Seminarians with same-sex attractions

[Eutychus]

[quote] You, like so many other Protestants, misinterpret the book the Holy Ghost and the Church gave to you.[/quote]

Apparently so did YOUR early church then.

For, as history shows 39 of the early so called "Popes" { title is really only seen after 600AD } were married themselves.

Did they teach you THAT in your RCIA or CCD classes? If not, why not?

Yes, Paul did list EXCEPTIONS to NORMAL RULE that clergy should be happily married. That is what they were, distinct exceptions, not the norms that he expressed in his doctrinal instructional teachings on general church governence to Timothy, one of his clear protoge's and being trained to run a church.

Look, it should be glaringly obvious, that single unmarried priests are just trouble waiting to happen. History over and over has proven that, and if a BILLION dollars plus in settlements hasn't taught you that Paul was indeed correct, then perhaps another few billion MORE will.

The endless "proofs" of the corruption in the clergy all go back to one source, failure to follow the rulebook provided by Paul.

[url="http://www.riteofsodomy.com/"]http://www.riteofsodomy.com/[/url]

****************************************************

Perhaps my favorite Catholic author now is Matt Abbott of Renew America a conservative group, heavily Catholic, who comment on matters affecting this nation, and the Catholic Church in particular when needed.


[url="http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/060812"]http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/060812[/url]

Matt is a very courageous man, tackles the "hard ones" constantly, and normally is dead on. His comments on this problem should REALLY open some eyes, and jumpstart some brains...if that were possible. Here he reprints an article submitted by a knowledgable laywoman, who obviously has a better grasp of the problem than does the USCCB.

[quote]Recognizing sexual predators?

Matt C. Abbott

August 12, 2006


The following is a slightly edited reprint from the summer 2006 newsletter of Catholic Citizens of Illinois.


Recognizing Sexual Predators or Disinformation?

By Mary Kelly Ames

About two and a half years ago, I had taken a series of chastity initiative training classes given by Mary Louise Kurey of the Chicago archdiocese's Respect Life Office. I was told that as a volunteer, I was required to take a training seminar at the Catholic Charities building on recognizing sexual predators against children. I understood that everyone who was either a volunteer or employee of the Chicago archdiocese was required to undergo this class due to the recent sex abuse scandal. I had some doubts about the necessity of the course, but understood that it was required, so I signed up for the class.

About 300-350 people attended the class. A male speaker from the East Coast explained to us that he was part of a consulting group which had been hired by the USCCB. He said that the bishops had voted unanimously to hire them as a solution to what had happened. I was surprised as I immediately thought that any 'solution' should begin in the seminaries and that each diocese most likely had their own unique problems and personal issues. Why hire one consulting group for every diocese in the United States?

Within about ten minutes after the class had begun, I noticed the speaker was only discussing predators that specifically target pre-pubescent children such as toddlers or children under ten. He was very specific in talking about their psychological makeup and explained to us how we must be vigilant in looking out for the Cub Scout leader or the adult who always enjoyed taking groups of children to the skating rink or the swimming pool.

While I had no doubt that these types of predators were indeed dangerous and agreed with everything he said about them, I kept wondering when the topic of homosexual priests would arise. The John Jay Criminal Justice statistics had already come out publicly stating that 81% of all abuse victims were teenaged boys aged 13-18 who were abused by homosexually active priests. Should we not be trained to watch for these types of potential abuse situations?

His talk was followed by a question and answer session. I immediately raised my hand and was asked to stand. I politely complimented him on his talk and said that while all of the information presented was very important, why were we not talking about the homosexual priests who had committed the vast majority of these abuse crimes? We were only being trained to watch out for very young children, not teenagers, especially teenaged boys. The speaker immediately looked at me very sternly and asked me 'Are you a conservative?'
[color="#003333"][u][b]
I laughed and said that yes, in fact I am, but what did that have to do with my question? He then proceeded to admonish me in front of everyone in the entire room and told me that I must not generalize or blame the homosexuals for this problem. To show I was not trying to discriminate, I quoted Pope John Paul II's pastoral letter about treating them with dignity and stated what I knew about the statistics that had come out. He then silenced me and never answered my question. I realized at that time that[u] we were being grossly misled and would never be taught the truth.[/u][/b][/u][/color]

About a month after the incident, Cardinal George was kind enough to meet with me, and I reported to him everything that happened. He said that he had attended a different class (there were several) with the same speaker and did not like him either. He also apologized for what happened to me. [color="#006600"][b] I told him that thousands of his employees and volunteers were being misinformed and should not have to go through such a terrible and deliberately misleading training for the most severe problem in our church today? I[u]t was almost as if we were being trained on purpose to ignore homosexual priests who could easily abuse [/u]and are known to prey on teenage boys. [/b][/color]

The cardinal was very generous to me with his time, and I have great respect for him, but I still find it difficult to understand why he felt he had to follow the directives of the USCCB regarding this scandal when their proposal of hiring a national speaker was so obviously not a solution to the problem of sexual abuse. These classes continue to be required for all volunteers and employees of the archdiocese. The purposeful disinformation provided in these classes appears to be just another cover-up from the USCCB.

Mary Kelly Ames, secretary of Catholic Citizens of Illinois, is a member of St. Mary of the Angels Parish and is active in the parish's young adult ministry.[/quote]

Edited August 17, 2006 by Eutychus

[avemaria40]

Yeah, we know early Popes were married. Celibacy is NOT a doctrine, it is custom. As I mentioned earlier, Eastern Rite Catholics still practice the tradition of married priests. But marriage is not going to stop pedophilia anymore than contraception is going to stop abortion. Celibacy happens to be more practical anyway, have you seen how huge Catholic parishes are? Not to mention the salary a priest makes? There would not be enough time or money to raise a family. The Church is trying to STOP pedophilia by making sure the priests have a healthy understanding of sexuality (hence, no same-sex attractions or any other abnormal attractions) But marriage is not going to cure this problem.

[Eutychus]

[quote]Yeah, we know early Popes were married. Celibacy is NOT a doctrine, it is custom. [/quote]

A custom?

Come on, that makes it sound optional. IT IS A DOGMA, or it is treated as if it were one. Try getting married as a priest. Unless you marry a Moonie, and are a Cardinal { Milingo} you will be out on the street in a nuns lunchbreak.

In fact, there is NOTHING that the papacy cracks down harder on than that. You can sacrifice animals at mass { the Bishops of South Africa } you can practice Voodoo and be a priest. You can worship at Hindu shrines as a priest. You can do ANYTHING as a priest and stay a priest....BUT....make your consort an honest woman.

THAT, is the ONLY sin the church will act on within seven days, EVERY TIME.

Now, even REAL PROCLAIMED DOGMA's don't get that sort of reaction when you break them, now do they?

Smooch.

[Resurrexi]

I agree that there are certain bishops that aren't doing their job to stop heresy and false oecumenism, but that doesn't make the Catholic Church evil. In the Eastern Rites, priests can marry. You shouldn't be so one sided as to forget the Eastern Rites.

[Guest Bro Wood]

The seminarian applicant needs to [u]know and believe[/u] that homosexuality and homosexual tendancies are intrinsically evil. But that doesn't mean as a person in their own human experience, they are evil or immoral. But these are to be rare occasions when someone is allowed into a seminary, despite their homosexuality.

As the saying goes, [i]if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.....it's a duck.[/i]

[Eutychus]

[quote]The seminarian applicant needs to know and believe that homosexuality and homosexual tendancies are intrinsically evil. But that doesn't mean as a person in their own human experience, they are evil or immoral. [/quote]

Has ANYONE here read the bible, even once?

What does GOD say about Homosexuality? What does Paul say about homosexuality?

Doesn't that SETTLE THINGS permanently for anyone here? Do you people even BELIEVE the bible is God's Word even?

Honestly, the longer I'm here, the more I'm convinced that to you, the bible is just a nice coffee table book that is useful when you need to grab ONE VERSE here and there for backup to some condemned practice, using that verse in complete isolation from the historic, and other supporting verses that explain and back it up.

Honestly, really, I really want to know...if you asked GOD, "Hey God, what do you think about homosexuals in church leadership positions...." what would God say?

[avemaria40]

They both say homosexualilty is evil, that doesn't mean the person is evil.

[Eutychus]

[quote]They both say homosexualilty is evil, that doesn't mean the person is evil. [/quote]

I guess God calling them REPROBATES is another nice term and doesn't *really mean* what it seems to mean, right?

1Corithians 6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, [b][u]nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,[/u][/b] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (Emphasis ours)

This verse has been translated in many ways among the 25 English versions of the Bible that we have analyzed. The two activities of interest here have been variously translated as:

bullet effeminate. In the English language, this covers a wide range of male behavior such as being unmanly, lacking virility. One might think of the characters "John," the receptionist on NYPD Blue, or "Jack" on Will and Grace.

bullet homosexuals, variously described as:
[b]
bullet "men who practice homosexuality," (ESV);
bullet "those who participate in homosexuality," (Amplified);
bullet "abusers of themselves with men," (KJV);
bullet "practicing homosexuals," (NAB);
bullet "homosexuals," (NASB, CSB, NKJ, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English);
bullet "homosexual perversion," (NEB);
bullet "homosexual offenders," (NIV);
bullet "liers with mankind," (Rhiems); and
bullet "homosexual perverts." (TEV)[/b]

[Resurrexi]

Pracitcing, unrepentant homosexuals would be considered evil, but those who are struggling with homosexuality and are begging for forgiveness from God would not be considered evil.

[Aloysius]

Most experts that at the very least married protestant clergy and celibate catholic clergy have about the same rate of pedophilia crimes. there were some statistics floating around the internet awhile ago that protestant minister rates were higher, but this is untrue because there are not reliable statistics in this department.

The problem is that our culture is sick and we get our clergy from our culture. You described it well when you discussed how we got our clergy from greek culture (at this period in history you are referring to, they were often married before they got ordained; but in the pagan greek culture married men committed acts of pedophilia just like in today's pagan american culture) and had to deal with this problem because it came from the outside world. Your clergy come from the same American culture our clergy come from: the same diseased American culture which produces these pedophiles and as such sociologically the rate of protestant clergy (married or not) who abuse children is right alongside the rate of Catholic clergy.

Who says so? Only the experts who work with victims of clergy sexual abuse.

[quote]Gary Schoener, a psychologist whose Walk-In Counseling Center in Minneapolis has consulted with more than 1,000 victims of clerical sexual abuse, believes that the percentage of abusers is no higher among Catholic priests than among Protestant ministers. [/quote]
[i]Alan Cooperman, "Sex abuse in clergy stymies scientists Lack of data thwarts efforts to gauge depth of the problem," Washington Post, 2002-MAR-24, at: [url="http://detnews.com/2002/religion/"]http://detnews.com/2002/religion/[/url][/i]

By the way: The Bible says that all creation is positively good, but that humanity has fallen nature. All tendency towards sin is part of the fallen nature, but no human being can ever be called positively evil (namely because positive evil does not exist, evil is always a negative, a twisting of good, a deficiency of good). If the persons afflicted with homosexuality were not intrinsically good, then homosexuality itself could not be considered evil because what would it harm? It harms the intrinsically good souls of those who partake in the practice.

No human being is evil. Human beings have evil impulses, desires, temptations, afflictions; human beings commit evil actions; but no human being is evil.

Homosexual sins will, however, send you to hell.

Christ's forgiveness can penetrate anyone no matter what sin they have committed.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1045448' date='Aug 17 2006, 12:12 PM']
I guess God calling them REPROBATES is another nice term and doesn't *really mean* what it seems to mean, right?

1Corithians 6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, [b][u]nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,[/u][/b] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (Emphasis ours)

This verse has been translated in many ways among the 25 English versions of the Bible that we have analyzed. The two activities of interest here have been variously translated as:

bullet effeminate. In the English language, this covers a wide range of male behavior such as being unmanly, lacking virility. One might think of the characters "John," the receptionist on NYPD Blue, or "Jack" on Will and Grace.

bullet homosexuals, variously described as:
[b]
bullet "men who practice homosexuality," (ESV);
bullet "those who participate in homosexuality," (Amplified);
bullet "abusers of themselves with men," (KJV);
bullet "practicing homosexuals," (NAB);
bullet "homosexuals," (NASB, CSB, NKJ, The Great Book: The New Testament in Plain English);
bullet "homosexual perversion," (NEB);
bullet "homosexual offenders," (NIV);
bullet "liers with mankind," (Rhiems); and
bullet "homosexual perverts." (TEV)[/b]
[/quote]
Yes, Eutychus, homosexuality is clearly and plainly condemned by both the Bible and the Catholic Church. No argument with you there.
Neither myself nor any orthodox Catholic defends this abomination.
I have consistantly argued against those liberals who would defend homosexuality in the past.
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s=&showtopic=54841&view=findpost&p=1024724"][b]Here's a recent example.[/b] [/url]

If you're expecting people to argue in favor of homosexuality, you've come to the wrong place.
(Of course, it is quite evident from your posts that you pay no attention to what either Catholic posters here nor the Church actually says, but merely want to attack straw-men and make pointless rants against the Church.)

[Eutychus]

[quote]If you're expecting people to argue in favor of homosexuality, you've come to the wrong place.
(Of course, it is quite evident from your posts that you pay no attention to what either Catholic posters here nor the Church actually says, but [b][u]merely want to attack straw-men [/u][/b]and make pointless rants against the Church.) [/quote]

[b]
Homosexuality in the priesthood is now a [u]STRAWMAN[/u][/b]????

Goodness man, how many BILLIONS of dollars does it take for you to understand this is NOT a creation of fundies that want to attack your church? Frankly most fundies don't give a rats backside about your church, they consider you pagans basically NOW, and they don't follow the ins and outs and problems of the Catholic Church, honestly.

We are that rarity, former Catholics with a love for Catholics and thereby want to stay current, follow things, and hopefully jumpstart a few minds that were shut down in "complete docility" to men that should be tossed out on their hind ends, not adored and adulated.

[b]STRAWMEN?[/b]

Still stunned that you would even have the chutzpah to call homosexuality in the priesthood that, literally sitting here in amazement.

[b]STAWMAN?[/b]

I just GOOGLED two words, PRIEST and HOMOSEXUAL....and it returned 340,000 replies. Yeah, I'm just inventing[b] [u]STRAWMEN [/u][/b]HERE no truth to this one, nosiree, just my fevered imagination, don;'t look, don't see, don't think, don't ACT. The credo of the online Catholic apology maker { not apoloGIST }

[i]Sad, sad, really heartrendering sad. [/i]

Edited August 18, 2006 by Eutychus

[Socrates]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1045722' date='Aug 17 2006, 06:36 PM']
[b]
Homosexuality in the priesthood is now a [u]STRAWMAN[/u][/b]????

Goodness man, how many BILLIONS of dollars does it take for you to understand this is NOT a creation of fundies that want to attack your church? Frankly most fundies don't give a rats backside about your church, they consider you pagans basically NOW, and they don't follow the ins and outs and problems of the Catholic Church, honestly.

We are that rarity, former Catholics with a love for Catholics and thereby want to stay current, follow things, and hopefully jumpstart a few minds that were shut down in "complete docility" to men that should be tossed out on their hind ends, not adored and adulated.

[b]STRAWMEN?[/b]

Still stunned that you would even have the chutzpah to call homosexuality in the priesthood that, literally sitting here in amazement.

[b]STAWMAN?[/b]

I just GOOGLED two words, PRIEST and HOMOSEXUAL....and it returned 340,000 replies. Yeah, I'm just inventing[b] [u]STRAWMEN [/u][/b]HERE no truth to this one, nosiree, just my fevered imagination, don;'t look, don't see, don't think, don't ACT. The credo of the online Catholic apology maker { not apoloGIST }

[i]Sad, sad, really heartrendering sad. [/i]
[/quote]
You're pretending like we're [b]for[/b] homosexuals in the priesthood!
If you've read a single one of my posts on this topic, you'll see that I'm 100% opposed!

Any homosexuals in the seminary should be immediately thrown out, and any homosexual priests should be defrocked!

It's that Fundy reading-comprehension problem acting up again!

Sheesh! . . .

(And if you regard Catholic priests as nothing more than pagan witch-doctors or whatever, why should any of this even matter to you?)

And the Catholic Church agrees with me on this.
[quote]Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: "Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature . . . be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery (chap. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.
Therefore, wishing to pursue with the greatest rigor that which we have decreed since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss."[/quote]

[OLAM Dad]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1045363' date='Aug 17 2006, 10:34 AM']
A custom?

Come on, that makes it sound optional. IT IS A DOGMA, or it is treated as if it were one. Try getting married as a priest. Unless you marry a Moonie, and are a Cardinal { Milingo} you will be out on the street in a nuns lunchbreak.

In fact, there is NOTHING that the papacy cracks down harder on than that. You can sacrifice animals at mass { the Bishops of South Africa } you can practice Voodoo and be a priest. You can worship at Hindu shrines as a priest. You can do ANYTHING as a priest and stay a priest....BUT....make your consort an honest woman.

THAT, is the ONLY sin the church will act on within seven days, EVERY TIME.

Now, even REAL PROCLAIMED DOGMA's don't get that sort of reaction when you break them, now do they?

Smooch.
[/quote]

I won't bother to scold you for acting immature or for posting factual error. I will however ask you to look at this link.

[url="http://www.diogh.org/ParishPages/parishpages-new/ourladyofwalsingham-houston.htm"]http://www.diogh.org/ParishPages/parishpag...ham-houston.htm[/url]

This web page is from the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston and the parish listed is Our Lady of Walsingham. The Pastor, Rev. James T. Moore is MARRIED. Furthermore, GASP, he has children.

This is proof that the Church not only has married priests but that they also serve in pastoral assignments.

Sorry to burst your anti-Catholic bubble.

[Budge]

Big Whoop...

a number of priests you can count on one hand, who got married before and converted in...

What percentage are they of Catholic priests...1%?