THE ELEPHANT IN THE CHURCH a Catholic priest speaks out against homosexual priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaPatri4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Scout:
I am amazed at some of the ignorant statements made on this forum. What is going to take to get some of you to understand that homosexuality and pedophilia are NOT the same thing, and to think that every homosexual is some kind of predator is absolutely wrong. It’s like saying all black men can’t be trusted around white women. Both statements are just plain ignorant! :mad:

The scandal in the Church had nothing to do with homosexuality. It was the result of a some very sick individuals who were attacking children and other individuals covering for them.

You cannot make the assumption that if you’re gay, you’re a pedophile and can’t be trusted around children.

Scout :tiphat:
Click to expand...
Scout I am sorry but you are COMPLETELY WRONG. The scandal had everything to do with homosexuality. Look at every single report. They all clearly state that the problem was with predatory homosexual priests. Further the majority of the abuse was NOT on little children. It was NOT pedophelia. It was an abuse of power by homosexuals. Read the John Jay report. It has been linked to this forum many times.

I do not believe all homosexuals are pedophiles and the research bears it out. However there is a higher incidence of pedophelia among homosexuals than their representation in our overall population. So we cannot put our heads in the sand about this potential problem. I would be concerned about ANY homosexual in a power position over children. There are just too many incidents both inside and outside the Church for me to believe that this is appropriate.

Lisa N
 
While it is true that not all homosexuals are pedophiles our experience shows that virtually all the pedophiles we are talking about are homosexual. To pretend otherwise is simply ignoring facts. There is a correlation whether it is pc or not.
 
I’m sorry Lisa, but I completely disagree with you. To lump homosexuals into the same category with pedophiles is just plain ignorant. It’s not the same thing, and being one doesn’t automatically make you the other.

Scout :tiphat:
 
interested in the statistics coming out. If anyone has any real statistics they can link to, please do. For example the 75% of homosexuals have had sex with underaged boys that was on the Boy Scout thread comes to mind. Where did that come from?
 
Lisa N:
Scout I am sorry but you are COMPLETELY WRONG. The scandal had everything to do with homosexuality. Look at every single report.
Lisa N
Click to expand...
Balderdash. The SCANDAL has to do with child abuse.

if we are not talking about child abuse – male AND female children (is the abuse of girls – of whatever number – not part of the scandal? is this acceptable behavior?) but about any sexual activitiy, then is seems there is more heterosexual abuse than homosexual – when you add in the sexual activity of adults, the number of women invovled soars.

So which is it? Children or Homosexuality?
 
40.png
katherine2:
Balderdash. The SCANDAL has to do with child abuse.

if we are not talking about child abuse – male AND female children (is the abuse of girls – of whatever number – not part of the scandal? is this acceptable behavior?) but about any sexual activitiy, then is seems there is more heterosexual abuse than homosexual – when you add in the sexual activity of adults, the number of women invovled soars.

So which is it? Children or Homosexuality?
Click to expand...
When you are talking about the priesthood it seems to be homosexual childabuse.
 
40.png
katherine2:
Balderdash. The SCANDAL has to do with child abuse.

…
So which is it? Children or Homosexuality?
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on how you define child abuse. I consider the seduction of a post-pubescent minor male to be abusive (it’s illegal as well). I don’t define that as child abuse. I define that as a homosexual statutory rape.

The same would be true of the seduction of a post-pubescent minor female. It would be statutory rape, not pedophilia.

All you have to do is look at the numbers. You have to do a whole lot of mental gymnastics to think that this wasn’t primarily a homosexual problem.
 
40.png
Scout:
I’m sorry Lisa, but I completely disagree with you. To lump homosexuals into the same category with pedophiles is just plain ignorant. It’s not the same thing, and being one doesn’t automatically make you the other.

Scout :tiphat:
Click to expand...
Scout if you are referring to my post (there are several Lisas here) you obviously didn’t read it very well. I said specifically that a) the priest abuse scandal was a homosexual problem not a pedophile problem and b) not all and not even most homosexuals are pedophiles although statistically they are are overrepresented with respect to their percentage in the total population.

Would you please read the post and respond?

Lisa N
 
40.png
StJeanneDArc:
I guess it depends on how you define child abuse. I consider the seduction of a post-pubescent minor male to be abusive (it’s illegal as well). I don’t define that as child abuse. I define that as a homosexual statutory rape.

The same would be true of the seduction of a post-pubescent minor female. It would be statutory rape, not pedophilia.

All you have to do is look at the numbers. You have to do a whole lot of mental gymnastics to think that this wasn’t primarily a homosexual problem.
Click to expand...
And coming soon we will most probably have a routine on the balance beam;)
 
40.png
katherine2:
Balderdash. The SCANDAL has to do with child abuse.

if we are not talking about child abuse – male AND female children (is the abuse of girls – of whatever number – not part of the scandal? is this acceptable behavior?) but about any sexual activitiy, then is seems there is more heterosexual abuse than homosexual – when you add in the sexual activity of adults, the number of women invovled soars.

So which is it? Children or Homosexuality?
Click to expand...
K2 read the Jay report. Read every single book, article, or website on the issue of priest sexual abuse. The vast majority of cases, over DECADES were a result of homosexual predatory behavior. Yes there were some cases of abuse of young females, but they were in the minority. A heterosexual priest constrainted by celibacy and chastity was far more likely to simply leave the church and marry an adult woman, rather than molest girls. However the homosexual priests were able to engage in this behavior within church confines. IOW they didn’t need to leave to be able to get their sexual satisfaction.

Further the young men targeted were not in the under 10 age group which would indicate pedophelia. These were homosexual predators who had power over their young charges and were able to get away with this reprehensible behavior. Many of the boys were in their teens. These priests were not ‘child abusers’ they were homosexual predators.

Please read the Jay report and then respond.

Lisa N
 
Kevin Walker:
Rather than anything so crude as that, just be equally aware of taking the advice of a homosexual as you would from a Downe syndrome or schizophrenic or a severely neurotic individual.

Since the Catholic Church discourages the ordination of homosexuals, what would a “objectively disordered” Priest be doing in a diocese anyways?
Click to expand...
OK. Those are some good points. Except I know they are wrong. The advice my priests give my parish weekly in their homilies is very good. They are thoughtful, kind, and considerate. I am sure they are both gay; I do not know if they are active homosexuals, but doubt it, since they are both very devout, humble, faithful men.
And there are other homosexuals in my community who give lots of good advice. A cardiologist and a general surgeon in my community are both very well-respected doctors who happen to be gay, for instance.
I think you’ve gone off the deep end if you think being homosexual is equivalent to being mentally retarded or schizophrenic. Let go of your needless hatred of other people. Learn to love everyone, man. You will feel a lot better about yourself.
 
40.png
sbcoral:
OK. Those are some good points. Except I know they are wrong. The advice my priests give my parish weekly in their homilies is very good. They are thoughtful, kind, and considerate. I am sure they are both gay; I do not know if they are active homosexuals, but doubt it, since they are both very devout, humble, faithful men.
And there are other homosexuals in my community who give lots of good advice. A cardiologist and a general surgeon in my community are both very well-respected doctors who happen to be gay, for instance.
I think you’ve gone off the deep end if you think being homosexual is equivalent to being mentally retarded or schizophrenic. Let go of your needless hatred of other people. Learn to love everyone, man. You will feel a lot better about yourself.
Click to expand...
I would feel a lot better if the sexual abuse scandal never occured, and it was the direct result of homosexuals in the Priesthood. To be perfectly accurate, homosexuals are irrational! They have above average acts of suicide, depression, self-destructive behaviour, anti-social behaviour, drug abuse, alcoholism, irrational thoughts, emotional damage, and acts of violence - the homosexual is incapable of clarity of thought and emotional stability which is why the Church has defined them as “objectively disordered”, and why they are not allowed into strategic government agencies or granted top secret security clearances.

They really shouldn’t be ordained as Catholic Priests either!
 
Kevin Walker: It seems you’ve glazed over my arguments rather than actually looking into them. In the sections of the Catechism dealing with Original Sin it is very clear that all human beings, aside from Mary of course, are subject to the inclination of sin. This inclination, or attraction, called concupiscence, is fundamental to human existence, and is also fundamentally disordered as it is described as “wounded”. That homosexuality is called “objectively disordered” is irrelevant to the argument of its uniqueness because that simply means that it can be seen to be disordered through natural reason. Incidently, all sins listed in the Decalogue are “objectively disordered” because they are a part of Natural Law, the natural order discernable by reason without need of revelation.
[2070](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2070.htm’)😉 The Ten Commandments belong to God’s revelation. At the same time they teach us the true humanity of man. They bring to light the essential duties, and therefore, indirectly, the fundamental rights inherent in the nature of the human person. The Decalogue contains a privileged expression of the natural law:
Click to expand...
From the beginning, God had implanted in the heart of man the precepts of the natural law. Then he was content to remind him of them. This was the Decalogue.31
Click to expand...
Homosexual attraction therefore falls intot he exact same category as the attraction to steal, which is also “objectively disordered”.

As for the second part of my post that you tried to pick apart, you fall into a number of traps yourself. First off, I explained in my post why same sex attraction is no longer considered a mental health disorder. You can make appeals to the contrary, but the fact remains that it is not considered as such by the scientific community. Furthermore, as I illustrated in this post and implied in that post, ALL attraction to sin is disordered according to the Church, so appeals to the Church’s definition of disorder automatically includes all sinful inclinations. Since all humans are subject to sinful inclinations, all humans are disordered. If having disordered attractions and inclinations is your grounds for barring someone from the priesthood, then all humans should be so barred. As for using temptation, it seems clear that it was merely substituting for attraction in that sentence. Replace it with attraction if it makes you feel better.

Finally I want to say that I’m not arguing that the Church can’t bar SSAs from the priesthood, only that it *shouldn’t, *at least not on the grounds that it’s a disordered attraction. That the Church currently officially bans such people from the priesthood is a matter of discipline that can indeed be changed.

Now there ARE reasonable arguments for banning homosexuals from the priesthood, among them the “alcoholic in a liquor store” analogy and the simple matter of scandal in the wake of the predominantly homosexual character of the abuse cases. Such arguments are wholly different from appeals to the disordered nature of SSA, however, and that’s the argument I’m fighting against.
 
40.png
Bill_A:
Do you have compassion for the thousands of gay wolf in Gay sheeps clothings victoms. Pulease. dont waste your “prayers” on us. Save it for the victoms who may grow up to act out this horedous and most hanius act.
Click to expand...
Homosexuals do very well in society as a group; look at all the homosexual millionaire actors (Rock Hudson, Liberace, Wayne Newton, etc.). South Beach Florida is a virtual homosexual Babylon [and a South Beach Hotel refused to admit a heterosexual married couple last year and were sued for discrimination]. Homosexuals thrive in the entertainment, food, bar & restaruant, legal, and publication industries - and good luck to them all!

But, homosexuals are irrational and therefore barred from key government strategic agencies and departments, they are prevented from gaining secret security clearances, and because of homosexual toleration in the Catholic Priesthood (against the canon law) the Church is now enjoying a sex abuse debacle thanks directly to all those homosexual Priests!

Do homosexuals want to pray in a Catholic Church? That’s fine with me, its just insanity to allow them to be ordained and thus gain access to a position of authority within the Church.
 
Lisa N:
Please read the Jay report and then respond.

Lisa N
Click to expand...
I have read it. I fear God’s wrath upon anyone who says the girls (of whatever proportion) of the children who wer abused are not part of the scandal.

We know, of whatever numbers and proportions, priests have had sex with men, women, girls and boys. Now, all of that is a violation of their obligation of celibacy and chasity.

Some say the greater scandal is homosexuality. Two of the four groups mentioned (boys and men) would entail homosexuallity. Two of the four (boys and girls) would entail child abuse.

One element is common to both of those postions (boys).

I say the greater scandal has been the abuse of boys and girls. I say that because in those cases, you have an innocent victim. With adults, you have two consenting sinners.

Let me be blunt on this. Those who think the nature of this scandal is not the age of the victim but the gender of the other party, if they are sincere and knowing in what they say, are committing a grave sin and endagering their own souls. I pray for them.
 
40.png
Ghosty:
Kevin Walker: It seems you’ve glazed over my arguments rather than actually looking into them. In the sections of the Catechism dealing with Original Sin it is very clear that all human beings, aside from Mary of course, are subject to the inclination of sin. This inclination, or attraction, called concupiscence, is fundamental to human existence, and is also fundamentally disordered as it is described as “wounded”. That homosexuality is called “objectively disordered” is irrelevant to the argument of its uniqueness because that simply means that it can be seen to be disordered through natural reason. Incidently, all sins listed in the Decalogue are “objectively disordered” because they are a part of Natural Law, the natural order discernable by reason without need of revelation.
Click to expand...
Hi Ghosty,

I also find your circumloucution and denial to be disturbing (and slightly insulting).

The Catechism directly defines homosexualilty as “objectively disordered” and your tortured rationalization is unnecessary.

Homosexuals are irrational, and have no place being in a position requiring emotional stability and clarity of thought, and on this Catholic forum, that means no homsexual Priests.
 
40.png
katherine2:
I have read it. I fear God’s wrath upon anyone who says the girls (of whatever proportion) of the children who wer abused are not part of the scandal.

We know, of whatever numbers and proportions, priests have had sex with men, women, girls and boys. Now, all of that is a violation of their obligation of celibacy and chasity.

Some say the greater scandal is homosexuality. Two of the four groups mentioned (boys and men) would entail homosexuallity. Two of the four (boys and girls) would entail child abuse.

One element is common to both of those postions (boys).

I say the greater scandal has been the abuse of boys and girls. I say that because in those cases, you have an innocent victim. With adults, you have two consenting sinners.

Let me be blunt on this. Those who think the nature of this scandal is not the age of the victim but the gender of the other party, if they are sincere and knowing in what they say, are committing a grave sin and endagering their own souls. I pray for them.
Click to expand...
Nobody said that Katherine, it has been proven that the biggest part of the abuses were homosexual predatory acts,why do you have to twist it around as if they are trying to dismiss hetero attacks?
 
Kevin Walker said:
Thank you!
Click to expand...

Oh cut that out…oops, you already did (out of context)! 🙂
This has been bothering me all day. I was really disturbed by the nasty tone of the initial post. It didn’t seem very priestly or christian to me. The fact that the church says that homosexuals cannot be ordained is not my beef, my issue is the degree of hatred and condemnation tossed out towards an entire group of people based on a stereotype. This is the kind of thinking that brought about the Holocaust…that a group of people were somehow just not right, just not equal, just not worth tolerating. I know quite a few gay people, and I just can’t keep their faces out of my mind when I’m hearing all this hate. Sure, I wish they’d change for the sake of their souls, but I’m not going to be their judge, jury and executioner because most of the folks I know are intrinsically GOOD people with one huge cross over their shoulders. I don’t condone their actions, I’d never say it’s godly, but Jesus will be their judge and my job while I’m on this earth is to do my darnedest to show them what Christ is like and hopefully be there for them in love if and when they try and change.
Regards,
Jennifer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top