Noel's angel Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 The name isn't Noel btw. What I am saying is that paedophiles are hardly gonna admit that they are attracted to children, so therefore, your solution of not atmitting them, wouldn't work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noel's angel Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 Socrates, I was refering to Ermerite's post which concerned paeophilia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 [quote]The name isn't Noel btw[/quote] O Lord. Pardon me, your highness. [quote]What I am saying is that paedophiles are hardly gonna admit that they are attracted to children, so therefore, your solution of not atmitting them, wouldn't work[/quote] If they are devout Catholic men they will. This is one of the reasons why we have so many homosexuals in the seminary. They don't reveal their disorders upon admittance, and it continues to fester during their formation, and eventually during their ministry. If a man will not reveal grave personal disorders to the proper ecclesiastical authorities, who must determine whether he is fit for the priesthood, then that's not a man who should be in the priesthood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 [quote name='Eremite' date='Jun 24 2005, 12:30 PM']Noel, You don't think there are good Catholic men who are attracted to children? Pedophilia is a disorder of the sexual appetite, just as homosexuality is. If chastity is the only consideration for admission to the priesthood, then we should admit men attracted to children, so long as they are chaste. [right][snapback]621773[/snapback][/right] [/quote] No we should not! (But the problem is largely attraction to post-pubescent males, not little children.) Seminaries becoming refugees for people with sexual disorders is at the root of the problem of the priestly abuse. Someone with a known sexual disorder is a poor candidate for the priesthood. Most of the abuse involved young males of the same sex. (Could you pull up those statistics again, MC Just?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 (edited) [quote]If they are devout Catholic men they will. This is one of the reasons why we have so many homosexuals in the seminary. They don't reveal their disorders upon admittance, and it continues to fester during their formation, and eventually during their ministry. If a man will not reveal grave personal disorders to the proper ecclesiastical authorities[/quote] It is attitudes like yours that make them not want to admit it, and the last thing you proposed is very different than barring them entirely. It should be done, and is done in every case of a candidate for seminary in our diocese at least, and is extremely proper and ordered. the abuses today were again, allowed under different rules from seminaries in a time of transition "in the spirit of Vatican II" during the late 70's/early 80's and later. how does that qualify as a problem now. Many of the seminarians i know will make awesome priests of the highest quality. Edited June 24, 2005 by jezic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 [quote]It is attitudes like yours that make them not want to admit it, and the last thing you proposed is very different than barring them entirely.[/quote] Yes, we should bar pedophiles entirely from the priesthood. Are you really going to dispute that? But my point is not about pedophiles themselves. If a person's chastity is the only consideration for admission to the priesthood, then we should have no problem admitting chaste men who are attracted to children. So you wouldn't mind a chaste pedophile running your parish, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 (edited) i would deny anyone who is not stable enough including pedophiles/homosexuals/heterosexuals/etc. as long as it is reviewed on a case by case basis by proper authorities like a bishop or vocations director. The priesthood is a demanding call and certainly not for everyone, but every stability issue needs to be examined. and no, you are reading me wrong entirely. if they are chaste, they aren't a pedophile because chastity extends to chastity of thought as well. Edited June 24, 2005 by jezic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 So only homosexual men who have never ever had a sinful homosexual thought should be admitted to the priesthood? Is there such a person? How do they know they are homosexual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 never ever disables a primary role of Christ as allowing for the total complete forgiveness of sins in Confession. If you do not believe that is possible, or the ensuing transformation that is possible with honesty and learning about the truth of faith, then you deny a primary reality of faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Eremite' date='Jun 24 2005, 12:37 PM']O Lord. Pardon me, your highness. If they are devout Catholic men they will. This is one of the reasons why we have so many homosexuals in the seminary. They don't reveal their disorders upon admittance, and it continues to fester during their formation, and eventually during their ministry. If a man will not reveal grave personal disorders to the proper ecclesiastical authorities, who must determine whether he is fit for the priesthood, then that's not a man who should be in the priesthood. [right][snapback]621786[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Someone in an earlier thread pointed out that (in the books) homosexuals are not considered fit for the priesthood. Any seminarian found guilty of homosexual activity should be immediately thrown out. The problem is that in too many seminaries, those in charge knowingly allow homosexual acitivtity and such behavior is protected (referred to by some as the "lavender mafia") Men applying to seminaries are even asked questions and barred if their answers show that they are opposed to homosexuality. (Thus the "Pink Palaces") (Some of this has been cleaned up, and there are some good seminaries, but this remains a problem. We are curently reaping the fruits of this outrage - no pun intended.) Edited June 24, 2005 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 Christ forgives men who indulge sexual thoughts about children. That doesn't make them fit for the priesthood. Period. Suitability for the priesthood has nothing to do with Christ's forgiveness. All homosexuals and pedophiles can receive God's forgiveness, and exercise a Saintly life of virtue. That doesn't negate their unsuitability for the priesthood. They have the same cross to bear as women. They are not called to the priesthood. With God's grace, they will carry that cross, and realize that it is not a cross at all, because it is not their vocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Just Posted June 24, 2005 Author Share Posted June 24, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Socrates' date='Jun 24 2005, 12:48 PM']Someone in an earlier thread pointed out that (in the books) homosexuals are not considered fir for the priesthood. Any seminarian found guilty of homosexual activity should be immediately thrown out. The problem is that in too many seminaries, those in charge knowingly allow homosexual acitivtity and such behavior is protected (referred to by some as the "lavender mafia") Men applying to seminaries are even asked questions and barred if their answers show that they are opposed to homosexuality. (Thus the "Pink Palaces") (Some of this has been cleaned up, and there are some good seminaries, but this remains a problem. We are curently reaping the fruits of this outrage - no pun intended.) [right][snapback]621799[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I want to build a orginization that will help rid the church in america of heterodoxy. Anyone interested in helping, let me know. lol i'm actually not kidding. I'm thinking something called "voice of orthodoxy". Edited June 24, 2005 by MC Just Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semalsia Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 [quote name='Eremite']Heterosexual men who have problems with lust should not be admitted to the priesthood either (eg, a man addicted to pornography). Pedophiles, like homosexuals, can be chaste. But that doesn't mean they are fit for the priesthood.[/quote] So you say that heterosexuals can be unchaste, but do not deny priesthood from all heterosexuals. Yet, when you say that homosexuals can be unchaste, you are denying priesthood from all homosexuals. This sounds like prejudice to me. Why does the promise to be chaste differ if coming from a homosexual instead of a heterosexual? Maybe catholics should only accept asexuals as priests. Would be easier that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 [quote]Why does the promise to be chaste differ if coming from a homosexual instead of a heterosexual?[/quote] As I explained above, heterosexual men do not have a disorder of the sexual appetite. Their appetite is naturally ordered to women. Homosexuals, pedophiles, and men attracted to hamburgers have an unnatural object of sexual affection. Their appetite is unnaturally ordered to something other than women. A heterosexual man addicted to pornography is also unsuitable for the priesthood, but for a different reason. Although his sexual appetite is correctly ordered, it lacks temperance, and like homosexuality and pedophilia, masks a deeper psychological problem. Our sexuality is intimately bound with with our entire psychology. The priesthood requires a man of sound psychological health; particularly sexual health, since the demands of celibacy, and its interconnectedness with the entire person, play such a big role in a priestly ministry. This is why the Church made clear in 1961: [quote]Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted June 24, 2005 Share Posted June 24, 2005 active homosexual people should not be admitted. Active straight people should not be admitted. Active drug users should not be admitted. People who were at one time, recognize the errors of the ways, repented, asked forgiveness, and changed are fit for the priesthood if they meet the other conditions, aren't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now