Don't Ban Gays from Priesthood, Ban Homophobes Says Former Catholic Leader

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaPatri4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Rhubarb:
My point is, instead of banning celibate homosexuals wouldn’t it make sense to ban the pedophiles?
Click to expand...
They are banned also. 🙂
 
40.png
Rhubarb:
My point is, instead of banning celibate homosexuals wouldn’t it make sense to ban the pedophiles?
Click to expand...
Wouldnt have much efffect as far as the sexual abuse scandals went-they were almost exlusively homosexual rape.
 
40.png
snoopy:
Denial–not a river in Egypt. Any BTW, you are wrong, there are plenty of posters who ARE trying to root out any priest who are homosexual, celibate or not. If I understand correctly, one of the criteria is if they “have deep seated homosexual tendencies” or if “they don’t condem the lifestyle.” Please re-read some of these posts and other related topics. I do apologize if I offended you if you are not one of them.
Click to expand...
It doeant matter what posters want to do-all that matters is what the Church is GOING to do…
 
An Englishman and former Master General or international head of the Order of Friars Preachers - commonly known as the Dominican Order - Radcliffe has written a letter to the London Times saying, “A document from the Vatican on the admission of seminarians is expected soon but we do not as yet know its contents. If it were to contain such a ban (on men inclined to homosexuality), which is highly unlikely, most Catholics, at least in the West, would find it unacceptable.”
Click to expand...
He has clearly never been on Catholic Answers Forum.
Click to expand...
He has a point though, talk about hating the sin, not the sinner, - or one who could be associated with the sin.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
estesbob:
It doeant matter what posters want to do-all that matters is what the Church is GOING to do…
Click to expand...
If I understand correctly, the church wants them out if they “have deep seated homosexual tendencies, or they don’t condem the lifestyle”. The church doesn’t care only what they do, but who they are. That is, if I understand correctly. Probably I should wait for the church to make a public statement tho, as I am only quoting speculation.
 
40.png
snoopy:
If I understand correctly, the church wants them out if they “have deep seated homosexual tendencies, or they don’t condem the lifestyle”. The church doesn’t care only what they do, but who they are. That is, if I understand correctly. Probably I should wait for the church to make a public statement tho, as I am only quoting speculation.
Click to expand...
I think that wait and see is a good idea. i was in the seminary in the mid 60s and you could see then the tolerance and outright encouragement to continue their studies of homosexual students. I dont but into the premis that they made uo a majortiy but would say 5-10% was probably the norm. It was sad and we reaped what we sowed when the Priest sex abuse scandal hit.

i dont think what we are going to see is nothing done about celibate in the closet Priests-rather a more careful sceeening of Seminarians-something that definately was not done in my days is the Seminary.
 
Padre Radcliffe might be correct but do you notice that liberal priests like liberal nuns never wear anything that would identify themselves as religious?

AJC :whistle:
 
My prediction is that IF a document is issued, almost everybody will be upset!

I predict that there will be an outright ban on anyone who has had homosexual sex within a certain time period. That period would vary depending on how immersed the candidate was in the homosexual culture prior to repentence. Candidates found to have been ‘active’ recently won’t be told to go to hell. They will be given spiritual direction and sent off into the world to reform their lives first. They may later have another chance once they’ve proven the ability to live chastely.

There will be zero tolerence within seminary or the rectory. Anybody breaking their vow of chastity at that point is done for good.

The instruction and formation of candidates will be policed for looniness much better than in the past.

Extra discernment will be directly at candidates with a SSA due to the potential that priestly vocation is sought due to the absence of other holy options rather than legitimate call by God.
 
40.png
estesbob:
It appears he has changed his views in the last few years. heres what he said in 1998:

Timothy Radcliffe, Master of the Order of Preachers, commented on the emergence of a homosexual sub-culture within a seminary or religious order: “It can threaten the unity of the community; it can make it harder for the brethren to practice the chastity which we have vowed. It can put pressure on brethren to think of themselves in a way that is not central to their vocation as preachers of the Kingdom…”
Click to expand...
And there is the problem. In theory, a homosexual can be as chaste and celebate as a hetrosexual. But there was a move by some homosexuals to literally take over religious orders – and that cannot be allowed.
 
vern humphrey:
And there is the problem. In theory, a homosexual can be as chaste and celebate as a hetrosexual. But there was a move by some homosexuals to literally take over religious orders – and that cannot be allowed.
Click to expand...
And sadly, the statistics do NOT support this theory of homosexual chastity and celibacy.

Also, if we allow homosexual Priests, would it not make more sense to have them live with nuns rather than their male comrades?

I am being somewhat facetious, but IN THEORY, this would make more sense.

I never understand why we debate these things anyway. We don’t get a vote or a say. Our job is to obey what the Vatican says. End of story. Debate is pretty pointless, since it changes NOTHING.
 
From the worlds leading Red Neck…"Just Look At The Dudes Picture…It Tells It All
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top