruel. At that point, when we find ourselves faced with profoundly evil people who take perverse pleasure in harming others by any means, starting with the spread of false news, or resorting to complaints based on artfully constructed falsehoods, we are faced with a problem that goes beyond homosexuality, because certain individuals would be such, that is, evil, even if they were heterosexual, regardless of their sexual orientation.

In the long conversations I have had with homosexuals animated by sincere and profound Christian sentiments throughout my years of sacred ministry, the phrase most frequently expressed, at times in dramatic tones imbued with profound inner suffering, was:

«… it’s stronger than me; I can’t control myself, no matter how hard I try to avoid the occasions».

Homosexuality, rightly removed from the list of diseases, remains a profound and complex disorder of the human personality. Although, according to the experts of the new clinical order, it can no longer be classified as an illness, thanks to the strong pressure exerted on them by powerful homosexual lobbies, the fact remains that there are, even in considerable numbers, homosexuals who do not accept the urges of their libido, which they themselves define as a «disorder» and «disturbance», and for this reason they seek help. And the request for help is often, in itself, a request for treatment, which in response deserves an offer of help, even for what today is rightly defined as a non-illness.

Among many, I remember a poignant conversation during sacramental confession with a forty-year-old penitent who said to me these exact words:

«How come today it is possible to cure even many forms of cancer, including serious ones if caught early, but not this “disease” that has consumed my soul since I was just 15 years old?».

As the Holy Doctor of the Church, Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, teaches us: «Pain exists» — and therefore manifests itself — «only in good natures»[17].” Sexual impulses, which, with a term now taboo, were defined “In addition to nature“, are much more controllable than those “against nature“, which by their very complexity tend to be uncontrollable, or at least very difficult to contain. And since what has been expressed so far is not hypotheses but clinical-scientific facts, I ask: how could we have left the leadership of our seminaries and religious novitiates in the hands of rectors, formators, and spiritual directors who, although aware of the homosexual tendencies of many of their seminarians and novices, thought they could resolve and close the problem — with the blessing of their bishops and major superiors — through a… «as long as they do not practice homosexuality»? All of this, in itself a very serious and wicked thing, despite knowing that these homosexuals would be placed like “foxes in a henhouse” within an all-male ecclesiastical environment? How could bishops, perfectly aware of the obvious tendencies of some of their seminarians, even debut with cynical quips — overheard by myself and various other witnesses — such as: «Not everyone can be perfect; there are also elements with manufacturing defects; the important thing is that they don’t cause scandal. Besides, the Church also needs men of service». Yes, then we saw in the tragic showdown what happened when the ambitious “men of service” in high gear staged their coup within the Church, chasing talented designers, engineers, and architects away from the construction site with clubs. Are these perhaps the presuppositions through which a bishop can lay hands, recite the consecratory prayer and anoint a new priest with sacred chrism, affirming that in the Church … there is also a need for certain “men of service”?

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SIMONIACAL ORDINATIONS AND THOSE THAT TAKE PLACE THROUGH THE EXCHANGE OF SEXUAL FAVORS AND THE RESULTING BLACKMAIL

I am a witness ― and have repeatedly informed the competent Ecclesiastical Authorities of the Holy See, with relevant references and evidence ― of cases of Italian bishops who, under pressure, ordained openly homosexuals as priests. Despite being aware of their terrible moral conduct and the incorrigibility of their nature, if they had not ordained them as priests, these would have sparked unspeakable scandals, smearing their dioceses. The first to indulge in homosexual practices were their own formators and several prominent priests of the diocesan presbyterate. I, however, pass over certain bishops out of a sort of sacred modesty. In light of all this, I have repeatedly asked those in charge and with authority: if several Church councils have declared invalid priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations obtained through simony[18], that is, through the sale of money, how much more invalid are those ordinations and episcopal consecrations obtained through blackmail, in order to conceal the sexual trafficking by virtue of which it was not possible to say no to those priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations? And does a bishop deprived of freedom who ordains a priest under blackmail and coercion, validly administer the Sacrament of Holy Orders? Or perhaps we must consider only paying money or blackmailing through money given to someone is illicit, and therefore condemned as such even by the Church’s ecumenical councils[19]? The paying or blackmailing through sexual services, whether given or offered, is instead to be considered entirely licit for the sacramental and canonical purposes of the validity of the Sacrament of Holy Orders? Having said this, I ask: can the gifts of grace of the Holy Spirit pass and take effect through such a sacrilegious and sinful action? I repeat: these are questions that have been posed repeatedly officially and publicly to the competent ecclesiastical authorities, who have never responded to their theological and juridical merits.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church considers simony a grave sin against the first commandment, along with tempting God and sacrilege. According to the current Code of Canon Law, the resignation of an office made for simony is invalid, and the simoniac provision of an ecclesiastical office is null ipso iure; canonical sanctions, such as suspension or interdict, are also foreseen against the simoniac conferral or reception of a sacrament[20]. It must also be added that the individuals in question, once raised to the Holy Orders Priesthood, far from being appeased and content, continued to use their poisons to gain positions of the highest importance within the dioceses, to obtain undeserved ecclesiastical academic titles, to become professors of heresiology in pontifical universities, to become diocesan bishops, apostolic messengers, and some cardinals; for be sent without any merit or talent to the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy, only to end up, not even forty years old, after less than five years of diplomatic service, in the most strategic key positions in the Secretariat of State. This, again, serves to reiterate the immense damage that can result from the self-destructive principle currently underway, implemented by people who, like the bishop I mentioned earlier, asserted: «Not everyone can be perfect; there are also elements with manufacturing defects; the important thing is that they do not cause scandal». Moreover, if the Church truly needs laborers, it should also be remembered that in the promises we make before the Bishop and the assembly of the People of God, we promise to remain celibate, and therefore chaste, that is, to renounce sexual relations with those wonderful creatures that are women. Or do we perhaps promise not to practice homosexuality, if we have obvious homosexual tendencies? Because in that case, according to the impious logic of certain bishops and their seminarians, it would be wise to revise the Roman Rite of Sacred Ordinations of deacons and priests, possibly also including this new form of solemn promise:

«I promise, as a homosexual, not to practice homosexuality and to remain celibate, aware that celibacy entails chastity both with women and especially with men».

I wrote in a 2010 book:

«One cannot ease one’s conscience by limiting oneself to public and stern proclamations, if in reality the number of gay priests increases in proportion to the presence of bishops who reason with a latent homosexual psychology. Or to put it bluntly: some seminarians who between the 1970s and 1980s led the “pious confraternity” within the seminaries are now bishops, and as soon as they became bishops, they first surrounded themselves with like-minded individuals, consistently and de rigueurly placed in all key positions in the dioceses, including seminaries. And these individuals, who protect and reproduce each other, have ended up creating a powerful power lobby within the Church very diabolical terrible»[21].

Today we cannot say that there are not clear and precise acclesiastical documents on this thema, for example:

«In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question (CF. Catechism of the Catholic Church, typical edition, 1997, n. 2358; cf. also CIC, can. 208 and CCEO, can. 11), cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture” (CF. Congregation for Catholic Education, A memorandum to Bishops seeking advice in matters concerning homosexuality and candidates for admission to Seminary, 9 July 1985; Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Letter, 16 May 2002: Information 38, 2002, 586)»[22].

This and other documents, however, are treated as dead letters, to the point that today, in several seminaries more akin to gay villages than houses of Catholic formation, a heterosexual wouldn’t even dare approach.

It is superfluous to explain with what pain and humiliation, over the last thirty years of Church history, I have witnessed the rise to the top of the ranks of certain well-known, open, and obvious homosexuals, many of whom are now professors of heresiology at pontifical universities, consultants and members of dicasteries, members of the diplomatic service of the Holy See, diocesan bishops, seminary rectors, diocesan vicars general, and so on and so forth…

«THEN YOU WILL KNOW THE TRUTH, AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE». MANY HOMOSEXUALS LACK THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF ORDERS, STARTING WITH FREEDOM AND TRUTH.

In the Gospel of the Blessed Apostle John, the Word of God asserts:

«If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free»

Faced with this assertion, which in its own way is also a warning, we should seriously question the inseparable bond between truth, freedom, and the ministerial priesthood. Within the ecclesiastical world, homosexuals cannot be free because they cannot be themselves. And those who are not themselves cannot know the truth and become its instruments. To believe that this is possible would be like affirming that man has the power to turn evil into good and to bring redemptive grace through sin. Only God can turn evil into good, something partially comprehensible to the human intellect, given that this remains in its entirety an inexplicable mystery, enclosed precisely in the great mystery of grace. God can in fact even make use of an impious action of Satan, to ensure that the supreme evil wrought by the Prince of Darkness can be transformed by his will and divine intervention into the supreme good, but man cannot, through his own fragile nature corrupted by original sin, transform the supreme evil into the supreme good, nor can he, even less, make use of an evil action of the Devil to transform it into an action of good.

Those who do not know the truth because, in order to live, they must descend into obscurity, thus into the eternal self-defensive lie, cannot be faithful to the Word and therefore cannot be disciples. They can only renew within the Church the Luciferian drama of Judas’ betrayal, all thanks to the sacred imposition of hands by certain wicked bishops, who thus reveal themselves not to be apostles of Christ but of the the mystery of iniquity.

We know that Christ instituted the Priesthood for men, not for angels. Therefore, the priest, although possessing by the mystery of grace a dignity superior to that of the angels of God, can be a sinner and, as such, fall into more or less grave sin; he can even commit very grave sins. The fact remains that a sin, however mortal, but still accidental, committed by a sinful priest, in its form and in its profound and intimate substance is something different from one who instead decides to structure the sacred priestly ministry on the state of sin resulting from a lack of freedom that must be defended with perpetual lies, thus being unable to know the truth and therefore be faithful to the Word, regardless of his own sin and his own human nature as a sinner. To act in this way and to “build” one’s “priestly being” on such evil and perverse elements means not having the basic idea and perception of what the Catholic priesthood really is, and therefore structuring the gift of the mystery of grace of the ministerial Priesthood of Christ on the the mystery of iniquity.

In dealing with such a delicate thema, one must be careful not to fall, even unintentionally, into the errors typical of the Donatist heresy, condemned by the Council of Carthage in 411. The Donatists maintained that the Sacraments administered by priests rendered unworthy by their state of sin were invalid. This heretical thought did not disappear in the fifth century, so much so that the Angelic Doctor dedicates 90 questions to it in Part III of the Summa Theologica. My question does not even remotely call into question the validity of the Sacraments celebrated and administered by unworthy and sinful priests, whose validity is dogmatically and canonically beyond question. The question I intend to raise on the theological and canonical levels is whether the Sacrament of Holy Orders, received by certain particular subjects in certain particular conditions, is truly valid, given that the Sacraments require certain minimum requirements for their validity. What if these minimum requirements were, in part or in full, the fact absent? In this case, can we speak of a valid priestly consecration through the Sacrament of Orders? Or, to put it another way, using the example cited earlier: why, after the sacred ordination of the famous castrated Origen, did legitimate Ecclesiastical Authority ban him from sacred orders, while the same Ecclesiastical Authority, in the centuries to come, instead covered up, protected, pampered, and nurtured in the best possible way an army of mentally castrated men? Simply, because the Ecclesiastical Authority never stopped to consider the fact that Origen, before resorting to the extreme act of physical self-castration, had already mentally castrated himself for some time. Therefore, his physical castration was merely the consequence of a mental castration that had matured and occurred previously.

I reiterate that the question I am raising is not the Sacraments, which are undoubtedly valid, even if celebrated and administered by unworthy and sinful priests, but the objective validity, in the full substance, of the Sacrament of Holy Orders received by some priests who lack the minimum requirements for its validity, starting with the fundamental requirement of faith. Therefore, with all due respect to those who continue to play with fire by pretending the dogmatic problem does not exist, my sad experience with the large army of homosexual clergymen plaguing the Church, especially at the highest levels of the hierarchy, confirms for me how high, sometimes in the frightening proportion of 7 out of 10, the number of clergy with obvious homosexual tendencies who undoubtedly lack some or all of the minimum requirements for the validity of the Sacrament of Holy Orders is. These fundamental requirements are: the man, the Christian, the believer, therefore the correct substantive and formal perception of the Catholic priesthood on the part of both the ordaining priest and the ordained. Or can anyone perhaps deny it?

The majority of these individuals are, in fact, blatantly heretical and proud propagators of heresies of a mostly pro-Lutheran nature, or, as one of my Polish confrere, Darius Around, called them, afflicted with homesesy:

«Homohelates is a rejection of the Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality. Supporters of homoheresy do not accept that homosexual tendencies are a personality disorder. They question whether homosexual acts are against natural law. Defenders of homoheresy favor the priesthood for gays. Homohelates is an ecclesiastical version of homosexuality» (cf. Roman correspondence Agency, On the need to stop homosexual lobbies in the Church, Rome, 08.02.2022).

I will now focus on these two elements: man and the believer as the founding and essential prerequisite of the Sacrament of Orders, therefore the absence of heresy and full awareness of the true substantial and formal nature of the Catholic priesthood. It is obvious that an openly homosexual, one of those “blissfully” ordained in recent decades, repeatedly described as «… only just a little effeminate, but because he has a sensitive soul … a mystic …», is in fact prevented from receiving Holy Orders, because a deep-rooted homosexual tendency is to be considered, pursuant to canon 1040, a perpetual impediment — the so-called irregularity to receive orders — for which no bishop or ecclesiastical authority can grant a dispensation, because that would be as if the Congregation for the Causes of Saints decided to dispense from sainthood a candidate for canonization, something which, these days…

Let us suppose that a candidate for Holy Orders tends to give in to the sin of lust “In addition to nature” (according nature), fully aware of the sin, mindful of his error, and therefore ready to seek God’s grace and forgiveness. He then falls back into the same sin, perhaps even worse than before, but returns to seek grace and forgiveness, aware of sin and evil. First of all, such a person demonstrates a Christian conscience, and therefore a sense of good and evil. Certainly, a wise formator and a pious confessor can evaluate the appropriateness of bringing a sinner who is unable to reform into Holy Orders; one might consider advising him that, faced with the potential inability to control himself, it would be best to wait before being admitted to the Holy Orders of Priesthood. Regardless of his sin and its gravity, however, it remains clear that this man is first and foremost a human being, a believer endowed with a moral conscience, capable of discerning good from evil, aware of what the Catholic priesthood is and what it entails and requires. And when this man, incapable of exercising restraint and self-control, indulges in the vice of lust “Praetrer nature“, he will be aware of the evil, of the error, of the fact that this is not in keeping with the priestly state of life.

Having been confessor to numerous priests for several years, I also found myself confronted by confreres who had had relations with women in violation of their sacred promises; just as I found myself confronted by others who, in a more serious and dangerous manner, had a stable relationship with a woman. Both experienced this with great discomfort, a sense of guilt, and a full awareness of their own sin, particularly those who had so-called “steady woman lovers.” And I cannot deny that several of these priests, by an inscrutable mystery of grace, despite living in a state of mortal sin, were authentic models of priestly piety in the exercise of their sacred ministry, devoted heart and soul to the best care of the People of God, as well as effective and precious instruments of divine grace.

The situation is different for a person with homosexual tendencies in a deeply rooted personality, inevitably compounded by the element of heresy. A homosexual who is aware of his homosexuality and determined to remain so, who chooses the Church as a quiet refuge and the priesthood as a means to advance his career, demonstrates, first and foremost, a profoundly flawed conscience, an inability to distinguish good from evil, and an a priori rejection of the moral teachings of the Catholic Church, its doctrine, and its magisterium. Added to all this — as I mentioned previously — is a lack of sincerity stemming from the inability to be himself, which will force him to live in lies and deception throughout his life. Added to this is the fact that many of these homosexuals, far from feeling themselves to be in mortal sin, are deeply convinced that it is not they who are in error, but the Church, judged by them to be guilty of indicating as evil what for them is truly good, convinced that what the Church defines as illicit and illegitimate, because highly sinful for the eternal salvation of the soul, especially for the soul of a priest, is in reality neither illicit nor illegitimate nor sinful, but rather good and beautiful.

I have known priests with obvious homosexual tendencies who did not hesitate to reject Church documents and exhortations on this matter, containing condemnations of certain disorders, or to manipulate them in truly pathetic ways. I have heard formators from various seminaries affirm that homosexuality cannot constitute an impediment to the priesthood. I have even heard priests define homosexuality and its practice as «a natural variant of human sexuality». But above all, I have heard them hurl rage at the sexual morality they described as «backward» and «repressive» promoted by the Church’s magisterium.

The height of aberration is represented by those who write and affirm that certain sexual tendencies and practices concern «the sphere of the private life of priests» (!?). I asked these individuals — one of whom even pride themselves on being excellent canonists —, whether, far from being private matters, certain sexual practices of clerics were not by chance included in the very serious canonical delicts category of carnal sacrilege. Obviously, no answer was given. Above all, I asked whether really believed that a priest, in his «private life» — assuming that a priest can have a private life marked by moral disorder — could engage in oral sex, be sodomized by another man, and then shortly thereafter say in public: «Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world». This was a question as dramatic as it was realistic. Instead of a response, an unusual reaction arrived, typical of an acid gay man: stung to the quick and unable to formulate a reasonable reply, the person in question sent a delirious letter of rare violence against me to my bishop and to all the members of the presbytery to which I belong, complaining about my language said was vulgar, after having defined me as a «serious psychiatric case» as well as «obsessed with homosexuals».

Incidents of this kind have affected us priests and theologians in different yet similar ways, as we have dealt with the serious phenomenon of the ecclesiastical gay lobby: My Polish Confrere Dariusz Oko, following a complaint filed by German priest Wolfgang F. Rothe of the Archdiocese of Munich, was sentenced in 2021 by the German court in Cologne to a fine of 4,800 euros and 120 days in prison for calling gay priests a «cancerous ulcer» and an «army of parasites within the Church» (cf. Article in italian version, HERE). The case became political, Poland made its voice heard, and some Polish politicians made it clear to the German judges that Germany had not convicted a Polish citizen since the Nazi regime. A similar fate befell Swiss priest and theologian Manfred Hauke, editor of the journal Theological, in 2024. He was found guilty of writing that it was necessary to «limit homosexual cliques in the Church». He was sentenced by the Bellinzona District Court to a fine of 9,450 francs. He rejected the ruling and requested a trial, after which he was acquitted. Meanwhile, a German court shortly thereafter fined him 4,000 euros following a complaint from a homosexual priest and LGBT activist (cf. Article in italian version, HERE). The question is: what did the bishops do with these openly practicing homosexual priests who reported their fellow confreres for discrimination and homophobia? They remained silent, trembling like rabbits before the power of The new Gaystapo. If we think about it, the attitude of these LGBT activists is typically fascist: «hit one to scare a hundred», that’s how the old fascists used to spread fear among the people. Today we are faced with true «rainbow fascists» hiding behind anti-fascism; violent and aggressive, weeping victims who complain of racisms and discriminations that very often doesn’t exist, with the aim of pursuing freedom of thought and of opinion to condemn anyone who dares not think that «gay it’s wonderful».

This is the style and behavior of certain homosexuals who camp among the clergy, driven by extraordinary malice. The sad truth is that those who freely choose to live in sexual disorder, feeling gratified by that very disorder, cannot expect to legitimize within the Church and its clergy all those worldly vices that, according to Catholic morality, constitute and remain serious deviations from Christian sentiment and living. In a different but substantially similar manner, the same individual reported Father Amedeo Cencini, a note Canossian italian priest, to the Order of Psychologists, accusing him of insulting homosexuals in his articles and conferences. The disciplinary commission examined the complaint and then issued this opinion: «No violation of the Code of Ethics was found». But when someone dares to contradict certain acids homosexuals, or doesn’t agree with them, a barrage of insults begins, directed at the professional body, accused of defending a homophobe, followed by accusations against the judiciary, accusations against the Italian Republic, and so on…[23]

It goes without saying, but we must remember it anyway: the damage these individuals can cause to the Church if admitted to the priesthood, or worse, if they advance within the clergy and end up in key government positions, is truly incalculable, because they are capable of using any unfair and illicit means to eliminate those they consider dangerous antagonists and die-hard rivals of the gay lobby. I even know of cases of priests whose legal cases have been fabricated, with baseless trials based not even on vague evidence but only on pure insinuations, Authentic Mafia-Style of Intimidation, casting doubt on their reputation and inducing them to waste time and money defending themselves from bizarre accusations. And when it all dissolved into a soap bubble, those affected were unable to retaliate against anyone, because gay clerics cowardly attack from behind, using their servile “useful idiots” — never directly, always through intermediaries, without ever appearing in the first place.

Inside the confessional, I had to wrestle with a penitent suffering from homoerotic urges, which he was trying to contain as much and as best he could. He told me, shocked, that during sacramental confession, a priest had told him:

«Expressing one’s homosexuality is not a sin, because homosexuality is in the natural order and is a natural variant of human sexuality; and we cannot force a homosexual to live in chastity, because preventing a person from expressing their loving affection would be inhumane».

In either case —whether it be the Arian heretic or the homoheretic — we are faced with an expression of heresy different in form but similar in substance, ad that such an irregularity becomes a canonical perpetual impediment. I reiterate: that a strong sinner can be legitimately and validly consecrated as a priest, but not one who lacks the fundamental requisites of a man and a believer and who aims to to the priesthood for evil and perverse purposes. For it is one thing to fall into grave sin, quite another to consider disorderly conduct as good and just and aspire to the priesthood for evil and perverse purposes.

While I tend to consider the ordinations of such individuals invalid, I will not even open — given the extraordinary sensitivity of the subject — the painful chapter regarding the validity of the episcopal consecrations of those who are similarly not men, not believers, and do not have a correct perception of the fullness of the apostolic priesthood; not to mention those who, despite being the receptacle of all the worst vices, nevertheless reached the episcopate through blackmail and the psychological terrorism exercised on the Ecclesiastical Authorities.

THE MYSTERY OF GOD’S GRACE, THE “SUPPLIES GRACE” AND THE “SUPPLY THE CHURCH” ARE NEITHER A WAY OUT NOR A PANACEA

I believe we cannot play either on the mystery of God’s grace or on that great “loophole” or, if you prefer, panacea, of the “grace fills” (supply the grace) and the “supplies the church” (supply the Church), because nothing can replace God’s grace, much less the Church, where the nature of the substance through which and upon which sacramental grace operates is completely missing. Or to put it another example: an aged host in which all the matter of the bread remains, and a low-quality, unpleasant-tasting wine in which all the matter of the wine remains, nevertheless, through transubstantiation, undoubtedly become, in their metaphysical essence, by the supreme mystery of faith, the Body and Blood of Christ. But a butter biscuit and an orange drink can never become the Body and Blood of Christ, because that matter on which the subsistence of the metaphysical substance depends by divine will is missing, given that what is transubstantiated is the precise matter of bread and wine, not any matter of solid and liquid food and drink.

Where the matter that gives life to the essence of substance is lacking, can God’s grace truly supply it, or can the Church perhaps supply it? And if so, why would the Church Father, St. Augustine, have wasted precious time and energy writing and giving us the treatise “Of nature and grace” (On the grace and the nature)? Not to mention all the subsequent speculations on matter by St. Thomas Aquinas? Grace works, and always works, but it works on existent nature, ot works on nature inexistent, because think whit works on inexistent nature would mean altering and falsifying the very mystery of creation and with it that of redemption.

The mystery of God’s grace transforms, through the work entrusted to our hands, the substance of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, while retaining the external species of bread and wine in visible form, smell, and taste. These external species, however, become Christ truly and truly present in a substantial way with his Body, his Blood, his Soul, and his Divinity. The grace of God, which is capable of all things, does not transform into the metaphysical substance a butter biscuit and an orange juice in Body and Blood of Christ, because God cannot contradict himself, for «This is my body» (this is my body) was said on the bread, and «This is the cup of my blood» (This is the chalice of my blood) was said on the wine. And no one can change these accidental elements on which the very metaphysical essence of the substance depends by divine will, if anything by affirming … “grace fills“, or worse “supplies the church“, not to mention certain acid gay people mentioned above, who, according according to their personal and eccentric “ecclesiastical law”, would like to relegate all of their moral disorders to the unquestionable sphere of the private life of priests (!?)

God’s grace works only on what exist, not on what isn’t exist and can’t exist; and this is clearly explained and taught in the Parable of the Talents. Through the Holy Priestly Order, an ontological transformation occurs, and the priest takes on a new character, which is indelible and eternal. But if a priest is five feet tall, God’s sanctifying and transforming grace cannot transform him into a barefoot, six-foot-three-foot-tall cuirassier. Or to be more precise: a donkey, in the figurative sense of the term, can also become a Saint, can even become the venerated patron of priests of the Catholic Church, but cannot be transformed into an Arabian stallion, because he will remain a donkey, regardless the his heroic holy virtues. Both Saint Augustine both Saint Thomas clearly clarified the principle that Grace Nature completes but not supply (grace does not replace the nature that isn’t there, but perfects the existent nature). And when nature is absent, starting with the nature of man, of the virile male, required for access to the Holy Order of Priesthood, what happens? Who can ever … supply? The only one who can do so is man, who has put himself in God’s place, or even worse: in Satan’s place.

I would like to conclude with a paradoxical question, but sometimes there can be a great deal of objectivity in paradox or hyperbole. This is the question: if a person, secretly belonging to a Satanic sect, wishes to become a priest for the purpose of validly consecrating the Most Holy Eucharist, destined later to the most impious profanations, thereby serving his Luciferian coven, can we, in that case, speak of a valid ordination? Well, could someone explain to me: what is the difference between a Satanist who aspires to the priesthood for evil and sacrilegious purposes and a homoheretic who also aspires to the priesthood for equally evil and sacrilegious purposes? I’ll explain the difference: a Satanist truly believes in the Most Holy Eucharist as the real presence of the true and living Christ, while in the majority of cases, homoheretics don’t believe in the real presence of the true and living Christ. This is demonstrated by the fact that in their discourse they speak of everything except the Real Presence. They fill their mouths with terms like «… banquet… feast of joy… encounter of love…». Rather than the metaphysical language they despise and the term “transubstantiation” they define as obsolete, they prefer the Lutheran term “consubstantiation.” As a result, their Eucharistic celebrations, brimming with liturgical abuses and free will of every kind, seem like Calvinist liturgies, the very foundation of which is the denial of the Real Presence, depicted by John Calvin precisely by standing during the words of the Last Supper. And in doing so, homosexual heretics eschew the term «living and holy sacrifice». They distribute the Eucharist as if it were free tokens of unleavened bread, they fail to treat the sacred vessels with sacred respect, they fail to proceed with their adequate purification, and they do not promote Eucharistic worship in any way. Added to this is the fact that many of our “fatal womens masters of ceremonies” — because for the last thirty years, finding a heterosexual among liturgists is like looking for a needle in a haystack — have also proceeded to abolish the plates for the Communion of the faithful, but in their place have instituted the silver plate on which to place the bishop’s most holy red skullcap, far more important than the collection of Eucharistic fragments. And there is even more: I have ascertained that the homoheretic bishops, through their homoheretic priests, are those who teach the People of God to stand with their heads held high during the Eucharistic Prayer, as well as being the proponents of the elimination of the pews with kneelers from many churches, replaced with cinema seats, because to strike the Church at its heart and de-sacralize it, one must first strike the Eucharist, rather than following the clear Pauline admonition:

«That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father»[24]

This explains the difference between a Satanist and a homoheretic: the Satanist is a believer, the homoheretic is not. And whoever wants to meditate, let him meditate, but let him do it quickly and well, while the house continues to burn, while the realistic possibility of putting out the fire grows increasingly distant, while the visible Church increasingly resembles a vast Gay Village.

From the Island of Patmos, July 28, 2025

This article is based on a previous article published on July 7, 2016

.

NOTE

[1] CF. Codex law canon, can. 1024.

[2] CF. Mk 3,14-19; kc 6,12-16.

[3] CF. 1 TM 3,1-13; 2 TM 1,6; Tt 1,5-9.

[4] CF. St. Clement of Rome, Ad Cor. 42, 4; 44, 3: PG 1, 292-293; 300.

[5] CF. John Paul II, Apostolic Letter. Woman's dignity, 26-27: AAS 80 (1988) 1715-1720; Id., AP. Letter. priestly ordination: AAS 86 (1994) 545-548; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dec. Among the most important: AAS 69 (1977) 98-116; Id., Response to the doubt regarding the doctrine of the Apostolic Letter. «Priestly ordination»: AAS 87 (1995) 1114.

[6] CF. EB 5,4.

[7] CF. First Letter of Clement, 44,2, later taken up by the Dogmatic Constitution The light n. 20.

[8] CF. Mt 19, 12: «For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven».

[9] CF. Johannes Quasten, Patrologia. The first two centuries (II-II). Marietti, 1980.

[10] XVIIIth Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter, pontificate, years 230-235.

[11] CF. Bibliotheca Cod. 118.

[12] CF. Apocatastasis. According to Origen, at the end of time there will be universal redemption and all creatures will be saved, including Satan. Therefore, the punishment of eternal damnation would actually have a purifying and not definitive nature. «We believe that the goodness of God, through the mediation of Christ, will bring all creatures to the same end» (Of principles, I, IV, 1-3).

[13] CF. Can. 1040.

[14] Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution The light, 19.

[15] John Paul II, AP. Ex. I will give you shepherds, 25 March 1992, 15, 4.

[16] CF. Cann. 1024-1052.

[17] St. Augustine, The nature of good, 19.

[18] The term simony derives from the episode narrated in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 8, 9-24) in which Simon Magus, a healer, asked the Apostles, in exchange for payment, for the thaumaturgical power conferred by the Holy Spirit and was consequently cursed by the Blessed Apostle Peter.

[19] Example: In 1093, the Supreme Pontiff Urban II declared all simoniacal ordinations invalid, except for those of clerics who were unaware of the simony of their ordinations. The condemnation of simony was decreed by various Church ecumenical councils, from the Council of Chalcedon in 451 to the Council of Trent in the 16th century.

[20] CF. can. 188.

[21] CF. Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo, And Satan Became Triune. Relativism, Individualism, Disobedience. An Analysis of the Church of the Third Millennium. Rome, 2011. Reprint: L'isola at Patmos Editions, Rome, 2019. Currently available only in Italian language.

[22] Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders, 4 November 2005.

[23] CF. Francesco Strazza: «Between criticism and insults: "I can't silent" ", Week News, November 25, 2022 edition (Italian version only).

[24] CF. Phil 2, 10-11.

 

______________________

Dear Readers, this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our Bank account in the name of:

Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican

Iban code: IT74R0503403259000000301118

For international bank transfers:

Codice SWIFT: BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff,

the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message: isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.