GLAD I DIDN'T MAKE IT

George Offerman

We just returned from a two week trip from my homeland in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan after visiting family and friends that was most interesting and informative.  I hadn’t been to the UP in wintertime since my father’s funeral almost 21 years ago, and forgot how cold and snowy it gets up there.  Besides celebrating on one of the greatest non-events December 21^st, I had an opportunity to get together with one of my old seminary classmates who happens to be a priest there.  It was in the midst of the conversation with him that I realized I would never had made it as a priest in the UP, or really anywhere in the American church due to the way I hold the church teachings and what I stand for.

This priest (who shall go nameless) looked worn out and frustrated, and it became clear as we talked that the problem of mediocrity is a church wide epidemic.  This priest had mentioned how the people up there had no interest in real church teachings, and even when laid out clearly (and this priest is very articulate) there was great resistance and complaints levied against him for doing this.  It also seems that his Bishop, like many around the country, respond to any form of criticism unfavorably for the priest,  and this serves to undermine both the credibility of the priest as well as the church in general.  So, many of the homilies given by this priest are rather on the unchallenging side and getting into the hard hitting issues is considered taboo.

It brought me back to my seminary days over a quarter of a century ago, when I spoke up against the homosexuals and how our church was being sold out.  I ignored the advice of fellow seminarians as well as some of the faculty when told to keep my thoughts and beliefs to myself.  It also brings home the point of Biblical truths that hidden sins would be ‘shouted from the roof tops’ and no amount of staying quiet would change that fact.  Yes, I was asked to get counseling for my ‘homophobia’ by the faculty as a condition of returning, but I knew my time was up when I left in the spring of 1986.  But I had also sensed at that time that telling the truth was going to result (most likely) in my not making it to ordination.  So I saw no point in continuing on, as I knew then I would not compromise on church teachings and sell the people out due to ‘feelings’ and horrible theology.

Many who made it into the priesthood knowingly sold out their belief systems in order to get ordained.  One of the main lines of thinking back then was “Tell them what they want to hear, and then after getting ordained, do what you want”.  I have only found that those who compromised their value systems in order to get ordained are still compromising their value systems today.  Now, some of the men I know did not compromise their values, but did stay quiet then and now seem to this day to be suffering in silence.  My fears for myself always had been if I could justify ‘playing the game’ to get ordained, how could I then come out of my shell and stand for the truth?  I didn’t see a way out, other than leaving the seminary and following what I believed outside of ordained ministry.  It turns out it was one of the best decisions I ever made in my life.

I’ve been blessed with a good family, children and a good career.  I am able to live the faith unencumbered by public criticism and can be as involved to whatever level in the pro-life movement and participate in civil disobedience.  I can write the truth and not have to worry about being censured, ‘suspended’ or sent to a monastery to’ rethink and contemplate my life’ by a bishop that doesn’t have the integrity or grit to stand up for the church or to the whiners and wimps who seem to be calling the shots.  And I don’t have to be beholden to the godless IRS and cursed 501 c 3 status and can call out by name those who are advocating evil and trying to destroy everything that is good and holy in our society.

I believe I am doing exactly as God called me to do, and that is to minister to my fellow man to the best of my ability and in the truth.  I am doing way more in a lay status than what I ever could have accomplished in the church as it currently is.  I am way freer than my former classmates, who as priests, are beholden to men and parishioners that believe they have a better theological background than the priests do.  And I am free to teach the faith, unencumbered by man-made shackles, and can debate with anyone at any level without worrying about losing my livelihood.  I never thought I could be a better priest outside of the priesthood, but it seems like it’s the case.  What a sad commentary.  Glad I didn’t make it.   

'RIGHTS' DOESN'T MEAN RIGHT

George Offerman

This could be considered a ‘part 2’ of the evening with Dr. Alan Keyes. Dr. Keyes went out of his way to expand on this point, and emphasized how the slight variation of the word ‘right’ can change the whole meaning of what is meant by the use of the word. Dr. Keyes pointed out, correctly, that the root of the word rights is right and for one to have their ‘rights’ affirmed, the rights should also be right, as in right from wrong. When sin is promoted as a ‘right’ it breeds confusion, anger and dissention within society. And when this occurs, repression must take place, and unfortunately it is the ‘rights’ pushing crowd that is winning the day and as such, those that know between right and wrong are persecuted for their beliefs.

The areas that emphasize the idea of rights that are clearly sinful and evil are legalized child killing and the homosexual marriage movement. Despite the fact both groups instigating these movements will use the term ‘rights’, they will deny the root word ‘right’, and insist on making a wrong an issue of ‘rights’. When the word ‘rights’ is used, it conveys the idea that one is entitled or can demand that particular actions or beliefs become legalized, and that another does not have the ‘right’ to stop them from achieving or participating in their desired behavior or activity. And too many in this country have come to seem many of these issues, once given legal status, as also given moral status of being correct and anyone who disagrees or fights against this activity is seen as bigoted.

The idea of rights as written in our Constitution refer to rights that are inalienable, and given by God. These rights as listed in the Constitution also happen to be ‘right’ in the moral sense that they are intrinsically good, and result in the betterment of the individual as well as the community, and ultimately the nation when followed. When immoral or Godless activities are elevated to the status of ‘rights’, trouble, discord and division ensues. We are seeing this now in our society, as small minorities of people have utilized the court system to force the majority into accepting their immoral ways and giving little recourse in which to change this position.

There were never huge protests by a majority to instill either legalized child killing or homosexual marriage upon the masses. It was done through back room deals, and sneaking it through the court systems. The majority of Americans find both practices to be repulsive, but have too much fear of being labeled by either of these groups to stand up to them. These groups, along with the MSM and complicit Church, make it look like it is the majority and that only unenlightened individuals would be opposed to this new way of thinking. With this charade pushed as reality, many individuals who may have some intestinal fortitude to stand up if they believed they had the numbers, will back down, and evil will progress because good men do nothing.

We are at a point in our nation’s history in which action on these issues is necessary, and there needs to be a vast amount of urgency to the actions. Christianity not only validates ‘rights’, but also is ‘right’ in its precepts and teachings. We need to have those willing to lead and we need to support them in their leadership roles and not sell them out, as has been the case over the past few decades. It is our duty and obligation to present the truth as our Lord Jesus taught, and let us not be timid or fearful in this mission to spread the Gospel to a needy world. If we have truth on our side, we have nothing to fear, and need to be the light that we know Christianity gives us. Let’s get out there.

NEUTRALITY AT EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY?

George Offerman

In a ruling that hit too close to home for me personally, a graduate student, Julea Ward, who was enrolled in the school counseling program was expelled due to her stance that homosexuality is morally wrong. The ruling cited the supposed facts that Ms. Ward had violated EMU school policy as well as American Counseling Association (ACA) code of ethics. The university had given Ms Ward the opportunity to continue on in the program if she agreed to a remediation program, and cease and desist in her belief systems pertaining to homosexuality, and ‘imposing’ her views onto her clients. In this ruling EMU has attempted to sell their position as being neutral, and therefore correct, while attempting to sell their point that they welcome ‘individuals from diverse background into our community”.

Interestingly enough, EMU along with most in the mental health community and the larger society in general are either not aware, or are not willing to admit that homosexuality was seen as a mental disorder as late as 1973. (This year is famous for another horrible decision). The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders second edition (DSM II) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder, and reclassified it as Sexual Orientation disorder. The subsequent DSM III further removed the category and again reclassified this as “ego dystonic homosexuality” which puts it into a category describing only those who are ‘disturbed’ by their orientation. In fact, there is a strong effort to utilize the DSM IV, that came out in 1994, to classify homophobia as a mental disorder, thus completing the 180 degree turn by the homosexual activists in scrubbing their ‘way of life’ from any treatment criteria, and vilifying anyone who disagrees with them as ‘mentally ill’.

The DSM series, otherwise known as the ‘psychiatrists’ bible’ is the standard in which mental health is diagnosed and treated. No one would argue that the DSM has changed over the decades and that there are many instances in which the diagnostic criteria has been altered due to medical, societal, as well as political pressures to change them. There definitely is no question, that if one researches this issue, there was tremendous pressure put on the American Psychiatric Association to change the status of homosexuality from a disorder to a more normal behavior, to a protected behavior over the years. The current DSM V is going through final revisions, and will most likely move diagnostic criteria even further away from a mental disorder, and may even begin to target those who oppose it with their own newly minted disorder.

The idea that therapists and counselors cannot and should not verbalize limits or boundaries to any client’s behavior is the height of insanity. What would the EMU counseling center recommend a counselor to do, if for instance, a client came in and stated “I hate all ‘fags’ and I wish they would all die” I don’t believe for a minute that limits wouldn’t be set, or possibly, that client would be ‘fired’ by the therapist or transferred to another provider. If the school wants to truly be ‘Neutral’ in its teaching and training of counselors, it should teach that it is OK for married people to carry on affairs with no guilt or depression, sociopaths to continue on in their sadistical and contorted ways, drug addicts and alcoholics should be allowed into sessions high or drunk without kicking them out, wife beaters, child molesters or other miscreants cannot be corrected in their behaviors. After all, isn’t it their ‘choice’ and the ‘code of ethics’ states we providers are supposed to meet the clients ‘where they are’ and not ‘judge’ them? We are not, and should not be ‘neutral’ on most of these issues, and have an obligation to society to have norms that need to be respected.

The articles I have read simply stated that Ms. Ward sees homosexuality as immoral. It did not mention, or allude to her preaching or attempting to convert clients while in session. There was no allegation of complaints lodged against her by clients that felt ‘offended’ by her statements or behaviors. The school alluded to Ms. Ward needing to change her beliefs about homosexuality, not about her behavior while delivering mental heath services. If this is the case, then the school outright lied about ‘welcoming individuals from diverse backgrounds into the community.’

It is insanity to claim to be open academically, and claim to teach and train students to be counselors, and then tie their hands with unreasonable and prejudicial precepts. There are limits to people’s unacceptable behaviors, and they need to be called on them. Unfortunately in this day and age, what is considered to be a mental disorder is too often what is politically correct, and what used to be considered an illness is now a protected status. EMU is doing no favors by singling out a student based upon her Christian views, as it sets up a true monopoly on thoughts and beliefs. Doesn’t EMU’s behavior meet some criteria in the DSM?

NOTRE DAME DOES IT AGAIN

George Offerman

Notre Dame just cannot seem to get it right. The open rebellion and scandals keep on rolling out of Our Lady’s University, to the shame and chagrin of the faithful. Just when you thought it was safe to bring out the Rosary beads, the University, in its ever infinite “Catholic” wisdom, decides to sponsor and hold a “Stand against hate week” that caters to the homosexual crowd. Here is a partial listing of events to be held, and a link to a petition by John Ritchie at the TFP Student Action site:

This is what's planned at Our Lady's university this week:

Pro-homosexual screening of "The Laramie Project"
Lecture on campus: "Homosexuality Under the Dome"
The hosting of a "Day of Silence" on April 16

Important note: The "Day of Silence" is a pro-homosexual propaganda tool designed by GLSEN (G a y, L esbian and Straight Education Network) to persuade school children and college students to accept homosexuality.

For your information, GLSEN:

* Promotes explicit homosexual reading material for teens
* Favors same-s e x prom dates
* Organizes pro-homosexual clubs in schools


http://www.tfpstudentaction.net/campaigns/index.php?option=com_chronocontact&chronoformname=protest_1010&utm_source=MailingList&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=SAE1047+-+Notre+Dame+%22Stand+Against+Hate+Week%22


As much as this is incredible, it unfortunately is believable, given the recent track record of events and positions held by the current President and board of Notre Dame. It seems the only hate the University is willing to show is hatred towards the Catholic Church, its traditions and faith. For these theophobics, it is any mention of God and real faith that scares them, and they must hide behind some fake ideal of social justice to push this agenda which is very anti God and very anti Catholic. Evidently, it doesn’t matter when the name of the game is to please the liberals and get along with everyone, over the sanctity of the faith.

No one is advocating hate, but when the rebellious wing of the church wants to dictate the terms of the discussion, and the traditional side of the church stays silent, confusion is born, and crisis of faith then occurs. These self righteous weirdoes believe any disagreement with them is hate speech, yet it is they who engage in the most outrageous terms and names and try to convey that they speak for God and righteousness. The problem they seem to not get is, God does not bless sin, and has been extremely clear that the shedding of innocent blood (legalized child killing) along with homosexuality are about the gravest of all the sins, and Notre Dame now has openly promoted both of them.

One cannot claim to be speaking FOR God when what they are saying goes AGAINST what God has made clear is serious sin. In effect, those in support of such policies are really saying love is hate, and hate is love. It is love to correct those in error, and it is hate to deliberately steer someone on a path of destruction. And there can be no question that deliberately rebelling against Church teachings is an act of hate, as it leads to destruction. The spirit of rebellion has never brought about the fruits of peace, joy, serenity and unity, and what Notre Dame is proposing will result in none of these. Again, confusion reigns at Our Lady’s University, and it is one more scandal for the church, and proof that by their silence, the American Bishops are unplugged from their true source of power.


From the R U Kidding Korner…

Heard yesterday on the radio, Senator Chuck Schumer angered over an airlines proposed charging for carry on baggage “How dare they do that? Every time we turn around, they are adding fees. There needs to be legislation to stop that”. Really? Hey Chuck, have you looked at all the federal taxes, Homeland security fees, added fuel taxes that are add on’s to all airline ticket prices? Where do we go to get YOU to stop raising our taxes at every turn?


The government hates competition…

Some very creative accountants, taking the lead from the demovamps status of the undead, decided to file tax returns on those playing harps in the sky, and got busted. It seems they were able to bilk $95 MILLION since 2001, and are now looking at hard time behind bars. It seems the government is very serious in cracking down on those wannabe thieves, as the government is the biggest and the best at thievery, and hates competition. Now, the government ought to show the same concern, and go after the JP Morgan’s and Goldman Sachs who just walked away with $2.1 TRILLION of the taxpayer’s money in the past 2 years. Yeah, right. Cool picture of the undead on this link:


http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Tax-Returns-of-the-Living-Dead-90266732.html

SELLING OUT IS NO SOLUTION

George Offerman

*** Warning to the reader***

This posting deals with the subject of homosexuality in the seminary, and is based upon my personal experiences and opinions. It deals with a subject that I have stayed silent on for too long, and may offend those who are sensitive, or who simply may not believe me. If this is the case, you should not proceed on. Nonetheless, I believe people have a right to know these things and to try to understand the effect it had and has on those who went through similar experiences.

****

The scandals to hit the Catholic Church are not going away any time soon, and in fact, will only continue to fester and increase until they are properly dealt with. These problems have taken decades to come to fruition, and are not going to disappear with a few “I’m sorry’s” and some token gestures. This is really gut check time, and time to make bold statements and to get rid of the problem people now.

Despite the fact that these scandals have been known and publicized for the past 15 years, it is still a shock to most people’s sensibilities when more stories and allegations emerge. One would have to wonder if there are lessons learned on any level, as we now are seeing the once bustling and alive Church in Ireland, coming to a near standstill. The fruits of this sin or plague, if you will, are truly ripening and seemingly multiplying. I saw a headline on Spirit Daily yesterday that read “Vatican: Abuse in Church less than in society. And is this supposed to be a comfort? Sounds like a sell out to me.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/204751-Unholy-Lies-Vatican-says-number-of-sex-abuse-cases-in-church-is-small


The homosexual culture was very ingrained into Seminary life when I attended in the early to mid 80’s. By the time I reached Theological College in Washington, D.C. (nicked named Theological Closet, Pathological College, Pink palace) I had been fairly indoctrinated to believe that homosexuality was quite ‘normal’ in the Seminary, and found out to my chagrin, that it was actually a protected status at this particular Seminary. Speaking out against it labeled one ‘homophobic’ very rapidly, and brought on a considerable amount of isolation from much of the faculty, and this large subgroup. (It seems proportionally the numbers of homosexuals in the seminary at that time would have dwarfed those found in the general public)

There were three classifications that we had for the men at this particular Seminary, those that were straight, the questionables, and those who were open about their homosexuality. It is of my opinion and that of the other straight men that were there, that we were outnumbered by the homosexual and questionable groups, and that the majority of the straight men ended up leaving prior to ordination. Now, what I cannot comment on were the numbers that were sexually acting out, but again, it was considerable, given the number of times some of the straight men reported being hit on (This included me as well).

The problem was that reporting this behavior GOT US INTO TROUBLE, and kept most of the straight men from saying anything. There was a lot of personal anguish in some of these men, and I am aware of at least one individual that had contemplated suicide during my year at Theological College. It was the comfort level of this subculture that was most disturbing to me, and the fact that the majority of the faculty, either condoned it or at least gave implicit permission due to their silence on the matter. Those of us that trusted each other in the straight group, understood quite clearly who was running the show and we spent much time with each other discussing this, and wondering what kind of faith do we have, if this ‘crap’ is promoted.

It dawned on a lot of us that many of the men, and faculty, saw the priesthood as a club to join, and the faith we were supposed to espouse seemed to be more of an annoyance than the centerpiece of why we were there. (That is why when people ask me if it was difficult to leave, I tell them it was one of the easiest decisions I have ever made… the most heartbreaking as well). I believed I would be serving the Lord in the highest capacity and saw Seminary as akin to “Sitting at the feet of the Apostles” and absorbing as much knowledge and wisdom as humanly possible. Theological College could not have been any further from this, and the culture and impact it had on my faith is still with me to this day. What a betrayal, and the Church wants to minimize this and protect the perpetrators.

It is difficult to discuss this with others who have not gone through this experience, as it seems so surreal at times, and like a nightmare that would not end at other times. It took years before I would take any active role in the Church and to this day it is still very minimal. However, I believe I have a much stronger Faith, and would love to have the opportunity to debate those faculty members and Seminarians who wanted to justify the homosexual lifestyle and entrance into ordained ministry back then. I know I will no longer blindly follow the precepts of any Bishop or Cardinal, if they dismiss or minimize the teaching of this Church, and will have no difficulty in letting them know this either through written word, spoken word or both. It is our Church too.

It has been only recently, that I have encouraged anyone to consider the priesthood or religious life. I have personally witnessed lives destroyed and faith lost due to the weak faith of those given the responsibility to safeguard and teach the faith as it should be taught. I have struggled with this question for nearly two decades; whether to support those wanting to go into ministry, or try to dissuade them knowing the filth and corruption that had been in place for so long. It seems lately, that some of the Seminaries have been cleaned up, and I have some hopes that good men are going back in and making it, due to more stringent formation, and activities now required by many of the Seminaries that challenge those to stand up for the Faith. I only wish it had been that way when I was in.

So far, I have given only general terms and conditions, and have not been specific and named anyone. I don’t know if it will ever get to that point that I would, but it sickens me to no extent that after all the warnings, the book “Goodbye, Good Men” the numerous scandals in many countries, that the Church seems to have learned nothing. The rot started in the Seminary, once it was infiltrated by the secularists and the homosexuals, and it passed on from there. No one wants to point out these two groups, due to the inconvenience and political incorrectness of it, but I am sick of these groups being the “sacred cows” and having this protected status. Until the church confronts, and throws out these two groups, it has sold out to them, and in essence, sacrificed the children, the good men and others on the altar of convenience and comfort.

THREE CHEERS FOR BISHOP SAMPLE

George Offerman

I once lived in the Diocese of Marquette, and was in Seminary for 4 years studying to be a priest for the diocese. I love the people and the church in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and am very happy to see there is a strong presence in the presbytery that is more in line with the first Bishop of the diocese, Blessed Bishop Baraga. Kudos’ to you Bishop Sample for the stand you took against this potential atrocity. We need more bishops like you to stand up for the Faith and send a message to those who believe our Faith is relative and do not have to be obeyed as taught by the magisterium .

Here is the following statement put out by the Bishop’s office in response to Bishop Gumbleton’s schedule appearance in the Diocese of Marquette:

Statement of Bishop Alexander K. Sample In Response to Bishop Thomas Gumbleton’s Public Appearance in the Diocese of Marquette 10/9/2009

“I attempted to handle this matter in a private, respectful and fraternal manner with Bishop Gumbleton. It is unfortunate that what should have remained a private matter between two bishops of the Catholic Church has been made available for public consumption.

I want to first of all say that my decision to ask Bishop Gumbleton not to come to Marquette had absolutely nothing to do with the group who invited him to speak, Marquette Citizens for Peace and Justice, nor with the topic of his publicized speech, since the Church is a strong advocate of peace and justice. I am sorry for the negative impact this has had on those planning this event.

There is a common courtesy usually observed between bishops whereby when one bishop wishes to enter into another bishop’s diocese to minister or make a public speech or appearance, he informs the local bishop ahead of time and seeks his approval. Only on October 9 did I receive any communication from Bishop Gumbleton, after this situation had already become public.

As the Bishop of the Diocese of Marquette, I am the chief shepherd and teacher of the Catholic faithful of the Upper Peninsula entrusted to my pastoral care. As such I am charged with the grave responsibility to keep clearly before my people the teachings of the Catholic Church on matters of faith and morals. Given Bishop Gumbleton’s very public position on certain important matters of Catholic teaching, specifically with regard to homosexuality and the ordination of women to the priesthood, it was my judgment that his presence in Marquette would not be helpful to me in fulfilling my responsibility.

I realize that these were not the topics upon which Bishop Gumbleton was planning to speak. However, I was concerned about his well-known and public stature and position on these issues and my inability to keep these matters from coming up in discussion. In order that no one becomes confused, everyone under my pastoral care must receive clear teaching on these important doctrines.

I offer my prayers for Bishop Gumbleton and for all those who have been negatively affected by this unfortunate situation.”

-End-