Did Cardinal Cupich just ordain a homosexual Jesuit?

Thursday, 3 August 2017

Did Cardinal Cupich just ordain a homosexual Jesuit?

 

Did Cardinal Cupich just ordain a homosexual to the sacred priesthood? This question may be seriously asked about his ordination of Michael Rossman S. J. 
 
Rossman is publicly known for openly dissenting against Catholic teaching on homosexuality. What other message is Rossman S.J., sending? That he only supports, defends, encourages others to engage in unnatural sexual vice? 

This would still be more than enough to have expelled him from the seminary. 




I have dealt with Rossman before, when he wrote an article praising the psychologically disturbed singer, mocker of the Catholic Faith and active bisexual, “Lady Gaga”.  

 
Rossman, like so many other Jesuits, openly supports the US Supreme Court decision on so-called “same-sex marriage”. 

* * *
 
 
 
Cardinal Cupich: you did not do due diligence in discerning if Michael Rossman S.J., should be ordained. Rossman’s dissent is public and with full knowledge of his Jesuit Superiors. According to Canon Law (1029), Rossman’s ordination may be valid, but it is certainly illicit. 
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2017/08/05/did-cardinal-cupich-just-ordain-a-jesuit-homosexual/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

One comment on “Did Cardinal Cupich just ordain a homosexual Jesuit?

  1. Can we stop pussyfooting around here?
    Look, the human race has understood since forever that, if you are silent in the face of grave evil, you effectively have said that it is not evil at all. If you aid an evil, you approve of it, and thus call it good. If you call an evil good, then, *even if at the moment you yourself haven’t done it yet*, you *would and will* do it the moment it seems attractive or advantageous to you to do so, because, after all, it is “good”. And if by chance it never does seem attractive to you personally, so that you never actually do it yourself, you are still guilty of the evil, because you approve of it in others.
    And therefore, those who condone homosexuality are homosexuals; those who condone transgenderism are transgender. It doesn’t matter if they have actually done homosexual or transgender acts themselves.
    Rom. 1:32 speaks directly of homosexuals as among those “Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”
    And check this out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term)
    An accessory to a crime is “one who gives generalized and/or limited help and encouragement”… Common law traditionally considers an accessory just as guilty as the principal(s) in a crime, and subject to the same penalties.”

Leave a Reply