"Are we prepared to promote conditions in which the living contact with God can be reestablished? For our lives today have become godless to the point of complete vacuity. God is no longer with us in the conscious sense of the word. He is denied, ignored, excluded from every claim to have a part in our daily life." - Alfred Delp, S.J.

Friday, September 26, 2014

I should have waited before publishing on the gay couple in Montana...

“The public conduct in this case is two members of the same sex 
attempting what some states recognize as marriage. 
The Church teaches with infallible certainty that marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. 
To act in this way against this core Catholic teaching 
is to fulfill the conditions laid out in canon 915, forcing the minister’s hand.” - Dr. Peters

Actually, I had waited to post - several days in fact.  I have to always remind myself how MSM spins stories to garner sympathy for gay people who act contrary to Catholic teaching, and expect Church approval nonetheless.

When I first read the story of Tom Wojtowick and Paul Huff, kicked off the choir, banned from communion at their parish because they got married in Seattle, I felt sorry for them.  I had to read all that was available in order to understand what happened.  I recognized that the local Bishop was acting in accord with Catholic teaching, but I still felt sorry for the guys.

Today I found out more details on the story.  Deacon Kandra posted:
A newspaper in Billings, Montana takes a closer look at the story of two gay men who were removed from ministry after they married each other. Among other things, it reveals that one of the men is a former priest. - Read the rest here.
 It changes everything.

Though 'elderly' these guys are not vulnerable adult victims.  They know Catholic teaching, they knew what they were doing, and as one of them declared:
“We didn’t start this fight, but we’re not going to cave in and back out of it,” Huff said Wednesday, sitting in the breakfast nook next to Wojtowick, his partner of 30 years, in their house on a 52-acre ranch north of town.
No doubt they were ready for a fight.

Mr. Wojtowick had been a priest.  An alcoholic, in recovery he realized he was gay.  He left priesthood.
In 1976, Wojtowick came to realize he was an alcoholic. In treatment, realizing he had to be absolutely honest with himself, Wojtowick acknowledged he was gay. 
By 1983, he decided it was time to leave the priesthood. 
“I loved my work, but it was pretty obvious to me that I was designed to be with someone,” he said.
As a former priest he should have known better than to attempt same sex marriage and expect to be admitted to Communion.

Matt Archbold made an interesting point regarding the predicament posed by the civil marriage of the two men:
This is a sad situation but I'm more interested in what one of the men involved said to the media. Exhibiting incredulity, he said, "We didn't think anything would happen, church is one thing, civil society is another." - Matt Archbold
Matt Archbold goes on to point out how some theologians and Catholics are tempted to use the separation of church and state argument to justify civil gay marriage.  Matt points out how ludicrous such thinking is, concluding, "More than just the separation of Church and state they are arguing for a separation of life from the Gospel, and the Church from the soul."

Like I said, a former priest should have known better.

Mr. Huff and Mr. Wojtowick can't have there wedding cake and eat it too.

Song for this post here.


  1. Yowsah, yowsah, yowsah!

    1. I love the old stuff too.

  2. I still think it's shameful the Bishop demanded they no longer be roommates, despite the fact he's a defrocked priest. If that's their personal choice to support each other (financially or otherwise), that's their business. The rest is the Bishop's provenance.

    1. No because the Church teaches that Christianity must permeate our lives; marrying goes against Church teaching and indicates that they're not just roommates so to be obedient and to receive sacraments they must separate.

    2. Nan, I think doughboy is agreeing with you. I think he is saying (and I agree with him) that the Bishop is certainly entitled to denying communion etc. But telling someone they cannot support someone emotionally or financially is ridiculous and out of the Church's provence. The guys are old so I am sure the dreaded SEX is not really an issue (at least not now) and as people get older, if they have no family (as most gay people of this generation dont) it helps to have someone around who can run errands, etc when the other is ill. Being a former priest and a music director for a church would tell me they arent exactly rolling in the dough.

      I think that God gives us a heart, compassion and eyes to see beyond "the rules," (and I for one dont listen to him enough) and to use our best judgement not to harm others around us. Its unfortunate that the Bishop is not using that. And this kind of thing feeds the anti-Catholic, anti-Christian people, who rightly so, call us hypocrites on so many things.

    3. I understand what you're saying but disagree; with their same sex civil marriage they have publicly declared they don't follow Church teaching. They hold themselves out to be a couple not two celibate roommates. The problem is that their marriage harms those around them as condoning it would send the message that the Church supports same sex marriage when it doesn't. That would be the true scandal.

  3. That's right. They have lost all credibility as the truth of their deception has been laid bare. I just cannot understand how one can engage in such a lifestyle and still want to participate in the life of the Church knowing what she teaches and defends as truth.

    Granted, there are those who quietly oppose the Church's teachings on many fronts and twist the Church's teachings to suit their needs.
    I suppose an example would be the priest who supported these two prior to the new one arriving.

    That fact annoys me because it causes more harm than good but like you say Terry;

    "Like I said, a former priest should have known better.
    Mr. Huff and Mr. Wojtowick can't have there wedding cake and eat it too."

    Many unfortunately believe they can...but woe to them! Let's not forget the words from the Old Testament from yesterday!

    "Vanity of vanities, vanity of vanities! All things are vanity!"

  4. Meh..lest I be accused of being judgmental ;p, I admit I know not what was understood between the former pastor and these two men that allowed them to remain active in their parish despite their lifestyle. But if the pastor knew full well what it was and still allowed it, then he has much to answer for.

  5. In the Minnesota music director's case, both the pastor and the Archbishop knew the guy lived with his male friend - since 2011. He was only terminated after the civil marriage took place. The Church doesn't recognize gay marriage and defends the inviolability of true marriage between a man and a woman as sacred. Civil gay marriage is a public declaration. The couple publicly declare their relationship is more involved than friendship. They claim the relationship is equal to marriage between a man and a woman. That is a public statement, action in direct opposition to infallible Catholic teaching on faith and morals. I suspect this is the reason why the Bishop in the Montana case asked Huff and Wojtowick to live separately. They publicly declared their relationship to be more than friendship. Chastity is more than simply abstinence from sexual activity.


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.