WARSAW, Poland (LifeSiteNews) — Cardinal Gerhard Müller has spoken in defense of Father Dariusz Oko, the Polish priest who was fined by a German court for condemning homosexual predators in the Church.
In an interview he gave last week to Paweł Lisicki from the Polish newspaper Do Rzeczy, Cardinal Müller, a former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said he was ashamed that in his home country (Germany) it is again possible “that a Polish scholar could be convicted for incitement to hatred for publishing a factual report.” The whole text of the interview can be read in English at the end of this article.
Müller was referring to a recent lawsuit filed by Germany against Oko, a Polish priest who has published works about homosexual lobbies within the Church. The author of “With the Pope Against Homoheresy” has been charged by a German Court with “incitement to hatred” for an article he wrote about homosexual clerical abuse, following a complaint by Fr. Wolfgang Rothe, a pro-LGBT priest in Germany.
The Cologne District Court claimed that Oko’s article, entitled “On the need to curb homosexual cliques in the Church,” constituted “incitement to hatred” against homosexual people. The court demanded that Oko pay a fine of 4,800 euros or serve 120 days in jail, according to Polish magazine Wprost. The court reportedly charged Fr. Johannes Stöhr, the editor-in-chief of Theologisches, as well. Oko has already appealed, and a trial is expected.
Müller drew a parallel between the lawsuit against Oko and the persecution of Polish intellectuals during the time of Poland’s occupation by Nazi Germany, saying that this case should “sound alarm bells amongst historically educated people.” He mentioned “a certain lawyer who, as a so-called ‘governor-general’ sent all of Krakow’s professors to the concentration camps.” This is undoubtedly a reference to Hans Frank, also known as “the butcher of Poland,” who became the governor-general of Nazi-occupied Poland in 1939.
The cardinal also praised Oko’s for speaking out against homo-heresy in the Church and described Oko’s work as “a courageous act that deserves the respect of all decent people.”
He went on to echo the priest-professor’s words and condemned the criminal acts of “individuals who live in the Church but protect themselves behind the shield of impunity afforded by their office,” adding that these individuals “are leading numerous young men to their doom.”
PETITION UPDATE (6/29/2021):
The Pope has written a note to Fr. James Martin, SJ, praising his fellow Jesuit’s controversial pro-LGBT ministry, saying it "reflects the closeness of God" and is in the "style of God."
The Pope’s note was written in response to a communication that Martin had sent Francis earlier, informing him of an upcoming LGBT conference organized by renegade New Ways Ministry (NWM), which has been denounced as non-Catholic ministry by the U.S. bishops and whose leaders defied the Vatican’s order to cease their affiliation with NWM decades ago.
In spite of the fact that Francis has done this, the Church still teaches that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered," and "under no circumstances can they be approved." (Catechism of the Catholic Church Para. 2357)
Therefore, when a priest, like James Martin, SJ - and, New Ways Ministry - adovcate for the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism, without calling for chastity and repentence, we know that this style is most certainly not in the style of God.
Please continue to SIGN and share this petition asking the bishops of the United States to stop Martin's LGBT advocacy.
'On eve of LGBT Catholic conference, Pope Francis praised Fr. James Martin, SJ’s pro-LGBT ministry' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/on-eve-of-lgbt-catholic-conference-pope-francis-praised-fr-james-martin-sjs-pro-lgbt-ministry
PETITION UPDATE (2/4/2020):
Fr. James Martin, SJ, can't resist telling bishops how to run their dioceses.
He recently opined that dioceses should stop firing homosexuals who are "married" by the state, saying that this is tantamount to discrimination.
But, of course, when it comes to such relationships, Bishops must discriminate between what is authentically Catholic and Christian, both under the natural law and in Revelation.
And, such people, who enter into a homosexual relationship and then have it publicly recognized by the state as something which nature and religion know can never be fruitful -- but, which conversely, can cause grave scandal to children -- cannot expect to hold positions in Catholic schools.
The two positions are contradictory, and not just in the way that other things are contradictory.
Homosexual "marriage" is a contradiction in terms, and is not only unnatural, but also confusing to young minds. And, not just about human nature, but also about the way that God has designed man and woman to be together, in marriage, in a lifelong, monogamous bond.
What Fr. Martin suggests is that bishops are free to take a sledge hammer to God's design...which, of course, is totally, totally wrong.
Bishops, please continue assert your right to protect the innocence of children as well as defend the institution of marriage.
Fr. James Martin, SJ recently issued a tweet questioning the Bible's condemnation of homosexual acts.
Fr. Martin’s tweet quotes an article from the Center for Action and Contemplation in which Fr. Richard Rohr, a priest with a long record of dissenting from established Church teachings, favorably shares a pro-homosexuality missive from his “dear friend,” Methodist minister Walter Wink. In June of 2018, Fr. Rohr declared in a speech that “historically, scientifically, culturally,” the Bible is “a mass of contradictions from beginning to end.”
This is decidedly NOT what the Catholic Church teaches.
Thankfully, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, and Cardinal Wilfrid Napier of Durban, South Africa, have both responded to Fr. James Martin’s tweet highlighting an article that questions the “biblical judgment” of “same-sex sexual behavior.”
Bishop Strickland issued a response yesterday evening on his own Twitter account:
“Thank you for acknowledging that you question scripture. If we go down that road where do we stop? I know you have lots of support but you are challenging the Deposit of Faith that I promised to defend. As a bishop I’ll keep defending it.”
This morning, Cardinal Napier also took to the popular social media platform to give his response to Fr. Martin’s tweet.
“How convenient to use slavery to justify support for homosexuality, totally overlooking the fact that the Bible is overwhelmingly the story of God freeing His People from all slavery — physical & political but also slavery to idols & false gods, to moral & spiritual aberrations!”
We give thanks to God for these examples of strong leadership from the episcopate!
But, we need more Shepherds to come out against Fr. Martin's LGBT advocacy, which is a stain on the Church's teaching and on Christ's admonition to, "Go, and sin no more!"
Thank you for SIGNING!
Fr. James Martin is perhaps the most notorious pro-LGBT priest in the Catholic Church today. His public statements are opposed to the Church’s perennial teachings on sexuality, marriage, homosexuality, and transgenderism. They blind souls to the truth about human nature and the harsh reality of sin.
And, in spite of meeting with the Pope recently, which gave the veneer of respectability to his morally dangerous positions on the Church's teaching on sexuality, no-one has the authority to declare morally good or neutral, something which is actually intrinsically disordered -- not even the Pope.
Thankfully, however, there are some pastors of the Catholic Church who continue to place the constant teaching of the Church on faith and morals, and on sexuality, above human respect.
This petition, therefore, asks the Bishops of the Catholic Church to stop bowing to human respect, and ban Fr. James Martin from spreading his spiritual poison in their dioceses..."spiritual poison", because encouraging someone to continue in mortal sin is like giving poison to someone's soul, no matter how well-intentioned one may be.
Just a couple of weeks ago, Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia released a statement noting that Fr. Martin’s “statements and activities” have caused confusion.
- “A pattern of ambiguity in his teachings tends to undermine his stated aims, alienating people from the very support they need for authentic human flourishing,” Chaput wrote. “Due to the confusion caused by his statements and activities regarding same-sex related (LGBT) issues, I find it necessary to emphasize that Father Martin does not speak with authority on behalf of the Church, and to caution the faithful about some of his claims.”
Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois quickly issued a statement supporting Chaput, saying that aspects of Martin’s teachings are “deeply scandalous,” and his “messages create confusion among the faithful and disrupt the unity of the Church.”
Bishop Stika of Knoxville, Tennessee has also opposed some of Martin’s statements.
And, in the Fall of 2018, Texas Bishop Joseph Strickland asked his fellow bishops to discern whether or not fraternal correction demands they ban from their dioceses Fr. James Martin and his pro-gay "marriage" message.
- Strickland said of Martin: “There’s a priest that travels around now basically saying that he doesn’t [believe the doctrine of the Church on marriage], and he seems to be very well promoted in various places.”
- “Brothers, I think part of the fraternal correction...we offer each other is to say, 'Can that be presented in our diocese? That same-sex ‘marriage’ is just fine, and the Church will one day grow to understand that.'”
- “That’s not what we teach,” he stated. “And I think we really have to ask those serious questions.”
Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has called Fr. Martin “one of the most outspoken critics of the church’s message with regard to sexuality.”
And, Cardinal Raymond Burke has called Martin’s teaching “not coherent with the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.”
Over the years, Fr. Martin has made numerous remarks that indicate open hostility towards and deep opposition to unchangeable doctrine on matters related to men, women, and sexuality. Bishops need to stop allowing him to spread his un-Christ-like message in their dioceses. Below is an extensive list of things he has said or done. For instance, Fr. Martin...
- Wants active homosexuals to be “invited into parish ministries” like eucharistic ministers.
- Once claimed “some” saints were “probably gay.”
- Told a gay Catholic journalist that he hopes that during the exchange of peace at mass “you will be able to kiss your partner or soon to be your husband. Why not? What’s the terrible thing?”
- Tweeted support for transgender bathrooms, claiming that “It doesn't hurt anybody" which bathroom "they" choose to use.
- Believes God made “LGBTQ people…who they are.”
- Wants the Catechism’s use of the term “intrinsically disordered” scrapped. He believes it is “needlessly hurtful" to homosexuals and thinks “differently ordered” is preferable because it is more “pastoral.”
- Has said a Catholic attending a same-sex “wedding” is just as acceptable as a Catholic attending a Jewish wedding.
- Claims to have discovered a "very high correlation between people who are against [same-sex marriage] and people who are in fact homophobic."
- Received an award from a pro-homosexual group for his “lasting contributions to the safety and/or equality of people who are LGBTQ, their families, and allies.”
- Thinks the Church should recognize the “special gifts” homosexuals bring to the Church because of their sexual attractions.
- Claims the Bible has been taken out of "context” in its condemnation of homosexual acts.
- Urged homosexual priests to “come out” as “LGBT” in order to facilitate “dialogue” with bishops.
- Praised the “fidelity” of a “married” transgender couple and wondered what the Church can “learn” from them.
- Retweeted a liberal journalist who complained priests can’t bless “committed gay couples.”
- Was given the “Bridge Building Award” at the 2016 gathering of the pro-gay New Ways Ministry, a dissident group censure by the Vatican and the U.S. Bishops Conference.
The cardinal also pointed out the hypocrisy of the German court system, arguing that courts never react when thousands of innocent priests are gratuitously being called “child molesters” as these attacks fall under the category of “freedom of expression.”
“Have we come back to the point where the guilty are protected and the innocent punished?” Müller asked.
Cardinal Gerhard F. Müller for an interview with Paweł Lisicki of “Do Rzeczy”
Warsaw, August 9, 2021
Lisicki: Your Eminence, after the publication of an article in the magazine Theologisches, the district court of Cologne filed against its author, priest-professor Dariusz Oko, a criminal warrant imposing a fine of 4,800 euros. The alternative is that he can serve 120 days in prison. He is not the only man condemned. On the same day, July 27, 2021, the court handed down a similar decision against the magazine‘s editor-in-chief, 90-year-old priest-professor Fr. Johannes Stöhr. […] Both are charged with inciting hatred. In Poland, the news was hard to believe at first, as it constitutes a direct attack on freedom of expression and a clear example of ideological censorship. What do you make of this decision, Your Eminence?
Card. Müller: As a German, I am ashamed that it is again possible in my homeland that a Polish scholar could be convicted of so-called “incitement to hatred” on the basis of a factual report. In connection with the Polish scholar from Krakow, alarm bells should sound immediately, especially for historically educated people, who will remember with horror a certain “lawyer” who, as a so-called “governor general,” sent all of Krakow’s professors to concentration camps.
Prof. Oko’s essay is a scientific documentation of serious crimes committed against young men and boys by high-ranking clerics including ex-Cardinal McCarrick. Either these judges have not read the essay, or they are incapable of judging it with scientific criteria, or they do not realize the criminal nature of certain acts committed by some individuals who live in the Church but hide themselves behind the shield of impunity afforded by their office and are leading numerous young men to their doom. To condemn these crimes with harsh words is not “incitement to hatred” but a courageous act that deserves the respect of all decent people.
The significance of the crimes mentioned in the essay must not be watered down under the pretext that the perpetrators were active homosexuals who might feel insulted if called child molesters everyday, but no court or press organ ever reacts to that. Have we come back to the point where the guilty are protected and the innocent punished? Especially considering that attacks against Catholic clergymen and even calls for violence against them are allowed to take place under the pretense of freedom of expression.
L: Some German journalists, for example at the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, support this decision. They believe that, in this way, the court protects society from hatred. What is your opinion on this, Your Eminence? Why does the German public seem to be so passive? Why are there no signs of resistance?
CM: Of course, so-called German journalists are happy when Poles are attacked. Instead of thanking the Poles and Hungarians for overthrowing totalitarian Soviet communism, European politicians and lawyers are bullying these people who have endured so much suffering for their love of freedom, because of the alleged threat to European values, but they give the worst kind of dictators a free pass in order to do business with them.
Usually, these opinion leaders don’t really value Christianity, but fortunately for us they are against “the grave sin of hatred.” Yet by making absurd accusations of hatred against the non-existent group of homosexuals, they only reveal their own hatred of Catholic Poland. These moralists should spend time studying the history of the four Polish partitions and the hatred of the Prussians and the Nazis against the Poles before acting as senior teachers of their Slavic neighbors.
L: In the article, Professor Oko referred to homosexual clergy as “a colony of parasites,” “a cancer,” and a “homosexual plague,” among other things. He spoke about “homo ideology” and “homo-heresy.” In his text, Father Oko also wrote that the Church should set up “a whole system for the protection of ‘defenseless adults’ who have become, or could become, victims of homosexual predators in cassocks.” Isn’t this language too strong? That is the most important accusation against him. Or do we have to clearly condemn the evil?
CM: A court cannot mandate the use of a watered down or benign language when it comes to the scientific analysis of the worst crimes and gravest sins. When ecclesiastical superiors corrupt young people, it warrants using the language of Christ, who threatens the corrupters of youth with damnation if they do not repent. Secular courts are there to bring criminals to justice, not those who call the misdeeds by their name.
L: After the publication of the article, Father Wolfgang F. Rothe from Munich, a priest committed to the rights of homosexuals in the church, reported Oko and Stöhr to the public prosecutor’s office in Cologne for incitement to hatred. This is quite shocking for Polish readers. Is homo-heresy then so strong in Germany?
CM: Anyone in St. Pölten who knows his history knows how the slogan goes: Stop the thief. How trained lawyers can let themselves be instrumentalized by such nonsense remains a mystery to every reasonable person. The aforementioned essay calls no one to hatred or violence against innocent people, but on the contrary, it calls for the protection of innocent young men from superiors who deliberately and skillfully abuse the trust of others in order to selfishly satisfy their wrong inclinations. Anyone who, under the pretext of the legal protection of minorities, trivializes crimes committed by certain individuals, is much worse than the ones dragged to court for denouncing said crimes.
L: Is it still allowed to criticize homosexuals in Germany? Or are we dealing with a gay cult?
CM: As long as the human right to freedom of religion and conscience is still recognized in Germany, we as Christians will defend the human dignity also of those with homoerotic feelings, and at the same time fearlessly proclaim the commandments of God: that the right to life is to be granted to all and under all circumstances including in the embryonic state, that active euthanasia is a mortal sin, that marriage consists of husband and wife, and that sexual union has its place only in a legitimate marriage alone. But even if we Catholics are persecuted again, as we once were during the Kulturkampf of Bismarck or during the struggle of the Church under the Third Reich, or if we are punished with fines and prison sentences under the disguise of the law, the truth remains the truth. No parliament or court can declare injustice a right or put the will to power above the natural moral law recognized by reason.
L: To what extent has the sexual revolution changed the Church and society in the West, especially in Germany?
CM: We’re dealing with an opposition between a nihilistic and a God-related image of man. According to the Catholic faith, marriage is of the highest moral and spiritual value. To pretend that the meaning of life is only money and power, or “sex”, where sexual drive is degraded and deprived of personal love, is a direct contradiction of the Christian image of man that has shaped the culture of Europe. Without Christianity, a Europe built solely on economic power and the consumption of material goods has no future.
As a German, I am ashamed that it is again possible in my homeland that a Polish scholar could be convicted of so-called “incitation to hatred” on the basis of a factual report.
L: What should happen now? The penalty order is not yet final, and the defendant’s lawyer has already filed an appeal. But how should Catholics behave? Do you believe that the German bishops will also take a stand, Your Eminence?
CM: One can wait a long time for the German bishops. But Prof. Oko’s work should quickly be translated into German. Even though only a few Germans can read Polish, there are still millions of decent German citizens of all Christian denominations and also of non-Christians who have not bowed their knees to Baal, the idol of perverse thought, who still have a moral discernment and who are ashamed of this grave injustice inflicted on a Polish scholar.
(Translated from the original German with consultation of the Polish article.)