Fr James Martin SJ and Fr Dan Fitzpatrick Tweet that the Holy Spirit is Female. How sad.

The subsequent post can be read at http://faithinourfamilies.com/2015/05/30/catholic-priest-threatens-mum

Let’s start by getting one thing straight shall we? The Holy Spirit is not a boy. It is not a girl. It is a spirit. But let’s also remember that as human beings we have limited ways of expressing our understanding and knowledge of God. Our language is not perfect. And even with our male and female nouns and pronouns we still often struggle to correctly describe certain theological things. However… Our limited non-perfect attempts at expression do not give us the right to skew the truth to what we would prefer it to look like. A misplaced word or phrase has massive connotations for certain situations – especially theological ones, and can completely change the meaning of a certain word and the proper teaching behind it. In short – it is not difficult to lead people down the wrong path. For those in a position of power or trust, this is an incredibly important issue. It is so important for the Pope that he has his own personal moral theologian who oversees every written speech, homily and even his Tweets. Speaking of Tweets… Father james martin Hmmm. For those of you who don’t know Fr. James Martin, he is an extremely well known Jesuit in America who has written plenty of books and has a very large social media following. His views are vague and liberal. He is not particularly concerned with upholding the truths of the catholic faith but instead is interested in discussing issues like gay marriage, women’s ordination ect… He leaves the content of his posts ‘open’ but does not step in to correct the ordinary person in the pew when they reply to his Facebook posts with comments like: “Thank you, Fr. Jim for your post. My wife and I are remarried divorced Catholics who anxiously await some change in the Church’s position on people like us. More importantly, though, we have a number of gay and lesbian friends including two married male couples each of whose love for each other could serve as an example to many couples, both heterosexual and homosexual! I pray that the day will come when all of us can be completely reunited within the Church we love and were raised in! God bless you.” “It was such an honor to obtain a secular appointment to officiate at legal marriages. I have only presided over one: the civil marriage of two wonderful gay friends who have been in a committed relationship for more than 30 years. I know the church would not approve of my doing this, but my conscience and the Holy Spirit said that their union must be legal and blessed.” Well, I guess if the Holy Spirit told you it was ok to go against church teachings then ‘she’ is right! (Goodness gracious me…) But every so often priests like this get a little too big for their liberal boots and end up making a big boo-boo. By calling the Holy Spirit ‘her’ based on the ancient Hebrew term ‘ruach’ is one of these big boo-boo’s. Now I am not an ancient Hebrew expert myself – but I have a few friends who are, and I showed them this tweet (hiding Fr. James’ identity) and asked them to give me their honest opinion: “Hilarious. Just another modern sort suffering from theological confusion. Who said that? According to Strong’s concordance it is a feminine noun. However, in Gen 1:2 it is used with a masculine noun (elohim). It is a fascinating usage. Ruach (feminine) Elohim (masculine plural). Literally translated as Spirit of Gods. The Rabbis are still working that one out. The Holy Spirit is pure spirit and does not have gender. Gender is of the material creaturely realm. Angels and God do not have gender (though the Son does because he has a body!!). Digressing slightly, the Son is often referred to as the Wisdom of God, but the book of Wisdom refers to wisdom in the feminine! The word ‘Spirit’ as ruach feminine noun, but it does not mean it applies exclusively to women, as per English language. Hebrew is ancient and thus has different rules to English, so he cannot apply the same rules. The New Testament word is ‘pneuma’ which is a neutral noun. The only phrase I can find where Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit using gender is John 15:26, ‘The advocate…he will…’ Either way, the Holy Spirit is ‘Elohim’ which is specifically masculine, and God is always referred to in the masculine, thus we should always speak of God like that.” So it seems Fr James either needs to brush up on his ancient biblical nouns, or he knows quite well that what he was saying was a load of old nonsense. But either way – he knew very well to begin with that the church does not refer to the Holy Spirit as a female. A comment like this has consequences theologically. I mean – what does it mean for Our Lady? Would it make her part of some sort of life giving same-sex union with a female holy spirit? Does that mean that Jesus had 2 mums? What would this sort of idea mean to someone who was not so well educated in theological terms and was dealing with same-sex attraction themselves? Would they feel that because a priest was saying this it was giving them the affirmation they were seeking that a same-sex union, even a same-sex family was ok? It might. I certainly can’t find anything Fr James has ever written saying that marriage can only occur between a man and a woman (correct me if I’m wrong here). He is leading the people of God down the wrong path. He is also leading younger priests down the wrong path. dan fitz Hmmm. Again I went to a friend who has studied both theology and ancient Hebrew and asked them (without revealing Fr Dan’s identity) to give an opinion on this statement: “First premise is wrong. The Holy Trinity NEVER acts alone – and to say the main way we relate to God is through the Spirit is to misunderstand the Spirit’s role is to lead us to the Father, by leading us to Jesus, who is the perfect image of the Father. Seems also to downplay the objectivity of the Holy Eucharist which is a tangible participation in the real Body and Blood of Christ – hardly and insignificant relation to God, rather a particularly intimate one. Second point is that the gender of verbs really does not get you very far – the Spirit proceeds from the Father AND the Son – being the love between them, being the glory of Jesus – therefore to posit a kind of competing feminine identity for the creative/salvific mission of God is – heresy. We in fact are the feminine – we are the receptive ones to the Spirit. This is a very dangerous and confused idea – and comes from someone with only a superficial understanding of both language and theology.” Oh dear. So here you have a young guy – not even been a priest for 2 years, and he is being led astray by the nonsense of a much older and more experienced priest – whom I’m sure he trusts. However, Fr Dan also knows full well that the church has never referred to the Holy Spirit as a female. It kills me to see priests go astray like this – especially young priests. I pray and fast too much for priests to let them throw themselves into Satan’s arms like this. If they don’t like or agree with what the Catholic church teaches them why stay in the Catholic Church? There are plenty of Protestant churches where you can believe whatever the hell you like – go and join one of them. The Catholic church requires solid faithful priests with strong backbones, not lily-livered flannels who’s limp theology destroys the church from within. What’s going on with these guys? Do they think that by throwing a bit of ancient Hebrew around they are sounding clever? Do they think they have suddenly found a new and incredibly ‘inclusive and diverse’ theology that the church must have inadvertently missed for the last 2000 years? Trying to make the faith ‘acceptable’ to today’s politically correct culture of death? Are they trying to look cool and clever?! Or are they just trying to forward their own warped theological ideas of what they would prefer the Catholic faith to look like? I contacted both priests today and explained the female/male noun thing and asked them for and explanation. Neither of them admitted error. In fact quite the opposite – although Fr James Martin SJ did delete the Holy Spirit quote from his Twitter feed when he realised it actually made him look a complete um… twit. Here is another post both these guys shared: Fr. Dan 1 Worrying isn’t it? And as you can see from the comments, no attempt was made to correct this pseudo idea of ‘Love’ that is being floated around. The person in the pew has been left in error. If our priests do not believe in the teachings of the church, is it any wonder that the people of God go astray. Maybe we should ask Ireland… When the shepherds lose their way, the sheep perish in the desert.

About Gertrude

Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to Fr James Martin SJ and Fr Dan Fitzpatrick Tweet that the Holy Spirit is Female. How sad.

  1. johnhenrycn says:

    Am trying to leave comment (two tries – same comment), but no cigar. Any thoughts?

  2. johnhenrycn says:

    I left this comment in support of Claire Short on her faithinourfamilies blog, where it is still in moderation, which is understandable since I’ve never commented there before:

    Talk about the 3 stooges. But Frs Danny, Jimbo and Marco ought to be told that they are sooooo 20th century. To say – if they did say (I’ve never actually looked at their blogs, pods or twits, TBTG) – that the Holy Spirit is a “she” is as mean and backward-looking an opinion as I hope to never see. Listen up fellas, sexual roles no longer exist as a meaningful concept. There are now over 50 Shades of Gay to choose from – 58 on Facebook apparently – including Androgynous, Bigender, FtM, Gender Questioning, Intersex, Neither, Non-Binary, Pangender, Transgender, Transsexual, Two Spirited and (my personal favourite) Neuter. In a just world, the progressive Catholics who seem to admire these ‘exceptional’ (one hopes) priests would be calling for their heads to be chopped off.

    Why do these guys remind me of Fr John ‘Black Dog’ Corapi? Because he was also one to threaten a libel suit when called on the carpet? Maybe, but I think it’s actually because, like him, they are out of place in the One True Church and ought to consider a career change.The sooner the better. Sue me. True identity provided upon request. I love a good scrap.
    ___

    Will this survive moderation? Not to worry, my true blog home is at Catholicism Pure and Simple, where I am also but a lowly commenter whose views, like those I’ve expressed here, do not necessarily match those of the owners😉

    Great blog, btw. I laughed my fool head off at priest arsonist a week or two ago.

  3. johnhenrycn says:

    Well there, that worked. If my other 2 similar previous comments are still in queue, please delete them. Thx.

  4. ginnyfree says:

    Well, Hell’s Bells are ringing for both! And this little comment: “If they don’t like or agree with what the Catholic church teaches them why stay in the Catholic Church? There are plenty of Protestant churches where you can believe whatever the hell you like – go and join one of them.” Yikes! Feeling a little hostile are we? Yeah, but they love having the Eucharist as if He’s the icing on their b-day cakes. Maybe they were inspired by some Swiss Priests who like them are very sadly in a constant of agitation and rebellion. Maybe they’ll take a hankerin’ to go ski the Alps. We can hope. But all that aside, Jesus died for them and when and if they ever repent of their madness, they can always make a good confession and be saved. It is God’s will that the sinner repent and be saved and until they recognize the sickness in their souls they will not be seeking the Divine Healer in the Sacrament of Penance any times soon. Pray that someone gets in their path that they can’t ignore to help them see the light of truth. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  5. toadspittle says:

    “A misplaced word or phrase has massive connotations for certain situations – especially theological ones, and can completely change the meaning of a certain word and the proper teaching behind it. “

    True enough. But why “especially” theological situations? It applies equally to scientific, philosophical, political, or grammatical ones, surely? The real problem here is how can we know that the teaching behind anything is “proper,” in the first place?
    “Proper” relative to what?

  6. toadspittle says:

    “Angels and God do not have gender (though the Son does because he has a body!!). “

    We can well understand why people who are ignorant of the subtleties of religion might consider this statement gibberish, can’t we?

  7. Tom Fisher says:

    Because logic, in’it. You dumb or wot?

  8. Tom Fisher says:

    Think of it as like Quantum Mechanics, but but better, because theologians don’t have to submit their theories to experimental tests.😉

  9. toadspittle says:

    Is it necessary to know if The Holy Ghost is a girl or not – to be a Catholic?
    Yes, Toad.

  10. toadspittle says:

    “If they don’t like or agree with what the Catholic church teaches them why stay in the Catholic Church? “
    Supposing (just supposing, of course – I know it’s purely hypothetical!) they don’t agree with what the Pope teaches them?
    Where should they go then?

  11. Tom Fisher says:

    Well, in all seriousness, the sophistication of a persons theology is partly contingent on the education in the Catholic faith that they have received. I have a biography of St Bernardino* which recounts the consternation felt by a 14th Century Cardinal who visited a remote Italian village and was greeted in the name of “Jesus, Mary, and their blessed brother ‘The Holy Trinity'”*. It would be churlish to blame the villagers for getting muddled.

    *that’s from memory, but pretty much accurate

  12. toadspittle says:

    ….”The Famous Five.”

    Norman Douglas wrote near a century ago that, for Southern Italians, the Holy Trinity was Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.

  13. Tom Fisher says:

    You doubtless know the old joke about the statue of Jesus that speaks to an old woman praying in a country church… “Be Quiet!! I’m talking to your mother!”

  14. toadspittle says:

    …And let us have no sordid, childish, “gay” jokes – about Dan Fitz Patrick – eh, JH? Not so much as a tweet.
    D’oh.

  15. ginnyfree says:

    Ah, but Tom, they will be judged by Someone who happens to be 100% male, fully human and fully divine, on every word that tumbles from their mouths. He’ll say “What were you thinking?” as He casts them and their specious arguments in Hell. In the meantime, the little old ladies league in the back row of every parish on earth give them the thumbs down. I once heard this cute one which I think apples: A parish was welcoming a gifted speaker and many came from parts unknown to hear him. A little old lady was seated next to a young Priest in the front and they made small talk before the speaker started. He was bright and well educated and polite and she thanked him for the gift of his Priesthood. Then the speaker got started. He began to talk about Hell, so the young Priest leaned over to whisper in the little old lady’s ear, “I don’t believe in Hell.” The little old lady looked up at him and blinked, and said, “You will when you get there.” So much for theology. It can’t save one but it can send one straight to Hell. Jesus is pretty simple and He doesn’t make it too hard to get, even children know Him, so you can’t be to dumb to be saved, but you can be too smart! God bless. Ginnyfree.

  16. toadspittle says:

    “He’ll say “What were you thinking?” as He casts them and their specious arguments in Hell. “
    I suspect the prospect of that gives Ginfree a good deal of innocent pleasure.
    ….That so, Gal?

  17. toadspittle says:

    “..the young Priest leaned over to whisper in the little old lady’s ear, “I don’t believe in Hell.” The little old lady looked up at him and blinked, and said, “You will when you get there.” So much for theology.”

    So much for theology, indeed, Ginyfree. Couldn’t have put it more neatly myself.( well not very much.)
    My word, Yes, it’s a Splendid Old Story, and only grows richer with each and every repetition. For myself, the idea of sitting Up There on my personal cloud, and laughing at sinners writhing Down There in eternal agony, might amuse me for a couple or so million years – but then, even I might suggest to one of God’s persons, “Time to give them a bit of a break now, Boss?” but, then, again, I’d probably come to what would be left of my senses and say, “Naah… the Hell with ’em. Serves ’em right for being sinful. Dunnit?”

  18. Tom Fisher says:

    He’ll say “What were you thinking?” as He casts them and their specious arguments in Hell.

    Are you saying that God will cast people into Hell based on their inadequate thought processes? That seems a tad iniquitous.

  19. Tom Fisher says:

    Tom, they will be judged by Someone who happens to be 100% male, fully human and fully divine, on every word that tumbles from their mouths. He’ll say “What were you thinking?” as He casts them and their specious arguments in Hell. In the meantime, the little old ladies league in the back row of every parish on earth give them the thumbs down.

    There is a great deal that I differ from C.S. Lewis on. But he was right that the ability to speak about damnation in flippant or triumphalist tones is the sure mark of a shallow thinker.

  20. ginnyfree says:

    Well, see Toad, God takes false teaching about Him more seriously than do some. The reward for being a wolf among the sheep isn’t Heaven. He won’t say to them, “Well done my good and faithful servant…..” They expect to hear this instead: “Well done my good and faithful servant for freeing my sheep from the burden of all that dogma weighing them down.” Freedom of expression for the Ordained is only found within the context of the Magisterium. They never heard “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.” To them it is restrictive of their freedom of expression. So, yes I do have a certain satisfaction in knowing that the reward for raiding the sheepfold is still Hell, whether or no it is believed. I’ve heard too many heart rending stories of what can and does go wrong when the wolves in sheep’s clothing ravage those near at hand. Need I say more? Not all crimes against God and His people are measured by society’s laws, but false teaching unleashes them all. The wise know this and tremble to carry the Message entrusted to their care. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  21. ginnyfree says:

    Ah, but Tom Cat, Tomas de Torquemada is my hero! Hee hee. Can I ask a few questions? I have a new mouse trap I’d love a cat’s opinion of………..

  22. ginnyfree says:

    Tom, Hell is real, no matter what some say with their new fangled theology.

    “There is a great deal that I differ from C.S. Lewis on. But he was right that the ability to speak about damnation in flippant or triumphalist tones is the sure mark of a shallow thinker.”

    Personally, I don’t give a whit what most folks want to call me. The only One I’m worried much about is the One who will call me faithful. I am a Catholic and not a member of the Church of Nice as it’s been called. God bless. Ginnyfree.

    Now about that mouse trap…….if you’d just place your tail across this little bar, I’ll see if I can find the mouse to see if it works…………………….

  23. johnhenrycn says:

    “Tom, Hell is real, no matter what some say…” sayeth Ginnyfree…

    But tell me this, GF, when you became a Catholic 15 years ago, did your priest or sponsor specify the people or types of people who go there?

    I believe in the reality of Hell, but I also have a real (Catholic) problem consigning anyone there forever, especially keeping in mind that Our Lord went there Himself. How do you explain that?

  24. Brother Burrito says:

    Hell is very real, and many of us here have direct experience of it.

    Hell is where we all were before we heard the Voice of Jesus saying

    “My Peace Be With You”.

    Anyone else remember that?

    We can anyone of us still go back there if we choose.

  25. Brother Burrito says:

    Hell is where one is at the mercy of the merciless, for all eternity.

  26. johnhenrycn says:

    There are people who choose Hell over Heaven. I can understand why they do.

  27. johnhenrycn says:

    Is that too elliptical? A serial killer for example, how could he/she ever be happy in heaven?

  28. Brother Burrito says:

    Well you’re a lawyer*, so that gives you special pleading, and insight.

    (Lesser) Lay people like the rest of us say “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do”,

    and pray for their souls, hopeless as it might be.

    *Theologians are God’s lawyers. We all must pray for both professions, constantly.

  29. Brother Burrito says:

    None of us are or will be privy to God’s judgement of any soul, even a serial killer’s.

    Just because I love corn on the cob +++ doesn’t make me a cereal killer, btw.

  30. johnhenrycn says:

    Ha, ha! See below.

  31. ginnyfree says:

    How do I explain that? He went to Gehenna, not the Hell of the damned. Next. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  32. johnhenrycn says:

    I got the joke about cereal, BB, but the fact is that if I was Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot or many others I can think of, I would be happier in Hell than in Heaven. The reality of Hell is that it exists because of God’s love for all of His creation. It’s a special place where those who deny God can go because He loves them and, therefore, refuses to annihilate them, but He does not torture them. The words of Jesus about the pains of Hell have to be read, I submit, in that way.

  33. ginnyfree says:

    Yippie! Thank you BB for bringing that up. Yes, although I wouldn’t exactly say my personal experience was described as you say, I knew I was going to Hell if I didn’t make some major changes in my own life pronto and yes, I sweat bullets awaiting my first in a lifetime experience of sinlessness at my Baptism. It was an awesome time in my life but it wasn’t fearless. Not by a long shot. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  34. Spelled out completely and cleary in the Catholic Church’s Catechism:

    633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” – Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek – because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.479 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:480 “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Saviour in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.”481 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.482

    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1R.HTM

  35. ginnyfree says:

    Yeah but the fellas in the article think they are doin’ God and His people favors by comin’ up with new ways to break the same ole Commandants and get away with it. They don’t think they are as bad as a Stalin or Hitler or Judas Iscariot, or even a plain ole serial killer. They think they are okie dokie and smarter than God. There’s the real rub. And the fact remains that those who trust them to teach them and mold their own beliefs will also be headed for Hell because of the errors they fall for taught by these guys. A failure of belief can send one to Hell. I know this isn’t a popular reminder in our times, but it is just as true now as it was two thousand years ago. So, these nice guys with their twisted Scriptures and queer theology are in fact, sending folks to Hell, so should we think nice thoughts about them and praise their efforts? I could go on, but I won’t. And what I say won’t be very popular either. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  36. johnhenrycn says:

    Ginnyfree says: “How do I explain that? He went to Gehenna, not the Hell of the damned. Next. God bless. Ginnyfree.”

    Burp. Why does every Catholic Missal in English say “Hell”? Is it because, in Christian theology, they are one and the same?

    “In Jewish, Christian, and Islamic scripture, Gehenna is a destination of the wicked. This is different from the more neutral Sheol/Hades, the abode of the dead, although the King James Version of the Bible usually translates both with the Anglo-Saxon word Hell.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehenna

  37. ginnyfree says:

    Nit Pikkie JohnHenry. Oh and BTW, I made a boo boo. Gehenna is Hell, Sheol is the word I should’ve used. Sorry. My bad. But the message is the same. He didn’t go to the Hell of the damned and save anyone. Once in Hell, always in Hell for ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and you’ll never get out. Universalism stinks. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  38. johnhenrycn says:

    Can’t argue with that THR, but explain to me where anything else I’ve said thus far on this thread (as of 22:40 today) contradicts your teaching. I will genuflect if necessary, because I’m never too proud to admit my errors.

  39. johnhenrycn says:

    Ginnyfree says:
    “Once in Hell, always in Hell for ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and you’ll never get out.”
    …and where, pray, have I ever said otherwise? oops, sorry, I did refer to Jesus’ trip to Hell. “My bad”, to use your absurd American vernacular. Aside from that, where have I ever said that the damned are released from Hell?

  40. ginnyfree says:

    Geeze JH, you can be soooooooo nit pickkie. I’m just a bother you know. I had no idea you lived in the UK. You could at least type with an accent or something.

  41. johnhenrycn says:

    Ginnyfree, you may not be “drop-dead gorgeous” as I surmised earlier on this (or another) thread today, but I said something earlier on this one which you’ve not addressed, viz:

    “I believe in the reality of Hell, but I also have a real (Catholic) problem consigning anyone there forever…”

    Why do you have a dogmatic (Catholic) problem with that? I believe in the permanency of Hell, and (@22:25 today) I hypothesized that some souls are there forever by their own choice – not God’s.

  42. To MODERATOR: Remove above comment of mine (23:51).

    To JH: So far what you’ve said is correct, if summarized thus (correct me if I’ve summarized it wrongly): God allows everyone out of love a permanent choice between themselves and him. To chose yourself eternally over God eternally is Hell.

    Summarized this way it indeed seems to be entirely orthodox.

  43. ginnyfree says:

    John Henry, I’m not sure I get you. You said this: “I believe in the reality of Hell, but I also have a real (Catholic) problem consigning anyone there forever, especially keeping in mind that Our Lord went there Himself. How do you explain that?”
    I responded by saying Universalism stinks. I guess I read into your above statement that you don’t accept that people go there forever and found that problematic. Perhaps I’m reading your statement wrong. Would you care to elaborate? God bless. Ginnyfree.

  44. johnhenrycn says:

    God bless, THR, but I’m not obliged by any Creed to believe in that thing you call “the Hell of Damnation”. That is something unmentioned in either of our Creeds. Show me anywhere in the Bible where “Hell of Damnation” is mentioned and I will eat my words. As for your CCC 633 link, yes, it does mention Sheol – “the hell of damnation” – as a metaphor, I suggest. It does not say that Hell is eternal; but that aside, where in the Bible does it say that Sheol to which Jesus descended was Waterloo and not merely Paddington Station?

    Punch Magazine, many years ago:

    Country Gent: “My Father fell at Waterloo.”
    Duchess of D… “Really? I heard that he fell at Paddington.”

  45. johnhenrycn says:

    The Great😉 Hapsburg Restorationist:

    I only read your 00:00 comment after posting mine at 01:01. If your comment at 23:51 is deleted, mine should also be deleted, which is fine by me.

    You should think about applying for part ownership of this blog.

  46. johnhenrycn says:

    …”was merely Paddington Station and not Waterloo”…is what I meant to say and would have said, but for that darn Chardonnay.

  47. johnhenrycn says:

    Much as I wish I lived there, I don’t. I live at 43.3583° N, 80.3139°

  48. ginnyfree says:

    Hello all! In an aside to all this talk about the mistakes of some Priests, seems one slapped back at the original blogger. Here is the article about what happened from Church Militant; http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/uk-priest-threatens-to-sue-catholic-blogger
    The title is UK Priest Threatens To Sue Blogger: She called him out for pushing heterodox ideas; he told her he’d sue for defamation. Yikes! Heterodox Priest has lawyer in tow so he can preach anything he’d like without fear from faithful! Ummmmmm…………what is wrong with this picture boys n girls? Clue # 1 – it isn’t about free speech. God bless. Ginnyfree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: