NationStates Jolt Archive

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?

Can you give me a link?

Oh dear, that's a bad decision. Heterosexual people are capable of abuse as well. Benedict's made his first mistake. :headbang:

The real question should be: Why would a gay man want to get involved with these child molestors?

Considering the fact that many religious gay Catholic men saw the priesthood as a way to get through life without their families and friends questioning them constantly about why they don't have a wife or girlfriend it's probably going to mean far fewer priests.

1) Many of the cases of priest pedophilia involved an adult priest and a teenage, not prepubescent, boy. I guess they want to cut down on those and see this as a way to do it. Also some people equate pedophilia with homosexuality, as if every gay guy is casing the local grade school.

2) Fashion sense.

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?

1. Nothing at all. It's a blind and irrational reaction from the Imperial... er Catholic Church. Like the Boy Scouts should know by now, banning openly gay men won't keep the pedophiles away; most child molesters don't even believe themselves to be homosexual and the ones who actually do maintain a Don't Ask Don't Tell policy that ends up with some boy getting a tube steak colonoscopy down the road.

2. In the still homophobic Christian world, verbal confession is unfortunately good enough as "evidence."

With personal experience with this I have a feeling it wont help at all
I was molested by my priest between the 4th and 6th grades … he was a self proclaimed strait male that did not prefer adult male companions
He had admitted to breaking his vow of celibacy many times with females before he went back to molesting kids again

I think this is a bullshit move by the priesthood justifying discrimination under the pretence of trying to help their patrons

Considering the fact that many religious gay Catholic men saw the priesthood as a way to get through life without their families and friends questioning them constantly about why they don't have a wife or girlfriend it's probably going to mean far fewer priests.

1) Many of the cases of priest pedophilia involved an adult priest and a teenage, not prepubescent, boy. I guess they want to cut down on those and see this as a way to do it. Also some people equate pedophilia with homosexuality, as if every gay guy is casing the local grade school.

2) Fashion sense.
1] My cathedral (google Clifton Cathedral!) has altar girls as well, although the guy who organises the altar doesn't approve. :rolleyes: Sexism. So girls could just as easily be abused (although all the priests I've met are great people).
2] Priests aren't supposed to have fashion sense anyway - black, black and more black.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/international/europe/22vatican.html?hp&ex=1127448000&en=4b5ee9218e6daead&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Basically, the position that homosexuality is immoral is so ridiculous that the only way they can keep arguing it is to invent links between homosexuality and paedophilia.

The real question should be: Why would a gay man want to get involved with these child molestors?

no,it should be why would a gay man get involved with a religion that tells him he's going to hell

no,it should be why would a gay man get involved with a religion that tells him he's going to hell Answer: it doesn't tell him he's going to hell.

The church is showing how blind it is by asserting there is a connection with pedophilia and homosexuality.

Re: fashion sense - Black, black and more black.

Maybe it's just because I live in an uber-liberal state, but I've seen the priest of the Catholic church nearest my house biking around in khaki shorts and a light grey shirt. It goes well with his hair and his eyes.

Maybe black is only for when you're on "company time"?

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?

They have to allow new priests, and yet they need to try to curb the instances of abuse by priests. I guess they figure that since most of the molestation has been done to boys that barring gays from becoming priests might solve their problem. I hear the Catholic church doesn't exactly love gays in the first place, so it works out for them - even if it doesn't.

2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?

They don't look for evidence of it as far as I know. It's just a guideline that the individual will have to take in to consideration when deciding whether to become a priest. Does a gay man really want to devote his time to a profession where he will not be welcome if it is found out that he is gay (or if he finds out he's gay). Even if someone is celibate for years I think that the person can determine or question their sexuality.

The church is showing how blind it is by asserting there is a connection with pedophilia and homosexuality.

Is it self-evident that there cannot be a connection between the two among those in the priesthood?

Answer: it doesn't tell him he's going to hell.

oh,they're ok with gays now are they?news to me

it has nothing to do with pedophile priests. the desire to have sex with men is not the same as the desire for sex with children.

if you cant trust a priest candidate to admit that he knows he is (or may be) gay, you cant trust them for anything. of course there are some men in deep denial so they lie to themselves as much as they lie to the world. then perhaps you go by the "but you had a boyfriend in highschool" evidence of being gay.

the number of men willing to go into a celibate priesthood in the united states is far fewer than the number needed. even with the importation of priests from other countries, the church is still having to close churches. up to 50% of all priests are gay. not practicing but gay nonetheless. how can the church deal with half the number of new priests?

this is a step in the wrong direction.

Answer: it doesn't tell him he's going to hell.
Hmmm that’s against what my bishop told me when he found out that Tom had molested me

He said we were both going to hell

Hmmm that’s against what my bishop told me when he found out that Tom had molested me

He said we were both going to hell Your bishop sounds eerily like the leaders of stonings in Iran.

Your bishop sounds eerily like the leaders of stonings in Iran.
Yeah he was an ass thank god he is dead

oh,they're ok with gays now are they?news to me Only homosexual acts are a sin. Being gay is something you can't help.

1. Clearly all homosexuals are pedophiles. [Sorry, sarcasm doesn't print well.]

2. I don't see how it matters who you're attracted to if you're not going to do anything about it either way...

I don't know, I've never quite understood much of the religious right's pre-occupation with homosexuality. Leads me to think that they're all just secretly a bunch of big queers. :fluffle:

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?
I'm amazed that gays were allowed to be seminarians up til this point.

Hmmm that’s against what my bishop told me when he found out that Tom had molested me

He said we were both going to hell

There's the classic insensitive and corrupt Imperial Church that the world has come to love. Blame the victim just as much as the perpretrator, it not more so.

I guess they didn't have to wait for Peter the Roman to become pope for the world to end. We have Palpatine.

Hmmm that’s against what my bishop told me when he found out that Tom had molested me

He said we were both going to hell
Well, individual priests, regional Church administrators (like bishops) and of course individual congregants will have their own ideas. No rule that says they're not allowed to disagree with the Vatican's official line.

Consider: some Catholics consider using condoms a sin, so they tell people that they shouldn't have sex until they're ready to get married to someone with whom they want to have children and whom they know (or don't care) the STD status of.

Some others instead spread the (false) word that condoms neither reduce STD transmission nor prevent pregnancy.

Some others instead spread the (also false) word that not only to condoms not protect against infection or unwanted conception, they're actually impregnated with HIV at the factory.

the number of men willing to go into a celibate priesthood in the united states is far fewer than the number needed. even with the importation of priests from other countries, the church is still having to close churches. up to 50% of all priests are gay. not practicing but gay nonetheless. how can the church deal with half the number of new priests?

this is a step in the wrong direction.

Indeed. Catholocism states that both priests and gay men are called to lives of celibacy. Wouldn't it stand to reason, then, that gay men might be called to the priesthood?

Some others instead spread the (false) word that condoms neither reduce STD transmission nor prevent pregnancy.

Some others instead spread the (also false) word that not only to condoms not protect against infection or unwanted conception, they're actually impregnated with HIV at the factory.


Funny, because some of those crazy American sex-'ed' classes in school are trying to convince you that you can get pregnant by jacking off.

I found that rather interesting.

Only homosexual acts are a sin. Being gay is something you can't help.

being is a verb,therefore being homosexual is a homosexual act

Hmmm that’s against what my bishop told me when he found out that Tom had molested me

He said we were both going to hell

Is that the way all abusers and their protectors try to keep children quiet?

The person who abused me when I was younger said, "We've both sinned and we need to pray for forgiveness." At the time, I really felt bad - that I had done something wrong - and I did pray for forgiveness. Looking back at in now, I'm like "Bullshit! I was 6 years old, you asshole! I was doing what I was told!"

Of course, it didn't really have the effect he was probably looking for. I always felt that, if I had done something wrong, I had to tell my mother about it...

Bleh

Funny, because some of those crazy American sex-'ed' classes in school are trying to convince you that you can get pregnant by jacking off.

Well, it is possible, if you are engaging in mutual maturbation, and one of the persons involved gets pre-ejaculate or ejaculate on their hand and then touches the vagina....

It is rather unlikely, but it is possible.

Funny, because some of those crazy American sex-'ed' classes in school are trying to convince you that you can get pregnant by jacking off.

I found that rather interesting.
You're not screwing with my head here, are you?

Can you source this? :|

Edit: masturbation with someone else's help can actually have a small but nonzero chance of bringing about conception.

it has nothing to do with pedophile priests. the desire to have sex with men is not the same as the desire for sex with children.

if you cant trust a priest candidate to admit that he knows he is (or may be) gay, you cant trust them for anything. of course there are some men in deep denial so they lie to themselves as much as they lie to the world. then perhaps you go by the "but you had a boyfriend in highschool" evidence of being gay.

the number of men willing to go into a celibate priesthood in the united states is far fewer than the number needed. even with the importation of priests from other countries, the church is still having to close churches. up to 50% of all priests are gay. not practicing but gay nonetheless. how can the church deal with half the number of new priests?

this is a step in the wrong direction.


And that neatly sums up the entire problem right there. Yet again, Ash knocks it out of the ball park. :)

Indeed. Catholocism states that both priests and gay men are called to lives of celibacy. Wouldn't it stand to reason, then, that gay men might be called to the priesthood?
it seems to ME that gay men might be called. esp. since they are denied the right to ever have a sex life anyway (no sex outside of marriage, no gay marriage)

i have no doubt that many gay priests have served the church and its people well over the centuries.

And people wonder why I walked away from the Church. :rolleyes:

Hmmmmm gay men want to rape boys? *SIGH* I guess all those pedophiles that attack their nieces, nephews, children, and grandchildren are secretly homosexuals? :rolleyes:

Glad to see the inquistion is still running. YEA get them homos! Wait a minute? What about the bishops and cardinals that moved these creatures around so they could attack other children?

Sorry Panzer Pope but until there is a formal apology; many like me will stay away and find our own answers......

And people wonder why I walked away from the Church. :rolleyes:

Hmmmmm gay men want to rape boys? *SIGH* I guess all those pedophiles that attack their nieces, nephews, children, and grandchildren are secretly homosexuals? :rolleyes:

Glad to see the inquistion is still running. YEA get them homos! Wait a minute? What about the bishops and cardinals that moved these creatures around so they could attack other children?

Sorry Panzer Pope but until there is a formal apology; many like me will stay away and find our own answers......


Keep in mind that the Catholic church did not link the child abuse allegations to homosexuality in any way. That was Amoebistan's spin on it, not the Catholic church's reason for implementing a ban on homosexuals. If you should be upset at anyone for trying to link the two, then it is Amoebistan you need to be upset with for he is the one who made that connection, not the church or even the article.

In fact, when asked why it matters, the church official said:

"The difference is in the special atmosphere of the seminary," he said. "In the seminary, you are surrounded by males, not females."

The Catholic church is concerned about homosexuality amongst priests. That is the real reason for this new guideline. You should learn to read the actual story rather than relying on the spin someone else puts on it.

More interesting snippets from the article to put everything in perspective:

But any move to ban or limit gay men from serving as priests would probably be popular among conservative Catholics, some of whom contend that heterosexuals hesitate to enter the priesthood because they have heard it is predominantly gay.

Mike Sullivan, of Catholics United for the Faith, a conservative advocacy group, said his group would favor a ban because putting a homosexual in an all-male seminary environment subjects that person to too much temptation, and increases his likelihood for failure.

"It's not appropriate to put an alcoholic in a bar either," he said.

On the general issue of homosexuality, official Catholic teaching, as explained in the catechism, says that while some people appear to have a predilection toward same-sex attraction, homosexual acts are impermissible and that homosexuals should remain chaste. But the church has also counseled understanding, and in 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed then by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, denounced the "unfounded and demeaning assumption" that homosexuals could not control their sexual behavior.

Why the timing now?

It's very unfortunate for the image of the Church, if not for what's actually going to happen (only time will tell us that). It looks like they're reacting to one problem by taking a do-nothing tack that will lead to a witch hunt, rather than actually addressing the problem that there are people who prey on children's trust of authority and that there are people who will help them cover up their sins.

Besides, he's essentially saying that gay men won't be able to control themselves in a male-only or male-dominated environment. From my experience camping and dorming, and what I know about the military, shows me that whatever gay sex does happen, happens off-campus and is not related to the environment in question.

The Catholic church is concerned about homosexuality amongst priests. That is the real reason for this new guideline.
Why are they suddenly concerned? After all, a gay priest - well, who knows that a priest is gay, other than himself and God? Priests who follow their duties are, by definition, celibate. So are gay Catholics. I don't know about you, but I know a few Catholic seminarians who have expressed to me that the reason they joined the priesthood was to take their place in Catholic life that God had mandated for them.

I don't see how being gay is something that can possibly affect the ability of a priest to do his priestly duties, if he is a good priest. If he's a bad priest, well... there are bad priests of all stripes. There are priests who visit prostitutes, there are priests who deliberately tell lies they know will end up in people dying, there are priests who steal, there are priests who drink to excess... do I need to go on? Priests who neglect their duties are all equally harmful to their congregations (with the exception of murder or murderous neglect, those are worse). You can't expect anyone to believe that a gay priest is more likely to be a bad priest, simply by virtue of the fact that if he were to have sex with anyone, he'd want it to be another man.

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?
Some one call the faulty logic brigade!

Just because the pedophiles are molesting young boys, it does not make them gay, it makes them pedophiles. Why molest young boys? Ever been to a Catholic Church? Very few have female altar servers.

Wow.

That's all I'll say as a gay man. In the eyes of a church, I'm a pedophile. That's just something else. I think that goes for one of the biggest logical contradictions of the decade.

Wow.

That's all I'll say as a gay man. In the eyes of a church, I'm a pedophile. That's just something else. I think that goes for one of the biggest logical contradictions of the decade.

Not at all, its Amoebistan who linked you to pedophiles. The Catholic Church did no such thing. This guideline is being passed due to their concern about homosexuality amongst priests, not due to concerns over pedophilia. It was Amoebistan's spin that turned this into a pedophilia discussion. Read four posts up where I explain this, or better yet go read the actual article. It's in the eyes of amoebistan that you are a pedophile, not in the eyes of the church. You fell for the spin hook, line, and sinker.

Not at all, its Amoebistan who linked you to pedophiles. The Catholic Church did no such thing. This guideline is being passed due to their concern about homosexuality amongst priests, not due to concerns over pedophilia. It was Amoebistan's spin that turned this into a pedophilia discussion. Read four posts up where I explain this, or better yet go read the actual article. It's in the eyes of amoebistan that you are a pedophile, not in the eyes of the church. You fell for the spin hook, line, and sinker.

I'm just reading his posts, and am quite eager to point out the overwhelming majority of child molesters are heterosexual males. I wonder... how many cases of child abuse has occurred against girls in the catholic church? Perhaps under-reported.

well now i get your point...

Keep in mind that the Catholic church did not link the child abuse allegations to homosexuality in any way.

As they recently passed the billion dollar payout mark for the scandles a month or two ago; the timing of this declaration begs the question.

Keep in mind they gave a nebulous answer to the problem and if they came out and linked the two then the follow up question would be why did you allow them in? Fact is many hard core conservatives (which the Vatican has many) link the two simply because the pedophiles mainly went after boys. So male on male equals homosexual. Backwards thinking but it happens. Even a certain person on these boards made that argument.


Originally Posted by Anonymous church official who broke this story
"The difference is in the special atmosphere of the seminary," he said. "In the seminary, you are surrounded by males, not females."

The Catholic church is concerned about homosexuality amongst priests. That is the real reason for this new guideline. You should learn to read the actual story rather than relying on the spin someone else puts on it.

So? Does a hetro Priest's vow of celibacy mean more then a homosexuals?


More interesting snippets from the article to put everything in perspective:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Article
But any move to ban or limit gay men from serving as priests would probably be popular among conservative Catholics, some of whom contend that heterosexuals hesitate to enter the priesthood because they have heard it is predominantly gay.

As one who seriously considered the Priesthood at one time, the question of family is more the issue. I decided I wanted a child. Many think the same way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Article
Mike Sullivan, of Catholics United for the Faith, a conservative advocacy group, said his group would favor a ban because putting a homosexual in an all-male seminary environment subjects that person to too much temptation, and increases his likelihood for failure.

"It's not appropriate to put an alcoholic in a bar either," he said.

Ahhh homosexuality is a disease? An addiction? :rolleyes: Obviously a homosexual can't keep an oath. Very judgemental that......


In fact, when asked why it matters, the church official said:

The Catholic church is concerned about homosexuality amongst priests. That is the real reason for this new guideline. You should learn to read the actual story rather than relying on the spin someone else puts on it.


Again timing this release. Billion dollar level for payouts and now they are going to purge those dirty homosexuals.

The Church has many problems and I really doubt they will get a significant influx of new Priests because they declared they are now homo free.

And people wonder why I walked away from the Church. :rolleyes:

Hmmmmm gay men want to rape boys? *SIGH* I guess all those pedophiles that attack their nieces, nephews, children, and grandchildren are secretly homosexuals? :rolleyes:

Glad to see the inquistion is still running. YEA get them homos! Wait a minute? What about the bishops and cardinals that moved these creatures around so they could attack other children?

Sorry Panzer Pope but until there is a formal apology; many like me will stay away and find our own answers......
I do

Because some bishop somewhere decided to play the shell game with my old priest he evaded justice for his origional crimes in 1970's only to molest me and my best two friends in the 90's

Their fucking complacency put me and countless other children in harms way

They KNEW ABOUT HIM FOR 20 FUCKING YEARS before he molested me WHY THE FUCK did they put him in charge of NOT ONLY a massive diosese but AN ELEMENTERY SCHOOL AS WELL

I mean they made that sick fuck teach the boys SEX ED!

Sorry ... I kind of went off there

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?
The real question is, "Is there any reason why we shouldn't be universally cheering this decision from the Vatican?"

So the Catholic Church wants to make its ignorance and bigotry even more public? GREAT! Gives us one more reason to toss them out with last millenia's garbage. If there are any gay people left associated with the Catholic Church, maybe this will wake them up...THE CATHOLIC GOD HATES YOU. HIS VICAR ON EARTH SAYS SO. QUIT ACTING LIKE A BATTERED SPOUSE, AND LEAVE THAT ABUSIVE SKY-DADDY WHO'S BEEN WHUPPING YOU FOR CENTURIES.

Sorry ... I kind of went off there

No need. You have every right to vent.

The real question is, "Is there any reason why we shouldn't be universally cheering this decision from the Vatican?"

So the Catholic Church wants to make its ignorance and bigotry even more public? GREAT! Gives us one more reason to toss them out with last millenia's garbage. If there are any gay people left associated with the Catholic Church, maybe this will wake them up...THE CATHOLIC GOD HATES YOU. HIS VICAR ON EARTH SAYS SO. QUIT ACTING LIKE A BATTERED SPOUSE, AND LEAVE THAT ABUSIVE SKY-DADDY WHO'S BEEN WHUPPING YOU FOR CENTURIES.

Hehe, I like Bottle. :)

Oh dear, that's a bad decision. Heterosexual people are capable of abuse as well. Benedict's made his first mistake. :headbang:

Yes, heterosexual people are capable of abuse, the only thing that sexual orientation has to do with pedophilia is that heterosexual abusers tend to choose opposite sex targets and homosexual abusers tend to choose same-sex targets.

There are exceptions but the Catholic church hasn't banned gay men from the priesthood, it's just banned "openly" gay men from the priesthood. I'm sure a lot of priests are in denial about their sexuality and would still gravitate towards a all-male profession.

Yes, heterosexual people are capable of abuse, the only thing that sexual orientation has to do with pedophilia is that heterosexual abusers tend to choose opposite sex targets and homosexual abusers tend to choose same-sex targets.

Actually untrue. The gender of the children to which pedophiles are attracted generally has nothing to do with the gender of adults they are attracted to. A straight pedophile is just as likely to victimize little boys as a homosexual pedophile.

After the paedophilia scandals of recent years that have afflicted the Catholic Church, the Vatican has decided to do something about it.

It has decided to ban gay men, even celibate gays, from becoming seminarians. This is not grandfathered in, so gay priest can remain, but no gay lay Catholic will be admitted to a seminary from here on.

Can anyone tell me:

1. What the hell does this have to do with pedophiles in the priesthood?
2. How are you going to find out if someone's gay or not, especially if he's been celibate for years? What counts as "evidence of homosexuality"?
1. Homosexuals are perverts and pedofiles are perverts. Ergo homosexuals are more likely to be pedofiles.
2. Presumably they'll take the priest's word for it. Priests are not supposed to lie.

1. Homosexuals are perverts and pedofiles are perverts. Ergo homosexuals are more likely to be pedofiles.
2. Presumably they'll take the priest's word for it. Priests are not supposed to lie.
you may want to point out if you ment that number 1 sarcasticaly

Is it self-evident that there cannot be a connection between the two among those in the priesthood?
No, but there has been studies trying to show such a correlation and turned up nothing. That is considered evidence against the correlation. Apart from the fact that there is no evidence for it, which in itself should be enough to not base your policies on it.

The Catholic Church IS still against homosexuality correct? So why is this such a big deal?

you may want to point out if you ment that number 1 sarcasticaly
I meant both sarcastically. But that is about the way you think when you make decision based on nothing but prejudice. At least it's the way I do it.

As they recently passed the billion dollar payout mark for the scandles a month or two ago; the timing of this declaration begs the question.

If you had read the article, you would have realized that this has been in the works for years. The timing of when this hit the news is not the fault of the Catholic church, it is the fault of the media who chose to break the story at this time.


Keep in mind they gave a nebulous answer to the problem and if they came out and linked the two then the follow up question would be why did you allow them in? Fact is many hard core conservatives (which the Vatican has many) link the two simply because the pedophiles mainly went after boys. So male on male equals homosexual. Backwards thinking but it happens. Even a certain person on these boards made that argument.

The answer wasnt nebulous at all. I understood it perfectly as can anyone with a 5th grade or higher reading level who is not looking for a conspiracy where there is none.



Again timing this release. Billion dollar level for payouts and now they are going to purge those dirty homosexuals.


This hasnt been released. The media chose to expose the existence of a document that has yet to be ratified. The Catholic Church has released nothing.

The church's position on this is ridiculous.
However, the church does not link pedophilia with homosexuality, period.

Frankly, the Catholic Church is moving backward with this step. We currently have a shortage a priests. The obvious ways to remedy that is to either allow priests to marry or allow women to join the priesthood. Further limiting the amount of people able to become priests will only exacerbate the problem.

If you really feel strongly about this, as I do, you should write a letter to the pope or the vatican consulate. If you want things to be different, tell the people with the power to make the change, don't just rant about it on the internet.

Mail Address: American Embassy to the Holy See
via delle Terme Deciane, 26
00153 - Rome, Italy

Or, better yet:
His
Holiness,
Pope Benedict XVI,
Apostolic Palace,
00120 Vatican City

State Vatican officials can be contacted at their particular departments (see our Vatican Government page). For example:

Archbishop John Patrick Foley,
President,
Pontifical Council for Social Communications,
00120 Vatican City State.

all this information was retrieved from http://vatican.usembassy.it/

The church's position on this is ridiculous.
However, the church does not link pedophilia with homosexuality, period.

Frankly, the Catholic Church is moving backward with this step. We currently have a shortage a priests. The obvious ways to remedy that is to either allow priests to marry or allow women to join the priesthood. Further limiting the amount of people able to become priests will only exacerbate the problem.

If you really feel strongly about this, as I do, you should write a letter to the pope or the vatican consulate. If you want things to be different, tell the people with the power to make the change, don't just rant about it on the internet.

Mail Address: American Embassy to the Holy See
via delle Terme Deciane, 26
00153 - Rome, Italy

Or, better yet:
His
Holiness,
Pope Benedict XVI,
Apostolic Palace,
00120 Vatican City

State Vatican officials can be contacted at their particular departments (see our Vatican Government page). For example:

Archbishop John Patrick Foley,
President,
Pontifical Council for Social Communications,
00120 Vatican City State.

all this information was retrieved from http://vatican.usembassy.it/


That or let homosexuals (openly homosexual) into the priesthood

As for contacting if you are catholic go for it

That or let homosexuals (openly homosexual) into the priesthood

As for contacting if you are catholic go for it

1. It's the Pope's church. He can make any rules he likes concerning the membership and priesthood. It's not a democracy.

2. If enough people don't have a problem with homosexuals in the priesthood, then I'm sure they can all become Episcopals.

Vote with your feet. Writing letters to the Pope is like sending a letter to Santa.

1. It's the Pope's church. He can make any rules he likes concerning the membership and priesthood. It's not a democracy.

2. If enough people don't have a problem with homosexuals in the priesthood, then I'm sure they can all become Episcopals.

Vote with your feet. Writing letters to the Pope is like sending a letter to Santa.
I already did vote with my feet

I was outta there years ago I just said if you feel it nessisary (like the poster I quoteD) go for it

The Catholic Church IS still against homosexuality correct? So why is this such a big deal?

Actually, incorrect. Catholoic dogma states that homosexuality is something one cannot help - that it is a natural situation. However, the Catholic Church states that homosexuals are called to a life of celibacy - that because their relationships cannot result in marriage (according to the church) or children, they should remain chaste.

Interestingly enough, priests are supposed to be called to a life of celibacy too!

I do

Because some bishop somewhere decided to play the shell game with my old priest he evaded justice for his origional crimes in 1970's only to molest me and my best two friends in the 90's

Their fucking complacency put me and countless other children in harms way

They KNEW ABOUT HIM FOR 20 FUCKING YEARS before he molested me WHY THE FUCK did they put him in charge of NOT ONLY a massive diosese but AN ELEMENTERY SCHOOL AS WELL

I mean they made that sick fuck teach the boys SEX ED!
i dont know why those bishops and cardinals who moved sex offenders from parish to parish arent in jail. they aided and abetted pedophiles in continuing their crimes.

even as the church faces bankruptcy for the criminal actions of these men, they are unwilling to admit their own sins and errors. can there be a more grievous sin than allowing the molestation of children? the magnitude of what the bishops and cardinal did boggles my mind.

and they think they can fix it by banning gay priests? what kind of solution is that? do they really think that only gay men engage in sex crimes?

the "solution" is to take the lives of children seriously. when they come to the bishop with a story of being molested he needs to take the case to the police. the church is not above the law. it isnt going to cure pedophilia with prayer. when a crime is committed the priest who did it must be held fully accountable for his actions in court.

The Catholic Church IS still against homosexuality correct? So why is this such a big deal?
Is it against homosexuality, against homosexual sex, or against homosexuals? There's a big difference here.

Christian ideology says that everyone is a sinner - that nobody, even the Pope, is perfect. (Protestants say that the Pope is explicitly imperfect by nature of the Church, but I'm not a Protestant and that's not important anyway.)

Given that everyone is a sinner, how can you tell someone he may not become a priest due to underlying inclinations he is not acting upon?

Let's imagine a Catholic teenager. He has a heroin problem. One day, though, he decides to kick the habit. And eventually he goes to apply to the seminary. Now, remember: this is someone who had an addiction to heroin, and if he sees the paraphenalia of the drug use and so on he will experience cravings and may fall off the wagon rather readily. However, he hasn't used any heroin in the past five years and he's lived an upstanding life since the last time he sinned that way, both studying and doing good works.

Should he be kept out of the seminaries for a desire to sin which he is not indulging?

Most people would say no. Some people (myself included) feel that coping with one's own real, glaring flaws is actually helpful experience for the work of being a clergyman.

Heroin addiction is a far-out example, I know. But if a recovered heroin addict - who if shown a kit, might be driven to sit down and use it - would be accepted into the seminary to become a priest and, hopefully teach others how to avoid the mistakes he made, how much more so a gay man, whose sin is a quiet one which (by Catholic doctrine) harms only himself and his partner, should be allowed into the seminary, if he is celibate.

And since there's no way to tell if someone's celibate or not, the best thing to do is trust them that their oath is valid, until they break it.

Also: having had a child molestor living in my community, I discovered that instead of simply ostracising him, the community had accepted him, with one condition: that he never be left unsupervised in the company of children. This was quite reasonable and he lived here a good while before family illness (okay, and the occasional vandalism and death threat) forced him to leave. Why not treat sexually abusive clergy in the same way? Let them stay, just don't give them the opportunity to abuse anyone ever again. (Yes, that does mean publicising who they are, what they did, and what steps will be taken to prevent its recurrence.)

i dont know why those bishops and cardinals who moved sex offenders from parish to parish arent in jail. they aided and abetted pedophiles in continuing their crimes.

even as the church faces bankruptcy for the criminal actions of these men, they are unwilling to admit their own sins and errors. can there be a more grievous sin than allowing the molestation of children? the magnitude of what the bishops and cardinal did boggles my mind.

and they think they can fix it by banning gay priests? what kind of solution is that? do they really think that only gay men engage in sex crimes?

the "solution" is to take the lives of children seriously. when they come to the bishop with a story of being molested he needs to take the case to the police. the church is not above the law. it isnt going to cure pedophilia with prayer. when a crime is committed the priest who did it must be held fully accountable for his actions in court.
Agreed absolutly
And they endangered others by conceling him

They could have saved his soul through repentance ... while his body was in fucking jail

This reminds me of my third grade teacher. He was openly straight. Everytime he took us boys to the restroom, he had the woman teacher across from his classroom take the girls. When we asked him why, he said that he was scared to take the girls to the restroom alone :rolleyes: . And yes he was Catholic. ;) Now as to my opinion of the Vatican's discision to ban homosexuals from the priesthood. I feel that just as a prisoner may try to rape other men while in prison, because of the abscence of women. A priest may also molest boys and young men, it doesn't mean that he's gay. It only means that, especialy in the abscence of a female presence, he's willing to substitute boys. :headbang: And another thing, one doesn't have to be Catholic to have problems of sexual assult and or harrasment while in church. When I was 14, I was using the toilet in a church restroom. When I came out of the stall, another teen boy a few years older than I came in and engaged in a display of exhibitionism. He said that he wanted to see mine as well, and that it wouldn't be gay as long as he didn't touch me, but he still wanted to see me touch myself. :eek: Of course I didn't comply, but it was still one of the worse days of my entire life. No one would have guessed that the guy who came on to me is gay. He was a jock, and he even had a girlfriend. But preceding this occurance, all of the other teens were spreading rumours that I was gay. I don't know if that's why he chose me or not. He claimed that it was because I was big in stature, and he wanted to see if my member was big as well. I think that he might be a youth minister now. :headbang: Well thanks for letting me get that off my chest. I certainly have had a weird life, filled with weird people. :rolleyes:

Let's imagine a Catholic teenager. He has a heroin problem. One day, though, he decides to kick the habit. And eventually he goes to apply to the seminary. Now, remember: this is someone who had an addiction to heroin, and if he sees the paraphenalia of the drug use and so on he will experience cravings and may fall off the wagon rather readily. However, he hasn't used any heroin in the past five years and he's lived an upstanding life since the last time he sinned that way, both studying and doing good works.

Should he be kept out of the seminaries for a desire to sin which he is not indulging?

Most people would say no. Some people (myself included) feel that coping with one's own real, glaring flaws is actually helpful experience for the work of being a clergyman.

Heroin addiction is a far-out example, I know. But if a recovered heroin addict - who if shown a kit, might be driven to sit down and use it - would be accepted into the seminary to become a priest and, hopefully teach others how to avoid the mistakes he made, how much more so a gay man, whose sin is a quiet one which (by Catholic doctrine) harms only himself and his partner, should be allowed into the seminary, if he is celibate.


Actually, your example is not a good one. There is no unusual heroin temptation in a seminary environment. The proper example for a heroin addict would be to pose the question of whether an ex-heroin addict should be allowed to become a street evangelist to heroin ravaged ghettos where he is expected to be in an environment conductive to heroin use.

There is still a good argument for saying that yes, the heroin addict should be allowed in that environment. But now the question is framed properly so you can compare it to the question of homosexuality.