Popular Priest disinvited from Catholic Seminary


HIlarious, a prime example of Eliteism , and Ignornace are living in " Catholic Seminaries " and in turn screwing up potential new priests, and then their is this big oh gee i wonder why there is such a decline in numbers for the priesthood.

Had this been a book on why Trump is evil, or a book promoting peace between Islamic terrorists and the Church, or why speaking in tongues is so much fun, chances are this " catholic seminary " would have thrown this guy a tinker tape parade.

Also notice how a " churchmilitant website " went out of their way to bash this priest. Way to go Church militants. I am sure all the negative critism is really going in the right direction in spreading peace.

and then this quote

“My provincial asked me not to talk about my sexuality, and I’m okay with that,” said Martin, referring to his religious superior in the Jesuit religious order.

Awesome, good for him if he is comfortable being railroaded by his own religious order and being told to keep silent on his sexuality, because more than likely he is homosexual. So exactly how is silencing a priest about his homosexualty helping the homosexual community understand the faith any better. If anything this priest deserves some kind of award for being loyal to a back stabbing religious order. I don’t have a problem with homosexual priests, I do have a problem with homosexual priests not being honest about their sexual orientation or being silenced for it.

An fyi, you dont ask someone to not talk about their sexuality if the person is heterosexual, all this religious order did by silencing this priest is send up a giant flag of being homophobic. An the Church will be more than happy to sweep this under the rug and say ho hum.


Backlash over Martin’s LGBT book prompts speech cancellations

I would have expected more from CUA. I hope that their statement that the University leadership did not approve, and this is the doing of the head of the seminary, is actually true.


If this is the priest I am thinking of I believe he has said some VERY contradictory things about sexuality and where the Catholic Church stands on this issue. We have our Church teachings for a reason. We have the Catechism of the Catholic Church and it is very easy to understand the teaching and why and how Catholics should be on this issue. This priest seems to be going “his own way” and wants the Church’s “blessing/support” to do so. If he wants to speak on this subject as a priest in the Roman Catholic Church he should do so as the Church wants him to. Now if he is speaking for himself as a man and giving his own opinion then say that and make sure that is known when he is speaking on the subject of sexuality. I don’t have all of the information but I will definitely pray for him.


While he pinky promised that he wasn’t going to speak about sexuality, he has said some rather concerning things that may be against doctrine as another poster has suggested. One thing of major concern is that he does not recommend abstinence for those in the LGBT community.

It is very reasonable, therefore, to be concerned with having a person of some clout with such beliefs as a speaker, even if they promise not to speak of this when they are there.


Being able to hear a variety of theological ideas and discuss them is essential to being a priest. If they can’t listen to what he actually has to say and then respond in a clear and calm manner then they’re going to have grave difficulty as priests dealing with a variety of people and other clergy. Echo chambers help no one.


We probably wouldn’t specifically ask someone not to bring up their sexuality if their sexuality were in line with what the Church expects of its clergy. The norm doesn’t raise any flags, and it wouldn’t be controversial to bring up, depending on the content.

As a faithful Catholic discerning the priesthood, I seriously doubt that hearing of a seminary wishing to distance itself from a controversial figure will have any impact on a faithful Catholic discerning his vocation’s decision to enter (or not) seminary.


Is it really wise to invite someone who has publicly spoken out against a teaching of the church? I think the administrators made a wise decision. It is one thing to never invite descent for the sake of conversation, but it is another to change plans when the invitation would imply complacency with someone who is in grave error.


Fr. Martin does not suggest he is being railroaded - only you do that. A man (say, a priest) experiences sexual attractions to women. Do you anticipate he would have cause to speak about that? From the pulpit? With the ladies auxiliary, or similar? Personally, I’ve never heard a priest speak about his sexuality.

A Priest experiences sexual attractions to other men. Do you anticipate he would have cause to speak publically about that - other than perhaps with a confidante (one offering spiritual guidance, or similar)?

I can understand you might feel it could be a good thing for a Priest who experiences sexual attractions to other men (and I’ve no idea whether Fr. Martin is such a person) to use himself as a walking “case study” or something similar, but it by no means follows that he should do so.


There’s always going to be people and clergy who either are in error or are expressing their thoughts in a controversial manner but when fleshed out are not error. If a priest simply stomps his feet and walks away from all such encounters then he’s in for a very long priesthood…


However, this is not a priest refusing to listen to those who are in error. This is about administrators who have chosen not to subject students to potentially dangerous teachings and to distance themselves from a speaker who has spoken out against the church?

Had they invited him in a less official capacity than speaking, it would be different. Speaking to students is a privilege, and those who teach students are wise not to subject them to something that carries potential danger to their formation.


This is about administrators who have chosen not to subject students to potentially dangerous teachings and to distance themselves from a speaker who has spoken out against the church?

So how good of an education are they giving these guys if they can’t think critically about what’s he’s saying? Being a priest is a lot more than knowing the right answers, its about being able to “show your work.” And let’s not pretend this is some far flung left winger coming in to speak. He’s controversial on a few issues but probably has some good challenging things to say on other topics. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


A good education doesn’t mean inviting those with opposing viewpoints, rather discussing them. What he said, that chastity in the LGBT life is unnecessary. This is not a “far-flung” statement.

Given that priests take vows directly related to chastity, and the church has had trouble with chastity issues in the priesthood, it sets up a very bad appearance. That’s an important part of it. It makes the seminary appear to be complacent with his statements. That’s not ok.


From Fr Martin’s Provincial Superior…


I guess the Catholic University had gone the way of most higher places of learning, placing political correctness over educating young adults to think for themselves and grow in knowledge.

Ironic that this is the same thing conservatives in America have accused secular institutions of doing for decades. I have not dog in this, but I recognize hypocrisy when I see it. It’s when that Golden Rule thing gets ignored.

Oh, and the accusation that this priest is a homosexualist, an alternate form of homosexual, is absolutely contrary to the teaching of the Church on Truth. Another irony.


There is no indication that Fr. Martin was pulled because the seminary disagreed with his views on LGBT issues. The rector would have already been aware of them. He was likely pulled for security reasons.


Once again, if a single or handful of speakers is going to lead these guys into blatant heresy then the seminary is either choosing its candidates poorly or providing a poor education. Once out of seminary they’ll be bombard with clergy and individuals who are in error on a few things and those people are gonna talk circles around them if they’ve never been forced to think critically. They’ll become lonely, bitter and frustrated and that’s not good for the Church.


What? No. There are MANY ways to teach different ways of thinking without inviting someone controversial to speak.

Part of this is image, just like near occasion of sin. With the priest making statements that are against church teaching it can appear as if they condone those statements.

The priest, admiralty, does bring much to the table, so what would be more appropriate is to invite him in a non-official capacity–for instance as a guest during a class that’s being lead by a professor who is allowed to guide the conversations. Speaking carries a different connotation.


The priest, admiralty, does bring much to the table, so what would be more appropriate is to invite him in a non-official capacity–for instance as a guest during a class that’s being lead by a professor who is allowed to guide the conversations. Speaking carries a different connotation.

I’ve been to seminary. Being a guest speaker is not some solemn occasion. There are guest speakers all the time.


It really depends…it can be an honor to be invited to speak at a university–any university–these are not things that are part of a seminary alone.


Unless I read the story wrong he was invited to speak at Theological College which is a seminary located at Catholic University.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.