Audio: Catholic Priests Discuss Sexual Self-Pleasure During Annual Meeting

The Association of US Catholic Priests (AUSCP) held its annual meeting in San Antonio, TX, this past June. The theme of this year’s Assembly was “Sexuality and Spirituality: Pastoral Approaches.” Audio recordings of these meetings – provided exclusively to the Lepanto Institute – reveal priests openly discussing self-pleasure, and even blasphemously suggesting that such an act could be considered a form of prayer.

The Lepanto Institute has been reporting on the AUSCP for nearly a decade, tracking its promotion of:

• women’s ordination,
• homosexuality and transgenderism,
• priestless parishes,
• heretical notions of the Holy Eucharist,
• the normalization of general absolution in place of personal confessions.

A full catalogue of our reports on the AUSCP can be found, here.

Opening this year’s Assembly, Fr. Ron Rolheiser – a professor of theology and philosophy at the Oblate School of Theology – spoke on the question of how priests should “work with” concerns pertaining to sexuality and spirituality.  His talk covered homosexuality, masturbation, transgenderism, and questions pertaining to mortal sin and worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist.

“The audio file we received was shocking,” said Michael Hichborn, president of the Lepanto Institute.  “We heard priests admitting to being homosexual, admitting to masturbating, and in one case, a priest even said that he ‘thanks God’ for the gift of being able to pleasure himself sexually.  And in the face of these admissions, Fr. Rolheiser refused to condemn such acts as intrinsically and gravely sinful.”

Excerpts from the audio file leaked to the Lepanto Institute reveal open disregard for the Church’s clear teaching on the standards for objective mortal sin, a refusal to regard the grave immorality of sexual self-abuse, and even openly embraced the notion that a mere desire to receive Holy Communion is a “sure sign” that one is not in a state of mortal sin.

“The ideas and teachings floated in this conference are sure to lead souls to Hell,” said Hichborn.  “And the fact that at least two bishops were in attendance – and said NOTHING to correct these grave errors – is unconscionable.”

Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, NM – the AUSCP’s Episcopal Counselor – and Bishop John Stowe of Lexington, KY – a member of the AUSCP – were both in attendance.  Other bishops who have participated in AUSCP meetings include Cardinal Blase Cupich, Cardinal Robert McElroy, Cardinal Wilton Gregory, Archbishop Robert Carlson, Archbishop John Hartmayer, Bishop Richard Pates, and Bishop William Wack.  Last week, the Lepanto Institute published a report on the elevation of Fr. David Buersmeyer – long-time AUSCP supporter, member, and collaborator – to the position of ombudsman for the Archdiocese of Detroit.

“With episcopal support, the AUSCP is working its dangerous ideologies into many aspects of the life of the Church in the United States,” said Hichborn.  “The threat to human souls posed by this organization is immense, and if left unchecked, an incalculable number of souls will be led into Hell by them.”

The Lepanto Institute is renewing its call for bishops to fully condemn the AUSCP, forbidding their priests from being members, or from having any contact with the organization in any way at all.

The full transcript of the video report is posted here, below:

Whether it’s the promotion of women’s ordination, homosexuality and transgenderism, or even openly admitting to engaging in sexual self-abuse and sacrilegiously calling it a “prayer,” this heretical organization of priests MUST be condemned!

Coming up on this special report from the Lepanto Institute.

(open)

On the 23rd of June, the Association of U.S. Catholic Priests (AUSCP) opened its annual assembly in San Antonio, Texas. The AUSCP is notorious for promoting priestless parishes, LGBT ideology, women’s ordination, and other heresies. This year’s theme? “Sex and Sexuality: Pastoral Approaches.”

The opening session was a retreat led by Fr. Ron Rolheiser, a Modernist priest who embraces dissident ideas about priestly celibacy, the nature of sin and atonement, and universal salvation. He has even written of “God as Holy, but also as Playful, Witty, and Erotic.”

His nearly three-hour retreat, titled “Sexuality and Spirituality Pastoral Concerns: How Do Priests Work with These Concerns?”, included open and positive discussion of gravely immoral acts, along with heretical and blasphemous ideas.

The Lepanto Institute obtained audio of the entire presentation. Some of the statements you’ll hear are deeply disturbing. This is not for young ears. If children are present, please use headphones or watch later.

Before addressing specifics, note that the event revealed more about the AUSCP than about Fr. Rolheiser, though it revealed plenty about him as well. During a Q&A session on sexual self-abuse, AUSCP members openly admitted to engaging in this intrinsically evil act. One priest even claimed to use it as a form of prayer, thanking God for the “gift” of self-abuse.

Thank you. So, I think that masturbation – um – when I masturbate, I pray and I say, “thank you, God.” I think this a moment for praying also. I don’t think they might, like, see as a something negative. For many years that I think that we must say to God, “thank you for that beauty of our sexuality and our (unintelligible).” But I am thinking in all these years that, it is not that it will be: “if I don’t masturbate, I don’t have a attitude of high level.” I think it can be also an expression of high level of praying and say God, “thank you for this beautiful expression that we have in our own sexuality and how we manipulate our – It’s negative to say manipulate, but – to do that it’s not a compensation.  It is part of the life, the rhythm, that the food, that that age. There are many circumstances in a very natural way to attend that.  So it is not that we are just looking for masturbating.  It is part of processing. You know.  When perhaps when someone is getting married, perhaps they don’t need that because they have a wife or that they have other ways. But in our case, I think that is part of saying, “God, Thank you for this.”  But I don’t see it negatively. Nothing like this.  It’s not a question of quantity. It’s just a question of quality.

Fr. Rolheiser disagreed that such behavior is “good,” but refused to identify it as objectively grave matter, that is, the kind of act which, when committed with full knowledge and consent, constitutes mortal sin. Instead, he suggested that it is an imperfection, an obstacle to the “ideal” of human sexuality.

This one is probably the one pastorally that’s the diciest stuff we have than we just dealt with. That, that gay, you know, (unintelligible). Ok, the issue of masturbation. OK.  Now, symbolic, symbolic and anthropology… Anthropologists would all agree that it’s not the ideal.  They Don’t say it’s wrong or it’s right. Anthropoligists say masturbation is not the ideal. You know, that’s not what, you know, Sex should be … at all.

Now, historically in, in, in theology and religion, it’s always been considered major perversion and a serious sin.  You know, and right into Scripture and so on. Masturbation, somewhat, this is a serious, serious perversion. In Roman Catholicism, a mortal sin.  Now, currently: quite the opposite way, in our cultural ethos.  And, this is the most natural thing in the world and is not essentially a moral of our psychological issue. So we’ve gone from mortal sin to this is not an issue at all.

OK, so where did they go from that? OK, moral and theological perspective would say: ‘Carrying sexual tension is carrying our solitude at a higher level and mirroring with purity of life.’

A little story here.  OK. When I was a theology student in the late 70s or pardon me, early 70s and um, and those were the years where there was a lot of Good, hard stuff going on in classrooms. We weren’t in a pious bunch in our group.

So one day our moral professor – we’re taking sexual ethos – you know, and he’s taking a question on masturbation.  So one of the seminarians blatantly asked him – and this is a priest – said to the priest, “Father. Do you ever masturbate?”

Quite a question in class.  The priest said, he said, “First of all, I should say that’s completely impertinent.  You don’t ask anybody something like that.   But I’ll tell you something. Since this is a class on moral theology, I want to answer it.

He said this, he said, “You know, sometimes I do, and sometimes I don’t. But I’m a better man and a better Christian when I don’t. That’s quite a to say. Sometimes I do, and sometimes I don’t. But I’m a better man. I’m a better Christian when I don’t.  And he said this.  He said, “you know masturbation, he said. And some of these these types of issues said it’s not a question, are they a sin or not a sin. So that’s not the way you asked the Moral question.

Basically he said, at what level do you want to carry your (unintelligible) and what level do you want to carry your sexuality and what level do you want to carry your soul?

(Fast forwarded)

“Do you masturbate?” He said “sometimes, yes, and sometimes no. But I’m a better man and a better Christian when I don’t, because I’m carrying my solitude.” He said “I’m carrying my sexual tension at a level I shouldn’t be carrying.” And I think that’s the way we come at this morally. Like he said, this isn’t so much a question of whether it’s a sin or not. So tell tell the person, “At what level do you want to carry your solitude? At what level do you,” for instance, for priest, “What level do you want to carry your self esteem?” Or married people. “What level do you want to carry? You know …” So, these are soul questions that, like, that you know, rather than “what’s right/What’s wrong?” You know, that’s not what moral theology is. Moral theology is personal spirituality. Basically, what kind of type of disciple of Jesus you wanna be?

Notice how he avoids the Church’s moral framework and clarity entirely, reframing the question as whether something is “good for you” rather than whether it is gravely sinful. Naturally, sin is never “good for you,” but not to recognize sin as sin is to leave souls blind to their need for repentance.

Earlier in the talk, he claimed fornication is not objectively grave matter, that is, the kind of act which, when committed with full knowledge and consent, constitutes mortal sin. Instead, he claimed fornication is merely irresponsible.

I’m going to handle masturbation separately, but I want to take the sex and mortal sin. You know, I grew up with that ethos that, you know, that was the ultimate dangerous mortal sin.

So again, a story.  I want to contextualize in a story. This was in Saint Louis some years ago. I’m giving a retreat. And so some woman says, you know, “our kids, you know, they’re having sex outside of marriage. Are they living in mortal sin?” OK, good question. Are they living in mortal sin?

I said: “most cases no.” you know, and I want to tell you why afterwards.  Mortal sin’s a pretty serious accusation.  Because, you know, say mortal sin is: if you die right then and there, you’re going to hell. OK. Now, most of these kids, they’re good kids, you know. And I quoted Thomas Aquinas and said, you know, Thomas Aquinas says, um. Thomas calls it: they’re living in invincible ignorance. See, Thomas Aquinas says there’s two types of ignorance.  You can be in culpable ignorance where you know better.

Or you could be an invincible ignorance. You simply don’t know better. That’s their culture. And so on. Well, you know some young guys steps up and says, “So now you’re telling us we’re stupid?”

Sin or stupidity? Take your pick.

You know, in most cases It’s. It’s basically irresponsibility. It’s not mortal. And we got to be careful with the word mortal. Mortal means, you are cut off from God.

According to Fr. Rolheiser, premarital sex is “stupid” and “irresponsible,” but not mortally sinful; it’s merely a feature of modern culture. Even worse, he claims that someone in a state of mortal sin may licitly receive Holy Communion.

Let me put that so it’s pastoral. Another question: Can you go to communion with a mortal sin on your soul? So how do you answer that?  Can you go to Communion with a mortal sin on your soul?

I said: ‘well, it doesn’t come up.’

If somebody sincerely wants to go to communion, it’s a sure sign they’re not in mortal sin.

You know, if somebody wants to go Communion, just to take the host and desecrate it or something, well that’s something different. When somebody is … If somebody wants to go to communion, it’s a sure sign they’re not in mortal sin.

Here Fr. Rolheiser directly contradicts Catholic teaching. The Church holds that sacrilegious reception of Holy Communion is itself grave matter, and subjective desire to receive Communion is not proof of being in a state of grace. To suggest otherwise is false, theologically reckless, and spiritually dangerous.

Bear in mind that Fr. Rolheiser is a theology professor at the Oblate School of Theology in San Antonio, TX.  From his teaching, sexual self-abuse is not grave matter, the term “mortal sin” should be used sparingly, and willingness to receive Communion is evidence of innocence.  That he could say these things unchallenged in front of a room full of priests is one thing.  But the idea that he may be teaching these things to young priests and nuns is deeply upsetting!

But there’s more. Another priest in the audience admitted he is homosexual and suggested that self-abuse could prevent violent crime.

Perhaps it’s a valve.  When you were talking earlier about – Um – Ignoring things and leading.  My, my thought is.  The ignorant, the ignoring of sexual desire sometimes leads to the acting out in negative ways. We’ve been talking about that. So as a gay man, who did not grow up knowing he was a gay man, but as a black and white catholic, so you know, if the church said it, I did it. I believed it. I try not to do that masturbation thing. Even though I didn’t know quite what it was. I was it was leading me to suicide. Because there was no release. and I think that might be what’s leading some of the males in our society to mass shootings, to to other expressions of violence, it’s another way of getting. So I think it might be a helpful valve perhaps.

Fr. Rolheiser’s response was that self-abuse can be the “better option” compared to criminal behavior.

Psychologists say. Imagine this. Imagine living in a building and you have a basement in the house.  And every time you have something you don’t like, a piece of garbage, just open the door and throw it down. OK? You know, out of sight, out of mind for a while, but then it’s going to ferment, and it’s going to come out through the vents. you know, and it may make for a mass shooter or for somebody with all kinds of stuff. See. So it’s going to, it’s going to snake bite you and weighs off on times that are not sexual at all.  You know it’s it’s it’s poisoning. It’s gonna poison the air. You’re breathing. It’s gonna poison the psyche. You’re trying to nurture, you know, and so that. And that’s why, you know, you almost hate to say this publicly, sometimes masturbation’s the better option.  You know sooner or that than you know, get poisoned and be a mass shooter or some, you know, that it ruins your life in other ways, you.

He also addressed homosexuality, same-sex “marriage,” gender dysphoria, and other topics, blurring moral lines, misrepresenting Catholic teaching, and endorsing immoral ideas. On same-sex “marriage,” for example, he supported blessing such unions in private.

The grave errors contained in this presentation are absolutely staggering! Priests openly admitted to being homosexual, embraced transgender ideology, and refused to acknowledge the moral danger of such lifestyles. Covering every falsehood would require a two-hour report, at least.

This much is enough to make the point: The Association of U.S. Catholic Priests is filled with clergy undermining the moral and theological teaching of the Church. Bishops and cardinals must publicly condemn it.

Write to your bishop. Send him this report. Respectfully urge him to condemn the AUSCP and forbid his priests from any association with the group or its members.