G
glencor63
Guest
Why not recruit to the priesthood men that are totally Asexual and Aromantic, while also including married heterosexual men with a Romantic orientation?
Vatican’s McCarrick report says Pope John Paul II knew of misconduct allegations nearly two decades before cardinal’s removal
- Status
A
AnaCarolina7
Guest
A saint knew.
Last edited:
T
twf
Guest
Is there any real evidence that sexual abuse remains a widespread problem in the Catholic Church RIGHT now? Pretty much every stat / case I’ve seen is from decades ago. Doesn’t make it better… but with all of the policies that have been implemented in recent years, as well as stricter psychological screening of seminarians, I’m not sure how feasible it would be for a child to be abused at present. Thankfully. Priests just aren’t alone with kids anymore.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Personally I don’t think the root cause has been addressed. All the safety measures put in place, while better than nothing, are superficialities.
M
MikeInVA
Guest
“Even the just man sins seven times a day.”
O
OraLabora
Guest
Unfortunately in this case, the victims of those sins have names. And wrecked lives.
G
glencor63
Guest
The Church is forcing celibacy upon the clergy. It doesn’t give men the option of marrying first and then becoming a priest. It forces all priests to be celibate.
Last edited:
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Evidence would be better than speculating, I imagine with a better understanding of science and historical perspective things should have improved.
Last edited:
G
glencor63
Guest
Sadly, this is not a problem of the past. 
T
twf
Guest
Sounds like most of these men are no longer actively serving as priests…
What evidence is there that active parish priests are abusing children? I’ve volunteered in my parish…no adult is allowed to be alone with kids in a private space period…it just doesn’t happen.
What evidence is there that active parish priests are abusing children? I’ve volunteered in my parish…no adult is allowed to be alone with kids in a private space period…it just doesn’t happen.
G
glencor63
Guest
Some are still around children and not a few have disappeared into the hinterlands. Frightening!
Last edited:
S
stpurl
Guest
I don’t know. Why have so many married couples fail after making the free choice to marry, yet disregard THEIR vows?
O
OraLabora
Guest
Of course they disregard their vows. Big difference though: they are not shepherding a flock… priests telling us what to do, and doing the opposite, what do you call that?
To whom much is given, much is expected and all that…
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Yeah but married priest would be in both positions.
R
rytx
Guest
After reading articles on the McCarrick case it seems like the decision makers within the Catholic Church don’t have a problem with the clergy having sex with other adult males. I don’t hate anybody and I’m no better than the next man however scripture does not condone Homosexuality. I am all for Homosexuals as members of the Church in an attempt to convert them from their ways but not as part of the clergy or having a position of authority within the Church.
From Catholic to Catholic why does the Church continue to look away from Clergy having sex with other adult males?
From Catholic to Catholic why does the Church continue to look away from Clergy having sex with other adult males?
S
stpurl
Guest
Yes, priests have a huge responsibility to their often many parishioners.
But tell me just exactly how different that is from the husband and wife who disregard their vows, split up their family, and how that affects the children.
The priests don’t come first. The family does. If the family is fractured then quite frankly they aren’t going to listen to the priests not even if the priests were all saints.
I see a lot of attempting to shove all the blame here onto the ‘priests falling short’ and complaints about how they don’t know their sexuality and whatever psychological trappings can be thrown into a thesis and sent out to a committee, and a heck of a deafening silence over the 60 years of a society saturated with sex, drugs, just do it mentality and a victim culture that puts the blame everywhere ‘else’.
I see too much of making this into a slam fest where “the Church MUST change to be perfect and then the laity will follow”.
Bull tickey. The Church was NEVER about having perfect priests in order to ‘lead the laity’. The Church was about encouraging sacrifice and picking up the cross. Part of the glory was that Christ did not demand perfect priests but that He offers each person who chooses the priestly vocation the chance to become perfect even when the person stumbles over and over again. . .just as all the rest of us do.
Talk about clericalism! This is the modern take; clericalism means whining that our priests and religious are ‘just as sinful’ as we are (except we are damn careful that we admit to as little sin ourselves as possible and even if we sin it’s ‘their fault’ for not leading us better anyway). Clericalism means in one breath demanding that we laity do everything priests do because none of it is ‘beyond’ the lay person, while in the same breath complaining that any sin in the clergy is far, far worse than the sin of anybody else. It’s not the clergy for the most part trying to be ‘more important’ the way so many shriek about; it’s the lay (and some clergy too) trying to flatten out any possible difference between lay and clergy as ‘false elevation of clergy’ yet at the same time screaming the clergy’s sins are unforgiveable.
But tell me just exactly how different that is from the husband and wife who disregard their vows, split up their family, and how that affects the children.
The priests don’t come first. The family does. If the family is fractured then quite frankly they aren’t going to listen to the priests not even if the priests were all saints.
I see a lot of attempting to shove all the blame here onto the ‘priests falling short’ and complaints about how they don’t know their sexuality and whatever psychological trappings can be thrown into a thesis and sent out to a committee, and a heck of a deafening silence over the 60 years of a society saturated with sex, drugs, just do it mentality and a victim culture that puts the blame everywhere ‘else’.
I see too much of making this into a slam fest where “the Church MUST change to be perfect and then the laity will follow”.
Bull tickey. The Church was NEVER about having perfect priests in order to ‘lead the laity’. The Church was about encouraging sacrifice and picking up the cross. Part of the glory was that Christ did not demand perfect priests but that He offers each person who chooses the priestly vocation the chance to become perfect even when the person stumbles over and over again. . .just as all the rest of us do.
Talk about clericalism! This is the modern take; clericalism means whining that our priests and religious are ‘just as sinful’ as we are (except we are damn careful that we admit to as little sin ourselves as possible and even if we sin it’s ‘their fault’ for not leading us better anyway). Clericalism means in one breath demanding that we laity do everything priests do because none of it is ‘beyond’ the lay person, while in the same breath complaining that any sin in the clergy is far, far worse than the sin of anybody else. It’s not the clergy for the most part trying to be ‘more important’ the way so many shriek about; it’s the lay (and some clergy too) trying to flatten out any possible difference between lay and clergy as ‘false elevation of clergy’ yet at the same time screaming the clergy’s sins are unforgiveable.
C
CLearthinking04
Guest
Never thought of it more broadly like that. Good point, something to consider.
CT04
CT04
- Status