By Theodore Shoebat (Shoebat.com Sunday Special) 

A major Catholic scholar from Poland, Fr. Dariusz Oko, has warned that 30 to 40 percent of Catholic priests are homosexuals, and 40 to 50 percent of bishops are homosexuals. According to a recent report from Life Site News:

Today Oko told LifeSiteNews that part of the problem is that up to 50 percent of American bishops have “homosexual inclinations.”

Writing from Krakow’s University of Pope John Paul II, where he is a lecturer, Father Oko told LifeSiteNews that the revelations about Cardinal Theodore McCarrick represent only “the tip of the iceberg” of what can be revealed about homosexual misconduct among the clergy.

“According to reliable estimates, it is estimated that about 30-40% of priests and 40-50% of bishops in the USA have homosexual inclinations,” he stated.

“At least half of them, at least periodically, may commit serious abuses, like Cardinal McCarrick or [Poland’s] Fr. Krzysztof Charamsa,” he said. “This also results from the fact that the lavender mafia often rules in dioceses, monasteries and seminaries, and even forbids the ordination of normal men who do not knuckle under to them. Such scandals are just the tip of the iceberg of what can still be brought to light.”

Oko has also discussed about how bishops will advance sodomites within the Church. As we read in one report from Life Site News:

Polish priest Fr. Dariusz Oko exposed in 2012 what he called a “huge homosexual underground in the Church” where actively homosexual seminarians, priests, and bishops “shield one another by offering mutual support.”

“They build informal relationships reminding of a clique or even mafia, aim at holding particularly those positions which offer power and money,” he wrote.

“When they achieve a decision-making position, they try to promote and advance mostly those whose nature is similar to theirs, or at least who are known to be too weak to oppose them. This way, leading positions in the Church may be held by people suffering from deep internal wounds,” he added.

These numbers, as high as they may seem, are actually not that surprising. To be honest, I would not be surprised at all if these numbers are essentially conservative estimations, and that the numbers are in reality higher. In my own experience as a Catholic, I have seen numerous of these citizens of the republic of Sodom. One of them is Msgr. Michael Yarborough, a priest (really, a priest of Sodom) who sexually assaulted a young man named Hector Escalante by groping him and kissing him in the lips. For this evil, I confronted Yarborough:

We have to be like Christ Who took up a whip and drove the thieves who were prostituting His Father’s House:

Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!” (John 2:13-16) 

But instead of selling merchandise, these priests are doing much worse: they are advancing Sodom. If Christ was angry about financial exploitation in the Temple, how much more anger does He have against those bringing Sodom into His Church! In lobbying for the domination of the kingdom of Sodom, what these priests are doing is emphatically changing the priesthood, from being Catholic to being pagan. St. Paul in his epistle to the Romans gives a history of paganism and explicitly describes the link between homosexuality and paganism. For in the beginning of this recounting St. Paul states that: “although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.” (Romans 1:21-23) 

Here we see humanity’s decline into paganism, since it states that they knew God but began worshipping nature. One can see the transition that humanity undertook from knowing God to paganism in the book of Genesis. For example, the Pharaoh of Egypt speaks of Joseph: “Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?” (Genesis 41:38) Here it is obvious that the Pharaoh at the time of Joseph knew about the true God, which indicates that pharaohs before him also knew about God, which means that there was an epoch, in far antiquity, in which the Egyptians knew about God. But one can also see in Genesis how paganism was seeping into the heart of Egypt at the time of Joseph. The scripture states that the Pharaoh gave Joseph “to wife Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of On.” (Genesis 41:45)

The name “Potipherah” is Coptic for “consecrated to the sun”, or “he whom the Ra gave.” Ra was the sun-god of Egypt, and the center of his worship was the city of On, where Potiphera had served sacerdotally, the name of which meant “light.” On was given the name “sun-city”, and it would even be later hellenized as Heliopolis, or City of the Sun; and in the hieroglyphs the city was revered as Re-ci, or “abode of the sun.”  The woman who the Pharaoh had given to Joseph to marry was Asenath, (Genesis 41:45) whose name has been translated as “favorite of Neith” (the mother goddess), “worshiper of Neith,” and “who belongs to Neith.”

One can see how by the time of Moses the knowledge of God in Egypt had been overtaken by paganism. For when Moses proclaimed to the Pharaoh: “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me in the wilderness” (Exodus 5:1), the tyrant had expressed his hatred for God. “Who is the Lord,” pompously asked the Pharaoh, “that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go.” (Exodus 5:2) Here the Pharaoh of Moses’ era is declaring that he does not know God. So we can say that by the time of Moses, Egypt had completed its full transition into paganism. By this time, the god of Egypt was no longer the true God, but Pharaoh. At the center of the political ideology of Egypt was a spiritual concept called maat, which — to the eyes of ancient Egypt — signified the power of the pharaoh over all of the forces of nature.

Now, how did the cult of the pharaoh begin? How did the pharaohs go from knowing God, to rejecting God and worshipping themselves? We do not know the entirety of how this happened, but I have a theory.

Notice what the Pharaoh says when speaking of Joseph: “Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?” This indicates that the ancient Egyptians held a theological belief that is taught by both the Catholic and Orthodox churches, and that is the teaching of theosis, or the union of man with the Spirit of God. It would not be shocking to find out that the deification of the pharaoh came as a result of the corrupting of the belief that man could be united with the Spirit of God, to where that it was not that man could be united with God, but that man could become God, that he could be as some sort of physical manifestation of the planets which the pagans worshipped, saying with Satan: “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.” (Isaiah 14:14)

The title of the pharaoh that indicated his power over all the land was “King of Upper and King of Lower Egypt,” and the appellation was certainly not secular, but was thoroughly connected to astral religion. For, accompanied with this title, was the epithet “The Two Ladies,” which signified that the pharaoh was the manifestation of the goddesses Nekhbet, who had represented Upper Egypt, and Wadjet, Lower Egypt. The pharaoh was also revered as “The Two Lords,” which indicated that he was the embodiment of both Seth, Upper Egypt, and Horus, Lower Egypt. Horus and Seth was symbolic of all conflict; they had quarreled and fought, with the latter subduing the former. But in the midst of their warring, it was believed, came reconciliation, and thus harmony amongst the cosmos. It was this mythological concept which the pharaoh represented: it was symbolic of his control over both Upper and Lower Egypt, his crushing over all opposition, and the unchanging order of the monarchy. It is the reason why one finds in the pyramid texts a depiction of a pharaoh calling upon the creator god Atum to look upon him, “the two-dwellers-in-the-place, that is Horus-and-Seth”. We find another example of this in another pyramid text which speaks of a pharaoh’s rebirth into eternity: “Thou art born of Horus (in thee) Thou art conceived because of Seth (in thee).” (See Frankfurt, Kingship and the Gods, b. i, part i, ch. i pp. 20-22.)

The apotheosis of the pharaoh was not mere flattery, but in fact had dictated the way of life for the Egyptians: the entire political, economic, religious, and cultural, system of Egypt was moulded by this imperial cult. (See Alberto R.W. Green, The Role of Human Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, ch. viii, p. 117)

It is most requisite for our study of Egyptian tyranny, to inquire of the concept of the goddess Maat, the daughter of the sun-god Ra, who represented the established order of the cosmos, and of the creation itself. (Frankfurt, Kingship and the gods, book i, part ii, ch. iv, pp. 51; ch. v, p. 61) When the pharaoh had ruled and kept order in his kingdom, it was believed that he was maintaining maat, which signified “right order”, which not only meant in caring for political and societal affairs, but for certain necessary phenomena of nature, such as the Nile river. (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. iv, pp. 51, 58) When the pharaoh possessed maat, he was “maa kheru”, or he who possessed unlimited power over nature and the cosmos. (See Budge, Osiris, vol. i, ch. iii, p. 91) It is for this reason that the pharaoh Amenhotep III boasts himself as working “to make the country flourish as in primeval times by means of the designs of Maat.” (In Frankfurt, Kingship and the gods, book, part ii, ch. iv, p. 51)

Also, in other text the pharaoh is praised as such: “Authoritative Utterance (hu) is in thy mouth. Understanding (sia) is in thy heart. Thy speech is the shrine of truth (maat).” (In Frankfurt, Kingship and the gods, book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 51) All authority was was shouldered upon the pharaoh; all aspects of living, both secular and religious, and all functions of natural order, were under his authority. Hence the following boastings of the king Amenemhet:

“I was one who produced barley and locoed the corn-god. The Nile respected me at every defile. None hungered in my years, nor thirsted in them. None hungered in my years, nor thirsted in them. Men dwelt (in peace) through that which I wrought…All that I commanded was as it should be.” (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 57)

This bestowing of agricultural benefits which the pharaoh had brought, such as the growing of barley, was not merely produced in an indirect way, such as by supporting the farmers of the land, but by the ruler’s maintaining of Maat, or the order which enabled nature to function without hinderance for the benefit of the society. (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 57) The fertility of fields, beasts, and plants, were believed to be embodied by the god Min with whom the pharaoh was associated; for it was he who had insured the benefits of these natural phenomena. (Ibid, book i, part iv, ch. xv, p. 189) One text exemplifies this belief, uniting the heart of Min with that of the pharaoh, and comparing this with how Osiris united with his mother by having with her incestuous copulation:”Thy (Min’s) heart united with the king as the heart of Horus united with his mother Isis when he violated her and turned his heart toward her.” (Ibid, book i, part iv, ch. xv, p. 189)

The dominion over nature which the pharaoh had held, had dictated the existence of his subjects. A common title of the pharaoh was di ankh, or “giver of life”, which meant that while he was the sustainer of life of his people, he could take it away at any time to his liking. Di ankh also meant “endowed with life”, which has the same significance as the former explanation. It is for this reason why the pharaoh also held the title of he who “keeps the hearts alive”. (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 59)  So strongly was this belief instilled in the people of Egypt, that children were instructed by their parents on how great the imperial cult was. A certain Egyptian named Sehetepibre, had instructed his children on the aspects of the pharaoh as such:

“He is one who illuminates the Two Lands more than the sun disk. He is one who makes the Two Lands more green than a high Nile. He has filled the Two Lands with strength and life. The king Ka [vital force]. His mouth is increase. He is the one creating him who is to be. He is the Khunum (former) of all limbs, the begetter who causes the people to be.” (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 59)

It was the pharaoh who had given each Egyptian his Ka, or vital force; it was essentially his will power.  (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. v, pp. 63, 68) On a stela it is inscribed: “The king gives his servants Ka’s and feeds those who are faithful.” (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. v, p 69)  The pharaoh Akhenaten, was not only identified with the Ka of each subject, but was also attributed to the begetting, forming, and developing, of his people, as one Tell el Amarna inscription reveals:

“Praises to thee, O Ua-en-Re (Akhenaten), I give adoration to the height of heaven. I propitiate him who lives by truth (maat), the Lord of Diadems, Akhenaten, great in his duration; the Nile-god by whose decrees men are enriched; the food (kau) and fatness of Egypt; the good ruler who forms me, begets me, develops me, makes me to associate with princes; the light by sight of which I live–my Ka day by day.” (Ibid, book i, part ii, ch. v, p. 69)

The maintaining of maat by the pharaoh was not considered as being done in Egypt, but also in all countries, and was thus associated with a universal dominance, since the king was indeed a conquering sovereign, who had expanded his kingdom for the attainment of world rule. A ancient Egyptian song, composed to celebrate the ascension of the throne by Merenptah, speaks of the universal rule of the pharaoh, his working of maat, and his punishment of supposed sinners:

“Rejoice, thou entire land, the goodly times has come. A lord is appointed in all countries. …O all ye righteous, come and behold! Truth has repressed falsehood. The sinners are fallen on their faces. All that are covetous are turned back. The water standeth and faileth not, the Nile carrieth a high flood. The days are long, the nights have hours, the months come aright. The gods are content and happy of heart, and life is spent in laughter and wonders.” (Ibid book i, part ii, ch. iv, p. 58)

In St. Paul’s brief but detailed history of mankind’s transition from knowing God to taking the road to Sodom, he states that once man began to worship nature:

“God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their ^[i]women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.” (Romans 1:24-27) 

Paganism will always bring man to Sodom. One can see this in pagan Rome. In Matthew Kneale’s history on the sackings of Rome (which is not a book that exactly favors the Church), he talks about how molesting children was, to the eyes of pagan Romans, not evil, and how this reprobate belief began to disappear because of Christian influence:

“Romans were not much bothered by the thought of men sexually abusing children so long as they were not the children of aristocrats. … Yet its acceptability was already waning by AD 408, as Christianity brought Near Eastern morality westwards.” (Rome: A History in Seven Sackings, ch. 2, p. 62, ellipses mine)

Reading this, one can get an idea as to the evils that St. Paul witnessed in the pagan Roman empire, and his descriptions of the evils of sodomites in his letter to the Church in Rome obviously resonated with Christians who lived in that city.

These priests in the Catholic Church who are advancing Sodom, are truly not Catholic priests, but rather priests of the temples of Sodom. By pushing for Sodom, what they are doing is transforming the priesthood to one of paganism, just as man in antiquity had done. Noah was a priest, the head of a priesthood really, with St. Peter calling him a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5). Noah’s three sons — Ham, Shem and Japheth — were thus also priests, being commissioned (since they were the sons of the priest Noah) to continue the true religion as was administered by their father Noah. Somewhere along the line, this priesthood got corrupted.

We see an apex of this corruption in the book of Genesis when it speaks of the Tower of Babel, which was really just a temple to the planets. The building of the tower in the valley of Shinar was superintended by Nimrod, the son of Cush who was one of the sons of Ham. Josephus tells us that there were priests in Shinar, during the time of the building of the Tower of Babel, who had with them the idols of Jupiter Enyalius (See Joseph. Antiq. of the Jews, 1.4.3). Therefore, there was a priesthood in Babel that was pagan, which signifies that already by the time of Nimrod there was a priesthood that was adverse to the priesthood of Noah. The corruption of a holy priesthood does not take that long at all.

What these homosexual agents who have infiltrated the Church are doing, is simply what those who knew God, but did not glorify Him as God and entered the realm of paganism: they are trying to advance the priesthood of Sodom. St. John says that Jerusalem is Sodom and Egypt (Revelation 11:8), and since Rome is the continuation of Jerusalem, it is not adventuresome to state that Rome has become Sodom and Egypt. St. Stephan declares that when the Hebrews worshipped the Golden Calf, “in their hearts they turned back to Egypt,” (Acts 7:39) and thus a return to paganism is a return to spiritual Egypt, which correlates right with Sodom. Remember why Lot chose to settle in Sodom, because it reminded him of the land of Egypt:

And Lot lifted his eyes and saw all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere (before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah) like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt as you go toward Zoar. Then Lot chose for himself all the plain of Jordan, and Lot journeyed east. And they separated from each other. Abram dwelt in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelt in the cities of the plain and pitched his tent even as far as Sodom. But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the Lord. (Genesis 13:10-13) 

When one loves Egypt (paganism), he will always travel to Sodom.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE AND HELP SPREAD OUR CHRISTIAN MESSAGE