Soho Masses Pastoral Council member makes unfounded accusation that Pope Benedict is a homosexual

Terence Weldon, a leading member of the Soho Masses Pastoral Council,  recently reaffirmed by Archbishop Nichols, has posted the unfounded accusation that  Pope Benedict is a homosexual on his blog Queering the Church.

Terence Weldon writes:

‘The question has been often asked, and sometimes answered by way of speculation amounting to not much more than guesswork or innuendo based largely on observations on the devoted, ever present and attentive gorgeous Georg or the expensive Prada red shoes, or the personalized celebrity fragrance.

Does it matter? Richard Sipe, noting that Benedict has has been the author seriously nasty Vatican documents seeking to bar gay men from the priesthood, and labelling our orientation as “disordered”, and has delivered speeches condemning gay marriage a “threat to humanity”, writes in a recent post that yes, it does matter. After speaking to people on the ground in Rome, both clerics and journalists, he has produced the strongest evidence that I have yet seen that Benedict is indeed “gay” – in the limited sense of having an orientation to the same – sex. (He is careful to stress that this does not imply any actual sexual activity, and we may safely assume that he is not engaging in the so-called “gay lifestyle” in Rome’s gay bars, clubs and saunas – although many of his  priest do).

Terence Weldon then goes on to quote from Richard Sipe’s original post:

I have asked a number of Roman clerics and members of the Roman press corps if they think the pope is gay. None, of course, wish to be named for obvious reasons, but every one was convinced that Pope Benedict XVI is gay. I repeat what I said at the outset—this does not impute sin or the misbehavior that plagued Pope Paul VI, but it is a strong assertion about his orientation.

The reflection the pope’s orientation itself emphasizes the need to discuss the whole range of questions about human sexuality that the Church has considered finalized with apodictic pronouncements of “intrinsic evil”.

The Vatican is wrong about sex. Its teaching is grounded on a false understanding of natural law. If not, Pope Benedict XVI is in big trouble—he is unsuitable even as a candidate for the priesthood and his ordination may be invalid.’

Weldon  also makes the unfounded allegation that Pope Paul VI was gay, and that Pope John Paul I was going to soften the Church’s teaching on homosexuality before concluding:

‘It’s high time that what is well known to Vatican insiders and reporters, be exposed to greater public knowledge. We need more openness about the sexuality and sexual behaviour not simply of the Pope, but of the people who surround him – and who really are the authors of the Vatican nastiness.’

Protect the Pope comment:  When Archbishop Nichols announced his reaffirmation of the Soho Masses he also claimed that he was going to ensure that those involved in organizing them were not promoting confusion or opposition to the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics.

Terence Weldon’s unfounded accusations that Pope Benedict is a homosexual, and Pope Paul VI was a homosexual, are proof that at least one member of the Soho Pastoral Council is promoting confusion and opposition to the Church’s teaching.

Coming just a couple of weeks after Archbishop Nichols statement, Terence Weldon’s blog suggests that his promise of a review of the conduct of those organizing the Soho Masses is not being taken seriously. In that case, maybe the CDF and the Apostolic Nuncio shouldn’t take the promise of a review seriously either.

http://queeringthechurch.com/2012/03/23/is-pope-benedict-gay/

 


 

 

49 comments to Soho Masses Pastoral Council member makes unfounded accusation that Pope Benedict is a homosexual

  • Luke

    This is appalling. What makes even worse is that he is a Eucharistic Minister. I used to support the the Soho Mass but now I have to say I think it must go. Mr Weldon should be stripped of his ministerial duties and should get himself to confession as soon as possible.

  • An anonymous individual referring to himself as “Duckman” left a comment at Weldon’s website asserting that, “In many issues…those who speak the loudest…frequently and rabidly…as in the case of ‘His Holiness’…we only need recall the words of Shakespeare ‘Me thinks the lady doth protest too much!’…I think we can safely label the German Shepherd, Benedict, as a rabid homophobe and suspected of being in an ivory closet.”

    This is the sort of disrespectful anti-Catholic commentary one can expect from Mr. Weldon and his associates. Because Pope Benedict XVI takes his vocation seriously: that of confirming or strengthening the brethren (Luke 22:32), and proclaims the truth in charity to the peoples of the world, some who advance the radical homosexual agenda are most anxious to besmirch his good name.

    Mr. Weldon asserts in his post that science proves from animal biology that the homosexual inclination is not intrinsically disordered but is rather normal and healthy. I refute this lie at La Salette Journey.

    And if you’re reading this Duckman, the quotation you cite is taken from Hamlet, Act III, scene II, which actually reads, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks” and not “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.” But thank you for showing my readers that you are not really familar with Shakespeare.

    By the way, the word “protest,” as used in Hamlet, does not mean protest in the modern sense of the word but instead refers to affirmation or avowal.

    But you’re forgiven for not knowing this. After all, you’re the product of a fragmented, semi-moronic MTV generation. You’re poorly read and haven’t been trained how to think.

    • harry

      ‘And if you’re reading this Duckman,the quotation you cite is taken from Hamlet,Act III,scene II,which actually reads,“The lady doth protest too much,methinks”and not “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”But thank you for showing my readers that you are not really familar with Shakespeare.

      By the way,the word “protest,”as used in Hamlet,does not mean protest in the modern sense of the word but instead refers to affirmation or avowal.

      But you’re forgiven for not knowing this. After all,you’re the product of a fragmented,semi-moronic MTV generation. You’re poorly read and haven’t been trained how to think.’

      Whatever I think of the various points made here, I also think that two wrongs don’t make a right. That was patronising and not necessary.

      • John Ansley

        “Duckman” deserves a tiny bit of sarcasm. What is that compared with his hate-filled and calumnious accusation that our Holy Father lives in an “ivory closet” and is secretly a homosexual?

        If “Duckman” doesn’t like honest criticism, he should stay out of the fray.

        • harry

          ‘John Ansley

          March 25,2012 at 8:27 pm ·Reply

          “Duckman”deserves a tiny bit of sarcasm. What is that compared with his hate-filled and calumnious accusation that our Holy Father lives in an “ivory closet”and is secretly a homosexual?’

          If “Duckman”doesn’t like honest criticism,he should stay out of the fray.

          I doubt that ts ‘hate filled’ [could be wrong]. I’m left with the feeling that he’s having a ‘bit of a larf’. And I stick with my original comment. Patronising pseudo intellectual comments just aren’t needed.

    • savvy

      Disorder here refers to a moral one. A predisposition towards something is not relevant in the natural law sense of the term, because the essence of a thing is defined by it’s purpose and end. The essence of sex is both bonding and procreation. Gay sex is not permitted. It’s unnatural, because it makes the wrong use of organs intended for heterosexual union.

  • Gurn

    Yeah, these soho masses were a joke from start to finish, shouldn’t all Catholics attend one mass together regardless of what their interests, hobbies or indeed their sinful inclinations are. I don’t know what planet our truly awful archbishop lives on, it was just so blindingly obvious that creating a separate mass for a separate group of people is pretty much an open invitation for descent. Especially when the group in question has a history of being hell bent on changing the Church’s teaching on numerous issues.

  • Genty

    I think many in the gay community have long posited that the Pope is gay because they fancy his papal secretary “georgeous” Georg Ganswein. The Pope merely joins the honourable roll Jesus, David & Jonathan, Alexander the Great, Shakespeare and a host of other significant figures whom the gay community want to claim as “theirs”.
    Of course, it’s a useful ploy to try to dilute Pope Benedict’s influence.

  • Marco

    It is hard to see why the so-called expensive Prada red shoes would prove a same-sex preference. Even so, the red shoes that the Pope wears are not from Prada. They are the gift of a devout shoe manufacturer, who has a shop near the Vatican. I go to his shop occasionally, as he would repair shoes that otherwise I would have to throw away. And he is unexpensive.
    It is easy to pile lies.

  • Nicolas Bellord

    The Soho Masses Pastoral Council is very careful to try and keep its website relatively safe from criticism. But their real views are expressed by Weldon (who organises the readings at the Masses) on his website. The continuing tolerance of this Council by the Church in E&W is incomprehensible.

  • Karla

    End the Soho Masses, these people have gay agenda which they are trying to infiltrate into the Catholic Church. Archbishop Nichols has to stand up and put a stop to this.

  • Karla

    Blair support of “gay marriage” the result of decades of bishops winking at public dissent

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/blair-support-of-gay-marriage-the-result-of-decades-of-bishops-winking-at-p

  • Nicolas, good comment. I would add that the SMPC website has posted homilies which were given at various Masses and which are themselves problematic. As I wrote at La Salette Journey recently, “His Excellency should ask Father Timothy Radcliffe, OP what he meant exactly when he said (in a homily on February 6, 2011):

    ‘Gay people are often not seen in Christ’s light! Gay people may be seen as threats, as predators, as temptations, or whatever. You have to shed Christ’s life so that people see that gay people love, have friendships, have gifts such like everyone else. Cardinal Basil Hume, clarifying Catholic teaching on homosexuality, wrote, ‘Love between two persons, whether of the same sex or of a different sex, is to be treasured and respected…When two persons love they experience in a limited manner in this world what will be their unending delight when one with God in the next. To love another is in fact to reach out to God who shares his lovableness with the one we love.’”

    Fr. Radcliffe’s homily may be found here:

    http://www.sohomasses.com/homilies

    • savvy

      Same sex attracted Catholics are called to chaste friendship and mystical union with God. Sex is reserved for a marriage between a man and a woman.

  • Benedict

    I cannot understand why the Archbishop is allowing these so called Masses to
    continue and why the Vatican has not stepped in and put an end to them, they are a scandal to the teaching of the Church

  • asrajit

    This is the same Mr Weldon who in his profoundly unhistorical blog claims that St Basil was gay? The same St Basil who stated that clerics found guilty of homosexual misconduct ought to be punished? Or does Mr Weldon think that St Basil was a repressed homosexual?

  • Mark from PA

    It isn’t insulting to say that someone has a certain sexual orientation. It is not a crime to be gay. The comments about the Pope also seem to imply that he is a faithful celibate. So if the Pope is gay and faithful to his vows there is nothing wrong with that. There is no scandal there. What is wrong is that some people seem to think that if a person is gay they are somehow less than fully human. The Holy Father is trying to live a chaste and holy life, we need to respect that.

  • fd

    I won’t make any comment on these stupid remarks.
    The Pope is being welcomed with great enthusiasm in Mexico, and at least a million people attended.
    Can you imagine the face of all those who go on saying that this Popacy is a failure and everytime they are defied and debunked by the sheer reality !?
    From Africa to Berlin,from Scotland to London, from the US to Australia, from Madrid to Barcelona,from Venice to Palermo, from Portugal to Mexico: wherever he goes the Pope always find hordes of people who are there to encourage him and to make him feel their affection.
    The Wednesday Audiences at St Peters’ are always full and so is St Peter’s square every Sunday for the Angelus.
    I think that part of the explanation for that is the fact that people see the great commitment of the local parishes to people , a commitment which has no equal in the world, from the commitmento for poor people, to the commitment to ordinary people, young people, elderly people and people from all walks of life. And the Church, with its missionaries, is there also in the most dangerous areas of Mexico, where human lives get lost for the sake of the drug war, where authorities and governments and international organizations are absent. This is what makes the difference, not the headlines on the papers.

  • fd

    this video from La Repubblica website shows the enthusiasm with wich the Pope was received by the huge cheering crowds in Mexico

    http://video.repubblica.it/mondo/messico-folla-in-delirio-il-papa-bacia-i-bimbi/91227?video

  • fd

    On the other hand the anti-Catholic daily Il Fatto Quotidiano has nothing at all on its website but this doesn’t surprise me anymore. It talks about the Church only to talk about asasination plots and other Dan Brown-fiction . Every time it talks about the Church it is all about the asasination plots and other Dan Brown -like fiction. When there are facts to report (e.g 1 million people welcoming the Pope in Mexico or 2 million young people in Madrid) it covers it all up.
    It always talks about the Church being in crisis, not realizing that, while ignoring all the Pope visits, this skewed newspaper has ignored millions and millions of people.

  • fd

    It’s interesting that Il Manifesto is also ignoring the visit. It’s interesting because the last time a Pope went to Cuba ( I’m talking about John Paul II of course) Il Manifesto headlined in the front page with the headline : A CUBA DIO CHE with a photomontage where the Pope John Paul prayed bowed under an image of Che Guevara. A CUBA DIO CHE can be read as A CUBA DIO C’E’ (CHE and C’E’ are pronounced the same) which means : there is God in Cuba, but with CHE (abbreviation of Che Guevara) instead of there’s (C’E').
    At the time Il Manifesto could perhaps afford to swagger. Now Il Manifesto, which denounces the Church as an istitution totally devoid of credibility, seems to be devoid of credibility with itself as it risks to have to close .
    And now that an other Catholic-hating daily Liberazione indeed has shut down because it sold so little , Il Manifesto could be next.
    So now ,instead of photomontage, it prefers not to say anything about this Pope visit to Cuba and the words he pronounced yesterday : ” Communism is out of reality”

  • Tom Esteban

    That these blasphemous Masses still go on is absolutely scandalous and evil. Yes, evil. Parishioners are told that sodomy is fine; parishioners are having their “marriages” blessed by dissenting Priests; Catholic doctrine (not just on sexuality, but on the Trinity, on Mary, on the Saints) is either denied or blasphemed; and things go on as usual week in week out with not a peep from the highest ranking Bishop in England. It’s absolutely disgusting and it needs to stop. But hey, what can be done? It’s the Traditionalists that are the “problem” right?

    Themed Masses have no place in the faith anyway. “Gay Mass” – why, there is no such thing. Every month something new comes up from this place – freely available on the web, and in fact these guys boast about it. Nothing happens… yet, time and time again we see examples of one Priest in no-where-land who offends a liberal by proclaiming Christ’s teaching in a kind-hearted manner and he’s removed from his office, has his faculties revoked and the world apologizes.

    I sincerely pray for these poor Catholics. They have such a cross to carry, and it is made harder because nobody will proclaim the truth to them. Their Priests lead them further into their sin. They continue to blaspheme, to commit sacrilege and mock Christ and it’s all given a blessing. It’s such a terrible, terrible thing. These parishioners have souls that are being destroyed.

    Please pray for our Bishops, our Priests and for these parishioners.

  • Nicolas Bellord

    This week’s Catholic Herald has an article by the Archbishop on the pastoral care of those with a homosexual inclination which relies heavily upon what Cardinal Hume said. From my reading it is entirely orthodox.

    Recently on 28th February Archbishop Nichols issued a statement which reaffirmed “the intention and purpose of this outreach” to those of a same-sex orientation. This can be read at:

    http://www.rcdow.org.uk/diocese/default.asp?library_ref=4&content_ref=3699

    However the statement ends as follows:

    “At the present time consideration is being given to the circumstances in which these Masses are celebrated to ensure that their purpose is respected and that they are not occasions for confusion or opposition concerning the positive teaching of the Church on the meaning of human sexuality or the moral imperatives that flow from that teaching, which we uphold and towards which we all strive.”

    It seems to me therefore that we might be about to see a review of the arrangements for these masses and the article in the Catholic Herald is a precursor of what is going to happen. My view is that his Grace needs to deal with the Soho Masses Pastoral Council by making it clear that they have no future role in these masses and instead setting up a proper Pastoral Council established in accordance with Canon Law with the Parish Priest as Chairman and that it should act purely in an advisory role with all members being required to assent to the teachings of the Church. The masses themselves could continue and welcome ALL but be closely controlled by the Parish Priest to ensure that there is no indorsement of or ambiguity about homosexual sexual practices.

    Perhaps we need to give a chance for something to happen but keep a close eye on the situation.

  • Mark from PA

    Tom Esteban, if you don’t like those Masses, don’t attend. People attend those Masses so they can hear the gospel proclaimed and worship God. Yes, I suppose that the people that go to the Soho Masses do have a cross to carry. The cross might be the hatred that some people have for gay people. They might feel it a cross because some people feel that they are disordered and defective beings. They might feel sad that other people think they are inferior. Some fundamentalist groups feel that it is a sin to have a homosexual orientation and that a person has to be “cured” of it to be saved. It is good that people can worship together without fear.

  • Mary

    I initially found this post to be very unsettling. What is unsettling is homosexual activists “outing” people based on nothing. Then, because the Holy Father has advocated not ordaining men with a homosexual identity, saying that he then is unworthy about being a priest. If there is anyone who has shown he should be a priest it is the Holy Father and so I am left with an understanding that the homosexuals attending Mass are not charitable and lack a complete understanding of what it is all about. We should not be upset by homosexuals having a harbor in the Church, like the SoHo Masses. We should be upset by their lack of charity and lack of belief.

    If the Holy Father has a homosexual orientation, one may actually asks oneself – why is he so serene then when others are not? Why does he not have the conflict of calling a sin, sin? The answer is in his identity as priest. His love of God is very apparent in all of his activities. The more he is hated and the more people throw “things” at him, the more convinced we should all be this is true. Meanwhile, perhaps, instead of being unsettled and angry, we should all pray that our brothers and sisters will find complete communion with us instead of dissenting on this issue. Our identity isn’t asexual, homosexual or heterosexual, it is ‘child of God’. God does demand something from us. Each of our suffering “to be made perfect” is different.

  • Ioannes

    @ Mark from PA

    To falsely accuse someone of being homosexual is defamation and actionable. Adultery isn’t a crime either, but impute it to someone without concrete proof, and you will end up in court.

  • Mark from PA

    Ioannes, being a homosexual is a state of being, adultery is an action. Saying that you think someone is a homosexual is making an observation, not an accusation. To say that someone is a heterosexual is not an insult so neither should it be considered an insult to say someone is a homosexual. It seems that you may think that calling someone a homosexual is making the assumption that someone is promiscuous. This is not true. Someone can be a homosexual and be a celibate virgin. On the other hand someone can be a promiscuous heterosexual who has casual sex with many women. What do you consider worse, to be a celibate homosexual or to be a promiscuous heterosexual?

  • Will ++Nichols tell Weldon to learn to hold his tongue after such mind bending baloney?

  • Ioannes

    @Mark

    To call someone a homosexual strongly implies that he indulges in unnatural (and immoral) practices. Those who have inclinations but do not act on them out of moral scruple usually do not advertise the fact.

    • Fred

      ‘Ioannes
      March 27,2012 at 9:03 am ·Reply
      @Mark

      To call someone a homosexual strongly implies that he indulges in unnatural (and immoral) practices. Those who have inclinations but do not act on them out of moral scruple usually do not advertise the fact.’

      But surely only if the speaker so regards ‘the practices’

  • Ioannes

    Fred, what the speaker may or may not think of the morality of such behaviour is immaterial. The Church’s teaching is clear. To falsely accuse someone of sodomy or adultery, even if the accuser thinks there is nothing wrong with either, still amounts to defamation if it adversely affects that person’s reputation; and if that person is someone whose function it is to uphold Church teaching it most certainly will do.

  • harry

    Putting the church’s view to one side; if someone is gay and cool about being gay then they’re not going to feel defamed, and most likely be a bit bemused if the church tells them they’ve been defamed. If you see what I mean. And if they’re straight, and are so ‘accused’; and again are cool about gayness, then they may smile and say I’m not gay, but no bother.

    Just to be clear, its a very academic argument in the modern world [even accepting that the church's teaching is right, timeless, unchanging, etc, etc,etc]

  • Mark from PA

    Nobody has accused the Pope of sodomy or adultery. That is the point. It is not a sin to be a gay person. People have an inborn orientation before they are ever sexually active. Some may consider it sinful to assume that a person is immoral just because he or she is gay. Many people who are gay may not be open about it for fear that people will wrongly assume that they are immoral, or a defective and disordered person. So they may quiet out of fear of hatred, prejudice and discrimination. In my opinion, it is a sin to discriminate against people because they are gay or because one thinks they are gay. Many priests have a gay orientation but most are silent about it for the reasons that I just mentioned.

    • Ioannes

      No-one is saying it is a sin to be a ‘gay person’ and the Church is quite clear that to persecute someone on account of his or her sexual orientation is indeed sinful. A deviant sexual proclivity (for example towards children, or persons of the same sex) is not in itself sinful, but is rather an ‘objective disorder’ which might lead to sin. This seems completely logical and rational to me, and takes full account of the fact that human sexuality is a complex issue. The poet Gerard Manley Hopkins vowed himself to chastity even before he became a Jesuit priest. It might be inferred from this that he felt that he might have homosexual leanings (and plenty of modern commentators have tried to find evidence of it in the poems) but no-one knows for sure, and it really doesn’t matter. Those who broadcast their sexual orientation almost invariably practise it – why else would they try and convince the rest of us that it is normal, natural and healthy when it patently and demonstrably is not?

  • Mrs Kelly

    Perhaps if Mr Paul Melanson had a wife he would not be so rude, irritable and cranky.

  • Michael Cole

    See Paul Melanson’s Blog post on Terence Weldon’s calumny which was posted today: http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com

  • Mark from PA

    Harry, you make a good point. If a gay person labeled me as gay I would be comfortable with it. However, if someone who hated gay people and thought they were less than fully human labeled me as gay then it would make me uncomfortable. It is difficult because you tend to be quiet because you don’t know who might wish to do you harm. Also people are individuals with different characteristics, likes and dislikes, so this is not a black or white issue but one with many shades of gray.

  • spesalvi23

    Opinions and grey areas are absolutely meaningless in teachings about any kind of morality.
    It is CLEARLY black and white and luckily so.
    Sure, we have all been told that we can justify anything with preferences, likes, dislikes, childhoods, inclinations, moods, heritages (endless list)…
    Jesus will love as all, as long as we have a nice, solid justification for our sinful behavior.

    The only thing we’ll have a problem justifying is self-discipline, adherence to moral codes and conformity with Catholicism.
    Very strange…
    .

    • harry

      I’d like to believe that morality is absolute Spes, but I have real doubts. I won’t give examples. But I will say that moral codes have been pretty movable over the millennia.

      • Ioannes

        When something which has been considered immoral for over three millennia, and not just by those who adhere strictly to religious teachings, is turned in the space of less than three decades into not just something morally neutral, but something to be encouraged and the public criticism of which can lead to criminal sanctions, then we are indeed living in strange times. When homosexual acts were decriminalized in 1967 it was argued that what consenting adults did in private (within reason) was their own affair, and that the existing law left homosexuals open to blackmail. These were valid arguments. No-one at the time suggested that homosexual acts were moral, and for years afterwards it was still a criminal offence to sodomize a woman, even within marriage.

      • spesalvi23

        Well, that’s the main problem isn’t it? This is what the Pope keeps repeating like a broken record:
        we have fabricated our own, new, shiny world – but we didn’t include God.
        Even when we did, we included our own, soft, nice version of God – the one without judgement and wrath.
        The God we have included is our own fabrication – mostly a rather bad replica of the God the Bible telsl us about.

        A fabricated world and a fabricated God leads to the erosion of all moral values based on Devine law – and also on natural law.

  • The moment one says “everything is relative,” that belief becomes an absolute. Relativism is self-refuting.

  • Fred

    ‘Paul Anthony Melanson
    March 28,2012 at 9:45 pm ·Reply
    The moment one says “everything is relative,”that belief becomes an absolute. Relativism is self-refuting.’

    Why is that?

    • Fred

      Sorry; badly phrased question. I’ll try again.

      Why do you feel that what Harry said:

      ‘But I will say that moral codes have been pretty movable over the millennia.’

      equates to ‘everything is relative’?

  • harry

    Leave t as Fred Nick; otherwise too confusing for everyone but you ;)

  • John Ansley

    To “Harry,” a.k.a. “Mrs. Smith,” a.k.a. “Fred”:

    You need counseling for your psychological problem.

  • harry

    I’m not Mrs Smith son.

  • Tommy Loo

    Double the Swiss guard and the bodyguards of the pope; I’m convinced the Papal Guardian Angel is working overtime to protect him ; Remember how John Paul II was protected ?

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>