stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Archbishop Who Says Gay Marriage Is From ‘Satan’ Accused Of Inappropriate Contact With Youth

by David Badash on December 17, 2013

in News,Religion

Post image for Archbishop Who Says Gay Marriage Is From ‘Satan’ Accused Of Inappropriate Contact With Youth

An outspoken U.S. Archbishop has temporarily stepped down from his post after being caused of inappropriate contact with a young boy in 2009. John Nienstedt, head of the St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota Archdiocese, has denied the charge, which includes the “allegation that he inappropriately touched an underage male on the buttocks during a public photo session,” the AP reports.

“The St. Paul Police Department began its investigation at 2 p.m. Monday after the archdiocese encouraged a person within the church who is required by law to report allegations of abuse to contact authorities,” Minnesota Public Radio reports. “In a statement this morning, archdiocese officials said they learned of the allegation from that person.”

“The single incident is alleged to have occurred in 2009 during a group photography session with the archbishop following a confirmation ceremony,” the statement said.

In a letter to Twin Cities Catholics posted on the archdiocese’s website today, Nienstedt denied the accusation.

“I must say that this allegation is absolutely and entirely false,” the archbishop wrote. “I have never once engaged in any inappropriate contact with a minor.”

Nienstedt is perhaps is best known for having spammed 400,000 Minnesota homes with unrequested anti-gay DVDs in a failed attempt to get voters to ban same-sex marriage last year. While the DVDs reportedly were paid for by an anonymous donor, Nienstedt did spend $600,000 in Church funds to lobby against the same-sex marriage initiative.

In September of this year, Archbishop Nienstedt claimed that “Satan” is “the source” of same-sex marriage.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


weshlovrcm December 17, 2013 at 8:04 pm

Homophobia is a sin like lying, stealing and murder. Where the sin of homophobia is present, there will always be other sins. Sin begets sin. Instead of promoting/celebrating the immorality of homophobia, those caught up in it need to repent and rid themselves of ALL their sins.

billbo66 December 17, 2013 at 8:38 pm

I am a liberal and very pro-gay rights, I detest bigots. Oh and Im also not to big on religion. However how exactly bigotry a sin?

russellsvocation December 17, 2013 at 9:03 pm

How about you go join the Westboro "church" with that trash talk, you would fit right in.

AMALGAMATE December 17, 2013 at 8:12 pm

Disgusting-the old adage is true about those who protest the most….-especially in the priesthood-they are all gay-what straight man woudl give up sex for life??

Derek Williams December 17, 2013 at 11:20 pm

What gay man would?

Derek Williams December 17, 2013 at 8:24 pm

Allegations like this never seem very far away from the clergy. However, even though I deplore Catholic teaching against same sex relationships, and this archbishop's anti-gay rhetoric, I have no intention of jumping to conclusions on this one as I have no wish to see an innocent man lynched, if he is indeed innocent.

It might easily happen that in ushering a person to their seat guiding with a hand from the back, that momentary and inadvertent contact could occur below the waist line. For this to be an offence therefore, it would have to be established that it was groping of a sexual nature, i.e. prolonged and with fondlng. The other evidence that gives pause for thought is that it was a public photo session, so others were around at the time. Event the most ardent pedophile would surely wait until there were no possible witnesses.

Siddigfan December 17, 2013 at 11:20 pm

I have a gay trans son so, I'd be the first one to be outraged if there were a cleric messing with kids and then oppressing LGBT folks. However, I must say that this article presents little in the way of evidence or what the circumstances meant. Did he swat the kid on the ass or did he grope him? In a public photo session? Is there a photo? I'm not saying he's innocent but, it seems a little too soon to be jumping to conclusions.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: