Homosexual Problem - The Truth is Annoying

[qui_est_ce]

Blech. This is disgusting. Even if the behavior involves consenting adults only - whether it is homosexual or heterosexual - going to bars; viewing pornography; having relationships with other religious; getting rid of more ethical people who raise questions about one issue or another, and finding a network of friends that is closed to opposing views is just gross.

I’d find this disgusting whether the behavior was heterosexual (for example, relationships w/nuns) or homosexual. either way they are making a mockery out of the commitment to be celibate.

You said it well. Fr. Corapi talked about seminaries he personally knew who kicked out seminarians for calling out heresy. He didn’t go into detail, but I see more and more where that came from. I am going to see him on May1. I wonder if he will address the issues brought up in Mark Everett’s post.

 

[Soutane]

You said it well. Fr. Corapi talked about seminaries he personally knew who kicked out seminarians for calling out heresy. He didn’t go into detail, but I see more and more where that came from. I am going to see him on May1. I wonder if he will address the issues brought up in Mark Everett’s post.

As I sit here reading these posts,guess who’s playing on 97.3fm Toronto’s Greatest Hits station?Gary Glitter a two time convicted true pedophile and nary a word was mentioned.Now if he had been Father Glitter…The scandal sickens me and the hypocracy just makes it worse.

 

[qui_est_ce]

As I sit here reading these posts,guess who’s playing on 97.3fm Toronto’s Greatest Hits station?Gary Glitter a two time convicted true pedophile and nary a word was mentioned.Now if he had been Father Glitter…The scandal sickens me and the hypocracy just makes it worse.

Absolutely. We have this sex-saturated society self-righteously pointing fingers at people who act just like they do.

 

[DianeGee]

If people really cared about the victims, then we’d hear about the homosexuality of the abuse. Who’s being protected when this aspect is omitted from public discussion?

 

[Soutane]

If people really cared about the victims, then we’d hear about the homosexuality of the abuse. Who’s being protected when this aspect is omitted from public discussion?

It is NOW coming out and the Usual Suspects are beginning their Homophobe chant.The secular media who HATE us and the TRUTH as preached by the Holy Catholic Church and the Homosexual Lobby groups such as Act Up-who are terrified that the reality of predatory homosexual abuse will become clear to all,even the mouthbreathers.Only a small percentage of homosexuals are hebephiliacs or ephebophiliacs but the refrain continues to be Pedophiles!Pedophiles!Pedophiles! lest the truth come out and ALL homosexuals would be tarred with that horrible brush.You see professed Catholics on this board denying that it is homosexual hebephiliac perversion and will argue semantically about what constitutes pedophilia.Homosexuals are Sacred Cows and criticism WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.Orwell was absolutely right.The Ministry of Truth is the media.
Ever notice that some militant homosexuals will disrupt the mass if they try to Communicate while wearing the rainbow sash and that they exorciate the Church for its stance on so-called same sex marriage but not a word is spoken about the predatory homosexual hebephiliac priests who have molested pubescent boys and young men(80%).

The Emperor has no clothes,my dear.

The Truth shall set us Free

 

[Abba]

Well, if any gay priest puts children (at least, male ones) at risk, why doesn’t the Vatican laicize all homosexual priests and bishops, or at least remove them from parish ministry?

I think this needs to be done. I understand that seminaries are to seriously examine prospective candidates and NOT accept those with homosexual tendencies.

Instruction
Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations
with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders

In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question[9], cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

The priesthood is NOT a solution for persons with homosexual tendencies to live out their celibate life. It is even damaging to men who suffer from SSA to attend seminaries as they are surrounded by men. One of the attractions to the seminaries of people who suffer from SSA is exactly that they would be with men and this goes also for the now somewhat extinct same sex colleges and universities. The priesthood is not good for those who suffer from SSA and it is not good for the Church to have them serve as priests. The priesthood is not a crutch for those who suffer from a disorder. The same also goes with the religious.

Matthew 19:12
For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." Notice the ‘because’, they are not celibate because they need to live a celibate life due to a disorder but as healthy men they offer themselves in sacrifice.

Peace,

Abba

 

[Theophile]

I find the whole phenonemon unspeakably shocking. This could anger some, but why not subject all clergy to polygraph tests, or get them to swear on the Bible that they are not homosexual or have committed indecent acts? I believe that Pope Leo IX used St. Remigus’s relics in 1049 to expose bishops who had bought their way into the office; they had to swear in their prescence that they had not committed simony. Why not try it again?

 

[Zoe_Brain]

As I sit here reading these posts,guess who’s playing on 97.3fm Toronto’s Greatest Hits station?Gary Glitter a two time convicted true pedophile and nary a word was mentioned.Now if he had been Father Glitter…

He would have been shuffled around between diocese, his crimes concealed, and you never would have heard of him.

Or do you think all of the child-rapers have been revealed? Do you think that none are still being protected?

 

[Santi2]

If people really cared about the victims, then we’d hear about the homosexuality of the abuse. Who’s being protected when this aspect is omitted from public discussion?

Obviously, the homosexual community. What is sad is that there does not seem to be a willingness, even in the slightest, of any consideration by them that members of their community are also just as prone to commit sexual abuse. Almost everyone is getting bogged down in categorising “pedophiles” and “pederasts” which does not help at all in identifying the problem. Then there is also an allusion to “scapegoating” followed by proposals to laicisize all gay priests, which is really neither here nor there because the real focus must be on offending priests.

 

[baylee]

Obviously, the homosexual community. What is sad is that there does not seem to be a willingness, even in the slightest, of any consideration by them that members of their community are also just as prone to commit sexual abuse. Almost everyone is getting bogged down in categorising “pedophiles” and “pederasts” which does not help at all in identifying the problem. Then there is also an allusion to “scapegoating” followed by proposals to laicisize all gay priests, which is really neither here nor there because the real focus must be on offending priests.

Yes, this is the issue I have. I understand their having an issue with reports making it sound like homosexuality is the reason for the abuse, but I hear no one saying that it’s very possible that some of these offending priests were in fact homosexual.

 

[Soutane]

He would have been shuffled around between diocese, his crimes concealed, and you never would have heard of him.

Or do you think all of the child-rapers have been revealed? Do you think that none are still being protected?

Hardly today my dear,he would have been outed swiftly and you know it.Ir’s 2010 not 1965 or hadn’t you noticed?

 

[markeverett49]

I’m not clear on if you were studying for the priesthood there.
.

Yes, I was. I was always ‘continued’ too. I think there is a ‘lavender mafia’ in Palm Beach, but I don’t think the gay priests comprising it are pedophiles. Further, a heterosexual priest in the Diocese, the priest I lived with during my pastoral year, was (-I strongly believe) heterosexual yet he ‘taught’ me that ‘no one who loves the Church would turn in a pirest for molesting a child.’ I was apoplectic. I think that attitude is the bigger problem becuase that is the attitude that protects the abusive priests and enables them to claim more victims.

I try to keep the issues separate.

 

[markeverett49]

By the way, a gay ex-seminarian for this Diocese got into trouble for rejecting the advances of gay priests----gay people can also be victims of the ‘lavender mafia’ which is more about the abuse of power than sexual orientation. Though I do believe there can be a subtle–or not so subtle–mutual blackmail among priests who ‘have something’ on each other. It need not be sexual in nature. (We now have two priests in jail for stealing money from a parish. They were successive pastors, meaning the retiring one introduced the ‘newbie’ to the scam. The newer one could have resisted that temptation and done the right thing, but after he started stealing too, he wasn’t going to tell on his predecessor…)

 

[qui_est_ce]

Yes, I was. I was always ‘continued’ too. I think there is a ‘lavender mafia’ in Palm Beach, but I don’t think the gay priests comprising it are pedophiles. Further, a heterosexual priest in the Diocese, the priest I lived with during my pastoral year, was (-I strongly believe) heterosexual yet he ‘taught’ me that ‘no one who loves the Church would turn in a pirest for molesting a child.’ I was apoplectic. I think that attitude is the bigger problem becuase that is the attitude that protects the abusive priests and enables them to claim more victims.

What does “continued” mean? Are you a priest now?

I’m in complete dismay about what you have written. I’ll keep all priests in my prayers. What difficult situations for them.

 

[markeverett49]

What does “continued” mean? Are you a priest now?
QUOTE]

“Continued” means that I got the thumbs up after every annual formal evaluation by the seminary. In other words, I was never ‘kicked out.’ But no,I am not a priest. I asked for time out to make sure I was doing the right thing----I was scandalized by much that I saw in my diocese. Frankly, I wanted to switch dioceses but that proved practically impossible, so I remain a layman.

 

[Zoe_Brain]

Hardly today my dear,he would have been outed swiftly and you know it.Ir’s 2010 not 1965 or hadn’t you noticed?

I live in Australia. We had another one revealed a few weeks ago. Plus another one whose crime was mere fraud and embezzlement, who had been protected by the Church hierarchy - though not exactly shuffled between diocese. More than once, anyway. The second time, it wasn’t the Cardinal’s doing.

catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=10791

 

[LCMS_No_More]

There are a lot of people screaming that the Church needs to face the truth. That is apparently easier to say than to do.

These priests are the only gay men on the planet that it is safe to hate, or so it seems.

It’s also okay for people in the Church to hate non-gay homosexuals, too. Or so it seems.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Love the title. Are we working towards a Final Solution?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

This “let’s pity the poor, powerless, perpetually victimized homosexuals” is a mantra that just will not sell any longer. The homosexual influence in both culture and politics is greatly disproportiate to their numbers. The gay political lobby is so powerful that it forced the President of the United States, at a time when prudence demanded he lean to the center, to swear a public vow of support for the entire homosexual agenda. There is tremendous power and influence exerted by homosexuals within the media as well. This is a bloc which must be highly scrutinuzed in this attack on the Church. It must not be misrepresented as something it isn’t just out of the fear of sounding politically incorrect.

And as far as hatred goes, one need only research the many published statements made in the aftermath of the state by state (mostly) rejection of gay marriage ammendments. The vehemence of the rage and cries for retribution are nothing short of incendiary, such as, “We need to burn down all the f***g churches…then let’s tax the charred remains”, and this, “Someone needs to burn down the Mormon Temple in L.A…I mean really DO IT!..Mormons and Catholics better watch their backs…I’m serious.” Do the research, see how organized homosexuality has targeted The Catholic Church and the Mormons for reprisals due to the intransigence of their stands on gay issues. Read it in THEIR words. It is all out there, stated as boldly as the slanderous headlines we now see every day. Do the research, it is worth it.

When a group vows in public to get revenge on another group, and does it with impunity, is it right to classify the aggressor in that instance as a “victim”? I think not. If a group of people make statements that threaten another group, in public, on the record, are those threats to be taken seriously? Absolutely.

Actually, I think that the Roman Catholic Church is one of the last things left that can be skewered and railed against, openly and savagely, and with impunity. That reality must change, and it might take Catholic activism to accomplish the job. It is a new age we are living in, where everything is turned on its end, We would be wise to keep our equilibrium.

What about non-gay homosexual persons?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Well, if any gay priest puts children (at least, male ones) at risk, why doesn’t the Vatican laicize all homosexual priests and bishops, or at least remove them from parish ministry?

I got a better one for ya! Let’s have an inquisition and declare all homosexual persons in the church to be “anathema maranatha” (outside the Church until Christ’s return – permanently excluded from all sacraments).

That way, they’re out of sight, out of mind and everyone in the Church is safe and secure from all alarm and all the homos can burn in hell.

(I’m trying to ensure that distinctions are drawn here and using absurd arguments to make my point, in case anyone is wondering).