Persecuted Fr. Kalchik responds to homosexualist Jesuit Martin

At Church Militant, there is a response by Fr. Paul John Kalchik – who was notoriously tossed from his Chicago parish after an infamous and blasphemous “gay” flag was burned – to homosexualist activist Jesuit Fr. Jasmine Martin, SJ. More on Kalchik, who is still in hiding I believe, HERE.

You want to read the whole thing, but here is the peroration.


So today I make a challenge to you, Fr. Martin, along the lines of Elijah on Mount Carmel. How is it that your new anthropology is better than that given to us by the Fathers of the Church? Why should we brush aside absolutely all of Sacred Scripture to make room for this “new” understanding of how a person is made?

I for one do not believe what you are saying, which boils down to rewriting Genesis to say, “God made them, male and female he made them, some heterosexual and some homosexual he made them, in the divine image he made them.”

I found your personal attack on me unsettling, but your attempt at supplanting the true faith with a funhouse mirror version of it makes me sick. And by the by, before you “demonize” me, or LifeSiteNews or Church Militant, check out your facts. Come judgment day, there will no longer be a leftist press corps to sing your praises.

Father Paul John, in hiding from the homosexuals who hate me.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Ms. M-S says:

    Genesis 1: 26-28
    Mark 10:7
    Matthew 5:11
    2 Timothy 4:3-4
    I won’t add the reference to the millstone around the neck, but I hope Fr. Martin has occasion to reflect upon it before it’s too late.

  2. Kevin says:

    No millstone deserves that fate!?

  3. OrdinaryCatholic says:

    Fr. Martin and those who think as he does cannot seriously be contemplating the the final judgment. What we see in Fr. Martin is what will become more and more prevalent in the Church in America. I’m not sure where the bishops stand on this guy but if there are some bishops who disagree with what he says then they MUST stand up and disavow this him otherwise will they not be complicit in his errors?

  4. bibi1003 says:

    My bishop actively supports Fr. Martin and New Ways Ministry–he speaks at their events. Yet he has never issued a public statement supporting the right to life. I find that incredible, especially in light of recent high profile attacks, both verbal and physical, on people praying outside Planned Parenthood locations. That includes an attack on an elderly woman in our own state, who was pushed down on the concrete by another woman, resulting in a broken leg. When she was interviewed from her hospital bed, she said she forgave the woman. This deserves a statement of appreciation from our bishop.

  5. Aquinas Gal says:

    last year I heard a talk by an auxiliary bishop of my diocese who buys into the “made that way” mantra. But God works through secondary causes and allows them to have their effects.
    Remember the tragedy of the thalidomide babies, born without limbs. Did God make them that way, or was it because some doctors made the terrible mistake of giving their mothers a drug that caused birth defects?

  6. bobbird says:

    We should send someone to China to learn the In’s and Out’s of how an Underground Church can survive, for unless more bishops speak out, that is where we are headed. The compromised bishops, are, well … compromised. It is the FAITHFUL ones who need to begin risk-taking. Fr. Z, are there canon law limitations the Vatican must follow in punishing faithful bishops?

  7. GregB says:

    In James 5:19-20:
    19 My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins”.
    In Ezekiel 3:17-21:
    17 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. 18 If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life. 20 Again, if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand. 21 Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning; and you will have saved your life.”
    These verses of Ezekiel speak to the responsibility of the prophets to their office. Admonishing the sinner is one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy. In the modern Church there is a serious imbalance between justice and mercy.

  8. TomG says:

    bibi1003: I think it’s time to start naming the diocese, if not the name of the ordinary.

  9. tho says:

    The catechism has it right “intrinsically disordered”, which means by its’ very nature, how hard is that to understand. If a bishop or priest doesn’t get behind that, they should turn in their collar.

  10. Gab says:

    More than anything, Fr Martin needs our prayers.

  11. SKAY says:

    Gab said:
    “More than anything, Fr Martin needs our prayers.”
    So do those whom he has led astray.

  12. SKAY says:

    Gab said:
    “More than anything, Fr Martin needs our prayers.”
    So do those whom he has led astray.

  13. Jerome Charles says:

    Fr. Martin’s premise is wrong. There is NO room for LGBT people in the Catholic Church. They should another church, for starters…

    I don’t really believe that. But I bet some of you were nodding your heads in agreement. Fr. Martin is simply promoting love and connection in our Church for a population many would rather cast out. This is no different than Jesus did– for lepers, prostitutes, tax collectors…

    It’s one thing to uphold and promote Catholic teaching. It’s another to abhor the people you have judged as falling short.

  14. Josephus Corvus says:

    Jerome Charles said: This is no different than Jesus did…

    The big difference is that Jesus followed up with something like “From now on avoid this sin so that something worse may not overtake you”. Fr. Martin is more on the order of keep doing whatever makes you happy.

  15. bibi1003 says:

    Bishop John Stowe of the Diocese of Lexington, KY. Read what he had to say in his op-ed about the Covington Catholic boys, MAGA hats, immigration and abortion at

  16. Jerome Charles says:

    Josephus Corvus, I don’t get the impression that that is Fr. Martin’s agenda. He’s not encouraging gay marriage. He’s been clear that he is advocating for LGBT people to be treated with respect, understanding, and compassion–just because they are human beings, created by God. That’s enough to deserve those gifts from the Church. He argues the truth that LGBT people are held to a higher level of virtue and thus are discriminated by the Church more than other Catholics who are living in sin– such as unmarried couples living together, married people who are having extramarital affairs, couples using birth control, business owners who lack honesty and integrity in their dealings, etc. His other main point is that before you can direct a person to “go and sin no more,” you need to know them a bit. Being respectful to another person opens a door for relationship, and then– maybe you can start talking about sin. He’s addressing the Church’s relationship with LGBT people. Yes, Jesus talked to people about sin. But first– he offered respect, understanding, and compassion. THIS is where the Church is falling short. LGBT people are not aliens. Or demons. They are human beings. Many live chaste lives– and may be guilty of other sins. If the Church jumps right to assumptions about their sin, that is ignorant and wrong. (And, I believe it’s “bearing false witness against your neighbor.”) Just because a person identifies as LGBT does not mean they are sexually involved with someone– as I’ve argued in previous posts.

    So, Fr. Martin is promoting love and connection with those who are outcast. Just like Jesus did. I stand by that.

    [I do not think that that is an entirely accurate view of Martin’s agenda. You have certain given it the most beneficial spin possible. While much of what you have offered is true and we can all agree with, he is doing a lot more, in fact.]

  17. richdel says:

    Until Fr. Martin can produce any kind of Church document or Scriptural reference that supports the notion God makes people “gay”, then such ideas remain nothing more than the gospel according to @JamesMartinSJ.

    And, Jerome Charles, your straw men arguments that others are suggesting that people are LGBT people are aliens or demons are intellectually dishonest since this is not what people are saying. Fr. Martin’s ideas if embraced lead to the approbation of gay people living in active homosexual relationships (after all, “God made me this way”, right?) while at the same time being able to go to receive Communion regularly (i.e., “feeling welcomed with “compassion”). The de facto result of such an approbation would be to the normalize long term commitment to active homosexual relationships which do not display the necessary “sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin again” as required to receive the sacrament of Penance (CCC 1451), for which reason alone it’s also intellectually dishonest to suggest that the Church somehow needs to get over its hang-ups over homosexual sins as compared to extramarital affairs, birth control, and extortion, as people would likewise need to display similar resolution not to commit again such sins as these in order to also receive the sacrament of Penance.

  18. Jerome Charles says:

    Richdel, I didn’t say anything about God making them gay– just that God created them. Human beings. And– yes, they are demonized by those in the Church who are hung up on homosexuality. I read it almost every day on this blog and on other Catholic sources. Your assumptions that people who listen to Fr. Martin will be lead to live in active homosexual relationships while receiving Communion are just that: assumptions. It’s your opinion, and a generalization that you can’t really back up.

    Perhaps this is the first time many/most LGBT people have heard from a Catholic priest: You are loved by God. You have dignity because you are a person. The Church will not abandon you.

    That’s the power of his message.

  19. Gab says:

    Has Fr Martin ever come out and explained to people with homosexual tendencies that they cannot receive Holy Communion if they continue to be involved in homosexual acts?

    Asking for a friend.

  20. richiedel says:

    Jerome Charles,

    Baloney: gay people hear that God loves them all the time. To attempt to forward Fr. Martin’s agenda on the false premise that people wouldn’t otherwise hear such things from other Catholic priests is also intellectually dishonest. People just don’t want to hear it when people like priests start distinguishing the sin from the sinner and the all of the sudden the act of making such distinctions is painted as calling homosexual people demons or aliens (see above).

    It’s also plain dishonest to say that Fr. Martin only says things as benign as God created gay people, or that it is only an assumption that Fr. Martin won’t continue to wring his hands over the Church’s lack of making gay people “feel welcome” with “compassion” until they are allowed to receive Communion while maintaining active homosexual relationships.

    Here is the text of a tweet of Fr. Martin’s from April 25 in which he feigns surprise over the fact that people have problems with his stating what you are saying is more specific than what he is actually saying, whereby the creeping incrementalism in this matter is clear: “Being gay isn’t a sin. It’s the way that God made some people. And be careful about biblical literalism. E.g., should we stone people who work on the Sabbath (Ex. 35:2)? Also, be careful: the Bible says a lot about marriage. Solomon, Moses and Abraham all had multiple wives. ”

    Here is a link to the tweet:

    And, Fr. Martin’s suggestion that it is unreasonable and discriminatory to expect a gay person to live a chaste lifestyle in order to receive Communion is clear by what he was quoted as saying, especially in light of the quote’s context, in a New York Times article dated June 13, 2017 about a “gay Mass” celebrated by Cardinal Tobin: “‘Pretty much everyone’s lifestyle is sinful,’ Father Martin said. ‘Unless the Blessed Mother shows up in the communion line, there is no one sinless in our church.'”

    Here is the link to the same article:

    So, my assertions about where Fr. Martin is going with his agenda are more than mere assumptions.

  21. I think it is manifest what Father Martin is doing: he is being deliberately and studiously ambiguous, and giving hints without coming out and saying too much that will cause him to get in trouble.

    And if someone wants to say, oh he just didn’t express himself well, I call B.S. First, Father Martin is neither unschooled and inept at expression. He writes books, for heaven’s sake! He knows the subjects at hand well, and he knows how to state things.

    Further, as a parish priest myself, I have the job very often of explaining all manner of subjects, either in homilies, or in teaching situations, or in the confessional. Over the years, you get certain questions over and over, and you learn how to explain things with some clarity and specificity. Father Martin’s muddled language is a choice. He’s choosing to give a wink and a nod toward a false anthropology (that God makes people to be sexually attracted to the same sex) and moral laxity regarding homosexual behavior, but he doesn’t want to come right out and say so in plain terms. Either he is taking this approach not because he himself believes the things he’s hinting at, but rather because he thinks it will gain him an audience where elsewhere he wouldn’t gain one; or else he dissents but is too coy to admit it. Either way, it is dishonest.

Comments are closed.