Gay Italian priests protest Vatican statement

[joeybaggz]

This argument continues to blow my mind. You said that one may want to check the statistics. (Most here have done that.) I think you may want to check the definition of a homosexual “encounter”. You say it’s between two sexually mature males and I would agree with that. You then say it is “regardless of any substantial age difference.” Can you possibly be serious? Any adult, homosexual or heterosexual who takes advantage of anyone, ESPECIALLY someone underage, is a predator. The definition of a “homosexual” does not equal “predator” any more than the definition of a “heterosexual” does. According to the John Jay College research, 50.9% of the victims were 11-14 years of age. A child predator (Pedophile by most people’s definition) prey on children. Why does this seem to be the one place where 11-14yr olds are not considered children?

I simply can’t believe the instances I’ve seen where people argue that because a 12yr old happened to have already gone through puberty, they’ve now become a victim of a “homosexual encounter”. We need to rememer that 20% of the victims were female. Going by this puberty clause, any female victim who was past puberty (even if she was only 12) was a victim of a heterosexual, not a pedophile. The Church has taken a stance against the ordination of homosexual men. What are we going to do now about the deviant heterosexuals? How about the 22 or so percent of the victims that hadn’t reached puberty? What are we going to do about the pedophiles now? If you are going to insist that this is a homosexual priest problem, go ahead. But should we forget about the female victims and the pre-pubescent victims? What about them? Some seem to insist this wasn’t a pedophile problem. I have a feeling most of the pre-pubescent victims wouldn’t agree with you. And you know what? I bet most of the post-pubescent victims wouldn’t agree with you either. Why? Because they happened to be children at the time.

I truly apologize if I come across as angry or harsh. I just really have a problem with this. I don’t see this as a homosexual problem or a heterosexual problem, I see this as a child predator problem (as does the law). I could care less if the 11 to 14 yr old had experienced puberty or not.

Kolbe - one word - decaf

The purpose of my original post on this thread was in opposition to a stated position that the Church is wrong on the issue of homosexual priests. Homosexual priests have caused massive financial and emotional damage by their actions. I do think the pedophile vs afoebafile point is important in making the point that the actions that have caused so much damage recently have been, for a great part of a homosexual nature. That was the original point. Subsequently, another poster pointed out that the priests in question weren’t homosexual but pedophiles (as in 100% I guess) . Statistically that isn’t true. It was not my contention that because a boy was over the age of 11 or 12 somehow the malice and moral repugnance of the action is somehow mitigated. It’s not and you are correct that it is all child abuse. The difference in age statement was a watered down version of a remark I posted and then edited. So, I’ll make it here. In the homosexual subculture, at least in the past, an adult male who sought out teen age boys, and particularly young teen age boys, was referred to as a “chicken hawk” It is (or was) a homosexual term and would operative in describing the actions of priests who preyed on young teen age boys. In no way was the post intended to defend in any way the actions of abusers.

See I have a problem too. It is with the words used by the liberal media who see the church as the enemy. And ‘pedophile’ is a favorite of theirs. It fills people with revulsion and paints a blacker picture. (and before you reach for the keyboard, I don’t think a totally accurate picture is going to make things much better) But there are tens of thousands of good and decent priests out there who have been tarred and feathered by this scandal, and it is my contention that for their sake the story must be told accurately. Words have precise meanings, and precise meanings are important in understanding any situation.

Personally, I think a 45 year old priest who has sex with a 38 year old woman, should be removed from pastoral ministry and given another position where he will not be a scandal to the Church. Or removed from ministry entirely.

Should we forget about any of the victims, no. But neither should we forget the honorable priests who serve us everyday, who deserve to have the story told correctly. And if the scandals that have done so much damage involve what is correctly called homosexual behavior, then facts need to be understood, especially when it comes to whether homosexuals can and should be ordained to the priesthood

 

[Kolbe300]

Kolbe - one word - decaf :

Hi joeybaggz. Unfortunately, I hate coffee. I suppose that could be a good thing in the long run though. Either way, your point is well taken.

Homosexual priests have caused massive financial and emotional damage by their actions.

No, predatory priests have. And I’m assuming many of the Bishops and leaders who swept known criminals under the rug for years were heterosexual. Like you said, words do have precise meanings. The word “homosexual” does not mean “predator”. These victims were molested and raped. I will be the first to admit that the priesthood obviously became a hiding ground for sexual deviants. A homosexually or heterosexually oriented priest who is unable to maintain his vow of celibacy ends up becoming sexually active with a sexually mature, of age, adult. A predator (a pedophile or ephebophile) who cannot maintain his vow of celibacy ends up preying on an innocent victim. There is a huge difference between a person with a homosexual orientation and a person who is a predator. Having a homosexual orientation doesn’t make me a threat to children any more than your being straight does.

I do think the pedophile vs afoebafile point is important in making the point that the actions that have caused so much damage recently have been, for a great part of a homosexual nature. That was the original point.

And my point is that someone who takes advantage of a minor is not simply dealing with a homosexual orientation. They are dealing with an inability to avoid committing crimes against children.

Subsequently, another poster pointed out that the priests in question weren’t homosexual but pedophiles (as in 100% I guess) .

I think that’s because most of society has viewed someone who preys on children as a pedophile, regardless of puberty. It’s interesting because I was recently reading about the Congressman Mark Foley scandal. His defense argued that he was an ephebophile, not a pedophile since his victim was 16 or 17. Everyone seemed outraged and insisted on calling him a pedophile. On CAF I see the exact opposite. Many insist they weren’t pedophiles but homosexuals. Why is that?

It was not my contention that because a boy was over the age of 11 or 12 somehow the malice and moral repugnance of the action is somehow mitigated. It’s not and you are correct that it is all child abuse.

I know that wasn’t your contention. I apologize if I came across as assuming that.

In the homosexual subculture, at least in the past, an adult male who sought out teen age boys, and particularly young teen age boys, was referred to as a “chicken hawk” It is (or was) a homosexual term and would operative in describing the actions of priests who preyed on young teen age boys. In no way was the post intended to defend in any way the actions of abusers.

And it should be noted that the term “chicken hawk” is overwhelmingly considered to be a slur in the homosexual community. It isn’t considered a nice word among those who aren’t criminals.

It is with the words used by the liberal media who see the church as the enemy. And ‘pedophile’ is a favorite of theirs. It fills people with revulsion and paints a blacker picture. (and before you reach for the keyboard, I don’t think a totally accurate picture is going to make things much better).

Could this be why “homosexual” is preferred over “pedophile”? What are we willing to do in order to keep that picture from being too repulsive and “black”?

But there are tens of thousands of good and decent priests out there who have been tarred and feathered by this scandal, and it is my contention that for their sake the story must be told accurately.

Amen. And for the sake of the wonderful priests out there who happen to have a homosexual orientation, lets try to be as accurate as we can.

Personally, I think a 45 year old priest who has sex with a 38 year old woman, should be removed from pastoral ministry and given another position where he will not be a scandal to the Church. Or removed from ministry entirely.

I agree. Any priest who is unable to maintain his vow of celibacy should be dealt with appropriately.

But neither should we forget the honorable priests who serve us everyday, who deserve to have the story told correctly.

And neither should we forget that many of those honorable priests are same sex attracted.

Should we forget about any of the victims, no.

But don’t we do just that when we proclaim this a homosexual problem while leaving the females and pre-pubescent victims unaccounted for?

And if the scandals that have done so much damage involve what is correctly called homosexual behavior, then facts need to be understood, especially when it comes to whether homosexuals can and should be ordained to the priesthood

And as soon as we can differentiate between homosexual orientation and criminal behavior we’ll be able to make proper judgments.

Have a great day! And I promise I’ll have a cup of decaf for ya.

 

[Harmony1988]

Thank you for your infallible statement!

Oh dear

 

[Migueliones]

If homosexuals don’t act like men and aren’t willing to take on the responsibilites of men, then they shouldn’t be allowed the priveleges of men.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Are those gay Italian priests protesting in Christ’s name?

 

[ZuzuBailey]

IMO; priest should not be gay or straight; they should be labeled nonsexual or something.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

IMO; priest should not be gay or straight; they should be labeled nonsexual or something.

Gay and Straight are artificial constructs. Either a person is in Christ and obedient to the Church or he/she is not. That’s the only identifier that matters.

CDL

 

[edwest2]

Artificial? According to who? All those GLBT groups should all just close down?

God bless,
ED

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Artificial? According to who? All those GLBT groups should all just close down?

God bless,
ED

Yes, but first they should shut the hell up.

CDL

 

[SenorSalsa]

i fail to see how a chaste, homosexual priest will do his job any worse than a chaste, hetrosexual priest. The assumed fact by most scientists is that it is a wiring diference. Both can preach chastity for homosexuals, becuase it would not be hypocritical of either. Both could preach acceptance of homosexuals, which is a Catholic stance. As i point out over and over again in various places, being Homosexual is not sinful, acting homosexually is

 

[GregoryPalamas]

i fail to see how a chaste, homosexual priest will do his job any worse than a chaste, hetrosexual priest. The assumed fact by most scientists is that it is a wiring diference. Both can preach chastity for homosexuals, becuase it would not be hypocritical of either. Both could preach acceptance of homosexuals, which is a Catholic stance. As i point out over and over again in various places, being Homosexual is not sinful, acting homosexually is

While this is quite true, it is also true that same sex attraction itself while not a sin is a disorder. Perhaps the Church has counselled caution in this area because the sex drive is so powerful. I do believe that this disorder can be overcome simply because I know several who have overcome it. Beyond that I don’t claim to know much about it.

CDL

 

[johnstown_johnn]

i fail to see how a chaste, homosexual priest will do his job any worse than a chaste, hetrosexual priest.

Chastity in so far as " absence of homosexual acts" is not a consideration since there is NO such thing as sex between same gender. If the acts are deviational then so is the attraction.

The assumed fact by most scientists is that it is a wiring diference. Both can preach chastity for homosexuals, becuase it would not be hypocritical of either. Both could preach acceptance of homosexuals, which is a Catholic stance. As i point out over and over again in various places, being Homosexual is not sinful, acting homosexually is

A simple question would be: “Can you define what a “man” is?”

 

[SenorSalsa]

Chastity in so far as " absence of homosexual acts" is not a consideration since there is NO such thing as sex between same gender. If the acts are deviational then so is the attraction.

A simple question would be: “Can you define what a “man” is?”

Chasitity is a consideration, becuase not living chaste would exclude him from being a quality priest, whether or not it is deviational is irrelevant

a simple answer would be: “an x and y sex chromosome”

 

[Paul_the_seaker]

I don’t know if you read the newspapers but the Diocese of Fairbanks is contemplating (or actually, in) bankruptcy because of the actions of homosexual priests. Homosexual priests have caused the Church a tremendous amount of pain, and the people in the pews, a tremendous amount of money, and fractured trust.

 

[Melissa]

joeybaggz;3338994:

I believe the issue was pedophia rather than mere homosexuality. I may wrong, but my understanding is that individuals who have same sex attraction are homosexuals, but do not sin on that account. The sin is in the act. Individuals who LIVE an active same sex life are in a state of sin and must repent, confess and amend their ways,

Actually, no–it was homosexuality in the majority of the cases (that is to say, more of the ones involved engaged in homosexual acts w/ post-adolescent males; granted, the pedophiles seem to have had more victims per capita).

My understanding is that choosing celibacy as a priest is giving up something GOOD in the case of the heterosexual man (marriage as the alternate vocation is a good thing), while the same cannot be said for the homosexual (he is not giving up a good thing for the sake of the Kingdom of God).

 

[RobbyS]

Paul the seaker;3367180:

Actually, no–it was homosexuality in the majority of the cases (that is to say, more of the ones involved engaged in homosexual acts w/ post-adolescent males; granted, the pedophiles seem to have had more victims per capita).

My understanding is that choosing celibacy as a priest is giving up something GOOD in the case of the heterosexual man (marriage as the alternate vocation is a good thing), while the same cannot be said for the homosexual (he is not giving up a good thing for the sake of the Kingdom of God).

The John Jay Report says that 80% of the cases were homosexual encounters. The percentage of homosexual priests is much lower than that. But a problem that Church has is that so many priests wish to justify themselves by discrediting the teachings of the Church. It is very much like the woman who has an abortion and tries to set her mind at rest by discrediting the teaching of the Church. Forgotten are the youthful victims.

Homosexuals consumed with lust are as likely as other men to prefer young sex partners. Given a choice, a man will choose a young whore over an older one, because of the beauty of the young–and their naivete. Seducing a young person gives a weakling a sense of power, generally because he is incapable of seducing someone older. A desire for power drives the rapist more than simple lust. The effect on the young male who is violated is often greater than that on the young woman, since he is made to feel unmanly.

 

[Aramis]

Paul the seaker;3367180:

Actually, no–it was homosexuality in the majority of the cases (that is to say, more of the ones involved engaged in homosexual acts w/ post-adolescent males; granted, the pedophiles seem to have had more victims per capita).

My understanding is that choosing celibacy as a priest is giving up something GOOD in the case of the heterosexual man (marriage as the alternate vocation is a good thing), while the same cannot be said for the homosexual (he is not giving up a good thing for the sake of the Kingdom of God).

At least, in Fairbank’s case, the law says the offending individuals are sexual predators if they are having sex with persons under 16 in most cases. For priests, or bosses, the age of consent is 18. For educators, the age of consent is 21…

The attraction to and sexual acts with youth and children is not healthy, not normative, and not homosexuality. It is any one of several recognized mental disorders. In most places, it’s statutory rape, even if it was mutually consensual.

Quit defending the pervs.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

joeybaggz;3338994:

I know homosexual priests (effeminte) that live holy lives. They are faith to their commitments and to the Church, I see no reason to cast this group of men out of the running for the presthood…

Paul

Are all homosexuals effeminate? Are all effeinate men homosexuals? I believe that the confusion between the two is what is very prejudicial and is a non-Christian point of view. It falsely categorizes many men who display some effeminate traits as homosexualists. While we might find effeminate traits in men disconcerting and even off putting it is possible and important that we get over it. Perhaps the men showing such traits hold some responsibility to get over those traits as well. I don’t know. In any event it is not proof that they are sodomites. One of the great evils of the homosexualist groups is that they have convinced many of us that having such traits proves that a person is a homosexualists.

The Church does not so discriminate. It doesn’t label people in such fashion. It is the non-Christian world that does that. We should not be tricked into such prejudice. Have we not seen very masculine looking men who also commit sodomy?

What we need to do is to keep sodomites out of the priesthood. There is only one difference between a Sodomite who has sex with a teenaged boy or a man and one who has sex with a boy 12 and under. Both are wrong, but ont the pedophile is also a criminal. A sodomite should not be allowed in the priesthood.

CDL

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Melissa;3367200:

The John Jay Report says that 80% of the cases were homosexual encounters. The percentage of homosexual priests is much lower than that. But a problem that Church has is that so many priests wish to justify themselves by discrediting the teachings of the Church. It is very much like the woman who has an abortion and tries to set her mind at rest by discrediting the teaching of the Church. Forgotten are the youthful victims.

Homosexuals consumed with lust are as likely as other men to prefer young sex partners. Given a choice, a man will choose a young whore over an older one, because of the beauty of the young–and their naivete. Seducing a young person gives a weakling a sense of power, generally because he is incapable of seducing someone older. A desire for power drives the rapist more than simple lust. The effect on the young male who is violated is often greater than that on the young woman, since he is made to feel unmanly.

AMEN!!!

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Why are homosexual priests being forced on the rest of us? There is no compromise: homosexuals will still be what they are and the nuclear families will still be a man and woman.

Priests are called, “Father” because they are married to the “Bride of Christ (the Church)”. The congregation is the priest’s children in a manner of speaking.

Pedophiles betray the “familiy” and impose a lasting spiritual/pschological wound on the children. All pedophiles deserve long, long stretches in a penitentiary and kept away from the Church FOREVER…not just “reassigned” to other parishes across the Diocese.

Ther bishops that do this “reassign” should share a cell with the pedophile he foisted on the Church.

Pedophilia and homosexuality are disorders and can be compatible with each other.

This begs the question: “Does a homosexual priest view pedophilia as a great sin?” An abomination?"

We will NOT be forced to live under such a disorder.