The Gospel Truth

The Anointed One | March 12, 2014

Just who is Michael Sam and why is everyone, including the Pope and Cardinal Richard Dolan talking about him?

For the uninformed he is a football player, who is an excellent defensive player who had a breakout year for the University of Missouri this past fall.

In anticipation of signing a professional contract with the National Football League Sam chose a prime moment to announce that he was a homosexual.

Michael Sam final Mizzou home game.jpg

A prime time moment

Many in the media have waiting for an anointed one to come along and break  the sexual preference barrier, which to them, was just another human rights obstacle.  Lost in their fifght is the fact that most detest football, as not only Neanderthal, barbaric but seriously homophobic. Sam  stands to be their agent to make America the first Rainbow Nation.

Was he recruited for this role?

Of course the Catholic Church with its long and controversial history of opposing homosexuality was drawn into the fray.

The new pope, Francis who in one short year has shown an enormous capacity for being misunderstood and taken out of context probably had more clarifications than the last four popes combined.

In a broader context, the pope when asked about homosexuality in the priesthood said: If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?  He told reporters, speaking in Italian but using the English word gay.

Of course that might not apply to Sam who has been known to frequent Columbia, Missouri’s gay bars.

According to news reports the pope’s words could not have been more different from those of Benedict XVI, who in 2005 wrote that homosexuality was ‘a strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil, and an objective disorder.’ The church document said men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies should not become priests.

Benedykt XVI (2010-10-17) 2.jpg

A different view

The Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera last week published an interview with the pope in which Francis reiterated the church’s teaching that marriage is between a man and a woman while acknowledging that governments want to adopt civil unions for gay couples and others to allow for economic and health benefits, for example.

It was the first time a pope had ever held out the possibility of the church accepting some legal arrangement for same-sex couples, and the remarks prompted a wave of stories, some indicating that the pope had endorsed civil unions or was even signaling an acceptance of gay marriage.

Vatican quickly clarified that Francis was speaking in general terms and that people should not try to read more into the pope’s words than what has been stated.

But the Pope wanted senior Church leaders to look into the issue and to scrutinize the reasons why many countries have legalized same-sex marriages.

Former Missourian, Cardinal Timothy Dolan also was asked about Sam and his gay debut.   Questions like these are often designed to evoke controversial or embarrassing remarks, given the Church’s recent history sex abuse by homosexual or pederastic priests.

Virtually echoing the sentiments of the pope, Dolan said. Good for him, Dolan replied. I would have no sense of judgment on him. God bless ya.

He also added I don’t think, look, the same Bible that tells us, that teaches us, well about the virtues of chastity and the virtue of fidelity and marriage also tells us not to judge people.  So I would say, ‘Bravo.’

I thought the teaching was love the sinner…hate the sin.  A Bravo for an active gay man does not seem much like pastoral advice to me.

Archbishop Timothy Dolan 20090519.jpg

Cheers for Sam

The discussion also dug deeply into America’s contentious racial past.

Liberals were able to dust off the nearly forgotten memory of true pioneer Jackie Robinson and even the often-misunderstood story of Rosa Parks to bolster Sam bid for a larger payday.

Michael Sam has the opportunity to be the Jackie Robinson of the NFL, said professor Orin Starn, chairman of Duke University’s cultural anthropology department.

This is balderdash!

Viciously taunted, and sometimes threatened by players, fans and others, Robinson faced enormous pressure to not only play well, but to do so while restraining the desire to fight back.

An insult to his legacy

Not only had some of his teammates submitted a petition in Florida, saying they would not play with him but during the season pitches under his chin or in his ribs, racial taunts–black cats on the field and the unmerciful heckling of managers, such as Philadelphia’s Ben Chapman made his maiden season a living hell on earth.

Not everyone thought this was an honest comparison.

Black columnist Larry Elder wrote: the attention and pressure on Robinson makes Sam’s future career look like a coronation. Robinson’s was a pre-television, pre-Internet, Jim Crow America, where sports fans really paid keen attention to only three sports – boxing, horse racing and America’s pastime, baseball. Most everybody was watching, many hoping and expecting him to fail.

In my opinion the only thing that Sam has in common with Robinson is the color of his skin.  Homosexuality is an accidental, such as religion and hair styles, not something unchangeable such as race, DNA and eye color.

Sam has not and will not suffer even a modicum of the harassment and opprobrium that Robinson endured.  He has a 100% support of the gay community and the weight of a godless secular society behind him.

LGBT pride flag

A new American flag

And whoever might have the temerity to oppose or even criticize him and maybe even his abilities on the field will quickly become and outlier and even a pariah to the game they play.

I could not help but note how many of the commentators, especially the black ones, cowered before the question when asked for their opinion.

It has been my understanding from my days as a talk show host on radio that most of my black callers were offended by the notion that anyone of their race could be a homosexual.

Such an accusation might have easily unleashed the dread R-word in any conversation. Personally I think that such a comparison is an insult to what Jackie Robinson did for his race, America’s social morality and the game of baseball.

So I have no Bravo for Michael Sam.

From what I have read he might not have enough talent to be an everyday player.  He is caught in the realistic squeeze of being too small for his college position on the defensive line and too slow for a linebacker in the NFL.

Will his coming hide these facts from his judges? I don’t know.

I do wish him well and wish that the mainstream media judge him only by his abilities on the gridiron and nothing else.

Of course I doubt that because as Al Gore has so profoundly told us a zebra cannot change its spots.



  1. Where do I begin?
    “In my opinion the only thing that Sam has in common with Robinson is the color of his skin. Homosexuality is an accidental, such as religion and hair styles, not something unchangeable such as race, DNA and eye color.”

    UNCHANGEABLE! Come’ on Bill, those people are BORN that way. It’s not a choice.
    If I remember this right, you ever said the problems within the Catholic Church problems can be laid at the feet of those who run and teach in seminaries around the world. THE Significant amount Homosexual who teach are letting those who are born that way,they should be rejected when entering the seminary before receiving holy orders. This was my only point that I’m unhappy with your blog.

    Homosexuality is not a choice, their actions are choices.

    Comment by Mike Ellington — March 14, 2014 @ 12:17 am

  2. Look…

    I might surprise a lot of people who know me by what I’m going to say but that’s nothing new.

    When I was a kid one of my best friends was someone who, it shouldn’t have surprised me to find out later, was a homosexual. He was very close to being what I never had in my life raised as an “only child”–an older brother figure.

    He never tried to seduce me or recruit me. Long after-the-fact it seems clear that he knew what he was long before any of the rest of us ( including his younger sister ) did.

    That said…

    There is an essence of a thing an then there is the ephemera attendant upon a thing. Xianity is based on a set of things the angry 4-letter-word doG of the jews has told humanity is their business. One of these things is to be fruitful and to multiply.

    There is a lot of derivative scriptural information regarding this issue but the basic message is that humans are intended to reproduce.

    Homosexuality and *all* other human sexual behavior which is predicated solely upon the seeking of pleasure does not really contribute to this essential edict.

    So why not just concentrate on the positive when possible? Cruising gay bars is not productive of bringing forth progeny. Shepherds of the the “lord’s sheep” should be selected from those who have a deep understanding of the impulse to *reproduce*. That they give up their personal option to do so should give them a strong inclination to try to encourage those who do not so-opt to “do as they say, not as they do”.

    That’s how I view it. If you don’t want to go along with that very very basic tenet, then go be something *other* than xian.

    One thing which always bothered my father greatly was someone trying to use some tool for a purpose other than that for which it was intended. He didn’t like to see anyone use a crescent wrench for a hammer or a large screwdriver for a pry-bar.

    He was, by trade, an aeronautical mechanical design engineer. When planes made by his company were crashing all over the place his response was that the companies who operated those planes were not purchasing the expensive ground support fixtures necessary to properly maintain the planes and that’s exactly what the problem turned out to be. Forklifts were being used in place of the specific ground-support fixture to support and lower engine nacelles from wings. The forklifts were not adequate to get the holes in the support structure in the wing aligned properly with that of the engine nacelle and the mechanics were simply brute-forcing pins that connected the two parts together by bashing them with sledge-hammers. This was causing damage to the holes through which the pins were being forced and mechanical failures were occurring and engines were falling off during the highly-stressful take-off phase and then the plane would flip over on it’s back and land on the passenger compartment catastrophically.

    Because certain airlines were too cheap to purchase airframe-specific ground support equipment.

    Humans are made to work in a certain way. The male member is evolved to penetrate the birth canal and deposit semen where it will ( hopefully ) fertilize an or some eggs. This is the design whether it just happened or was intelligently designed that way. Even the silly sad sorry people who made up religions thousands of years ago could figure this out…

    I used to argue otherwise on the basis of certain naturally occurring situations where homosexual behavior on the part of certain creatures increases the fecundity rate of these creatures to the extent they have sustainable reproductive rates. This is absolutely true in the case of certain hybrid sub-species where what can only be described as lesbian tribadism stimulates ovulation to the extent a sustainable reproductive rate can be maintained.

    As far as I’m aware there is no known occurrence of any human population of only women reproducing through parthenogenesis and whose population requires female-to-female couplings to stimulate the requisite rate of ovulation to support their population as a distinct subspecies/race. I stand to be corrected and if anyone reading this knows of such a population let me know because I’d love to be their theatrical agent…

    We are what we are. We are many things. We are egalitarian and charitable and I don’t think those inclinations come from any particular religious outlook but are human, found to a greater or lesser extent in the various races. It doesn’t make me happy to see various religions taking credit for what is really a human trait. But it does seem there is a deep and abiding need in humans to believe there is something greater than the natural world “out there” ( and considering the cruelty and dispassionate austerity of the natural world I can’t say I blame any rational/thinking being for wanting to so-believe ) and it’s only natural for any religions growing out of the spirituality which occurs from such desires and hopes to be assigning responsibility for maintaining or authoring the various characteristics of what it is to be “human” to their religions and to edicts of the deity(s) in which they place their faith.

    It’s not necessary to dwell on any particular derivative law or scripture in any religion decrying non-heterosexual behavior. The essence and basic default/least-common-denominator is that we are sexual beings and that sex is obviously in service of reproduction. I find nothing evil or cruel in accentuating this positive viewpoint in the doctrine of any religion, national or tribal culture or any creed.

    You don’t *have* to “judge” in this case. Nature has already judged. If you believe that nature is an outgrowth of a supernatural creation then whatever deity you follow judged it. This is not a case of judgement. Anyone who can’t see that is having a problem using the sensory apparatus and processing faculties with which nature, “God” or what-have-you provided. Show me the island of Lebos and a self-sustaining population of lesbian warriors who reproduce sustainably through pathenogenesis which is dependent upon indulging in tribadism. Where is it outside of legend?

    It’s my belief that homosexuality is some sort of birth defect which is as-yet not completely understood by science. I don’t believe people should be punished for things for which they were not responsible. I believe not being allowed to have your homosexual partner be taken automatically as the arbiter of your disposition when you are no longer competent would be a form of psychological punishment.

    Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.

    Temporal government is in charge of meting out punishment for wrong-doing. Your tales of the sticky-ends of various saints are full of this. Temporal government should not be in the position of meting out punishments to people for having congenital defects for which they are not responsible unless there is some overwhelming argument for the prevention of harm to the general society or violation of human rights.

    But religion is not in the business of meting out punishment–not in a xian society.

    The government never ought to have been tasked with the recognition of marriages. That’s a holy station which is to be sanctioned in churches or temples.

    Government recognizes and enforces legal contracts.

    If one employee gets to confer some benefit on a surviving family member then it is patently unfair for someone with no such family member who does the same job and produces the same beneficial profit to his employer to be denied the benefit of passing on such a benefit. So if we factor out the religious element of the temporal law which enforces and oversees employee/employer relations then any employee should be allowed to assign whatever this benefit is to whatever person they would like to see get it. Maybe some sexually dysfunctional man who never married would like to select his favorite female bank teller for his survivor benefits because he’d like to see her have some advantage which might then contribute to her being able to get married sooner and bring forth more offspring than she would otherwise be able to bring-forth on only her and her spouse’s income.

    Maybe it’s the love of one homosexual for another which motivates the assignment of benefit. The point is equal treatment under the law would or should require that what one employee gets should pertain to another.

    Personally I’d like to see the benefits gained through employment consist of wages or salary period and let people buy whatever insurance or invest in whatever mutual funds or stocks they think are best for them. K.I.S.S.

    That’s just what is fair and pragmatic and fairness should be considered as a motivator to induce productive behavior on the part of the labor force. Period.

    What religions want to say about what God puts together and which shall not be disassembled by men is between the religion/church and it’s adherents. if being “god fearing” has any value then let it’s value be thus manifested.

    The two things don’t have anything to do with one-another. What is God’s’ is God’s and what is Caesar’s is Caesar’s.

    If some cleric wants to take the viewpoint of the temporal government then let him take off his robe, turn his collar around and pay his fee to get on the ballot.

    I personally believe that the last paragraph of Article VI of the United States Constitution clearly indicates a “wall of separation”. If there can be no religious test associated with serving in the capacity of an elected, appointed or hired public servant what else could that mean? Some argued that inclusion of this language would “open a door” to “infidels” (me ) Mohammedens ( “Hadjii” ) or Jewes. They lost and the Constitution was ratified as-stands.


    And that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

    James Stenzel

    Comment by James Stenzel — March 16, 2014 @ 4:49 am

    • Dear Jim:

      It is always a pleasure to read one of your blog posts within a blog post. My only gripe about homosexuals is the MOVEMENT that wants to transform American culture. Those who live in the quietude of their own lives bear me no harm nor shake the cultural tree.

      Can I take your analysis as a secular endorsement of the Church’s position? I do think there is much morte to human sexuality—between a real wife and a real husband. I qualify that because too many gay coiuples are adapting the traditional nomenclature without any regard for sexual definition. I have a French film where one strong female character refers to her “wife” at home. I suggest you read John Paul II’s studies on the Theology of Marriage. It is a revolurionary beginning for a subject that my Church even after 2000 years needs to explore even more thoroughly. I think the pope spent too much time on the “single life” when he could have devoted more space to dynmmamics of real marriage sinstead of the almost abstract qualities he assigned to a state I have been in for nearly 48 years. Thanks for writing. BB

      Comment by Bill Borst — March 18, 2014 @ 2:50 pm

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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

About author

After graduating from Holy Cross, Bill Borst earned an MA in Asian History from St. John's University and a Ph.D in American History from St. Louis University. (1972) A former New Yorker, he taught for many years in the St. Louis area, while also hosting a weekly radio show on WGNU from 1984-2006. He currently is a regular substitute for conservative Phyllis Schlafly on KSIV radio. (1320) He is the author of two books on social history, "Liberalism: Fatal Consequences," and "The Scorpion and the Frog: A Natural Conspiracy." He just retired as the Features editor of the Mindszenty Foundation Monthly Report. In his 11 years from 2003-2013 he wrote nearly 130 essays on Catholic culture and world affairs. Many in St. Louis also know him as the "Baseball Professor," because of a course that he offered at Maryville College from 1973-74. It was arguably the first fully-accredited baseball history course in the Midwest.The author of several short books on the old St. Louis Browns, he started the St. Louis Browns Historical Society in 1984. In 2009 his first two plays were produced on the local stage. "The Last Memory of an Ol' Brownie Fan," ran six performances at the Sound Stage in Crestwood and "A Perfect Choice" ran for two performances at the Rigali Center Theater in Shrewsberry. His third play, "A Moment of Grace," ran six performances at DeSmet High School in January of 2011with First Run Theater in January of 2011. He is currently working on a 4th play, "A Family Way," which is a comedy about a happy dysfunctional family. He can reached at







%d bloggers like this: