Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boy Scouts had to fight with Catholic priests to remove gay leader from Catholic scout troop?
LSN ^ | 8.21.2012 | Ben Johnson

Posted on 08/21/2012 9:44:44 AM PDT by Morgana

LOUISVILLE, August 20, 2012, ( –The Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have assured a homosexual will no longer act as an assistant scoutmaster at a Catholic church’s troop. But he will continue to lead Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church’s Girl Scout troop.

“I am finding it increasingly difficult to keep a low profile and stay ‘in the closet’ with the Boy Scouts,” Greg Bourke, 54, wrote in a letter to the Lincoln Heritage Council on June 22.

Bourke said he had “become increasingly uncomfortable with the don’t ask, don’t tell policy of the Boy Scouts…I feel like it’s hateful and I don’t approve of it.”

In response to his letter, Commissioner J. McFerran “Mac” Barr II asked Bourke to resign from the Catholic church’s BSA troop, where he had volunteered for the last five years.

Bourke told local media after he refused to resign, the council contacted the church’s priest, Fr. Scott Wimsett, and later Fr. Jeff Gatlin, the Scouting liaison for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Louisville.

Bourke claimed both refused to remove him from his Boy Scout post. He stepped aside only after the Boy Scouts threatened to revoke the church’s scouting charter.

However, he will remain a leader in Girl Scout troop 1575, which also meets at Our Lady of Lourdes Roman Catholic Church in Louisville. The Girl Scouts support homosexual leadership. “I do believe it’s time for the Boy Scouts to come in to the current century,” said Girl Scouts of Kentuckiana CEO Lora Tucker.

Cecelia Price, a spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Louisville, said in a media statement that the Church expects “adult leaders — whether heterosexual or with same-sex attraction — in any ministry strive to lead chaste lives.”

According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, Bourke “said he and his partner attend Our Lady of Lourdes, and it is widely known that they are gay.”

Bourke has lived with another man for 30 years. They have adopted two children.

The Supreme Court upheld the Boy Scouts’ right to set membership criteria as a private organization in a June 2000 ruling, and the scouts reaffirmed their policy on July 17.

Mitt Romney, who served on the organization’s executive board, said, “I feel that all people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation” during a 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy. Campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul confirmed earlier this month that, while he opposes the BSA’s scouting policy, he has not pressured the group to change its stance.

Other adversaries resorted to force. In 2011, the Missouri PTA has asked its 420 affiliates to sever ties with the BSA because of its stance on homosexuality; and in 2007, Philadelphia’s City Council voted to end a 70-year lease over the policy.

Rev. Donald E. Overton, an Episcopalian priest in Lousiville, vouched for Bourke’s leadership. “We have to encourage a change at the highest level,” he said.

But Boy Scouts of America’s chief Scout executive Bob Mazzuca said parents appreciate its policy, which gives them the “right to address issues of same-sex orientation within their family, with spiritual advisers, and at the appropriate time and in the right setting.”

To respectfully contact the Archdiocese of Louisville:

TOPICS: Catholic; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: boyscouts; catholic; homosexualagenda; kentucky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Morgana
Good for them!

It is no real news about the GSA, though. They have been supporting atheistic secularism for decades now.

Of course there is going to be push-back on this, true Christians are few and far between these days.

This man, living with another man for thirty years in sexual deviancy, is no position to guide the character development of youth. This would be like putting a sex addict as their leader and one whose sexual preferences have a history towards pedophilia.

The sad part about this is that these two males are raising their two children to believe this deviant behavior is to be promoted when, the truth is that, it is a behavior that is not only immoral but a rather severe disorder and nothing that should be encouraged nor accepted in the public sphere.

21 posted on 08/22/2012 6:32:34 AM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo

In a few years some of these children raised by homosexuals are going to grow up and be old enough to tell a story or two

I am waiting to hear this.

22 posted on 08/22/2012 6:34:50 AM PDT by Mr. K ("The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum [of good]")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Homosexuality, if you mean the action, is a sin, always was and always will be.

Homosexuality, if you mean the temptation, is a temptation, not a sin in itself but always a moral danger, due to our fallen nature.

Is it possible for a person who experiences this temptation, to live chastely? Yes, it is. By rejecting the sin in thought, words, and deed; by avoiding the persons, places, and circumstances which conduce to this sin; and by a firm reliance on the grace of God and recourse to the Sacraments.

1 Corinthians 10:13
No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.

This applies to people battling temptations to homosexuality, or alcoholism, or gluttony, or wrath, or avarice, or thievery, or sloth, or marital infidelity, or any other sin.

It is important to make a distinction between the temptation, and the sin.

The Catholic doctrines have never, as you say, "normalized" homosexuality.

There are way too many ignorant, deluded, or proudly dissident Catholics in error about this, but it is their opinion, and not Catholic doctrine, which is erroneous.

23 posted on 08/22/2012 10:46:14 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Bourke said he had “become increasingly uncomfortable with the don’t ask, don’t tell policy of the Boy Scouts…I feel like it’s hateful and I don’t approve of it.”

First of all, it isn't a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The policy clearly states a homosexual cannot be a scout leader.

Second of all, if you are "uncomfortable with it" then quit being a scout leader. They don't want you anyway, so both parties will be happier.

24 posted on 08/22/2012 2:01:49 PM PDT by MEGoody (You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Temptation does not define a person. Tempted to steal does not make one a thief. Tempted to kill does not make one a murderer. Tempted to bugger another of the same sex does not make one a homosexual. while temptation is sinful in the eyes of God it is not sinful in the eyes of society. Homosexuality only occurs when it is performed. There is no predisposition to homosexuality that brands one a queer, only the act.
A scout leader who is a professed queer has performed sexual acts on another male. Such persons are not constrained by sexual taboos or moral controls. Unless they turm away from and reject as sinful their sexual immorality they can not be permitted to be in authority over children.

Your attempt to define a person as a chaste homosexual is an aberration and is not consistent with Catholic doctrine.

25 posted on 08/22/2012 7:01:57 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
(1) "Homosexual" is, ambiguously, commonly used to mean both the act and the orientation. If you use it to mean "a man who has sex with men," then by definiton one can't be a chaste homosexual. It's an axynmoron because of the tautological use of the definition.

(2) But if you mean "homosexual" as in "a man who experiences sexual attraction to a man," then of course a homosexual in this sense can be chaste. He resists temptation -- he resists in thought, word, and deed, by the grace of God, and does not sin.

This is why the word "homosexual" is problematic, because this verbal confusion between the two common meanings keeps recurring.

An analogy: temptation to get drunk does not make one a drunkard, but alcohol dependence syndrome (a particularly sensitivity to alcohol toxicity), does make you an alcoholic --- and it's something you can be born with (e.g. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.) This hyper-vulnerability may be none of your own doing, but you still have a responsibility to abstain from alcohol for your entire life. Thus you can be a teetotal, sober, clean, alcoholic. But you're still an "alcoholic," --- albeit a "dry alcoholic," --- because you still have that inward vulnerability to alcohol.

26 posted on 08/23/2012 5:09:49 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Despite the redness of my neck, I prefer "Appalachian-American.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
As you may know, Gore Vidal -- whose opinion I usually did not value -- was firm in his belief that no one could be homosexual. He said there is no such thing as a homosexual. And there is no such thing as a heterosexual. There are simply acts -- some acts are homosexual acts and some are not. Vidal felt that everyone was everything, and some people perform acts that other people do not.

This thinking is completely opposite the "God made me this way" pablum that today's homosexual activists push. I think everyone recognizes that Man has a sinful nature and we are tempted to do many things that we should not do (stealing, violence, perversion, etc.). The point of being a moral person is that we abstain from the acts which are improper.

The people who claim "I was born this way" have simply given up on behaving in a moral manner. They don't even try.

27 posted on 08/23/2012 5:20:44 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
I understand your point. I think the traditional Catholic assumption was/is that sodomy is simply a vice, and, like gluttony, blasphemy, drunkenness, avarice, irascibility or any other vice, is something any man might succumb to, given the opportunity, imprudently putting himself in the way of temptation, and making no great effort to resist.

I think Vidal is right on this point. However, people do differ from each other in their particular vulnerabilities or individual temperaments, and the word "homosexual" (or better, "a man who experiences SSA") can be used in that sense to describe a person with that particular vulnerability.

There are some men who would never feel inclined to engage in sexual relations with another man under any conditions. There are some who would feel so inclined under conditions of stress, an all-male environment, and isolation from women (armies, navies, monasteries, prisons). There are some who "feel" this inclination during early adolescence but not upon full maturity. And there are still others who feel this inclination more-or-less persistently from puberty onward.

It's important to recognize the existence of these varying tendencies, because, for one thing, one would want to shield a male with this kind of temperament, from being placed in morally challenging situation, a place of accentuated temptation and opportunity. Even if this man intends chastity, you don't put him in a submarine with a bunch of good-looking sailors, or make him a voice tutor for the Vienna Boys' Choir.

28 posted on 08/23/2012 6:23:50 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Despite the redness of my neck, I prefer "Appalachian-American.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Here’s the problem. If there is a prediliction to homosexuality, a genetic or even a psychological disposition them homosexuality is a condition warranting legal protection. This is the slippery slope that has permitted homosexual marriage, adoption and fornication with children aka scout leaders buggering the children they are bound to protect. It is not for nothing that a major plank of the homosexual agenda is the corruption of children. Homosexuals are nothing more than bad little boys getting nasty.

29 posted on 08/23/2012 4:56:22 PM PDT by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson