Thursday, June 24, 2021



As I viewed the Lifesite reporter and others of a like mind in the Church as this reporter berated heterodox priests and bishops and the ultra progressive and heterodox Association of Priests, I thought to myself if someone was interested in the Catholic Church or returning after having been away, would this video of a reporter and priests gone stupid win them over?

What if you are a homosexual and have bought into the culture’s ethic about sex and your life is empty and you know you are being used and are using others, would this video be a call to join the self-righteous who resort to name calling and the rest of it?

Is there a way to promote the Church’s sexual teachings as it concerns adultery, fornication and Humanae Vitae without shaming, ridiculing and being just nasty to sinners who engage in these particular sins, yet there is a wink and non towards those who are the most uncharitable of Catholics?  Are there greater and lesser mortal sins and some mortal sins get a wink and a nod and sexual sins of the same sex kind cause others to go ballistic? 

Finally, we are more forgiving of heterosexual mortal sins when young people move in with each other with benefits, older people are in civil unions which are not blessed by the Church or enter a “living together” situation after a spouse has died in order to keep the financial benefits of being considered a widow or widower. 

Is there a way not to freak out over sodomy of homosexuals while giving heterosexuals a pass on the same sins? 

In the photo above the man holds a sign saying “it’s not okay to be gay, it’s a sin.” Why not just have a sign saying, “it’s not okay to be a sinner.” And then the Church becomes a country club for the saved and not the sinner. 

It’s complicated and we live in a complicated world. And the world which promotes their ethic of love which equals tolerance looks at the Catholic Church as mongering hate. Is that what we want?


a sinner said...

Speaking about a call to repentance?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Yes, sinner, I read that. And yes, each bishop of those politicians needs to call that person up and discuss what it means to be a Catholic and the obedience that is due to Christ and the Church He founded in the areas of Faith, Morals and Canon Law. I happen to agree that bishops and lower clergy should not be micro managing politicians, but if a politicians after having been privately warned by his bishop to change his public rhetoric about the genocide of unborn babies, what some call infanticide, or else stop receiving Holy Communion and the politician goes public with a snarky disobedient reply that is not just disobedient but rebellious, I think excommunication should be on the table.

Just think of the rebellious New Orleans' politician and how the Archbishop then dealt with it--he's a role model for today's bishops!

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

My question, though, has to due with lay Catholics taking upon themselves an authority in the Church they simply do not have and being quite public and vocal about it when the rebuke of Catholics in error should be mostly in the internal forum until a public rebuke is made and by the one who has the authority to do so--the bishop. I think we have a lot of Catholics who claim to be traditionalists and ultra orthodox but really have drunk the Kool-aide of the spirit of Vatican II when it comes to Church authority and thus aren't too different from the heterodox Association of priests but only in an faux orthodox way.

Thoughtful said...


Step One: Love your Gay brother or Lesbian sister or Transgender Cousin. Love the murderer and visit her in prison. Love the liar and send him cards for bis birthday and Christmas. Love the one who has done immeasurable harm to you and send him regular gifts of chocolate and wine. Show them, don't "tell" them, that God's grace can bring healing and peace.

Step Two: Stop using the degrading terms that are popular among some to describe the sinner. As cute as Fr. Z thinks his term "homosexualist" is, it's not.

Step Three: Recognize that a person's sexual orientation does not define that person.

Step Four: Recognize that the sins of the establishment, the rich, the powerful (think Corporations) shold be as much a target for conversion as ANY sin of the flesh.

Don Lemonade said...



But holding a sign that says that? That's a whole 'nother can of worms. If anyone in ANY denomination held up signs like that, they would be fodder for accusations of self-righteous hypocrisy, because we are all sinners.

I don't know what the correct slogan is, but even THAT is problematic because we no longer have any kind of public discourse on such issues. Instead sloganeering and bumper-sticker sentiments are supposed to pass as discourse. We've dumbed ourselves down (EVERYONE) so much that we have to climb out of a big hole before we can seriously discuss these issues with secular society. Our culture has to change or we are doomed.

But I think it is worth noting that the Catholic Church seems to attract more converts and get converts that are more faithful when we actually stand for truth and refuse to compromise. Every compromise with truth, with social "norms", with Protestantism, sends a message: Why bother being Catholic if we're just the same as everyone else?

The problem is how to boldly proclaim the truth without sounding strident and shrill. Since a good example is essential probably a good place to start would be to have leaders with integrity.

Yeah, I thought so too.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Thoughtful, AMEN! Stop the name calling. A person may commit the sin of sodomy, even a heterosexual, but calling him a sodomite to shame and humiliate him is not Catholic but thoroughly Protestant fundamentalism and of the Protestant ethos that a human is a worm and God only loves humans who are hidden by Christ. Not Catholic at all!!!!! Very Lutheran. That might explain Fr. Z.

Don Lemonade said...

Perhaps we should not only read the Bible and the Catechism. We could supplement our reading with a twice-yearly review of How To Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie.

No, I am not joking either.

Michael A said...

Father McDonald: It appears that the culture we live in today is not the one you live in. You don’t seem to understand that there is no tolerance for anything that hints at criticism of LGBTQ. You need to get with it too, and make sure you use the right acronyms when you discuss this subject. You didn’t use one LGBTQ in your observations – that’s not good! When is the last time you gave a sermon and warned people not to embrace the spiritual destruction caused by the militant homosexual lobby that demands that we all completely reject the existence of the sin of lust? You shouldn’t worry so much about how you are going to diplomatically show your compassion and just preach the truth. However, be aware, because you do seem to have a blind spot on this issue, that when you do speak the truth you will be threatened with losing your non-profit status. That is where this is heading, I hope you know this? If you don’t stop worrying about how to show your compassion, before you know it you’ll be forced to preside over a gay marriage or risk losing your right to be recognized as a legitimate religious entity under the constitution of this wonderful country. BTW, stop placing an equivalency on the reporter and those political radicals pretending to be priests. You’re way off base there too. I hope you’re not reverting back to your liberal days. Maybe as you’re approaching retirement, you’re starting to think a little too much about how great it was to be an idealistic liberal? You better snap out it before you become a “contributor” to the Pray-Tell Blog. Not a goal to have aspirations for.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Michael A, I hope you are not suggesting that the Church use the tactics of the world in dealing with enemies. I am fully aware of the world agenda that is anti-Christ. I am speaking of people that the Church should be reaching out to in order to offer them the salvation of Christ. Why use language that is as incendiary at theirs to do so? That is not a recipe for fidelity to Christ for the one doing so or the one reaching out to the one who needs Christ and His Church for their salvation.
What you are indicating is worldliness in evangelization and the Protestant approach. As for me and my household, I choose the Catholic way. There is no need to go the route of protestant evangelists who tell everyone, in particular Catholics, they are going to hell for being Catholic and sinners.

Michael A said...

Father: I think it’s best for us to call sin a sin, as a first step. This is where we are today. Children are being indoctrinated to respect and consider a homosexual identity. We are back to the basics when it comes to this issue. People are rejecting the slightness notion that sodomy is a sin. I think it best to begin taking baby steps toward educating people in your pews that homosexuality is a sin. Maybe you reject the idea that probably at least 75% of the population thinks that to even discuss the concept of homosexual behavior as a sin is now the abhorrent deed. You’re right that you need to find a way to begin a new evangelization to help people understand that what the sleazy modern culture is telling them is not okay. I’m concerned that you’re too worried about offending people that would send you to a concentration camp or worse if they had their way. No matter what you say that is critical of LGBTQ is going to get you in hot water so why not just speak the truth. And when you have agents of evil infiltrating the Catholic clergy, I don’t see anything wrong with giving them a kick in the ass. These are not honorable men and shouldn’t be given the sightless respect.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Yes, we have to be clear on what Original Sin is and its implications for every aspect of who we are including the distortion of our human sexuality either at conception or for sociological/psychological reasons later in life. Because of Original Sin and the disorders that flow from it, one could be conceived gay--just as people are conceived with a variety of physical disorders. Original Sin though is not our culpability. It's an inheritance received at conception.

Then there are two types of actual sin for which we are responsible venial and mortal. It is not a sin of any kind to be homosexual, heterosexual or suffering from any of the philias that afflict both orientations and one's orientation can be mixed or fluid.

It is acting on doing the wrong that God's commands forbid. For a sin, no matter what that sin is, of the flesh or something else to be mortal, three things are required, serious matter, the person committing the sin knows it is a sin and serious and does so with full consent of the will and usually with forethought and planning.

When it comes to sex that is a sin, why focus just on homosexual. General terminology fits all people, such as sins of fornication, adultery, or any other deviancy.

Chip said...

I agree folk such as Lifesite engage in gutter journalism/yellow press. They are simply following the lead of journalism today in general. Being nice has not worked, one only need look at pathetic USCCB efforts for confirmation.

Do not forget it was not the Bishops who led the pro-life fight, which fight they also ignored for the longest, leaving it to rabid activists to start and maintain the offensive, long before they became involved.

Neither have the Bishops led the charge against the forced gaying of America, or racist BLM/Critical Race Theory messaging, nor did they pressure the govt to provide a standard deactivated virus vaccine for covid such is available elsewhere in the world, nor have they yet to do so on any of those issues.

Leaving nobody but ugly militants to carry the fight, and against equally ugly militant opponents who have been SUCCESSFULLY using such tactics for decades.

William said...

"...3For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear. 4They will reject the truth and chase after myths." 2 Tim, 4:3,4

Woe betide our priests who whisper sweet-nothings into itchy ears!

Michael A said...

I think your description is one to go with. Use it this weekend and see what response you get. Probably in your area and parish it will be mostly accepted. In my area less so. You might need body armor just for the instruction you're offering in your post.

I have no problem with calling out all types of sins of the flesh, but I think if I'm at a rally where the subject is gay pride, I think it would be logical to identify the specific objection I have to the group I'm addressing my thoughts to. So go ahead and hold a sign that says "Don't Sodomize Me". I wouldn’t have the courage to do it myself, so I have some respect for those that do.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s so I saw how the devil skillfully used Hollywood as a tool for indoctrination. First it began with appealing to heterosexual lust and now we have arrived at the point where you need to encourage a child to change her/his sex at about the age of 8. Heterosexuals bear a lot of responsibility for where we are today because we have enjoyed our pornography and fornication and now we wonder why the world we live in is a septic tank.

I haven't paid much attention to Church politics lately, because I simply resolved to pray each day for a new and holy pope soon. I'm in much pain these last few weeks because my parish priest has been thrown out of active duty - no assignment.
If you could keep some attention on the canceled priest issue going on in the country, I think that would be some good material for posts on your blog. There is now a new group formed in Illinois, the Coalition for Canceled Priests. I think it has the potential to have some impact God willing. Something needs to be done to protect good and faithful priests from outrageous injustices. Please pray for Father James Parker, he is a holy and devout priest that has been a wonderful gift to me and all who know him. Thank you and God bless you.

John said...


As it concerns priest vs. lay people's right in the Church

Yes, clerics have greater administrative rights but when they betray the faith and live as heretics they loose their special status and privileges. In such cases lay people have the obligation to call those clerics to repent. That is not being protestant, that is being good Catholics. Luther and other protestants would never have been successful had the bishops, chief among them the contemporary popes, had acted more as guardians of the faith than guardians of their families' wealth.

In the old days emperors and kings exercised oversight often by calling synods; insisting if the Pope was reluctant to cooperate. Luther gained credibility because the Church was staffed by bishops who abandoned their flocks and congregated in Rome to be close to the Pope when new vacancies became available. Lay people get involved when clerics disrespect their own vocations but cling to privileges, exploit the faith, and lead others to do likewise. We have a right to call on our Bishops to shepherd us to make us better Christians. Ultimately, the Church is not the Pope's or bishops' it is Jesus Christ's.

Pierre said...


You are describing CNN and MSNBC to a tee!

The angriest and nastiest priests I have known are “liberal” priests! Moderate to conservative priests have been gentlemen

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Catholic evangelization is not proselytizing. We don't go into people homes,no matter how sinful they are, and then tell them to convert or they will go to hell. We don't visit non-Catholic Churches and then picket outside telling them unless they convert, they will go to hell.

If a gay person attends Mass, hears a good message that leads him to abandon a non Catholic life, more power to him. A priest who singles someone or small group in the parish for special lashing out in order to convert isn't doing his job.

Catholicism isn't in your face like Protestant fundamentalists. Sometime I wonder if those promoting a more in your face form of Catholicism are converts from Protestantism and still at heart, protestant?

Chip said...

Father, that kinder/gentler approach is a relatively new thing in Catholicism, and the many many Sainted thundering preachers/reformers in the Church who preached against sin on street corners and in squares say otherwise.

The US Catholic Church has always kept a low profile for safety, being a small minority for the longest time, and such has surely tainted the "can't we all get along" response to the cultural upheaval of the last 60yrs.

To be sure, I find whackadoodle militant "Catholics" in offensive protests just as repugnant as their opponents, but the command was not to go into all the established churches and preach to the choir, but to go into all the world and preach the Gospel.

The "more bees with honey than vinegar" approach mainly seems to a drawn a cloud of flies.

But, I fault the majority of Catholics, lay and ordained for the failures, as ever so few have put God first in their lives and become living saints who will attract people to the Church. The vast majority are nearly or actually indistinguishable from the pagans around them, and so what they DO say is ignored as just another opinion by folk just as phony as anyone else.

The ugly militancy a perfect example.

NH said...

I might be wrong, but I think today's society has a lot in common with the cultures that were around when Christ preached. I think Saint Benedict also was familiar with a society that was far removed from a Christian lifestyle.The same for Saint Augustine. The bible is full of advice on how to live as Christians in a society that promotes a different path. It also mentions how to interact with those that choose a different lifestyle. None of this is really new.

Pierre said...


Ironically, on the eve of the Council, the American Catholic Church was at the height of its influence. You need look no further than how Hollywood treated the Church in those days. For example, Otto Preminger's "The Cardinal" made while the Council was still in session and shortly following the Council, "The Sound of Music" and "Becket" all of which portrayed the beauty and majesty of the Church in a favorable light. The hierarchy made a conscious choice, and it was a very bad one. Instead of the Catholic Church influencing the world for the better, it allowed the world to influence the Church, for the worse. Although I see pockets of the Church recovering slowly, it will never attain that level of influence in my lifetime.

Paul said...

Michael A, Chip and NH et al,

Thank you for your comments. I largely agree with you. However, (I am not sure how to articulate this…) it is important to remember that a sound, orthodox priest like Fr McDonald, is in a position, at times, where he simply has to be more diplomatic and or prudent (if they are the right words?) than each, individual orthodox layperson has to be. And I think assumptions regarding the inner motivations of any basically conservative and - in the best sense - traditionalist priest in a situation described above, or in this particular context, should be more charitable and less accusing…

Paul said...

More than one commenter above and elsewhere on this blog has got it wrong regarding how our glorious postmodern era regards SODOMY (in all its various forms and modern manifestations); ie - it is simply not enough for individuals and society as a whole to tolerate and accept sodomy; sodomy is, actually, in the West, in our times, something to be CELEBRATED!

By the way, I can recommend “Reformation: Europe’s House Divided 1490-1700” which I read when I completed some BA courses in early modern European history, especially:

Ch 15 - Love and Sex: Staying the Same (including : the fear of sodomy: pp 620-629)

Ch 16 - Love and Sex: Moving On.

The author is the standard modern Cambridge/Oxford scholar and historian, and, I believe, a lapsed Anglican - Diarmaid MacCulloch.

Yet, in my opinion, he gives quite a good and fair, objective account of how Christianity….or rather, what Christianity has believed and taught re love, family and sexuality over the centuries.

Mark Thomas said...

We win souls via attraction...via loving, kind, peaceful words and actions.

Pope Benedict XVI, May 13, 2007:

"The Church does not engage in proselytism. Instead, she grows by “attraction”: just as Christ “draws all to himself” by the power of his love..."


Mark Thomas

Michael A said...

Hey Mark,

I agree that Benedict's papacy can be summed up as loving, kind and peaceful. I'm glad you agree. Too bad while he was head of CDF,CDW and Pope that people accused him of being otherwise. I think they thought he was too direct and rigid. Good you're not in that camp.

Mark Thomas said...

Michael A, I submitted without hesitation to Pope Benedict XVI's God-given Magisterial authority over me.

I believe that as then-Pope, and today as Pope Emeritus, he has conducted himself in holy, humble fashion.

He has been a kind, peaceful, loyal son of Holy Mother Church throughout his life.

Peace and good health to our holy and great Culture of Life Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.


Mark Thomas

Michael A said...


Happy to hear it. We all know that he would favor loving, kind and peaceful. Here's a gay website's understanding of Benedict's thoughts on the issue.

“Same-sex attraction is unnatural and disordered,” Pope Emeritus Benedict continues to teach in retirement Do you submit yourself to his teaching?

Maybe you should have added something like this to your kind, peaceful and loving quote because then it would offer a clearer representation of what the Holy Father teaches on the specific subject?

Mark Thomas said...

Michael A,

Have a nice day.

Big Benny said...

"It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs."