FAIL! @JamesMartinSJ claims you can’t dismiss false teaching on same-sex unions because Francis developed doctrine. Wherein Fr. Z Rants

Jesuit homosexualist activist James Martin said this on CNN:

“[Pope Francis] may have in a sense, as we say in the church, developed his own doctrine. We have to reckon with the fact that the head of the church has now said that he feels that civil unions are ok. And we can’t dismiss that…. Bishops and other people can’t dismiss that as easily as they might want to.  This is in a sense… this is a kind of teaching that he is giving us.”

If you watch this dreck (there is a lot that’s bad in it), you will see how he leans in when he stresses “a kind of teaching”.

“A kind of teaching”?  It sure is.  It’s a bad teaching.   And the claim that people “can’t dismiss it that easily” is laughable on the face of it.  The Church herself dismisses that bad teaching.

More on that later.  Martin said another erroneous thing intend to mislead people into thinking that it must be accepted.   You, dear reader, aren’t permitted to dismiss this because Francis is the “head of the Church”.

A Pope is not the “head of the Church”.  Christ is the head of the Church (read Col 1:18, Eph 1-22-23, Eph 5:23 with nuptial imagery that does not say, “for the husband is the head of the, you know, the other guy”.

Going on, Martin the homosexualist says, “Francis, as we say in the church, developed his own doctrine.”

“As WE say in the church”?!?  Who the hell says that?

The only true, Catholic sense of development of doctrine does not allow contradiction of what has always been taught.

But what Francis proposed, and what Jesuit Martin constantly champions, contradicts the Church’s teachings.

And Martin claims we “can’t dismiss” this just because Francis said it.

Oh yeah?

We can and MUST dismiss these wicked, misleading claims by Jesuit Martin the homosexualist activist.

We can and MUST dismiss false teaching no matter what the source.

Some might say that Francis was just speaking as a private citizen, not as Pope.  So what?  Even when St. John Paul and Pope Benedict did that, they didn’t contradict the Church.

Francis contradicted the Church’s teaching, private or official opinion notwithstanding.

Both Francis and Jesuit Martin have an obligation to bring clarity not confusion, to uphold the Church’s doctrines, not undermine them, to strengthen the brethren, not enervate them through ambiguity, ill-sounding and downright scandalous statements about condoning a civil set up, which is a secular mockery of marriage, in which men inseminate each other’s … whatever.

Even the slightest appearance of condoning such a thing must be avoided.

That is why the Church teaches, as it did clearly with the approbation of the Vicar of Christ, St. John Paul II through Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2003 that civil unions between people of the same sex, “obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of the institution of marriage.”

The CDF taught, with the approbation of St. John Paul – whom Francis thinks should not be Doctor of the Church and whose Magisterium he has been relentlessly undermining since 2013 – that…

To vote in favour of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral.

And yet that is precisely what Francis did.  That’s what Jesuit Martin advocates and claims that you must accept.

By the way, that 2003 CDF document, “Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons” was signed on 3 June, the Feast of St. Charles Lwanga and Companions, slaughtered by a homosexual pederast king.

I would also point to a footnote in that document, which says,

“It should not be forgotten that there is always “a danger that legislation which would make homosexuality a basis for entitlements could actually encourage a person with a homosexual orientation to declare his homosexuality or even to seek a partner in order to exploit the provisions of the law”.

Thus, the multiplication of scandal upon scandal, sin upon sin.  In this case, sin that “cries to heaven”.

But Jesuit Martin says that we cannot dismiss Francis’ – the head of the Church’s – own developed doctrine.  He is committing scandal.

Christ is the head of the Church.

Popes don’t develop doctrine contrary to the Church’s teachings.

The Church’s teachings about homosexual unions STAND FIRM and UNCHANGED.

The public positions of Jesuit homosexualist activist James Martin are a clear and present danger to souls.

He and his superiors will answer to God.



The moderation queue is ON.



About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Francis, Jesuits, Liberals, Sin That Cries To Heaven, What are they REALLY saying?, You must be joking! and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. ChrisP says:

    Dear Fr Martin
    The Bible ( you know that thing you use to weigh down your obviously huge pile of fan mail) teaches that correcting the Pope when he is wrong is quite ok- in fact necessary. Like when Paul rebuked Peter in Gal 2:11 “But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him in public, because he was clearly wrong.”
    Bp Schneider, Abp Viganò and Cdl Burke are clearly acting in accord with Paul and the 3700+ yr plus Word of God concerning such behaviours.

  2. robtbrown says:

    Fr James Martin was absolutely correct when he said some years ago that he is not a theologian.

  3. Tooksam says:

    “Real development is not leaving things behind, as on a road, but drawing life from them, as from a root”
    G.K. Chesterton

  4. Charles E Flynn says:

    The “teaching” is just another defective consumer product. If there were a Theological Teachings Truthfullness Commision (similar to the Consumer Products Safety Commission), it would issue a recall.

  5. Kent Wendler says:

    My consolation is that the Church has survived bad priests (Martin Luther, anyone? Damage continues…) and really bad popes, like Rodrigo Borgia.

  6. TRW says:

    The CDF never should have used the phrase ” Homosexual Persons”. It’s misleading. It’s not an ontological category. Language matters.

  7. The key turn of phrase is “developed his own doctrine.”

    Kind of like another Martin, five centuries ago, developed his own doctrine.

  8. samwise says:

    Yes, Christ is the Head of the body, the Church–thank you, Fr Z! “Ecce Homo”, the One who deserves our focus & devotion, not the distraction of identity politics so rampant in the world. Identity rests in Christ the God-man who reveals man to himself, not hair-brained sexual identities that enslave.

  9. acardnal says:

    1 Cor 6:9 Holy scripture

  10. ChesterFrank says:

    I read that Pope Francis’s comments were taken entirely out of context, that it was a cut and paste that gave the views of the producer, not the Pope. It’s not the first time this has happened. Yes, I do think the leftist and progressives are actively lobbying the Church and I do think the Pope leans left. I’m not 100% convinced he wants to overthrow Church teaching .

    [He has said it before. He said it this time.]

  11. Senor Quixana says:

    So much to unpack here.

    That we as Catholics must oppose same-sex marriage is patent. The popular sentimental conception of marriage that is currently dominant obscures the rational conception of marriage as an institution that exists as much for the good of societal stability as for the spouses and children that they produce. A culture that buys into that concept will not properly value marriage and will extend it to anyone who thinks it will make them happy. Coupled with the heterosexual devaluation of marriage, easy divorce and attitudes diminishing the value of having a father and a mother in a family and the idea of same-sex unions is almost irresistible.

    I am trying to read this statement by Francis as a statement about public policy in a specific context and not as a weakening of the Church’s moral position on marriage and homosexual acts. We have had Doctors of the Church argue against shutting down brothels, not because they approve of prostitution, but because that recognized that such things mitigate against other societal ills. In charity to Francis and to highlight that this is not giving approbation to sinful acts and unions, I will stick with that view for now.

    Unfortunately, too often perception is more important than reality, and this unnuanced statement will be read the way that Martin wants it to be read, whether that is Francis’ intention or not. We will spend decades attempting to recover from this, emphasizing the insignificance of a non-authoritative statement by a pontiff relative to the centuries of unequivocal authoritative statements by the Church. If you have a camera, a nice guy image and a message that tells people what they want to hear without challenging them in any way you are regarded as exactly the kind of authoritative guy we should have hanging around. This is the kind of thing that Martin and his ilk will get lots of benefit from and I know how we prayerfully fight back, but not how we practically fight back.

    Like many people. I have been dubious of Francis from the start and while my doubts are being resolved in all the wrong ways I do not know exactly we cope with a pope who seems to be tying the millstone ever more tightly around his neck.

  12. Gab says:

    How many souls is he leading down the wrong path? So, so many. And how must those who remain faithful to the Church’s teachings of 2000 years and are same-sex attracted be feeling about what the Pope and the other Jesuit are now expounding?

  13. JustaSinner says:

    Jesuit Jesse James Martin just wants his perversion to be ‘accepted’ so he won’t guilty….

  14. James C says:

    The homosexual director of the documentary (who makes homosexual-themed films) screened the documentary to Francis last August. This week Francis held a celebration party for the director in the Vatican gardens.

    Francis has not been misled. Let’s not he polyanna about this.

  15. Ms. M-S says:

    “He [Martin] is committing scandal.” Just that. Silently ignoring it is not dealing with it. Think of the first little patch of mold, the first mouse, the first cockroach, the first weed, the first smell of smoke.

  16. Charles E Flynn says:

    From Pope Francis Oversteps the Papal Office

    Fr. Gerald E. Murray
    SATURDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2020

    The endorsement of civil unions for same-sex couples by Pope Francis in the film Francesco, directed by Evgeny Afineevsky, is a true scandal in both the technical and popular meaning of that term. He has repudiated the teaching of St. John Paul II that “respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions” and that the “legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behavior, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity.”

    In addition to endorsing civil unions, Pope Francis says that homosexuals “have a right to a family.” What are we to make of this? There is evidence that Afineevsky has egregiously taken this statement from a videotaped 2019 interview of Pope Francis by the Mexican journalist Valentina Alazraki out of context.

    Pope Francis was in fact speaking about the right of homosexuals not to be rejected by their own families, not about homosexuals creating new families of their own, presumably by adoption or through surrogate motherhood.

    The problem, though, remains that the Vatican has publicly embraced this film. And the pope’s out-of-context “right to a family” comments have been widely interpreted in the media in the way surely intended by Afineevsky but not by Pope Francis. The Vatican has the duty to issue a correction stating clearly that Pope Francis was not giving an endorsement of a right to the adoption of children by homosexual couples. The Church has always taught that there is no right for two men or two women living together in an immoral sexual relationship to adopt children.


    Pope Francis’ comments are a flagrant betrayal of the mission of the successor of St. Peter “to confirm the brethren” in sound doctrine.

    This is a volcanic eruption. Catholicism is now widely but incorrectly seen to consist of the latest remarks by Pope Francis to journalists and filmmakers. Pope Francis has used the power and influence of his sacred office to promote something that is sinful. That is not the mission entrusted by Christ to St. Peter and his successors. Catholic doctrine on the immorality of homosexual acts cannot be changed by Pope Francis or any other pope.

  17. jcariveau says:

    For Peter in view of his primacy is only Christ’s Vicar; so that there is only one chief Head of this Body, namely Christ, who never ceases Himself to guide the Church invisibly, though at the same time He rules it visibly, through him who is His representative on earth. After His glorious Ascension into Heaven this Church rested not on Him alone, but on Peter, too, its visible foundation stone. That Christ and His Vicar constitute one only Head is the solemn teaching of Our predecessor of immortal memory Boniface VIII…

    — Pius XII, Mystici Corporis 40

  18. Proverbs Douay-Rheims Bible
    25 You have despised all my counsel, and have neglected my reprehensions.

    26 I also will laugh in your destruction, and will mock when that shall come to you which you feared.

    27 When sudden calamity shall fall on you, and destruction, as a tempest, shall be at hand: when tribulation and distress shall come upon you:

    28 Then shall they call upon me, and I will not hear: they shall rise in the morning and shall not find me:

    29 Because they have hated instruction and received not the fear of the Lord,

    30 Nor consented to my counsel, but despised all my reproof.

    31 Therefore they shall eat the fruit of their own way, and shall be filled with their own devices.

    32 The turning away of little ones shall kill them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.

    33 But he that shall hear me, shall rest without terror, and shall enjoy abundance, without fear of evils.

  19. acardnal says:

    Addendum: When I quoted 1 Cor 6:9 previously to Fr. Martin in a Tweet, he Blocked me.

  20. mo7 says:

    It’s okay Father, I’ve decided not to ‘receive’ this teaching.

  21. robtbrown says:

    The pope says that homosexuals have the right to a family. What is the basis for that right? Certainly not natural law.

    So on the one hand he says that homosexuals have the right to a family. but on the other Chinese Catholics don’t have the right to worship.

    Beam me up, Scotty. There’s no intelligent life down here.

  22. John Malloy says:

    @Senor Quixana: Another Jesuit was condemned by the Vatican in the now well known “Letter from the Holy Office” way back in 1949, for his “unnuanced” preaching on the salvation dogma (EENS). I don’t think I’m off topic because this seems to be the root of the Church’s dogma and moral issues we hear about today. Your comment applies beautifully:

    “We will spend decades attempting to recover from this, emphasizing the insignificance of a non-authoritative statement by a pontiff relative to the centuries of unequivocal authoritative statements by the Church.”

  23. Gaetano says:

    To paraphrase Upton Sinclair: It is difficult to get a priest to understand something when his popularity depends upon his not understanding it.

    That is especially true when “pelvic issues” are concerned.

  24. robtbrown says:

    Semper Quixana says,

    We have had Doctors of the Church argue against shutting down brothels, not because they approve of prostitution, but because that recognized that such things mitigate against other societal ills. In charity to Francis and to highlight that this is not giving approbation to sinful acts and unions, I will stick with that view for now.

    Not all sexual sins are of the same gravity. Heterosexual prostitution is a sin of concupiscence. Homosexual acts are sins against nature, as are acts of bestiality.

    Thus: Adultery is worse than fornication. Homosexuality is worse than adultery. Bestiality is worse than homosexuality.

    In the lingo of moral theology:

    Fornication and Adultery are not wrong in genus (man-woman sex). But they are wrong in species,(unmarried in the first case, at least one married in the second).

    On the other hand, homosexuality ad bestiality are wrong in genus (man-man and man-sheep), thus They are always wrong in species.

  25. Grumpy Beggar says:

    @ Anita Moore, O.P. (lay) : Thanks for the chuckle (lol).

    robtbrown said: “Fr James Martin was absolutely correct when he said some years ago that he is not a theologian.”

    Hmmm . . .Pope Francis said exactly the same thing about himself – that he wasn’t a theologian as well – said it while returning from Korea on August 18, 2014 during the in-flight press conference he gave. Even America magazine admitted it HERE .

    So, what’s does that leave us ? – A personal doctrine as perceived by two self-confessed non-theologians? How reassuring !
    Under these circumstances I would hesitate to use the word “developed” as much as I would hesitate to use the word “doctrine.” I’m sorry, but Fr. Martin’s flights of intellectual flatulence do not merit using the word doctrine in its proper sense.
    Fr. John Hardon (God rest his soul) who was an actual theologian, a Jesuit, and a whole lot more defines development of doctrine this way:

    Growth in the Church’s understanding of the truths of divine revelation. Also called dogmatic progress or dogmatic development, it is the gradual unfolding of the meaning of what God has revealed. Always presumed is that the substantial truth of a revealed mystery remains unchanged. What changes is the subjective grasp of the revealed truth.

    The source of this progressive understanding is the prayerful reflection of the faithful, notably of the Church’s saints and mystics; the study and research by scholars and theologians; the practical experience of living the faith among the faithful; and the collective wisdom and teaching of the Church’s hierarchy under the Bishop of Rome.

    Implicit in the development of doctrine is the will of God that the faithful not only assent to what he revealed but also grow in the depth, clarity, and certitude of their appropriation of divine faith.

    In our present society, thanks to homosexual activism, and gay tyranny, “gay marriage” and “gay civil unions” are now deemed as being synonymous by the general public and governments alike. We’ve seen the consequences: Parents’ rights and children’s rights become systematically trampled as governments force their citizens to view the world through gay-tinted glasses – a world where the word “heterosexual” has become practically interchangeable with the word “homophobe.”

    By calling the concept of gay civil unions “dogma”, one runs the very real risk of insulting God ; because it may hence be inferred that God always meant for men to sleep together. This in turn would suggest that He made pretty serious mistake in the anatomical design department – wouldn’t it ? And guess what ? If God’s not perfect and is a God of mistakes, then we all lose our sense of sin eventually.

    Given that we’re living in the COVID-19 era maybe we could all pray for Fr. Martin to practice a little social distancing – particularly where his keyboard is concerned : If he can continue to stay 6 feet away from it, there’s a much better chance that far less people will be infected by his errors.

  26. Pingback: Venezuelan dictator Maduro cites Francis to promote same-sex marriage legislation | Fr. Z's Blog

  27. Tooksam says:

    JustaSinner, that’s always been my contention.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if in the future, maybe years from now, Fr. Martin comes out. Like Gregory Baum.

  28. samwise says:

    When “going to the periphery” crosses the line is when the exception becomes the rule of law. What about COURAGE ministry, isn’t this a slap in the face of those trying to enact 12 step program to leave homosexual lifestyle?

  29. FrankWalshingham says:

    Only a Jesuit would fail to recognize the difference between a personal opinion of a fellow Black Robe, and authentic dogma!

  30. APX says:

    in which men inseminate each other’s … whatever.

    Excretory system. [Also.] I just say it like it disgustingly is. It creates a disgusting image in even homosexualist minds. At the end of the the day the excretory system and its parts will never be the reproductive system. As St. Alphonsus Liguori writes (Colloquially, of course) in his moral theology treatise- it doesn’t go there.

    [It must be particularly trying and scuzzy when considered by women, who often get men more than men do themselves.]

  31. Pingback: CATHOLIC HEADLINES 10.25.20 – The Stumbling Block

  32. samwise says:

    PF has been developing ad nauseum. Here’s latest contra just war,

  33. MK says:

    Not only is Jesus, not the Pope, the head of the Church, I find it inconceivable that the Roman Church claims Papal supremacy among bishops. I am baptized Catholic but more and more inclined to Orthodoxy. I doubt I’ll convert because I don’t see a need to. I’ve been baptized and I believe in Christ and his Church, which includes the Eastern rite.

    As for Pope Francis’ call for civil unions, it raises severe questions about other Church teaching, namely the doctrine against sex before marriage and the premise behind the prohibition against the use of contraceptives. By calling for “civil unions”, Francis has assertively distinguished such a union from marriage between a man and a woman. Regarding contraceptives the premise of the prohibition is that the sexual act is life giving and husband and wife need be open to new life created through that act. The suggestion that same sex couples can live together in a civil union, implying sexual activity, is a direct assault on both significant Catholic teachings. If that is acceptable, then why believe any Catholic teaching?

Comments are closed.