Where’s Fr. Martin SJ?

Out @ St. Paul is one of James Martin, SJ’s favorite clubs. He re-tweets his pride for them quite often. He portrays them as just a benign, loving support group for those who are so oppressed by the Church simply for trying to be faithful Catholics that She needs to change for them. The reality is they completely support engaging in sodomy, entering into “gay marriages,” and engaging in the slander and detraction of Bishop Morlino, all while continuing to receive the Body and Blood of Christ. Let’s look at just two of their tweets from this last week and you can tell me how loving and moral they are.

First we have this…


Harvey Milk was NO saint and no martyr for the Faith. To portray him as such is such a dishonor to saints, especially saints like Charles Lwanga. Milk was a homosexual man who sexually preyed on teen runaways who were homeless and resorted to prostitution.  He even encouraged boys to run away to join him in San Francisco. We’re not even talking about teens who were above the statutory age, which is really irrelevant but people are going to make the claim it is. He admits some of these relationships and/or parents intercepted his letters. Even his own biographer friend, Randy Shilts, wrote, “Harvey always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems.”  Sadly, at least one of his victims committed suicide years later. So, please, Fr. Martin and his buddies who talk about how we’re so mean or how horrible the abuse of minors is might want to zip it instead of trying to claim loving, moral superiority.  Of course, there wasn’t a peep from Fr. Martin to build his bridge and point out the Church’s position on this.

And then there’s this…


Bishop Morlino was NOT an opponent of LGBT people.  He was an opponent of the LGBT lifestyle. He LOVED people suffering from same-sex attraction so much that he spoke the hard truth to them. On the occasion of his death, to say that he was an enemy of anyone, that he hated anyone, that he committed calumny or persecution is disgusting. And still no peep from Fr. Martin on this one, either.

Out @ St. Paul is not some warm, cozy support group for those intent on living the chaste life. They’re not some group of persecuted who just want to be accepted so they can practice the Faith in peace. It is a militant group seeking to thwart as many of the Church’s teachings as they see fit. 

I call on Fr. James Martin, SJ, to condemn these scurrilous posts and tweets. I know he won’t, but it just shows, once again, show how fake his bridge overtures are. The bridge only leads one way – away from the Church that wants the best for all of us.+



15 thoughts on “Where’s Fr. Martin SJ?

  1. p.s. I was at the Post Office buying stamps and was asked what kind I wanted. Answered “Anything but Harvey Milk and Theodore Hesburgh!!” BTW, stamps are going up to .55 in January. Buy your forever stamps now.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. It is clear that Father Martin endorses evil. He just does it in a very clever way, designed to fool people. He has taken lessons from the devil, apparently. That Out at St Paul’s should dare to call that pervert Harvey Milk, a saint indicates that they are doing EXACTLY what Father Martin does – they are altering the faith to be a political thing. If a person abuses hundreds of young vulnerable boys, well that is fine, because he is useful as a political rallying point for their political movement. No morals in the New Father James Marin church. Or should I say, no real morals, just justifications for gay sex.


  3. Why is James Martin still a Catholic priest? Why doesn’t his Bishop discipline him? How can a Catholic priest flout Catholic teachings and still be a priest?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. As to your title question, I have it on “good” authority that he, Fr. Martin, has just realized he is woman, Martina?, and is having his plumbing “overhauled” (I think that that is the correct medical term) so that we will have our 1st legitimately ordained & indelibly marked “woman priest”. But I could be wrong, I hang with a very unreliable crowd.


  5. “As to your title question, I have it on “good” authority that he, Fr. Martin, has just realized he is woman, Martina?, and is having his plumbing “overhauled” (I think that that is the correct medical term) so that we will have our 1st legitimately ordained & indelibly marked “woman priest”. But I could be wrong, I hang with a very unreliable crowd.”

    I hope this is not true. If it is, it is disgustingly beyond the pale! Any priest who would do such as this, was likely never ordained validly.



    1. Not true, I thought the “I hang with an very unreliable crowd” would give it away. Sorry, the title reminded me of “Where’s Waldo”, and I made up what I thought was a humorous reply. Sorry, again. My apology to Fr. Martin whom I sure would make a wonderful “woman”, if he so choses to be, although no longer a priest (deadnaming, and all that)


    2. You are falling into the heresy of Donatism. A man’s ordination CANNOT be rendered invalid because he holds repulsive opinions.


      1. I think you misunderstand.
        Under the transsexual “doctrine of deadnaming” one my not even call a transitioned person by the name they used to have, that person is “dead” and gone from this earth and now a “new” person, appearing similar, is present & alive.
        If dead -then the “new” person would have to be ordained again , I think. Yes, yes I know it’s all nonsensical. but by the movement’s own reasoning how can this new person claim the accomplishment earned by the old one who is no more? Priestly ordination can not be inherited, can it? But then again maybe those popes whose sons became pope were on to something.


        1. Say, if someone committed a terrible crime, like murder, or worse – deadnaming of an individual, and then were reborn as a different gender, would they be responsible for the actions of the dead person some might falsely believe they still are?


          1. I actually think that this question is entering the court system. Can “Martina” be held responsible for “James’s “crimes (to pick 2 random names as an example)? I think the transsexual movement would lean toward “no”, but who knows what judges will say. The net year or two will tell us more.


  6. It is ironic to see the author claim Bishop Morlino couldn’t have been a homophobe because he loved people “suffering with same sex attraction.” In and of itself, that description presents a wholly distorted picture of the way the vast majority of LGBT people perceive themselves. What Bishop Morlino’s relationship was with LGBT people who were not “suffering” (i.e., the overwhelming majority of LGBT people) is a better measure of just how compassionate and friendly he really was.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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