There Is No Place In The Church For The Likes Of Mons. Burrill.

“Do you want to see my app”?

I have written yesterday about the fall (as a man of power; not as a priest!) of Monsignor Jeffrey Burrill. I have, also, written about the appalling “casual” way in which the US Bishops seem to treat the problem of homosexuality. The idea that transpires is that the guy had to fall not because of his perversion, but because he was “not chaste”. This is making an equivalence between sins that go with nature and sins that go against it, whereby every 5 years old should know that the second category is a different matter altogether.

And it’ snot only the Bishops, either! This article quotes at length a “catholic” scholar, Dr Janet E Smith, who is retired (and therefore not the youngest) and, at her age, should really know better.

Obviously wary of alarming the “gay gods”, Ms Smith’s solution is this one:

“Shouldn’t the bishops welcome this data? Msgr. Burill has a bishop who is his spiritual father. Msgr. Burill’s soul is in mortal danger. His father should want to know what he is doing and help him stop and recommit himself to a chaste life,” she concluded. “For let’s not forget, this is all about souls.”

Heavens! The bishop should not (I repeat: not) defrock this damn pervert. He should “help” him “stop” and “recommit himself” to a “chaste life”.

There is no idea of disciplining the man; kicking him out; getting rid of him. No, he should be “helped”. Helped to what? To remain a homosexual priest! But, let’s try to be “chaste”, hey?

If this is the mentality, I just understood how paedophile priests could roam the sacristies for decades! “Dear Father Paedo, as your Bishop it is my duty to take care of your immortal soul; please stop what you are doing and recommit yourself to a chaste life, OK?”

Let us make some things clear here:

There can be no real chastity in a homosexual, because there can be no purity in a pervert.

If a homosexual priest does not engage in sodomy, this does not make him suitable for the priesthood.

Moreover, we have seen countless times that homosexuality is such a strong perversion, such an all-invasive diabolical rot, that the idea of “Father Fag the chaste” is nothing more than a PC fantasy.

The rot is not only in the priests and bishops. The rot is in these so-called “scholars” who perpetuate this PC tale of homosexuality as just one way of being, and thinking that some priests are straight, some priest are “gay”, all need to be chaste, end of story.

Fantastic. You can now send your children to Mass to Father Elton, who will consecrate the host in a somewhat shrill voice, will give you a homily about the evil of being “judgmental” and will, no doubt, want to stay near your children.

Happy now?

We need to fight for our sensus catholicus, and tell everybody that we expect from them that they defend it instead of undermining it. The likes of Mons Burrill must be defrocked, all of them. There is nothing less that can be done if we want to protect the Church from these people.

Let Mons Burrill care for his soul after having been defrocked. The faithful don’t own him a robe (which, I am sure, he does not wear) or a living.

Posted on July 22, 2021, in Bad Shepherds, Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Dissent, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 5 Comments.

  1. Monsignor Burrill’s bishop is Bishop Callahan─ the one that is persecuting Fr. Altman. Measures should be taken against him for harrassing a solid priest & ignoring a homosexual predator. It also raises questions about his own sexuality. More journalistic investigation needed on this one.

  2. Very tragic. We speak of “defrocking”. Isn’t a man a priest for life? Is that really the only solution? You certainly cannot send these men to a diocesan reform center because they would simply hook up there. In days of yore there might have been a monastery where a predatory priest might have lived out his life among holy monks, no? What would St Peter Damian do? Too, in days of yore society would not be so tolerant of perversion. I’m sure recalcitrant sodomites were hung as a menace to the common good. The problem seems so huge in our 21st century Church.

  3. How many pervert priests are being supported by the laity? Why should they enjoy a retirement, health insurance, transportation, etc? (Two million dollars/year for Wuerl??! He knows something.) Yet a priest such as Fr. Altman and the others who speak out are left without a cent. I haven’t given to any diocese for many years, and I certainly won’t now.

  1. Pingback: 23 July 2021 – Dark Brightness

  2. Pingback: Canon212 Update: ‘Political Pause’ Or A Street Fight? – The Stumbling Block

Leave a reply. Please be concise and to the point.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: