Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
And how many faithful Catholics are on the NY Times editorial board?
Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
How do they propose to measure and regulate 'same-sex attraction' exactly?
It's about time...at least the panzer pontiff will bring the seminaries back to where they need to be regarding this whole, wretched matter. And the NYT usual banter that it might cause further rifts as did the contraception issue did in the past; big difference there obviously.
The Church needs to not only prevent the ordination of homosexuals but also defrock those that are known. Sorry, it's better to err on the side of safety then take a chance.
How many "dry" (i.e., non-practicing) homosexuals do you know? I know none, however, I suspect there's not many to begin with, given it is central to their lifestyle to do the deed so to speak.
Can the Church afford to lose 30-50% of new priests?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I'm not Catholic, but it seems that homosexuals are less likely to maintain celibacy, than heterosexuals. If you get into thinking about all of this, you may form all sorts of politically incorrect conclusions, and we sure don't want to risk that, do we?
One of these days, when I can afford some really decent Sour Mash, I will write an essay on my theory, that homosexuality is an expression of neotony. If I mispelled that, oh well, what can you expect from a talking Redneck?
It will all come back to what my Daddy told me, "son, if you can't control yourself, someone else Damned sure will".
Good for the Pope!!!
Did you see any mention of what is really motivating this move to 'ban' homosexual priests?
An independent committee that investigated the sexual abuse scandal among Catholic priests concluded that the vast majority (80%) were homosexual priests engaging in sex with boys!
Why did the NY Slimes fail to mention that fact as a motivation for the possible ban?
The NY Times is clueless. The new generation of Catholics who support gay rights are for the most part do not attend mass, and havent stepped foot in a parish in years.
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
If you want to read the NYT's highly slanted take on the excellent news from Pope Benedict. If Grampa Dave reads this, he can tell us about the reporters employed by the NYT. A huge percentage of them are homosexuals, and I doubt if very many are practicing and believing Catholics.
Freepmail me AND DirtyHarryY2K if you want on/off this pinglist.
Nothing new regarding what it says in the Bible, so the fact that Catholics are getting more strict in making sure no gays become stalkers of children is a good thing.
A question: What about priests that molest little girls. It is odd, the Pope has not said anything about that.
Excuse me, but a "GAY" priest is not celibate. GAY infers taking part IN the lifestyle. Someone with a homosexual orientation, but does not engage in homosexual activity is NOT "GAY"! That being said, a man with a homosexual orientation should NOT be considered for the priesthood, mainly because by living in a community of men, he is being placed in a near occasion of sin. He needs to be in a place where he is not tempted on a daily basis.
They should also ban any "heterosexual" priest who even comtemplates sex with a woman.
Matthew 5:28
But I say unto you, That whosever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.