Recently, the Boston Globe responded to Cardinal Sean O’Malley’s decision to halt a Mass honoring Gay Pride Month at St. Cecilia’s in Boston.
In an editorial, the Globe pretended that “No one would have had the misimpression that the church was endorsing gay sex” by allowing the Mass to be said. Columnist Kevin Cullen also played the role of virgin, wondering why anyone would think that such a Mass might turn the church “into an outpost of Sodom.”
The front-page news story went one better, maintaining that the Boston archdiocese “gave the impression that St. Cecilia’s supported the annual Gay Pride Celebration.” The priest behind the Mass, Rev. John Unni, also feigned ignorance, saying of the Gay Pride agenda, “I don’t know what that is.”
Sounds like they all need a reality check. In the June 5 weekly bulletin of St. Cecilia’s, it stated quite plainly, “The Rainbow Ministry of Saint Cecilia Parish invites all friends and supporters of the LGBT community to a Mass in celebration of Boston’s Pride Month.” (Our italics.) So there was no need to lie about the purpose of the event.
Gay Pride Month, for the uninitiated, is not exactly like Black History Month: the latter commemorates the achievements of African Americans, while the former celebrates libertinism. That’s why African Americans do not appear naked on their floats. Nor do they engage in simulated sex. While evidently the marchers managed to keep their shorts on this year, they’ve had difficulty doing so in the past. In the late 1990s, naked women fondled each other on a mattress, and a man on stilts exposed himself, and yet the same Boston Globe that likes to lecture the Catholic Church said absolutely nothing about it.
At Boston’s Gay Pride Parade, men dressed in leather—along with their trusty harnesses—marched alongside the drag queens and dancing go-go guys, while the boys from MassEquality “gyrated on a flatbed.” As usual, organized homosexuals mocked nuns. But none of this disturbs theBoston Globe. Indeed, it pretends not to know what’s going on!
