Complete Responses to Father Schembri’s ‘Xarabank’ Comments

 

For this article published yesterday at the National Catholic Register, several Maltese faithful — clergy and laity — answered questions in response to comments made by Father Kevin Schembri, a Maltese priest, on the television program Xarabank, on March 8.

Father Schembri spoke approvingly of homosexuality as created by God and “part of his plan,” adding that God created people with “difference sexual orientations,” and that being homosexual “cannot be something bad, because he created it.”

Here below are the complete remarks of the respondents with some minor edits, all of whom responded anonymously due to the sensitivities of the positions they hold.  

Father Schembri and Archbishop Scicluna were asked to comment but did not reply.  

 

Priest One

How concerned are Maltese faithful with these attempts to push a homosexual agenda on the Church by priests within the Maltese Curia?

Judging by the amount of complaints, not only to priests but also to the Presenter of Xarabank, as he himself admitted in a post on Facebook, I would say that many of the Maltese faithful are against such attempts to push a homosexual agenda by what had been termed to be a “progressive” priest, who boasted he is also the Defender of the Bond on the Metropolitan Tribunal and lecturer of canon law on the Faculty of Theology, and who was sent by the Archbishop himself, “Insisting that the public would want to hear what he has to say” (lovinmalta.com: “It Cannot Be Bad to be Gay, Says Priest on Xarabank: ‘Where There is Love and Sincerity, There is God’”). There is no question that the archbishop, like practically every other priest in Malta, knew what Fr Kevin’s ideas and beliefs have always been.

Having said that, however, and given the Maltese general way of easily adapting to the current trends and the widespread tendency to have the best of both worlds, I am afraid that once the initial furore has calmed down — and there being no steady Church leadership — most of the Catholic population will settle down to accept even this agenda. Which unfortunately was also the case with the introduction of divorce and same-sex unions. With the great difference that this time around, it is the Church in Malta that is introducing this LGBT agenda.

How much do you think Archbishop Scicluna agrees with this LGBT agenda?

This is a hard question for me to answer, but he seemed to toe the line without much effort during the sexual abuse summit in Rome when it came to avoiding the “gay” issue as a cause of sexual abuse. The impression I have is that he has fallen in line with Rome’s newly-adopted LGBT agenda. And it seems, from what I have said in question one, that he has embarked on applying that agenda also in his diocese.

Could the archbishop in some way be compromised into following the agenda and if so, how is this possibly detrimentally affecting his work both in Malta and in the Vatican?

I am becoming more and more convinced that while until some time ago, Scicluna had grown in stature on a world-wide level, and many had placed great hopes in him as a person sincerely striving to eradicate the sexual abuse problem, once he started increasingly toeing the line of Cupich and la bella compagnia, he lost much of his former standing. It is quite widely accepted that he has his eyes on something higher. 

How much does this and the Amoris Laetitia guidelines, point to a deeper crisis of moral relativism in the Maltese Church and poor leadership?

One reaction on Facebook to Fr Kevin’s Xarabank’s interview was  “Long live Relativism”, obviously to the detriment of moral values. Not to mention the many complaints expressed by so many people. Yet until this very moment (March 14), we have heard no word from the local authorities, trying in some way to clarify the situation and put the faithfuls’ mind at rest. Yet a number of priests and laypersons have directly addressed the archbishop to express some guidelines. But so far there is only a deafening sound of silence. Is this a sign of good leadership? Or is it because what Fr Kevin said is completely in line with the archbishop’s newly-embraced beliefs, in line not with God’s word, but with the word of Francis, and it won’t in any way benefit Scicluna to go against the present Pope’s wish? Just as he did when he issued the Maltese Guidelines on Amoris Laetitia?

Do you think Archbishop Scicluna is the right person to battle against sexual abuse given these questions over his views on homosexuality?

I had high hopes and I looked up to him. I had great confidence in his abilities. But the present Vatican circumstances and personnel, as I have explained above, have seriously compromised his standing and his abilities. So my confidence is ebbing away quite fast, more so following the Xarabank interview issue and the lack of any guidance following that interview.

Priest Two 

How concerned are Maltese faithful with these attempts to push a homosexual agenda on the Church by priests within the Maltese Curia?

As priests we must welcome everyone, we should not exclude anyone from our pastoral ministry. Doing that does not makes us priests of Christ who has eaten with the prostitute, entered the house of the tax collector, etc. We have always been taught to accompany everyone in their journey to Christ. But that means accompanying them to make difficult choices. However, the homosexuality agenda being pushed now is that it is feelings that matter, not objective Gospel truths, and this is what is being drip fed especially under the episcopacy of Scicluna. We are being terrorised by a small but vocal group of “Catholics” who definitely have the backing of the archbishop to bend us to their idea of ministering pastorally to LGBT people. That is not challenging them to live their lives coherently according to the beliefs they claim to possess.

How much do you think Archbishop Scicluna agrees with this LGBT agenda?

We always gave him the benefit of the doubt because as a bishop he is very warm and friendly and so we had no doubt that he will be an inclusive bishop. But the Summit opened our eyes to his commitment to the LGBT agenda when he refused to acknowledge that the statistics state many of the abusers are homosexuals. That was quite shocking to behold but not as shocking as seeing him endorse the interview by Xarabank during which Fr Kevin Schembri outlined a brand new teaching. So I would say that Scicluna’s endorsement of the LGBT agenda is complete and he is quite comfortable with this since it seems that he is only implementing what is the norm in the Vatican. 

Could the archbishop in some way be compromised into following the agenda and if so, how is this possibly detrimentally affecting his work both in Malta and in the Vatican?

I think he is severely compromised. I have had people who are not necessarily believers, or Church goers, but who admire the archbishop’s leadership in society at large, who have been aghast at his cosying up to the likes of Cupich and his many accusations of cover up. They were even more concerned that Scicluna seems to close an eye to the Pope’s guilt where the case of [Archbishop Gustavo] Zanchetta is concerned. They do not read Church news where doctrinal debates are concerned, but they are very interested in the issue of clerical sex abuse. Some have told me that they were very proud to have their archbishop at the forefront of this fight, but now he has gone to the other side and they cannot understand his change of heart. Most agree that it must have something to do with his ambition to get promoted. Personally, I think that Scicluna is no longer credible. He has nailed his colours to the mast of a ship mired in scandal of cover up. In Malta, his safeguarding efforts are looked upon with suspicion and mistrust. It doesn’t help that they are in the mould of this current pontificate.

How much does this and the Amoris Laetitia guidelines, point to a deeper crisis of moral relativism in the Maltese Church and poor leadership?

This latest debacle is the second wave of the misguided guidelines issued by our episcopal conference where our bishops laid the ground work for such pronouncements by Fr Kevin, since in the guidelines they insisted on meeting people where they are, but ignored the fact that as priests and as a Church we must always try to help people, in whatever situation, to rise and walk, and sin no more. We are tired of being the guinea pigs of the Vatican where such experiments of “pastoral” initiatives are tried out. We have been overwhelmed by people coming over to us, pleading with us that what they have heard is not true, and if it is, whether the archbishop will retract and issue a clarification. That was sadly scuppered when Xarabankitself issued a statement saying that the archbishop himself sent Fr Kevin in his name. Worse, it is being said that, when confronted, Scicluna asks whoever is complaining to show him exactly where Fr Kevin goes against the teaching of the Church. Even worse is the rumour that whatever Fr Kevin said during the interview was agreed upon with the archbishop himself. 

Do you think Archbishop Scicluna is the right person to battle against sexual abuse given these questions over his views on homosexuality?

I think I have answered this question above. But if it is the red hat that he wants, may he get it as soon as possible and leave us in peace. He has traumatised his flock by his bad leadership in moral matters, and it will take a while for us to get our footing, if ever. 

“Peter Canasius” — A Homosexual Maltese Catholic 

It is obvious that the name showing in the Inbox is not my real name. I would rather not tell you my name but my friend who spoke to you about me can vouch for me. 

I am a gay man and Catholic. I have struggled so much with my sexual identity and for most of my adult life I was a closeted gay man trying to live my life in accordance to my beliefs and calling as a Christian. It was difficult for me even to talk about it with anyone especially after I had succumbed to my attraction. Like many gay people across the Catholic church, I rejoiced when the Pope said “who am I to judge?” and thought that it was like a greenlight to embark on relationships without guilt. I was happy for a while if one can be happy living without structure.

So I continued to struggle with what I felt and with what I believed, I still do! It is something that will not go away. I spoke to several friends of mine who are believers who encouraged me to seek counsel from priests. And I did. But it took me a long time to find the right priest who although being sympathetic to my struggles, he always walked with me to live a coherent life. Yes, I sin. I fall into my old ways when I am weak, and every time I confess my sins. I cry with this priest who listens to me with charity. But he tells me: “God loves you and he wants the best you can be. He knows our sins, he makes allowances for our sins, he looks into our hearts, sees our burning desire to turn to him in spite of our failings, and he gives us his mercy and his grace.” But he also gives us free will, this priest tells me. He tells me that we have a choice. We are not ruled by our feelings and passions. So I try to live well. to live an authentic life.

Once I had the occasion to speak to Archbishop Scicluna.  And I went away a little confused because he didn’t emphasise my responsibility as a Christian to live my vocation, but he focused on my gayness as if I am identified by that only by telling me that the Church loves me just as I am, and doesn’t condemn you. When I told him that I have been struggling all my adult life, he seemed to brush it off, as if to say that is something of the past. I must have looked shocked or maybe perplexed for he repeated: The Church loves you. We don’t judge you..

It looks lovely on paper but I wasn’t convinced. So I continued to seek my confessor and his counsel. I was reminded of this odd exchange when I saw the interview with Fr Kevin. It sounded remarkably similar. The tone, the neither here or there statements but everything is implied. Had I not have had the grace to be in a long and fruitful dialogue with my confessor, I would have seen nothing wrong with what the Archbishop told me and with Fr Kevin’s words. Those words are not useful for believers who are gay because they conform to the dictates of society. They are not based on the words of Christ and the teachings of his Church but rather they are the words of the LGBT propaganda. I know, because I get bombarded every day by my friends who are gay and laugh at me for not living the homosexual lifesyle.  I have suffered a great deal since the interview aired because these friends keep taunting me: See? Your Church wants you to have gay sex after all because where two are three love each other, there is God.” Of course, here they are mocking the Gospel by misquoting a famous line. This is what’s hurtful. That the Archbishop is allowing people to mock the Gospel. But then, Fr Kevin mocked it first. I am wondering whether my sacrifices have been all in vain and I would like my Archbishop to tell me that this is not the case.

Thank you for listening to me. I hope this will help people like me to feel less confused.

Priest Three

How concerned are Maltese faithful with these attempts to push a homosexual agenda on the Church by priests within the Maltese Curia?

It was very unjust last Friday that the people got the impression that the priest expressing the Church’s position was delegated by the Archbishop to do so.  Having expressed an unorthodox position, we cannot in good conscience follow suit.  Most of us felt disgusted at the manipulation of the truth, because I am sure that even the priest sharing his own opinion and passing it as the Church’s knows that it is not so.

How much do you think Archbishop Scicluna agrees with this LGBT agenda?

He is sympathetic but he has never openly expressed himself.  So far he has not disassociated himself from Friday’s position, not even by a tweet.  How should one interpret this?  During the last Assembly of Bishops on abuse, he refused to consider homosexuality as an issue on the agenda saying that one does not judge a whole category on the deeds of individuals.

Could the archbishop in some way be compromised into following the agenda and if so, how is this possibly detrimentally affecting his work both in Malta and in the Vatican?

If he continues to run wtih the hare and hunt with the hounds on doctrinal matters, like the case of the guidelines on Amoris Laetitia, he is compromising his doctrinal authority.  He asserts that he is following the lines of the present Papacy, but it seems that even the Pope himself does not go as far.

How much does this and the Amoris Laetitia guidelines, point to a deeper crisis of moral relativism in the Maltese Church and poor leadership?

These supposedly pastoral approaches are in fact leading to the legitimisation of moral relativism.  The people reassure themselves that even the Church is changing its moral doctrine, and everyone decides for himself.  We have seen on the part of both Bishops an acquiescence of very serious moral issues created by liberal legislation.  With the idea of Church-State separation, pluralism in society, and changing mores the Church’s teaching authority and credibility is at an all-time low.

On the other hand, a strategy to attack the Church’s credibility on the part of liberals and sections of the media has indeed forged people’s mentality.

Do you think Archbishop Scicluna is the right person to battle against sexual abuse given these questions over his views on homosexuality?

I do esteem the Archbishop for his sharp mind and strong will and for various brave actions he did.  Pastoral leadership is wanting though, and his service outside the diocese does not help him to concentrate on the needs of the diocese.  As concerns, the fight of abuse of minors, he is more on the rigid side rather than on leniency.      As regards sexual abuse or sins against chastity, he shares the uncertainty of approach of the universal Church, where it seems that actions are taken only when they cannot be avoided.

If the Church is to save itself it has to turn to Christ and not to be a player in the politics of this world.  

Priest Four

Another priest, who did not want his words fully reported, wrote about an attitude of confusion and frustration among practicing Catholics in Malta. He said they do not know where the bishops stand, at least officially. 

He said everyone is for genuinely pastoral attitudes towards LGBT persons and certainly priests advocate pastoral charity, but he stressed this should not come at the expense of the truth and established Church doctrine and moral theology. The priest nevertheless noted changing attitudes among clergy and laity which are often erroneously seen as laudable. 

He also highlighted LGBT Christians who, even though they are prayerful and no doubt well meaning, espouse gay “marriage” and same-sex adoption, which contradict Church teaching. The conversation has therefore been twisted, and Malta’s Church leaders have adopted it completely, perhaps out of a misplaced compassion.

He did not know how much Archbishop Scicluna agrees with such a view, but recalled his opposition to legalising same-sex marriage, and is willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He did not think questions over his views on this issue would hamper his work in tackling abuse, and hopes his unwillingness to discuss homosexuality at the Vatican summit was to avoid drawing a direct link between homosexuality and pedophilia, rather than to wilfully ignore any correlation between these two realities.

Priest Five 

How concerned are Maltese faithful with these attempts to push a homosexual agenda on the Church by priests within the Maltese Curia?

Maltese faithful are not fed up with the pushing of the homosexual agenda. They do not know what to do with it. Although the government has given by law many “rights” to the LGBT community, the Maltese people are truly still against the homosexual agenda. Maltese people might be misconceived about the idea of gay marriage, as in, they do not really know what the difference between Holy Matrimony and Gay marriage is. However Maltese people still show a great resistance against the idea of gay couples adopting children and they feel very strongly about it until they become subjective cause of a relative or a friend of their own being gay.

That being said, there are many priests within the Maltese curia or priests that hold favour with certain media outlets or favour with the archbishop, who outrightly bless gay couples or bless their rings and make it all public. They give it publicity by disguising it as a form of accompaniment with gay couples.

How much do you think Archbishop Scicluna agrees with this LGBT agenda?

As to how much Archbishop Scicluna agrees with the LGBT agenda, I cannot say. I can only say that he has many times shown great leniency to homosexual priests, and all the homosexual groups who claim to be Catholic but are not actually Catholic except for the name Catholic that appears as part of the name of their organisation. Many times these associations are the same ones advocating in favour of IVF, abortion, divorce and euthanasia.

Could the archbishop in some way be compromised into following the agenda and if so, how is this possibly detrimentally affecting his work both in Malta and in the Vatican?

I do not know if he is compromised. However, it is very strange to keep seeing priests who are known to be homosexuals, who constantly keep getting defended by the archbishop. Not only are they defended but also given titles or comfortable positions within the Church, like becoming Canons of a certain collegiate or other, or even parish priests of certain communities. Locally this creates great frustration within the clergy who chooses to remain silent on the matter out of fear the archbishop will somehow retaliate. 

How much does this and the Amoris Laetitia guidelines, point to a deeper crisis of moral relativism in the Maltese Church and poor leadership?

Stemming from Amoris Laetitiawere a myriad of problems. Never was the Maltese Church given any clear indication on accompaniment of the people in such situations as those discussed in AL or homosexual couples. The path chosen by the episcopal conference was that of ambiguity. That being said, the Maltese lay people in such situations have long sought all other advice except from that of the Church’s — meaning that, whilst the Episcopal conference thought they might attract the masses of people back to the Maltese Church pews, they were gravely mistaken.