Gay men can be Catholic priests if celibate-report

[Seeking33]

Castus_Agape:

Last time I checked, the church did not condemn homosexual tendencies, only acting on them. The thing we are all forgetting here is that whatever disorder they have, homosexuals are people too.

Yes, but simply being a “person” shouldn’t alone qualify someone for the priesthood. For example, women are “people” but are not qualified. Married men are “people” but are not qualified.

I know it sounds corny but its absolutely true. Why should anyone, regardless of their past, be deprived of serving God just as the person next to them? It does’t seem right to me to say that men who have gone out and had sex with women can be priests but those who are homosexual can’t.

Men having sex with women is not an abomination to God and perversion. Done outside of marriage it would be considered of course immoral. However, it can not be compared logically to men with men. In the Old Testament God condemns this act. It is detestable to Him.

They are both sins and we have no right to say that either is more serious because none of us really know that.

However, the church does have a “right” to say who is “qualified” for the priesthood and who is not.

One reason I looked up this post this morning is because I am preparing to be confirmed into the Church tomorrow. Last night, I had one of my protestant friends over to visit who does not believe in my decision to join the Church. Well, we were watching TV and this report came on about the Church saying it would not ban gays but they would have to be celibant 3 years. My friend let out a groan and shook her head. I was disappointed as well. But, it was a poor witness to her for the Church. It automatically puts up a road block for many people who may otherwise consider joining the Church. But many simply CANNOT understand why homosexuals, people with a severe weakness that have the potential for damaging others and the church’s reputation itself, are allowed to serve as Holy priests! I was hurt over it because I felt it hurt my witness towards her.

Furthermore, I have 3 boys. Twins who are age 8 and a 9 yr old. I am very afraid and nervous because of this situation with the church. If I did not have such clear direction from God, I would never join in order to protect my boys from the potential of sex abuse in the church. It’s a terrifying thought. And I’ll bet you this, although I may be joining…they will STAY up under me as much as possible. And even then, I know that it can’t be that way when they get older. Sad to think I have to feel that way huh? Do you see how it affects people?

Why, if these men really loved people and loved God, would they want to hurt the Church in this way by joining the priesthood? It seems they would graciously step aside with the understanding of how it affects the Church. If they are celibant and love God wholeheartedly, that should have a clear understanding and submission as to why they should not be a priest. No, I’m not a bigot. I believe people who have this tendency can overcome it with God’s grace and go to heaven. BUT, it doesn’t mean they have to or need to be a priest.

 

[Benedictus]

TNT:

And reality is somewhere in Kansas, (or Boston)Toto, where 90+% of newchurch sex abuse is by “Being gay” with minors, has no statistical relevance.

I love statistics. My Master’s minor is in statistics.

90% of sex offenders have facial hair (look at the pictures in a registry of sex offenders). But that proves nothing.

Almost all drug users (>95%) smoke tobbacco. Does that mean that smoking makes you more likely to become a drug users?

In all three examples (“gay” priests, sex offenders with facial hair, smoking drug users), we find the Prosecutor’s Fallacy. The solution is the application of Bayes’ Theorem.

Take the sex offenders with facial hair. In my county there are 57 Level III sex offenders. 51 of those have facial hair, and 6 do not. We might conclude that a man with facial hair is far more likely to become a sex offender, but Bayes’ Theorem will show us that I need not worry about my neighbor with a beard.

To find the probability that a man with facial hair is a sex offender, we need to use Bayes’ Theorem. Assume that P(s|f) is the probability of a man being a sex offender, given that he has facial hair. Bayes’ Theorem says that

P(s|f) = (P(f|s) P(s)) / P(f)

where P(f|s) is the probability of a man having facial hair, given that he is a sex offender, P(s) is the probability of any particular man being a sex offenders, and P(f) is the probability of a man having facial hair.

We know that P(f|s) is 51/57 or .895. There are about 558,100 men in my county, so P(s) = 57/558,100 or .000102. Let’s assume that P(f) is about 1/5 or .200.

P(s|f) = (.895 * .000102) / .200 = .000456

So the probability of a man with facial hair being a sex offender is about 0.05%.

Similarily, we can find the probability of a man without facial hair being a sex offender.

P(s|-f) = (.105 * .000102) / .800 = .0000134.

So the chances of a man without facial hair being a sex offender is about .001%.

Granted, it my neighbor with facial hair may, in a sense, be more likely to be a sex offender, but I need not worry about him just because he has facial hair.

Finding similar probabilities for “gay” priests and smoking drug addicts is left as a exercise to the reader.

 

[mlchance]

Why can’t journalists get terminology straight? Assuming general accuracy of the piece, the opening paragraph messes things up completely. “Celibate” means “not married.” The Vatican will allow the ordination of homosexual men who haven’t been married for at least three years?

As to the question of ordination for homosexual men, if Rome approves, the matter is settled. If Rome disapproves, the matter is settled.

This is all close to much ado about nothing.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[MikeWM]

This is very good news if true, good sense has prevailed!

Three years doesn’t sound excessive to me. I would imagine there are unofficial similar rules for heterosexual men.

Priests shouldn’t be publically ‘manifesting’ their homosexuality any more than they should be publically ‘manifesting’ their heterosexuality, so I don’t see any problem with that.

Fingers crossed that this is true…

Mike

 

[TNT]

Benedictus:

I love statistics. My Master’s minor is in statistics.

90% of sex offenders have facial hair (look at the pictures in a registry of sex offenders). But that proves nothing.

What a bunch of doublespeak and obfuscation:

Attorney: gay priest gave dog Communion

October 05, 2005 12:00 AM EST

In what seems to be one of the worst – if not the worst – archdiocese in terms of the presence of non-celibate homosexual clergy, the saga of Miami whistle-blowing priest Andrew Dowgiert continues.

The following is the most recent (edited) update from Father Dowgiert’s attorney, Sharon Bourassa:

"We met with the canon lawyer on September 30 for four hours. He came in from Rome and is considered to be one of the best. We gave him all we have and he was shocked by the bigger picture of what is going on in our archdiocese.

"He has asked that we present him with a report of everything [Bourassa’s private investigator] has uncovered on the sexual and financial improprieties of the local clergy: homosexual activity, stealing, drugs, parties, and an incident in which the Sacred Host was given to a homosexual priest’s dog at a Mass with other homosexual priests. [Bourassa was informed of that particular incident by an archdiocesan official.]

“We have the Pink Mafia under our noses in this entire archdiocese. We need to stop being blind. Good priests are leaving or are so oppressed that they can’t stand it anymore. Their names and what they know will be provided to the Vatican.”

Watch this column for future updates on Father Dowgiert’s case and the goings-on in the Archdiocese of Miami.

Sharon Bourassa can be reached at WinandSharon@[no spam]aol.com.

Related links:

renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/050918

renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/050907

renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/050521

(Matt C. Abbott is a Catholic journalist and commentator. He is a columnist for and/or contributor to TheConservativeVoice.com, RenewAmerica.us, MichNews.com, Catholic.org, Opeds.com and Speroforum.com. He is also an occasional contributor to “The Wanderer” Catholic newspaper. He can be reached at mattcabbott@hotmail.com.)

 

[Starsweeper]

What’s the deal? Last week we got a completely conflicting different report. Is this a reliable source? I don’t think we can really take any of it too seriously until it actually comes out.

 

[Guar_Fan]

Starsweeper:

I don’t think we can really take any of it too seriously until it actually comes out.

I agree. There is little point getting worked up over a rumor when the truth will be known shortly.

 

[rwoehmke]

Della:

In the Twin Cities here we’re living through a sex and murder scandal that happened in Wisconsin, just across the border in Hudson because of a homosexual priest who had pornographic pictures on his computer of both young men and boys. He murdered a man and another young man (who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time) because this man was one of his parishioners and was going to blow the whistle on this priest for molesting one of the teens in the parish. After the police questioned this priest, he hanged himself. So, we are having this horrid affair shoved into our faces at every broadcast of the news since it happened 3 years ago. And it isn’t about to stop. Now they are asking what his bishop knew and when did he know it because apparently this priest, before he was ordained, had been caught having sex with a 4 year old boy! And there were other incidences, as well. And as if that weren’t bad enough, he was a hellfire and brimstone preacher to boot!

Now, I’m sure people are going to respond with examples of gay priests who are the epitome of love and grace, but maybe they ought to be a little more skeptical. The parishioners at this priest’s parish thought that too, until he murdered two people to try to cover up his sins and his crimes. I don’t think gays ought to be priests, period. Homosexuality is a personality disorder that no amount of so-called “celibacy” will ever erase. It is too great a temptation for persons with such disorders, be they gay or heterosexual men who are addicted to sex and porn. Both ought to be barred from the priesthood for the sake of those whom they will be serving, especially in parish life.

I am a member of this parish and knew Fr. Ryan rather well and have been a good friend of the victims family for many years. Fr. Ryan had been accused several times of abuse or attempted abuse but the authorities were never able to substantiate any of them. He was tested psychologically and reported as a heterosexual man who was more likely to be tempted to women than to a males. The accusation of the four year old boy was at the time when Fr. Ryan was six years old. Hardly a pedophile at that age. He was liked and respected by many men and women in our parish and many of us still believe that this was a railroad job to get the case off the books so the Chief of Police could retire. He has been holding off till the case was closed. Father Ryan was convicted in the local papers as long as a year and a half ago.

Their has been an alternate explanation for the murders for at least a year, but that appears to never have been seriously considered. Fr Ryan gave a very good sermon and was more “orthodox” in his thinking than any other priest that I have known in the past thirty years. He loved the Latin Mass, strongly advocated communion on the tongue, lids on the women in church, and kneeling for the Eucharistic prayer, something our parish had not done for over twenty years. He led at least one pilgrimage to Rome for some of our young families. In fact I cannot think of even one slip into heterodoxy during the three years he was here. He brought at least two score young men and women back into a strong Catholic Faith. I am no limp wristed lily of a man and I never once observed him as anything else but a man’ man. I will say that some of our more liberal parishioners did not always like what he had to say. The story sells a whole lot of newspapers and someone will probably write a book or do a television movie. I have sorrow for the families of the two murtdered men. One way or the other they have borne a heavy sad burden and perhaps the one grace that comes out of this is that they have found closure.

 

[Marian_Carroll]

**General Reminder:

This discussion has strayed from its original topic of Gay Men Can be Catholic Priests if Celibate-Report Please return to the original topic under discussion. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
**

 

[Benedictus]

TNT:

What a bunch of doublespeak and obfuscation:

I’m not sure what my post has to do with giving a dog Communion. I successfully demonstrated how your reasoning was severely flawed, and your response seems to consist of posting an article about some nutjob who gave a dog Communion.

 

[fix]

New Report on Vatican Gay Priests Document Said to be Gay Lobby “Rumor Mill”
Catholic Insight publisher/editor says it is attempt to water down Vatican document

TORONTO, October 7, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A report widely circulated today from the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera claims the expected Vatican document on homosexuality and the priesthood says those who exhibit homosexual tendencies cannot be ordained unless they can show they have lived chastely for at least three years. This contradicts previous reports indicating the document would re-emphasize traditional norms against the ordination of even celibate men with homosexual tendencies…

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/oct/05100707.htm

 

[fix]

Benedictus:

I love statistics. My Master’s minor is in statistics.

90% of sex offenders have facial hair (look at the pictures in a registry of sex offenders). But that proves nothing.

Almost all drug users (>95%) smoke tobbacco. Does that mean that smoking makes you more likely to become a drug users?

In all three examples (“gay” priests, sex offenders with facial hair, smoking drug users), we find the Prosecutor’s Fallacy. The solution is the application of Bayes’ Theorem.

Take the sex offenders with facial hair. In my county there are 57 Level III sex offenders. 51 of those have facial hair, and 6 do not. We might conclude that a man with facial hair is far more likely to become a sex offender, but Bayes’ Theorem will show us that I need not worry about my neighbor with a beard.

To find the probability that a man with facial hair is a sex offender, we need to use Bayes’ Theorem. Assume that P(s|f) is the probability of a man being a sex offender, given that he has facial hair. Bayes’ Theorem says that

P(s|f) = (P(f|s) P(s)) / P(f)

where P(f|s) is the probability of a man having facial hair, given that he is a sex offender, P(s) is the probability of any particular man being a sex offenders, and P(f) is the probability of a man having facial hair.

We know that P(f|s) is 51/57 or .895. There are about 558,100 men in my county, so P(s) = 57/558,100 or .000102. Let’s assume that P(f) is about 1/5 or .200.

P(s|f) = (.895 * .000102) / .200 = .000456

So the probability of a man with facial hair being a sex offender is about 0.05%.

Similarily, we can find the probability of a man without facial hair being a sex offender.

P(s|-f) = (.105 * .000102) / .800 = .0000134.

So the chances of a man without facial hair being a sex offender is about .001%.

Granted, it my neighbor with facial hair may, in a sense, be more likely to be a sex offender, but I need not worry about him just because he has facial hair.

Finding similar probabilities for “gay” priests and smoking drug addicts is left as a exercise to the reader.

None of that gives us proof most of the abuse was anything other than homosexual.

 

[contemplative]

fix:

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican will allow gay men into the priesthood if they can show they have been celibate for at least three years, a report in leading Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera said on Friday.

But the Vatican will ban men “who publicly manifest their homosexuality” or show an “attraction” to homosexual culture “even if it is only intellectually,” Corriere added.

Righto
And how exactly will the measure of homosexual activity of a man be conducted…and what about the possibility of future affairs with fellow seminarians and priests? Homosexuality is a disorder not fit for the priesthood.

Would a 300 pound man be a gymnast in the National Olympics?
Would Don Knots have ever made it in a Mr. Universe Contest?
Would you want a dyslexic performing surgery on your heart?
Can a woman with a AAA or EE bra cup out perform Mary Lou Reton on the balance beam?
Would an introvert make it as a talk show host in replacement of Jay Leno?

The point is that there is a place for everyone in this world…it is up to us to discover gifts that God gives us. The Roman Catholic Priesthood should not be a safe-haven for men with homosexuality. They just do not belong.

There will be some who do not like my opinions stated here. I will not argue any rebuttals.
Frankly…
this topic isn’t worth any more of my time.

 

[Psalm45_9]

The name of this thread does not do justice to the issue. Gay men are those who live a lifestyle contrary to the Gospel. The Church has decided that celibate men who have same sex attraction can be ordained. Gay men cannot be ordained.

 

[oat_soda]

it’s pretty clear in the catechism the church considers even the inclination of homosexuality a disorder and inhierently evil. there is no chance the vatican would allow anyone who objectively has this or any other serious disordered sexualities. the same can be said to personality and mental disorders. it’s common sense.

i figure the only people who support gay seminarians are either gay or think with their heart and not their head.

 

[felra]

New Report on Vatican Gay Priests Document Said to be Gay Lobby “Rumor Mill”
Catholic Insight publisher/editor says it is attempt to water down Vatican document

TORONTO, October 7, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A report widely circulated today from the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera claims the expected Vatican document on homosexuality and the priesthood says those who exhibit homosexual tendencies cannot be ordained unless they can show they have lived chastely for at least three years. This contradicts previous reports indicating the document would re-emphasize traditional norms against the ordination of even celibate men with homosexual tendencies…

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/oct/05100707.htm

Yes, here is more excerpt from this article that correctly points the finger at the pro-homosexual lobby as trying to influence and manipulate the document. They will stop at nothing. Do not think for a moment that the Church so quickly contradicts its earlier release regarding the forthcoming document which specifies that chasteness/being celibate is not a defining criteria for admission of homosexual men into the seminary.

"Father Alphonse de Valk, a Toronto Basilian order priest, historian, and publisher of Catholic Insight magazine told LifeSiteNews.com this latest report is “all a rumor mill.” He expanded, “the pro-homosexual lobby within the Catholic Church is participating in a rumor mill with the hope they can water down a document which rejects a homosexual condition as not suitable for the priesthood.’ "

“It has always been the policy of the Church”, said de Valk, “that homosexuals should not be ordained. Not only since 1961. ‘Particular friendships’ was something that was abhorred in all the spiritual direction books of the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. They called it ‘particular friendships’ by which they meant homosexual. It was to be warned against.”

Here is article excerpt from the original press story:

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=39700

“The text, which was approved by Pope Benedict at the end of August, says that homosexual men should not be admitted to seminaries even if they are celibate, because their condition suggests a serious personality disorder which detracts from their ability to serve as ministers.”

“The Instruction does not represent a change in Church teaching or policy. Catholic leaders have consistently taught that homosexual men should not be ordained to the priesthood. Pope John XXIII approved a formal policy to that effect, which still remains in effect. However, during the 1970s and 1980s, that policy was widely ignored, particularly in North America.”

 

[MikeWM]

oat soda:

it’s pretty clear in the catechism the church considers even the inclination of homosexuality a disorder and inhierently evil.

Evil?? Please don’t go around making things up that the Church ‘says’ when it says nothing of the sort.

Mike

 

[netmilsmom]

oat soda:

it’s pretty clear in the catechism the church considers even the inclination of homosexuality a disorder and inhierently evil. there is no chance the vatican would allow anyone who objectively has this or any other serious disordered sexualities. the same can be said to personality and mental disorders. it’s common sense.

i figure the only people who support gay seminarians are either gay or think with their heart and not their head.

A disorder is not evil.

 

[felra]

contemplative:

Righto
And how exactly will the measure of homosexual activity of a man be conducted…and what about the possibility of future affairs with fellow seminarians and priests? Homosexuality is a disorder not fit for the priesthood.

Would a 300 pound man be a gymnast in the National Olympics?
Would Don Knots have ever made it in a Mr. Universe Contest?
Would you want a dyslexic performing surgery on your heart?
Can a woman with a AAA or EE bra cup out perform Mary Lou Reton on the balance beam?
Would an introvert make it as a talk show host in replacement of Jay Leno?

The point is that there is a place for everyone in this world…it is up to us to discover gifts that God gives us. The Roman Catholic Priesthood should not be a safe-haven for men with homosexuality. They just do not belong.

Well stated. Such an obvious “duhhh” factor at play here. Is common sense too simple a reasoning for some folks? Is it a fear of being labelled/perceived as judgemental, or depriving SSA seminarian candidates their sense of entitlement, or not wanting to offend or hurt any one’s feelings, or total lack of appreciation of what in persona Chrisiti means, or …?

 

[HappyCatholic01]

fix:

But the Vatican will ban men “who publicly manifest their homosexuality” or show an “attraction” to homosexual culture “even if it is only intellectually,” Corriere added.

today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-10-07T082908Z_01_FLE730430_RTRUKOC_0_UK-POPE-GAYS.xml&archived=False

What a joke. So unless they flaunt they homosexuality, it is okay? (regarding the first phrase in the sentence…).

To me, it seems obvious that Satan doesn’t show up woth a loud crash in the form of a red horned demon, with a trident spewing fire. If he did, his existence (currently in doubt by far too many in this world) would be obvious to even the most skeptical cynic.

He shows himself in sly ways - a serpent in the garden, the allure of pornopraphy and sexual abuses, the “it’s a woman’s right to govern her body” argument of the pro-choice movement…" All seemingly innocuous, all deadly.

Do you really think he (el diablo) is going to make it obvious where he lurks? Come on. Why don’t they take a stand against him, and stop worrying about offending people?

He certainly isn’t going to stop until we are all dead, and living in hell…