[fwdude]

So, why wasn’t the complicit pastor removed, or at least disciplined?

[Craftmore]

because the catholic pastor is probably gay as well.

[dangus]

>> So, why wasn’t the complicit pastor removed, or at least disciplined? >>

As the bishop said, “this is not a witch hunt.” We might be inclined to believe the gay dude’s claim, but it would be completely unseemly to bar someone from their profession on nothing more than an assertion. It might well be a completely different matter were the priest to write in his bulletin, “I’ve known Nick and David to be having gay sex with each other for years, and I think it’s just dandy!” Or if the priest had performed, blessed or in any way sanctioned the “marriage.”

I’d even go so far as to say that the gay dude may not be lying, and yet the priest could still be innocent. Being “open” need not mean being explicit, and a celibate’s naivete may be stunning; don’t forget that the confessional offers no basis for contextualizing.

[Bigg Red]

So, why wasn’t the complicit pastor removed, or at least disciplined?

**
My question, as well. Sounds like he was definitely in on this.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I obviously don't know anything about this particular situation, but I think it's very possible for a pastor to be naive and/or out of the loop as far as parish gossip about who might be homosexual couples.

There's 2 or 3 pairs of female housemates in our parish that may be now (or may have been in the past) sexually/romantically involved, but I (being generally out of the gossip circuit) would have no idea, and I've been in the parish for 23 years. It's common enough for women to live together; if they don't wear rainbow scarves or entwined female-symbol earrings, most people wouldn't know.

The same may be true of guys too. Males can certainly share an apt without being sexually involved.

I would imaging there's ALWAYS been a lot of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," simply because people don't stick their noses into other people's household management.