Don’t Cry For Father Held

Not really needed

I have a very uneasy feeling about what is happening in Michigan, where a priest resigned after parishioners’ protests, which again followed father’s statement that being homo is a no-no, which again followed the same father inviting the same homo to read a children book to children, or such like thing, because some things never change.

Father Held was gravely at fault for inviting the little fag. There is simply no excuse. I don’t even care if the invitation has been proposed or sent out by someone else. He is responsible, the Buck stops at him.

When the error was discovered, Father Held gave a rather clear, and not even thundering, explanation of the obvious, and all hell broke loose. The fag gave an interview to a queer “ministry” site, the faggotry organised itself, the protests started. The local parishioners did little to nothing to protect Father, probably because they don’t like him in the first place. Reflect, on this, that the first outcry came from Catholic parishioners, not the fake catholic ones. If my priest invited a homo to read to children, be assured I would not be on the barricades for him, though I would certainly react to the homo protests.

What does, then, Father Held do? He resigns. This is his second grave, unenforced error.

Now seeing this from the outside, what do I notice? I notice that inviting a homo to read to children is a typical faggot behaviour, and resigning one’s position because the homos are all in a flutter is another typical faggot behaviour. Is, then, Father Held a homosexual? Perhaps, perhaps not. But of one thing there can be no doubt: his unmanly behaviour is unworthy of a priest. In fact, it is so weak, that you will forgive me for thinking that perhaps, just perhaps, some sort of Kompromat was unearthed about him. Again, a real priest endowed with real genitals (which, remember, is a required physical characteristic of a priest) would have behaved in exactly the opposite way as this one.

I can assure you that I have been under massive, massive pressure in my life, in various situations, and I have never moved an inch, much less apologised, much less resigned. I can, therefore, say to you with a serene conscience that a hypothetical Father Mundabor would 1. Never have invited the pervoreader, 2. Have preached a rather assertive form of Catholicism from the pulpit, 3. Never, ever, have resigned following any faggoprotest, and 4. have doubled down on Catholicism in a situation of faggoprotest, come what may. This, because Father Mundabor would know that being a priest means being able to endure all sorts of persecution, up to and including torture and death, which makes the protest of some group of faggoenablers with the rainbow flag near their name look like a walk in the park on a sunny Saturday morning.

I really, really don’t like this sort of whiny quitters, as Father Held (whom I already consider suspicious because of the first, unenforced mistake) has certainly proved to be. I expect far, far more from a priest. In fact, Father Held’s easy quitting tells me how weak his homilies must have been. Again, I can tell you that in Father Mundabor’s parish there would be no scarcity of parishioners vocally and strongly defending him, because Father Mundabor would have fostered a healthy Catholic thinking in his parish.

A priest must be ready to die at one’s moment notice, more so than the garden variety parishioner. He has given his life to Christ. He can’t invite homos around and then quit with some lame excuse at the first sign of trouble.

Whatever he his, Father Held is not a real man.

I will not cry for him.