Why no homosexual priests?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lourdes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Lourdes:
I find the twisting and desperate use of semantics to call the molestation of a 12 or 13 or 14 year old boy “homosexual behavior” revolting. The boy is underage, it is morally pedophila. Heterosexual men who are attracted to and molesting/raping 12 and 13 and 14 year old girls don’t have their behavior described as “heterosexual”. It is perversion, and pedophila.
That is not semantics. It is established scientific fact and part of the body of knowledge that deals with such types of attractions. The attraction to a child (pre-pubescent) is much different from the attraction to a youth. The desire for youth is very much a distinguishing characteristic of male homosexuality.
40.png
Lourdes:
Homosexuals are attracted to adults of the same sex.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. Stats show that 75% of homosexuals have reported having contact with a minor.
40.png
Lourdes:
I’ve heard that 80% of the cases of sex abuse in the Church occured between priests and boys just past puberty. Why is this a reason to bar all homosexuals from the priesthood? If you claim that homosexuals are inherently inferior to heterosexuals, that they are all automatically more prone to sin/going to sin no matter what…that seems to fly in the face of everything Catholicism has taught us.
That is not the Church’s position. The Church is at risk for further grave scandal if men who are unable to abstain from same-sex activity are put into a position where they are frequently very lonely, where their peers are men, etc.
 
40.png
Lourdes:
Why not screen for priests who are attracted to the underage - “homosexual” and “heterosexual”? They have the means. Why not take the time to weed out all those that plan on abusing children or sleeping with grown men and women and who show signs of not taking their vows of celibacy seriously, no matter what their attractions?
This is part of the screening process.
40.png
Lourdes:
If priests that fornicate with grown men are thrown out (as they should be) so should priests who fornicate with grown women. If priests who molest/rape little boys and teenage boys are routed out and severely punished (as they should be) then the priests who molest/rape little girls and teenage girls should receive the exact same punishment and exposure.
The Church identifies some acts as so morally corrupt that they automatically bar men from priestly ministry. Both of the instances described above are included.

With that said, please keep in mind that homosexuality is treated differently because it is different. Its not just another choice like “I like vanilla and you like chocolate”. It makes a mockery of God’s divine and wonderful plan for creation. It violates the body’s natural systems and processes.

It may help you to understand the Church’s position by reading about the homosexual lifestyle and how sexuality and sex acts are viewed. You might also want to note that the homosexual lobby has wanted to remove age-of-consent statutes since as early as the 1970s.
 
40.png
Ken:
All through the abuse scandal we heard defenders of the Church saying that the abuse rate among the clergy was no more than among the general population. That’s nice. These ordained men of God are no better than the average.

Now, for most of that scandal, the rate of abusers was quoted at 2%, and this is what the defenders said was the rate in the general population.

But the John Jay report says that 4% have been accused. I know that accused does not mean proven, but I note the large difference between 2% and 4%.

OK. So now what is the abuse rate among the general population? Is it 2% as defenders said for so long? If so, why is the Church rate double the average for the population?

The other question is, what is the percent of dioceses in which bishops covered up or enabled abusive priests? It is much higher than 4%. Why are so many of the successors of the apostles cowards? Why are these guys still in their jobs? Does this treatment of the bishops contribute to the ongoing abuse in Latin America that is being documented by the Dallas Morning News this week?

The Church has failed at the highest levels. This means the pope. It means the bishops. It means all the priests who were not abusers, but remained silent. And the Church continues to fail.

This is valid grounds to question the authority of the Church and the claims it makes to have special guidance from God. When the successors to the apostles are the culprits, the argument that they are simply misguided individuals loses its punch.
I agree that the Church as a whole has failed to protect against this kind of abuse.However, you admitted that 4% is only the number for accused priests and is not the same as proven cases, but then you went on to compare the priests to the general population using the 4% figure that you already admitted was probably not the correct number. Apples and oranges.

I would not be surprised to find out that genuine pedophilia is less likely to happen by a priest than by a man in the general population. I do believe that the homosexuality rate is probably higher in the priesthood than in the general population. Once again, I still see homosexuality as the root of the problem. The mishandling of the situation by Bishops is a whole other problem entirely. 😦
 
40.png
Ken:
All through the abuse scandal we heard defenders of the Church saying that the abuse rate among the clergy was no more than among the general population. That’s nice. These ordained men of God are no better than the average.

Now, for most of that scandal, the rate of abusers was quoted at 2%, and this is what the defenders said was the rate in the general population.

But the John Jay report says that 4% have been accused. I know that accused does not mean proven, but I note the large difference between 2% and 4%.

OK. So now what is the abuse rate among the general population? Is it 2% as defenders said for so long? If so, why is the Church rate double the average for the population?

The other question is, what is the percent of dioceses in which bishops covered up or enabled abusive priests? It is much higher than 4%. Why are so many of the successors of the apostles cowards? Why are these guys still in their jobs? Does this treatment of the bishops contribute to the ongoing abuse in Latin America that is being documented by the Dallas Morning News this week?

The Church has failed at the highest levels. This means the pope. It means the bishops. It means all the priests who were not abusers, but remained silent. And the Church continues to fail.

This is valid grounds to question the authority of the Church and the claims it makes to have special guidance from God. When the successors to the apostles are the culprits, the argument that they are simply misguided individuals loses its punch.
Just to put these statistics in perspective…

According to the John Jay report, around 4% of priests between 1950 and 2002 were accused of sexual abuse of children under 18 years of age. The total number of allegations reported was 10,667 from 1950 to 2002.

Now compare that to the findings in a draft report by the US Department of Education released earlier this year. The US dept of Ed. found that from 1991 to 2000, there were 290,000 (or just under 10%) allegations of sexual abuse by public school faculty and staff.

That means:

Public Schools average:
29,000 incidents per year

Priests average:
205 per year

(also note that since 1995 the average number of abuse incidents by Catholic clergy has been under 50 per year).

Of course, none of this even makes the news!

Here’s a pretty chilling quote from the Professor who conducted the study for the US Department of Ed:

"The physical sexual abuse of students in (public) schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests." -Carol Shakeshaft, Professor of Educational Administration, Hofstra University
 
40.png
Ham1:
Just to put these statistics in perspective…

According to the John Jay report, around 4% of priests between 1950 and 2002 were accused of sexual abuse of children under 18 years of age. The total number of allegations reported was 10,667 from 1950 to 2002.

Now compare that to the findings in a draft report by the US Department of Education released earlier this year. The US dept of Ed. found that from 1991 to 2000, there were 290,000 (or just under 10%) allegations of sexual abuse by public school faculty and staff.

That means:

Public Schools average:
29,000 incidents per year

Priests average:
205 per year

(also note that since 1995 the average number of abuse incidents by Catholic clergy has been under 50 per year).

Of course, none of this even makes the news!

Here’s a pretty chilling quote from the Professor who conducted the study for the US Department of Ed:

"The physical sexual abuse of students in (public) schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests." -Carol Shakeshaft, Professor of Educational Administration, Hofstra University
Excellent info that got absolutely no media time. Thank you for citing it here.
 
40.png
Ham1:
Just to put these statistics in perspective…

According to the John Jay report, around 4% of priests between 1950 and 2002 were accused of sexual abuse of children under 18 years of age. The total number of allegations reported was 10,667 from 1950 to 2002.

Now compare that to the findings in a draft report by the US Department of Education released earlier this year. The US dept of Ed. found that from 1991 to 2000, there were 290,000 (or just under 10%) allegations of sexual abuse by public school faculty and staff.

That means:

Public Schools average:
29,000 incidents per year

Priests average:
205 per year

(also note that since 1995 the average number of abuse incidents by Catholic clergy has been under 50 per year).

Of course, none of this even makes the news!

Here’s a pretty chilling quote from the Professor who conducted the study for the US Department of Ed:

"The physical sexual abuse of students in (public) schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests." -Carol Shakeshaft, Professor of Educational Administration, Hofstra University
What total number of public school employees do we compare to the 29,000 incidents per year?

What total number of priests do we compare to the 205 incidents per year?

Without that data, it’s very hard to find any significance in comparing the two annual incidence figures.

I think the John Jay report said they did not know if the reduction since 1995 was a function of an actual decrease in incidents or a function of the age at which victims felt secure and strong enough to make the incidents public. A 1995 thirteen year old is 22 today.

The quote by the professor makes sense when one compares the two total figures, but we don’t know its significance since we don’t know the total populations involved.
 
Lourdes,

Just a thought. Priests are standing in for Christ. Christ is the Bridegroom or husband of the Church. So, logically the ideal kind of man you would wnat to be a priest would be the kind of man who would make a good husband, i.e. a (good) heterosexual man.
 
40.png
Ken:
What total number of public school employees do we compare to the 29,000 incidents per year?

What total number of priests do we compare to the 205 incidents per year?

Without that data, it’s very hard to find any significance in comparing the two annual incidence figures.

I think the John Jay report said they did not know if the reduction since 1995 was a function of an actual decrease in incidents or a function of the age at which victims felt secure and strong enough to make the incidents public. A 1995 thirteen year old is 22 today.

The quote by the professor makes sense when one compares the two total figures, but we don’t know its significance since we don’t know the total populations involved.
First off, I agree with you that many bishops handled this issue badly. And perhaps, priests even do have a higher % than the general population. I would think that the way children are educated now, they are taught to tell people about sexual abuse and not keep quiet.

Even if many more adults come forward, there is still far less abuse now than there was 30-40 years ago. As I have mentioned in other threads, there must have been catastrophic problems in the seminaries back then. Clearly, there were many men ordained who should not have been.

I just think that it is unfair of the media to paint this as “abuse by priests” when the truth is a crisis in “child abuse.” This is happening everywhere, and a good part of the blame is our sexualized society where perversions are embraced and people are taught that sexual pleasure is one of the highest goods.
 
I can’t imagine why anyone would think homosexuals should be allowed to be a priest. Only in recent times has our moral judgment been so clouded as to think it should even be a topic open to discussion.

I can’t help but cringe when I read all these quotes about statistics and so-called psychological findings. Fields like psychology are filled with credentialed misfits. Was it not psychologists that advised the bishops that homosexual pervert priests were cured? Is it not psychology and related fields that claim homosexuality is just a simple variation of normal, or that transgender surgery is good, and same sex marriage is ok, and contraception is great, and euthanasia is mercy? I could go on and on.

I agree homosexuals desrves prayer, compassion and medical therapy. They have no place in the priesthood or secular occupations that would place them near children or teenagers. Yes, heterosexuals can abuse, but that is a deviation from normal. Homosexuality involves disordered desires. They need our help, they do not need what our society offers them which is false compassion and enabling of their disodrered tendencies.
 
Because homosexuality is wrong and it is against God’s law. Trust in the church, they have been burned badly by low lifes that have slipped through the cracks and they are not about to let it happen again. I agree completely with the church’s stance on this issue.
 
40.png
fix:
I can’t imagine why anyone would think homosexuals should be allowed to be a priest. Only in recent times has our moral judgment been so clouded as to think it should even be a topic open to discussion.

I can’t help but cringe when I read all these quotes about statistics and so-called psychological findings. Fields like psychology are filled with credentialed misfits. Was it not psychologists that advised the bishops that homosexual pervert priests were cured? Is it not psychology and related fields that claim homosexuality is just a simple variation of normal, or that transgender surgery is good, and same sex marriage is ok, and contraception is great, and euthanasia is mercy? I could go on and on.

I agree homosexuals desrves prayer, compassion and medical therapy. They have no place in the priesthood or secular occupations that would place them near children or teenagers. Yes, heterosexuals can abuse, but that is a deviation from normal. Homosexuality involves disordered desires. They need our help, they do not need what our society offers them which is false compassion and enabling of their disodrered tendencies.
Agree on all points.

Good post. Thanks.
 
Many of you seem not to understand the issues at all. I cannot believe that there continues to remain this equating of homosexuality with pedophilia. Get it: they are not the same thing! To say they are is not to have an accurate handle on the issues!

Yes, homosexuality is disordered, but so is the desire of a supposedly straight heterosexual man who molests children. They are both disorders of the sexuality. Understand this–they are not two so vastly different things, as if a sexual disorder that is heterosexual in nature is somehow better or less offensive that a sexual disorder that is homosexual in nature.

Yes, a homosexual seminarian may have to practice even more self-control while in the seminary, but once in the role of a priest of a parish, he will undergo the same challenges that a heterosexual man must. There sill be women and men alike in a parish. Homosexual priests will encounter men in the seminaries and parishes, as heterosexuals will encounter women in the parishes, including nuns.

Homosexuality is something to be overcome, but it cannot always be rooted out. Some people think that certain homosexuals can possibly reverse their tendencies through some sort of therapy; however, most homosexuals are born as such and no reversal can be made, just as a heterosexual cannot magically become homosexual.

Finally people, stop making the error of equating homosexuality with pedophilia or fedrophilia (teenage attraction). There is homosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and attraction toward adults, just as there exists heterosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and adult attraction. So, under the umbrellas of heterosexuality and homosexuality there are these different categories. It seems that both kinds of pedophilic and fedrophilic sexual relations were the problems in the sex abuse scandal, not adult relations, although of course they have always been present.

Homosexuals are people too, who can enter the ministerial priesthood of Christ just as heterosexuals can. The conversion of heart is what makes the difference, that is, the desire to serve Christ completely. A magical “change” is sexuality is not only largely impossible if possibe at all, but not the solution to any problem. Get the story straight, stop the descrimination, and think of what Christ would say. People who are mature and have a handle on their sexuality and faith in Christ pose no threat to the priesthood and the Chuch, but rather show themselves to be assets to it and models of right behavior!
 
Catholicmatt,

*Many of you seem not to understand the issues at all. I cannot believe that there continues to remain this equating of homosexuality with pedophilia. Get it: they are not the same thing! To say they are is not to have an accurate handle on the issues!
*
Please, we get it, you don’t. Do not try to soft peddle homsexuality as genetic, unchanging, and equal to heterosexuality in anyway. It is a disorder. It is not normal. The homosexual lobby is trying and succeeding to brainwashing our minds. As I posted before, fields like psychology are not infallible and often are anti Christian.

Talk of discrimination is a fraud. Discrimination, of some sorts, is a must as a Christian. We dicriminate in many matters all the time. And we must. No one is advocating deying human rights.

Understand this–they are not two so vastly different things, as if a sexual disorder that is heterosexual in nature is somehow better or less offensive that a sexual disorder that is homosexual in nature.

Homosexuality, in and of itself is a disorder, heterosexuality is not a disorder. There are heterosexuals who deviate, that is pathology from the norm. Homosexuality is pathological in itself.

Finally people, stop making the error of equating homosexuality with pedophilia or fedrophilia (teenage attraction). There is homosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and attraction toward adults, just as there exists heterosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and adult attraction.

Really? Homosexual men crave teenage boys. That is part and parcel of the disorder. Please do not equate the state of homosexuality with all of heterosexuality. A more apt analogy would be to equate homosexual tendencies with heterosexual deviants.

Finally, not all heterosexuals have a tendency toward pervert sexual acts. All homosexuals do have a tendency toward perverted sexual acts. Get it?

We all need to accept homosexual as are brothers and pray they remain in a state of grace. we do not need to allow them to be priests, or teachers, or get married to each other.
 
40.png
Catholicmatt:
Many of you seem not to understand the issues at all. I cannot believe that there continues to remain this equating of homosexuality with pedophilia. Get it: they are not the same thing! To say they are is not to have an accurate handle on the issues!

Yes, homosexuality is disordered, but so is the desire of a supposedly straight heterosexual man who molests children. They are both disorders of the sexuality. Understand this–they are not two so vastly different things, as if a sexual disorder that is heterosexual in nature is somehow better or less offensive that a sexual disorder that is homosexual in nature.

Yes, a homosexual seminarian may have to practice even more self-control while in the seminary, but once in the role of a priest of a parish, he will undergo the same challenges that a heterosexual man must. There sill be women and men alike in a parish. Homosexual priests will encounter men in the seminaries and parishes, as heterosexuals will encounter women in the parishes, including nuns.

Homosexuality is something to be overcome, but it cannot always be rooted out. Some people think that certain homosexuals can possibly reverse their tendencies through some sort of therapy; however, most homosexuals are born as such and no reversal can be made, just as a heterosexual cannot magically become homosexual.

Finally people, stop making the error of equating homosexuality with pedophilia or fedrophilia (teenage attraction). There is homosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and attraction toward adults, just as there exists heterosexual pedophilia, fedrophilia, and adult attraction. So, under the umbrellas of heterosexuality and homosexuality there are these different categories. It seems that both kinds of pedophilic and fedrophilic sexual relations were the problems in the sex abuse scandal, not adult relations, although of course they have always been present.

Homosexuals are people too, who can enter the ministerial priesthood of Christ just as heterosexuals can. The conversion of heart is what makes the difference, that is, the desire to serve Christ completely. A magical “change” is sexuality is not only largely impossible if possibe at all, but not the solution to any problem. Get the story straight, stop the descrimination, and think of what Christ would say. People who are mature and have a handle on their sexuality and faith in Christ pose no threat to the priesthood and the Chuch, but rather show themselves to be assets to it and models of right behavior!
Do you mean ephobophilia?

Statistics show that homosexuals are way over represented in cases of child molestation (<12 years of age). Homosexual men, by their nature, find teenage boys erotic and a source of sexual desire. This has been known since ancient Greece.

With due respect, you should consider objective research into the true nature of homosexuality and how it manifests itself.
 
40.png
Joanne_ca:
Because homosexuality is wrong and it is against God’s law. Trust in the church, they have been burned badly by low lifes that have slipped through the cracks and they are not about to let it happen again. I agree completely with the church’s stance on this issue.
I thought and hoped this might be the case until I read this week’s series in the Dallas Morning News on abusive priests and the bishops who protect and enable them in Latin America. This is happening now. Today. As we read this.

The Church had a chance to reform. But it blew it and its agents are up to their same old tricks.

How did so many bishops slip through the cracks?
 
Here is the truth, if you allow that humans are born homosexual then in reality they can state that there is nothing wrong with it, Many a paedophile state that they are just naturally that way, therefore there is nothing wrong with it, The same thing goes for sex with animals etc.

I challenge any homosexual advocate here to tell me why the homosexual condition is any different than that of the paedophile condition.
 
40.png
Ken:
I thought and hoped this might be the case until I read this week’s series in the Dallas Morning News on abusive priests and the bishops who protect and enable them in Latin America. This is happening now. Today. As we read this.

The Church had a chance to reform. But it blew it and its agents are up to their same old tricks.

How did so many bishops slip through the cracks?
You are correct that this is still happening is diocese in the world and that needs to be dealt with. This is sorely misunderstood if people think this is strictly an American issue. There have also been reports of abuses in Africa as well.

That being said, the Church is doing something about this. The Church teaching on this has never changed. What has happened is there have been some people in the Church who have broken the rules or tried to make their own rules. This is a failing of people in the Church, not the Church itself. These people need to be brought to justice and taken out of their pastoral positions.

As for the “so many bishops falling through the cracks”, going back 50 years in the Church in America, there have been about 4% of priests and bishops involved in these abuses. Is it horrible that it happened? YES!!! Should these people be held accountable? YES!!! Anyone in any country should be held accountable.

The way I look at it is this is another in the ongoing attacks on Christ’s Church from the devil. We in the laity and those in authority need to fight this and to work to rid this from OUR Church. To say this is only on the Church hierarchy is wrong. We all need work together to fight this.

My opinion…

GregA
 
As a 27 year old man, I have to say that, if I was unscrupulous and unChristian, I could very easily allow myself to be attracted to a 15 year old girl. It would be wrong to entertain such thoughts, let alone act on them-but it would not be perverted in itself. The argument that attraction to teenagers is a perversion does not really hold up. Just think: when I am confronted with homosexual images (men kissing, holding hands) my revulsion is almost physical. I feel sickened. It is that far beyond the pale. When I see a pretty 15 year old, I am not sickened, and I treat her with respect as a woman created in God’s image- as I would any attractive woman.🙂 It’s not a big deal. If you spend a lot of time around soldiers, you will hear them talk about “gaol bait”; girls who look older than they are, and around whom one must be careful, lest one end up in gaol. A sad attitude, but one that conveys some truth.

If I were an unscrupulous, heterosexual priest, I might prey upon such girls. It would be wicked, but not perverted. If, however, my tastes ran to 10 year olds, my appetite would be fundamentally disordered. If I acted upon them, I would be a paedophile.

The same is true for a homosexual priest. For a man struggling with this burden, it would be a “natural” part of his condition to find 15 year old boys attractive. He may or may not act upon them, but to create a distinction between homosexual attraction towards grown men and attraction towards 15 year old boys is disingenious, and obscures the issue at hand.
 
40.png
GregA:
You are correct that this is still happening is diocese in the world and that needs to be dealt with. This is sorely misunderstood if people think this is strictly an American issue. There have also been reports of abuses in Africa as well.

That being said, the Church is doing something about this. The Church teaching on this has never changed. What has happened is there have been some people in the Church who have broken the rules or tried to make their own rules. This is a failing of people in the Church, not the Church itself. These people need to be brought to justice and taken out of their pastoral positions.

As for the “so many bishops falling through the cracks”, going back 50 years in the Church in America, there have been about 4% of priests and bishops involved in these abuses. Is it horrible that it happened? YES!!! Should these people be held accountable? YES!!! Anyone in any country should be held accountable.

The way I look at it is this is another in the ongoing attacks on Christ’s Church from the devil. We in the laity and those in authority need to fight this and to work to rid this from OUR Church. To say this is only on the Church hierarchy is wrong. We all need work together to fight this.

My opinion…

GregA
Four percent of priests and bishops may have been active abusers, but a much larger percentage of bishops protected and enabled the abusers. This is addressed in the John Jay report. The bishops are the glaring failures and they stayed on the job.

A dusty writing can demonstrate Church teaching, but the Church is not living that teaching. How long would we wait for executives at IBM or Walmart to stop protecting employees who abused 13 year olds on the job? How long would we wait for the abuse to stop? Would it be a defense to say that IBM’s employee handbook said 13 year olds should not be abused?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top