Friday, October 30, 2020

Marriage or Not Marriage for Catholic Priests and Gays? Here Is the Question the Pope Can Answer about Gays, But Not About Priests

 

Marriage or Not Marriage for Catholic Priests and Gays? Here Is the Question the Pope Can Answer about Gays, But Not About Priests

By Julio Severo

The Catholic Church is facing a major challenge as Pope Francis has suggested approval for homosexual civil unions. The United Nations, under the leadership of left-wing Catholic Antonio Guterres, praised the pope’s stance on such unions.



Yet, while the Catholic Church under Francis is advancing to make easy a kind of gay “marriage” there is no sign to make easy marriage for priests, bishops, cardinals and popes.

It is so wrong to approve marriage to gays as it is wrong to forbid Christian male leaders to marry women.

The Catholic Church has committed a very big sin against God by forbidding marriage for their priests, bishops, cardinals and popes. They should marry, because this is God’s first commandment to man.

The Apostle Paul warned us:

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage…” (1 Timothy 4:1-3 ESV)

So Paul said that one of the signs of people departing from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons is exactly by forbidding marriage. The Catholic ban on marriage for its leaders perfectly fits this.

It is abnormal for a large number of men to remain single solely by religious votes. God never commanded such extreme sacrifice. Pagan religions do it, with disastrous consequences — the same consequences we see in the Catholic Church.

It is normal, and commanded by God, for men to marry to women. In a few cases, some will not marry. But this is very, very rare and should never be imposed as a Christian doctrine.

To forbid marriage draws “naturally” men to unnatural problems. So when a Christian church demands abnormal things from men, what should it expect? Normalcy?

The traditional Catholic ban on gay “marriage” is approved by the Bible. In contrast, the traditional Catholic ban on marriage for priests, bishops, cardinals and popes is not approved by the Bible — unless they are homosexuals.

 The Apostle Paul, who by Catholic standards would be a pope or cardinal, said:

“Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5 ESV)

He could also say today to the Catholic Church:

“Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other priests, bishops, cardinals and popes?”

Yes, every Christian leader has the right to have a believing wife.

If a priest, a bishop, a cardinal and even the pope made a vow against marriage but later their sexual urges began to manifest, there is no sin in marrying. They can marry and stay in their religious posts, just as Paul said.

If a priest made a vow not to marry, but later he wants to marry a woman, his marriage should be embraced and celebrated as a pro-family decision, and efforts to expel him from his post should be seen as an anti-family attack. There should be no ban for him to be promoted to bishop, cardinal and pope.

But if he is a homosexual, he should leave any Christian post he occupies.

The Catholic Church has some good stances on marriage. What better way to demonstrate the Catholic stance in defense of family than letting their priests, bishops, cardinals and popes marry women?

If marriage is a blessing, it is a curse to forbid it. In fact, the Bible has expressly warned Christians against forbidding marriage.

If gay “marriage” is a curse, it is a curse to approve it.

Marriage for gays is a curse and should be forbidden by all laws.

The Catholic Church should repeal its unbiblical ban on marriage for priests, bishops, cardinals and popes and should keep its ban on homosexual “marriage.”

Marriage for priests would be a blessing. It would be a curse only if Steve Bannon is right. He said that 90 percent of priests and cardinals in the Vatican are homosexuals. So if priests, bishops and cardinals are mostly gay, what kind of marriage will they choose?

If they are really men, they should not fear marriage to women.

If Apostle Paul were alive today, he would say that one of the signs of people departing from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons is exactly by forbidding men to marry woman and allowing men to marry men.

Portuguese version of this article: Casamento ou não casamento para padres católicos e gays? Essa é a pergunta que o papa sabe como responder sobre gays, mas não sobre padres

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

United Nations praises the Pope for backing same-sex unions: secretary-general of the U.N. welcomes Francis’s remarks that homosexuals “have a right to a family” in move which has enraged conservative Catholics

Francis became 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions, saying: “Homosexuals are children of God and have the right to be in a family”

Pope Compares Politicians Opposed to Gays, Jews To Hitler

In his effort to produce a film exposing homosexuality in the Vatican to make Pope Francis renounce, Steve Bannon caused backlash from conservative Catholic leaders and was exposed for his own involvement with two notorious pedophiles

The Hijacking of Homosexuality by the Right, a Challenge for Christians

Spotlight: Exposing Pedophilia Scandals and Hiding Homosexual Scandals in the Catholic Church

Luiz Mott saves Catholic Church from suffering mega pedophilia scandal 

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Censorship and termination of my account, the Facebook answer to my Christian conservatism

 

Censorship and termination of my account, the Facebook answer to my Christian conservatism

By Julio Severo

Can free speech be real in Facebook when conservative Christian views are censored and, if a conservative Christian does not respect its left-wing censorship, an account termination is imposed?


My account has been deleted by Facebook on October 25, 2020. Some days before, Facebook asked me for my ID, and I gave them. And their final answer was termination.

This was my account, which I had used since 2009: https://www.facebook.com/julio.severo

Now people who try to access my Facebook profile find this public Facebook message:

“This Content Isn’t Available Right Now. When this happens, it’s usually because the owner only shared it with a small group of people, changed who can see it or it’s been deleted.”


Instead of using a forthright language, Facebook used a maze of meaningless words to say that my account was deleted. But how can people bypass this maze to understand that my account was deleted?

When people read the Facebook message, they do not know that my account has been deleted. So because of the misleading message, they wonder if I, the owner, have restricted my account by sharing my Facebook content only to a small group of people or if I have changed who can see it. Or they could even think that I have excluded them, because Facebook refuses to acknowledge directly that my account was terminated because of anti-Christian bias and censorship.

For people who read the Facebook message, it is hard to imagine what has happened. In contrast, for Facebook, it is not hard to know what happened, because Facebook itself deleted my account. So why mislead the public and let people confused about the termination of my Facebook account?

Why is so hard for Facebook to explain clearly to the public that they deleted my account because of my conservative Christian content? Why does Facebook hide its anti-Christian censorship behind a misleading message?

For me, Facebook gives me a private message whenever I try to access my old account saying:

“Your Account Has Been Disabled. You can’t use Facebook because your account, or activity on it, didn’t follow our Community Standards. We have already reviewed this decision and it can’t be reversed. To learn more about the reasons we disable accounts visit the Community Standards.”


The last two Facebook groups I created before the Facebook’s ultimate censorship were “Prayer for Trump Intercessory Group” and “Grupo de Intercessão Oração por Bolsonaro” (Prayer for Bolsonaro Intercessory Group). Bolsonaro is the Brazilian who has tried to advance some conservative causes in Brazil.

For years, I have faced several actions, restrictions and blocks from Facebook against my conservative Christian views, in a pattern of harassment that is very common from left-wing behavior against Christians.

On 2019, Facebook blocked me for 30 days because I reported on a boy tortured by two lesbians.

I suffered several 30-day blocks from Facebook exclusively for my conservative views.

* I was blocked for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, even though the owner of Facebook is a Jew and he should respect my pro-Jew feelings. But he preferred instead to respect the feelings of Muslims who do not accept Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

* I was harassed by Facebook on the Brazilian presidential elections over my conservative stances.

* I was blocked for commenting on the bad example of two lesbians.

* I was harassed by Facebook for publishing on my profile the whole Bible verse of Leviticus 18:22 where God himself says that homosexuality is an abomination.

This case was reported in a headline by WND (WorldNetDaily), one of the most prominent conservative websites in the world. See: http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/christian-catches-facebook-censoring-bible/

And there are many other examples of harassments and 30-day blocks from Facebook against me.

The only time Facebook ever backtracked on its harassment and bullying against me was when a conservative legal group in California sent a letter to Facebook on 2017. See: Facebook Acknowledges Its Own Censorship on Julio Severo. What Happens Now?

Sadly, the only language the Facebook censorship machine can understand is strong legal action. Without it, conservative Christians are powerless and have little hope to see Facebook understand that conservative Christian posts and stances, including mentions of the Bible, are legally-protected free speech.

Portuguese version of this article: Censura e cancelamento da minha conta, a resposta do Facebook ao meu conservadorismo cristão

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading on Facebook censorship:

Expose on your Facebook profile the horrific crime of a 9-year-old boy who was tortured, mutilated and murdered by two lesbians and Facebook punishes you with a 30-day block to protect the crime and the left-wing criminals

Does Facebook Reject My Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital?

Victim of Facebook’s War Against Conservatives: My Account Has Been Permanently Terminated by Facebook

Facebook Censors Comment about Lesbians But It Does Not Censor Homosexual Comments against Jesus Christ

I understand Facebook’s censorship

Famous Bible verse too sizzling for Facebook

Help! Facebook Is Censoring Bible Verses

Facebook excludes Israel and Includes Palestine

Why Does Facebook Harass and Censor Christians?

Why Does Facebook Grant Free Speech to Anti-Christian Radicals and Impose Censorship on Christians?

Facebook Acknowledges Its Own Censorship on Julio Severo. What Happens Now?

Saturday, October 24, 2020

Thirty-Two Nations Sign Statement Declaring There is “No Right to Abortion,” But the Statement Puts Feminism Before Babies

 

Thirty-Two Nations Sign Statement Declaring There is “No Right to Abortion,” But the Statement Puts Feminism Before Babies

By Julio Severo

The United States, Brazil, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia and Uganda on October 23, 2020 co-sponsored a nonbinding international pro-life declaration, in a rebuke of United Nations human rights bodies that have sought to increase abortion access.


The statement was signed by 32 countries in total, representing more than 1.6 billion people, and was titled “Geneva Consensus Declaration.”

“There is no international right to abortion,” said U.S. State Secretary Mike Pompeo.

The declaration states the signing countries “emphasize that ‘in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning’” and that “the child… needs special safeguards and care… before as well as after birth.” It also says states have no obligation to finance or facilitate abortion.

Pompeo said in his remarks, “Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States has defended the dignity of human life everywhere and always. He’s done it like no other President in history. We’ve also mounted an unprecedented defense of the unborn abroad… Today, we’re taking the next step, as we sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. At its very core, the Declaration protects women’s health, defends the unborn, and reiterates the vital importance of the family as the foundation of society.”

In September 2020, Trump told the UN General Assembly, “America will always be a leader in human rights” and he added, “My administration is advancing religious liberty, opportunity for women, the decriminalization of homosexuality, combating human trafficking, and protecting unborn children.”

Trump put religious liberty in first place. But in a misguided decision, the Trump administration gave its highest religious freedom award to a Brazilian left-wing sorcerer who has persecuted conservative evangelicals, including black evangelicals, in Brazil. It was one of the most absurd awards I ever saw, even after years witnessing many absurdities from the left-wing Obama administration.

And Trump put the decriminalization of homosexuality before protection of unborn children. To put decriminalization of homosexuality in a conservative speech is by itself a nonsense, but to put it before protection of unborn babies is a greater nonsense. Is it any wonder that gay activists say that Trump is the most pro-gay president in the U.S. history? Even so, his evangelical supporters are reluctant to criticize it.

This is not the only controversy. Trump also believes that unborn children victims of a rape deserve no legal protection.

Even though the Geneva Consensus Declaration presents a pro-life defense against abortion, it never called abortion murder. It said,

“Reaffirm that there is no international right to abortion, nor any international obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion, consistent with the long-standing international consensus that each nation has the sovereign right to implement programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies.”

Murder is always inconsistent with the right to life. If abortion had been mentioned clearly as murder, nations would understand that “programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies” would never condone any murder, including abortion.

Besides, in a feminist tone, the document put women and their rights before family, even saying,

“Improve and secure access to health and development gains for women, including sexual and reproductive health.”

“Sexual and reproductive health” is a UN jargon for the feminist, homosexualist and even abortion agenda. So how can a pro-life document condemn abortion and at the same time uses one of its UN jargons?

Then how “improve” “sexual and reproductive health” for women? Under “sexual and reproductive health,” girls have received plenty of immoral sex education and birth control around the world, resulting in abundant sexual activity, with many girls concluding that there is no need for marriage. Under “sexual and reproductive health,” girls are led to feminism, not marriage and family. And does the document propose to increase all of this?

The document was signed by Pompeo and Alex Azar, Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). If abortion is a matter of human rights and murder, why did a health secretary sign a pro-life document? After all, is abortion really murder or a health issue? If it is a health issue, it follows that pro-abortion feminists are right because they have managed to frame abortion as a health issue.

The pro-life document should never be signed by the HHS secretary. It should be signed by the Attorney General, because abortion is not a health issue, but a criminal and legal issue.

Among seven important items, the statement put family in the sixth place. Abortion was put in the third place. The other items were dedicated to the advancement of women — when clearly it should have dedicated to the advancement of the rights of unborn children.

The document mentions women 13 times, family 7 times and children 2 times. In fact, the first item of the “pro-life” document says,

“Ensure the full enjoyment of all human rights and equal opportunity for women at all levels of political, economic, and public life.”

This is a fulfilled feminist dream or nightmare. In the vision of this document, which represents the feminist vision, if men can be generals, women have equal right to be general and occupy any other male job.

While in a feminist document there is no room for pro-life words, in a pro-life document should there be plenty of feminist words?

So in a pro-life document, which should be dedicated totally to defend unborn life, there is feminist advocacy.

The Geneva Consensus Declaration is much more feminist than pro-life.

Feminist papers address not only abortion, but also the advancement of women. In contrast, a pro-life document addresses abortion without mentioning murder and promotes feminist issues putting family in second place. This is a feminist victory among pro-lifers. The Geneva Consensus Declaration did not also show any importance to the role of authority God gave to men in family and society.

NSSM 200, a paper prepared by the CIA in 1974 for a Republican administration, had guidelines and plans for the U.S. government to implement around the world to reduce the population of several nations, including Brazil, for the purpose to increase U.S. influence. One of these plans was to make the United Nations and the nations promote the advancement of women to reduce families and children.

For women, their advancement in male jobs reduces their chances to form families and have many children.

For men, their advancement in homosexuality equally reduces their chances to form families and have many children. In fact, when women occupy men’s jobs and roles, the only role left for men is… to be “women.”

So even though the Geneva Consensus Declaration condemns abortion without saying that it is murder, it contains many suspicious mentions of advancement of women, which contributes to population control and its natural effect sooner or later: abortion.

With information from LifeNews, HHS and UPI.

Portuguese version of this article: Trinta e duas nações assinam declaração afirmando que “não existe direito ao aborto,” mas a declaração coloca o feminismo na frente dos bebês

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Trump Became First U.S. President to Attend March for Life

President Donald Trump Proclaims January 22nd “National Sanctity of Human Life Day”

Trump Has Broken His Promise of Defunding the American Abortion Holocaust

Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda

Tom Parker: the Biggest Threat to Abortion in this Generation, According to Pro-Abortion Critic

Trump suggests pro-lifers have gone too far in Alabama with near-total abortion ban as he says he is pro-life but believes in abortion for babies conceived in rape and incest

Trump and Prophecies, and a New Model of National and World Leader

Friday, October 23, 2020

United Nations praises the Pope for backing same-sex unions: secretary-general of the U.N. welcomes Francis’s remarks that homosexuals “have a right to a family” in move which has enraged conservative Catholics

 

United Nations praises the Pope for backing same-sex unions: secretary-general of the U.N. welcomes Francis’s remarks that homosexuals “have a right to a family” in move which has enraged conservative Catholics

By Julio Severo

The secretary-general of the United Nations has praised the Pope’s historic comments in support of same-sex civil unions after Francis said homosexuals are “children of God and have a right to a family.”


UN chief Antonio Guterres said the papal support was “extremely welcome” after Francis’s words sparked cheers from left-wing Catholics and outrage from conservative Catholics.

“This is a clear demonstration of a fundamental principle, which is the principle of nondiscrimination,” said Guterres in New York. “And one of the things that has been very clear in the UN doctrine on this is that non-discrimination is also relevant in the questions of sexual orientation. So this is decision of the Pope is, of course, extremely welcome from our perspective.”

Guterres, who identifies himself as a Catholic, was, from 1999 to 2005, the president of the Socialist International. He was also Secretary-General of the Socialist Party of Portugal, from 1992 to 2002.

It is just natural for Guterres to praise anything homosexual, because he has condemned traditional masculinity.

Socialism is the major factor leading Catholics, including the pope, to anticonservative stances.

Francis’s comments emerged in a new documentary, produced by a gay activist, in which he said that “what we have to create is a civil union law,” a position at odds with the official teaching of the Catholic Church.

Catholic teaching says that homosexuals must be treated with dignity and respect but that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.” A 2003 document from the Vatican stated the Catholic Church’s respect for homosexuals “cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.”

Doing so, the Vatican reasoned, would not only condone “deviant behavior,” but create an equivalence to marriage, which the Catholic Church holds is an indissoluble union between man and woman.

That document was signed by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI and Francis’ predecessor.

Conservative Catholics think that with Ratzinger as a pope, any acceptance of homosexual acts or homosexual “marriage” would be impossible. But he had to leave its papacy perhaps because of a scandal about to explode: a Catholic school administrated by his brother was involved in a staggering scandal of 547 boys abused, including homosexually.

The scandal has been shrouded in mystery and silence as nothing has been mentioned if Ratzinger’s brother was homosexual or how many homosexual priests raped the boys.

Homosexuality among Catholic priests is the only cause of sexual abuse of boys in the Catholic Church.

French homosexual author Frédéric Martel said that “a very large majority of priests and Vatican cardinals, 80% perhaps, would be homosexuals.” But Steve Bannon said that “it’s not 80%, but rather 90%.”

Bannon intended to launch a film exposing the Vatican’s homosexual scandals, but he was involved in scandals himself.

Even though Bannon is against Francis, his reasons have nothing to do with homosexuality. Martel said about Bannon and his right-wing fight against Pope Francis:

“He thinks like me that the battle is no longer played in Rome between pro-Francis cardinals who would be gay or gay-friendly, and anti-Francis cardinals who would be homophobic and heterosexual. Everyone, on the right, as on the left, would be fairly homophile or homosexual. Steve Bannon has no problem with this observation: he also came to it himself. I suddenly understand the plan of Catholic Bannon. The Church may have to abandon its moral positions on sexuality that are hypocritical, anachronistic and, given the large number of gay cardinals in the Vatican, schizophrenic.”

By their perspective, the Catholic Church is divided between left-wing homosexual Catholic priests who want to liberalize homosexuality and right-wing homosexual Catholic priests who want to keep the Catholic doctrine about homosexuality.

The problem is that regardless if the homosexual priest is left-wing or right-wing, homosexuality is connected to sexual abuse of boys. The evidence is the Catholic Church itself, where multitudes of boys have been raped by homosexual priests. If Martel is correct in his view that there are left-wing and right-wing homosexual priests in the Catholic Church, it follows that boys have been raped by left-wing and right-wing homosexual priests.

Pope Francis is open to socialist causes, including homosexuality, because he is open to Liberation Theology and he has been very harsh against conservative Christians opposed to the gay agenda. Left-wing homosexual Catholics support him. Right-wing homosexual Catholics oppose him.

Yet, both left-wing and right-wing homosexuals should know that in the Bible God condemns all homosexuality, regardless ideological issues. Both left-wing and right-wing homosexual sinners cannot inherit God’s Kingdom.

Francis was wrong to say that “homosexuals are children of God.” To be a child of God, a man must first receive Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord of his life. Only after giving his life to Jesus does he become a child of God. The Bible said,

“To all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” (John 1:12 ESV)

So while a man does not accept Jesus’ deliverance and salvation, he is only a creature of God.

The removal of Francis and left-wing homosexual priests from the Vatican will not remove the problem of homosexuality in the Catholic Church as “conservative” homosexual priests sin more silently, even abusing boys. If the Catholic Church wants to solve its homosexual problem, it should not tolerate open left-wing homosexuality and silent right-right homosexuality, because both victimize boys.

With information from the Daily Mail.

Portuguese version of this article: ONU elogia o Papa por apoiar uniões do mesmo sexo: secretário-geral da ONU dá as boas-vindas aos comentários de Francisco de que os homossexuais “têm o direito a uma família” em mudança que enfureceu os católicos conservadores

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

United Nations Condemns Male Leadership, Not Communism, over COVID-19

Francis became 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions, saying: “Homosexuals are children of God and have the right to be in a family”

Pope Compares Politicians Opposed to Gays, Jews To Hitler

In his effort to produce a film exposing homosexuality in the Vatican to make Pope Francis renounce, Steve Bannon caused backlash from conservative Catholic leaders and was exposed for his own involvement with two notorious pedophiles

The Hijacking of Homosexuality by the Right, a Challenge for Christians

Spotlight: Exposing Pedophilia Scandals and Hiding Homosexual Scandals in the Catholic Church

Thursday, October 22, 2020

Francis became 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions, saying: “Homosexuals are children of God and have the right to be in a family”

 

Francis became 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions, saying: “Homosexuals are children of God and have the right to be in a family”

By Julio Severo

Pope Francis became the first pontiff to endorse same-sex civil unions in comments for a documentary that premiered on October 21, 2020, sparking cheers from left-wing Catholics and concerns from conservative Catholics, because the Vatican’s official teaching is against the homosexual sin.


The film, titled Francesco, which premiered at the Rome Film Festival, features fresh interviews with the pope and delves into left-wing issues Francis cares about most, including the environment, poverty, migration, racial and income inequality, and the people most affected by discrimination. It is, therefore, a left-wing film.

“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God,” Francis said. “You can’t kick someone out of a family, nor make their life miserable for this. What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered.”

Catholic teaching says that homosexuals must be treated with dignity and respect but that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.” A 2003 document from the Vatican stated the Catholic Church’s respect for homosexuals “cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.”

Doing so, the Vatican reasoned, would not only condone “deviant behavior,” but create an equivalence to marriage, which the Catholic Church holds is an indissoluble union between man and woman.

That document was signed by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI and Francis’ predecessor.

Conservative Catholics think that with Ratzinger as a pope, any acceptance of homosexual acts or homosexual “marriage” would be impossible. But he had to leave its papacy perhaps because of a scandal about to explode: a Catholic school administrated by his brother was involved in a staggering scandal of 547 boys abused, including homosexually.

The scandal has been shrouded in mystery and silence as nothing has been mentioned if Ratzinger’s brother was homosexual or how many homosexual priests raped the boys.

Homosexuality among Catholic priests is the only cause of sexual abuse of boys in the Catholic Church.

French homosexual author Frédéric Martel said that “a very large majority of priests and Vatican cardinals, 80% perhaps, would be homosexuals.” But Steve Bannon said that “it’s not 80%, but rather 90%.”

Bannon intended to launch a film exposing the Vatican’s homosexual scandals, but he was involved in scandals himself.

Even though Bannon is against Francis, his reasons have nothing to do with homosexuality. Martel said about Bannon and his right-wing fight against Pope Francis:

“He thinks like me that the battle is no longer played in Rome between pro-Francis cardinals who would be gay or gay-friendly, and anti-Francis cardinals who would be homophobic and heterosexual. Everyone, on the right, as on the left, would be fairly homophile or homosexual. Steve Bannon has no problem with this observation: he also came to it himself. I suddenly understand the plan of Catholic Bannon. The Church may have to abandon its moral positions on sexuality that are hypocritical, anachronistic and, given the large number of gay cardinals in the Vatican, schizophrenic.”

By their perspective, the Catholic Church is divided between left-wing homosexual Catholic priests who want to liberalize homosexuality and right-wing homosexual Catholic priests who want to keep the Catholic doctrine about homosexuality.

The problem is that regardless if the homosexual priest is left-wing or right-wing, homosexuality is connected to sexual abuse of boys. The evidence is the Catholic Church itself, where multitudes of boys have been raped by homosexual priests. If Martel is correct in his view that there are left-wing and right-wing homosexual priests in the Catholic Church, it follows that boys have been raped by left-wing and right-wing homosexual priests.

Pope Francis is open to socialist causes, including homosexuality, because he is open to Liberation Theology and he has been very harsh against conservative Christians opposed to the gay agenda. Left-wing homosexual Catholics support him. Right-wing homosexual Catholics oppose him.

Yet, both left-wing and right-wing homosexuals should know that in the Bible God condemns all homosexuality, regardless ideological issues. Both left-wing and right-wing homosexual sinners cannot inherit God’s Kingdom.

Francis was wrong to say that “homosexuals are children of God.” To be a child of God, a man must first receive Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord of his life. Only after giving his life to Jesus does he become a child of God. The Bible said,

“To all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” (John 1:12 ESV)

So while a man does not accept Jesus’ deliverance and salvation, he is only a creature of God.

The removal of Francis and left-wing homosexual priests from the Vatican will not remove the problem of homosexuality in the Catholic Church as “conservative” homosexual priests sin more silently, even abusing boys. If the Catholic Church wants to solve its homosexual problem, it should not tolerate open left-wing homosexuality and silent right-right homosexuality, because both victimize boys.

With information from the Associated Press.

Portuguese version of this article: Francisco se tornou o primeiro papa a endossar uniões civis do mesmo sexo, dizendo: “Os homossexuais são filhos de Deus e têm o direito de pertencer a uma família”

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Pope Compares Politicians Opposed to Gays, Jews To Hitler

In his effort to produce a film exposing homosexuality in the Vatican to make Pope Francis renounce, Steve Bannon caused backlash from conservative Catholic leaders and was exposed for his own involvement with two notorious pedophiles

The Hijacking of Homosexuality by the Right, a Challenge for Christians

Spotlight: Exposing Pedophilia Scandals and Hiding Homosexual Scandals in the Catholic Church