PREDATOR, HOMOSEXUAL, OR BOTH?

Pope Leo XIV is not a heterosexual

Mark Brooks left the U S. Marine Cops after eight years of active duty service to study for the priesthood. While enrolled at St. Francis Seminary in the Diocese of San Diego, Brooks was drugged and sodomized by Father Nicholas Reveles, a good friend of San Francisco Archbishop John Quinn, who “mentored,” ordained, and promoted one Robert Walter McElroy. Like many abuse victims, Brooks died young at the age of 56. Reveles lived to be 74, while Quinn died at the age of 88.

Following his abuse, Brooks went to confront Reveles at his residence, where he claimed he witnessed Reveles and Quinn watching gay porn together. After receiving a meager settlement from the Catholic Church, Brooks joined the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). Unlike some SNAP members who were abused during their period of psychosexual development and are homosexuals today, Brooks recounted in a talk given before his death that he did not feel accepted by SNAP because he was a heterosexual who identified his abuser as a “homosexual.” Brooks reported that some SNAP members said that if he was going to talk about Reveles, he should refer to him as a “predator” and not as a “homosexual.”

Having met Reveles in Coronado, California, in 1994, six years after he assaulted Brooks, I would like to “weigh in” and explain why I believe some SNAP members may have shunned Brooks, and why Brooks was justified in identifying Reveles as a “homosexual,” and not simply as a “predator.”

Allow me to introduce you to three priests who were victims of sexual abuse when they were growing up: “John,” “Bob,” and “Ted.” One I would consider a homosexual; one a homosexual and a predator; and one a predator.

John was abused in high school by a religious order priest. Before that encounter, John was never emotionally or sexually involved with girls. John is similar to some women who become lesbians or bisexual after being sexually abused by a relative or a boyfriend. John’s sexual encounters with the predator priest affected his sexual orientation, preventing him from being able to develop emotional and sexual feelings for women. In an effort to hide his homosexuality, John entered the seminary and was ordained a priest. Because John viewed what happened to him as abuse, like many SNAP members, he would never even think of preying on a teenage boy. As a “homosexual,” John engaged in consensual sex with other adult men and, eventually, left the priesthood to “marry” another man..

Bob was abused in the seminary by a priest who befriended and groomed him, thus leading Bob to look upon the priest as a friend, a mentor, and not an abuser. The difference between viewing a priest as a friend versus an abuser is critical. John, who viewed what happened to him as abuse, would never think of repeating the behavior with a teenage boy. Bob, on the other hand, by interpreting his gay sexual experiences as acts of love and friendship, would go on as an ordained priest to prey on teenage boys while also engaging in consensual sex with other homosexual priests. Bob is similar to Reveles, who was both a “predator” of seminarians and a “homosexual” who engaged in consensual sex with other gay adults.

Ted was abused as a young boy by his parish priest. Discovering how the abuse seriously impacted his relationship with girls, Ted entered the seminary and was ordained. Unlike Bob, who preyed on teenagers while also having sex with adult men, Ted had no desire to have sex with other adults. Ted’s sexual interests only involved teenage boys. It was only after Ted was ordained over 30 years that victims reported his sexual predation, leading to his laicization.

From the above real-life examples, one can see that some Catholic clergy are just homosexuals like John, others are both predators and homosexuals like Bob and Reveles, while others are just predators like Ted. A question in the minds of many abuse victims and advocates is whether Pope Leo XIV, a product of Catholic high school seminary education, a context where it is known that countless boys were groomed and abused in the USA, might be a homosexual, a predator, or both? Studies show how the sexual orientation of both males and females can be affected by abuse experienced when growing up. My own work with both victims and predators, many of whom were abused themselves in seminaries, confirms this fact.

Just as a straight man would not hang out with homosexuals in gay bars, I believe a truly heterosexual pope would not retain an outed homosexual like Cardinal Víctor Manuel "Tucho" Fernández as the head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, or endorse the LGBTQ ministry of homosexual priests like Jesuit Father James Martin or lesbian nuns like Dominican Argentine Sister Lucía Caram.

Even though Pope John Paul II, who was a heterosexual, covered up sexual abuse both before and after his papal election to protect the image of the Church, far more closeted homosexual prelates like Cardinal Robert McElroy, Archbishop George Lucas, and others have been documented to have covered up abuse than the much smaller group of heterosexually oriented bishops.

In addition to “guilt by association” with “Tucho” Fernández, James Martin, and Lucía Caram, Leo is also convicted by: 1) His failure to discipline no fewer than 60 U.S. bishops and 102 bishops from other countries, most of whom are credibly accused of abusing minor boys and vulnerable adult young men; 2) Accusations that he covered up abuse both in Chicago and Peru; and 3) His failure to meet with or reach out to victims of sexual abuse.

Most people believed that Pope Francis was a closeted homosexual owing to: 1) His close association with and support of clerics like Msgr. Battista Ricca, Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, and Father Julio César Grassi, all credibly accused or convicted of sexual abuse or homosexual misconduct; 2) His documented record of abuse cover-ups both in Argentina and as pope; and 3) Allegations from two sources (Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and an Argentine priest) that he preyed on Jesuit novices in Argentina. More and more people are beginning to conclude that Robert Prevost, by what he has done and failed to do since his election, is also a closeted homosexual and, in reality, “Pope Leo Francis 2.0.”

The pontificates of homosexual Popes Leo X and Julius III led millions of Catholics to leave the Church in the sixteenth century. One recent religious demographic study led one researcher to write, “Were it not for immigrants bringing their Catholicism with them, the Catholics would look like the Episcopalians.” With “9 out of 10 cradle Catholics” leaving the Church under the pontificates of Popes Francis and Leo XIV, will the remaining Catholics sheepishly support a closeted pope, bishops, and priests, no different than the gay and lesbian clergy who oversee and pastor most dying mainline Protestant churches today?

This Substack column is free. If you find it informative, please recommend it to others and support it by contributing to the “Save Our Seminarians” Fund.

Gene Thomas Gomulka is a sexual abuse victims’ advocate, investigative reporter, and screenwriter. A former Navy (O6) Captain/Chaplain, seminary instructor, and diocesan Respect Life Director, Gomulka was ordained a priest for the Altoona-Johnstown diocese and later made a Prelate of Honor (Monsignor) by St. John Paul II. Email him at msgr.investigations@gmail.com.