Priests are dying of AIDS at a rate at least four times that of the U.S.populatation

[Brad]

otm:

Is it trash science simply because you don’t like the results?

The lowest estimate I have seen in print puts the population of homosexuals in the priesthood at 10 percent; the highest at 80%. While I am inclined not to believe the 80% figure, and while I am no fan of Mr. Rose and his “Goodby Good Men” book - lousy writing and even lousier research - and I think Lukedis’ book amounts to a witch hunt, let’s assume that the statistic of 10% is accurate; statistically, that would put the presumed death rate from AIDS at 3 to 5 times the rate in the general population of men, given the real statistics of male homosexuality in the general population is about 2 to 3% (not 10% as the urban myth dictates - Kinsey is known to have lied).

And do you have any evidence that refutes Mr. Rose’s?

 

[Brad]

Nohome:

Even a former Catholic like me who (as Byz likes to say) has an “axe to grind” can see that this is trash science. The story is five years old and would have spread like wildfire if it were true. Major news outlets would have relayed the story around the world.

I’ve read dozens of books that attempt to estimate the homosexual population in the clergy. It is impossible to estimate the numbers other than to say that it is indeed very likely that there are some gay priests. Still, a priest that is gay can remain celibate.

Are there gay priests? I think so. Are some of them sexually active? No doubt. Have some contracted AIDS? It is likely. Is this the greatest challenge the RCC faces? Not even close.

Nohome

It is either the greatest problem or the second greatest problem. It depends on whether you believe that dissent is dirven by immorality. I believe dissent is the greatest problem. I believe much of the dissent is driven by acceptance of immorality. They are intertwined problems that cannot be ignored. They are wreaking havoc on the Church and if these issues are not addressed head-on, the church in the west will continue it’s downward spiral.

 

[Nohome]

Brad:

I believe dissent is the greatest problem.

As a “dissenter”, I obiously have a bias, but I believe dissent is little more than an annoyance to the RCC. The real problem, or I should say the root cause of problems in the RCC is indifference, apathy, secularism and ignorance. I believe the greatest problem is ignorance.

If people were truly taught what it means to be Catholic I believe they would either tow the line or check out (like me). A few dissenters are good for the Church, at least they have some passion about their cause. I know others will disagree, but I believe the huge numbers of secular, cultural, INO Catholics are the greatest challenge.

Nohome

 

[Brad]

Nohome:

As a “dissenter”, I obiously have a bias, but I believe dissent is little more than an annoyance to the RCC. The real problem, or I should say the root cause of problems in the RCC is indifference, apathy, secularism and ignorance. I believe the greatest problem is ignorance.

If people were truly taught what it means to be Catholic I believe they would either tow the line or check out (like me). A few dissenters are good for the Church, at least they have some passion about their cause. I know others will disagree, but I believe the huge numbers of secular, cultural, INO Catholics are the greatest challenge.

Nohome

I should have clarified. I mean religous teacher dissent. Priests, sisters, teachers. These are individuals that purposefully dissent and teach dissenting views. They do not check out because they want to change the Church. What they do not realize is the Church is based on a Rock, which is Christ. They cannot change it but they can mislead many a soul to Hell. That’s more than an anoyance, my friend, to those who are victims.

 

[Nohome]

Thanks for the clarification Brad. I agree that there is little room for dissent within the clergy.

Nohome

 

[stanley123]

otm:

The lowest estimate I have seen in print puts the population of homosexuals in the priesthood at 10 percent; the highest at 80%.

According to the Bible:
“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” [Leviticus 20:13 (New International Version)]

 

[Nohome]

stanley123:

According to the Bible:
“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” [Leviticus 20:13 (New International Version)]

Yes, well Leviticus has a lot to say:

'Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams, you may eat any that have fins and scales. But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to detest. And since you are to detest them, you must not eat their meat and you must detest their carcasses. Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to you. [Leviticus 11:9-12 (New International Version)]

So shall we kill all homosexuals AND burn every Red Lobster?

 

[Brad]

Nohome:

Yes, well Leviticus has a lot to say:

'Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams, you may eat any that have fins and scales. But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to detest. And since you are to detest them, you must not eat their meat and you must detest their carcasses. Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to you. [Leviticus 11:9-12 (New International Version)]

So shall we kill all homosexuals AND burn every Red Lobster?

Nice try but the New Testament also prohibits homosexual behavior, in accordance with the moral law still applicable as natural law but much of the disciplinary law no longer being necessary thank to the sacrifice of Jesus.

 

[Nohome]

Brad:

Nice try but the New Testament also prohibits homosexual behavior, in accordance with the moral law still applicable as natural law but much of the disciplinary law no longer being necessary thank to the sacrifice of Jesus.

So, am I free to dimiss anything in the OT that is not restated in the NT?

Natural law is a copout. What about all other of God’s creatures that practice homosexuality? Is this “unnatural” too?

Nohome

 

[Brad]

Nohome:

So, am I free to dimiss anything in the OT that is not restated in the NT?

You are free to dismiss it but would be foolish to do so both based on what I said and the fact that Jesus is the fufillment of the old law. Understanding it is a key to understanding God. Futher, it’s moral truths remain equally true today.

Nohome:

Natural law is a copout. What about all other of God’s creatures that practice homosexuality? Is this “unnatural” too?

Nohome

A copout? Natural law indicates that human beings have capabilities that other animals do not. For instance, we can observe and analyze their behavior. They cannot do the same of us. Unfortunately, we seem to be learning less by this analysis than we used to.

Further, homosexual behavior in other animals is never the norm. It is always the exception. See how these animals continue to exist.

 

[Robert_Bay]

Thread closed

Reasons:

1. Original news item not substantiated with a corresponding news article
2. Discussion of Holy Orders and the “scandal” has been delegated to the Sacraments forum by super moderator fiat. Holy Orders is a sacrament.