Posted on 09/30/2005 11:20:25 AM PDT by NormB
Estimates of the numbers of gays in the priesthood vary from 25 percent to 50 percent. About one-third of the 42,500 U.S. priests are members of religious orders.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"On the other hand, if these men were not wearing the collar and I met them at work, I'd peg a large percentage of them as being gay."
Gosh, that was really reasoned and reasonable! As was your entire post. You could have worked for Hermann Goering, and nobody would have realized your agenda until it was too late.
Virtually everything you said was anecdotal, and as far as I'm concerned, your subtext was: Whoa! there sure are a heckuva lot of homo priests out there, aren't there?
Do us both a favor: Step on your impulse to respond. Reason: We ain't going nowhere with this.
You have pissed me off hugely.
That said...Safe travel.
They're all at Gonzaga? Or? I've heard Fessio and Pacwa on EWTN and like them very much.
I guess the sin would begin with something like, "boy. would I like to...". The sin then would continue on as imagination.
Obviously sexuality is a unique case. But let us say that someone has a powerful inclination to steal things that he doesn't need. Suppose by force of will this person is abe to keep this tendency in check. Then this person is not a thief. But they still have a major psychological problem with kleptomania. If this tendency were strong enough, (e.g. if they became sexually aroused at the thought of stealing) I think it would be fair to call this person a kleptomaniac even if they hadn't progressed to being a thief.
What is your name for people who are sexually attracted to their own sex? You may think that everyone feels these attractions. I don't think this is true.
So what's your point?
Should a person who's been tempted to commit adultery, but did not, decide that their identity nevertheless is that of an adulterer?
If that was the case they might as well give up and give in to the temptation.
A person who covets something another has, but doesn't steal should STILL identify themself as a theif?
My point was that a person who has homosexual temptations but resists should NOT base their personal identity on that, but on their choices and actions. That is who they are in their heart and soul and in God's eyes.
This problem would go away if the Catholic Church would allow Priests to marry.
I agree with you that most of my post was anectdotal. My experience with a percentage of the priests that I've met is anectdotal and also based upon snap judgments that I made having known men for no more than fifteen minutes to an hour. I may not have made the brevity of the time period known, but you are right that the statement is anectdotal. It is hard to know when a man is a sensitive but effeminate servant of the Lord and when he is gay -- and that applies to all denominations.
Again, if these men weren't wearing a collar and I met them in another profession, I'd probably peg a large percentage of them as gay -- by large I mean 10%-20%. That's just my reaction; that's just my impression; that's just anectdotal evidence -- but my response is the same as when I find my teenage daughter watching one of those fashon makeover shows with a male fashion designer. I don't know for certain, but my first impression is often: gay. That's the first impression -- again, anectdotal evidence -- I get from 10-20% of the priests I work with. I don't automatically make that assumption with priests or any other religious leaders -- there is a lack of unnecessary bravado, of forcefullness -- I don't know what to call it -- that often appears to come to those who have achieved a higher level of inner peace than most of us have. They just don't need that baggage and it doesn't mean they're gay. I've also worked with some Catholic priests in Scouting who could probably still play nose tackle for Notre Dame or Boston College in their 50's, who show up for a Scout's Eagle project and lift timbers that I could never hope to raise. Having the bravado is no baggage for them, so I'm a believer you can have priests at either end of the testosterone spectrum, just like a cross-section of the public. There are also mild and sensitive priests who are inordinately strong in spirit through the power of Christ.
My statement about knowing three men who claim to have dropped out of the seminary because of the large number of gays and gay overtures is also anectdotal and is and was not offered to prove anything other than I've had three prospective priests who CLAIMED (because that may not have been their reson) that a number of gay fellow priests-in-training was a reason for their dropping out. That says nothing about those three and is only valid to the extent they knew what they were talking about and telling the truth. I could also tell you that two of the priests at my college town's Catholic church propositioned a fraternity brother, but that again is anectdotal and pertains only to them. I'll bet I could have found female friends who were hit on by more than two Protestant ministers, easily.
As for the insinuation that none of my post was reasoned or reasonable, I'd say that my statement that the Kinsey study that pegged homosexuals as 10% of the population is skewed because the subjects of his study were inmates who were asked if they had ever had homosexual sex is a fairly well-reasoned statement. Sample a group of inmates and I'll bet you'll find more that have had homosexual sex -- forced and voluntary -- than the outside population. Shoot, I'll also bet they have more tattoos per person, and probably more tattooed knuckles. Just speculation, but I'd say it's reasonable. So please don't suggest that my entire post was unreasoned and unreasonable drivel.
The main-stream media would like nothing better than to "prove" that a high percentage of Catholic priests are gay; they would like to "prove" that about all Protestant leaders, all Republicans, and all capitalists. Admittedly, the results of the so-called "scientific" studies are all over the map -- but they distressingly show a significant percentage of gay priests, either through distortion of data, refusal of straight priests to respond, selection of an inappropriate sample group, or possibly, just possibly, a significant percentage of current priests in the US are gay. Many faithful Catholics would like to "prove" that the percentage of homosexual Catholic priests is at least no higher than the percentage of gays in the population, and certainly not remotely as high as some of these "scientific studies" purport to show. They all have agendas.
If the percentage of homosexual priests remains an issue, then I wish someone could conduct a scientific study, laying bare all their data including selection methods of the study group, and find out that there is no materially high incidence of homosexuality among Catholic priests. That would be a whole lot more palatable to me that seeing the Catholic Church try to figure out how to deal with the opposite result.
I'll say it again with emphasis on the word MAY and a few changes: a meaningful percentage of the Catholic clergy -- not the Catholic Church, not the Holy Father, not the wonderful Catholic men, women, and especially Scouts I deal with on a frequent basis -- MAY have developed into a significant "sanctuary" for homosexuals in the United States over the last 30 years.
We know there was a problem with some Archdioces covering up for some priests and having to pay large sums in settlement -- then sending the priests on to other Archdioceses without warning. That represented at best a handful of priests nationally.
Agenda? If you thought I had one, then I made a mistake and misled you. I think the MSM has an agenda to show a large percentage of gay Catholic priests. I think the outspoken gay Catholic priests and gay activists in general have an agenda to show a large percentage of gay Catholic priests. I think many Catholics have a sincere desire to believe that there is no more to the pedophilia claims of the last five years than has been made public -- and that many Catholic-bashers want to claim that it is the tip of the iceburg -- and they may be right. I think many Catholics know that the Church can and will survive an current abundance of gay priests (IF ANY) if the Holy Father and the Church leadership maintain a firm position -- and I think they are right. I should think most Catholics would be concerned that the Servants of the Paraclete in Jemez has to run a treatment center in New Mexico for pedophilic priests. I may simply be naive. The Methodists and the Presbyterians may have their own versions, or may permit their pedophilic and adulterous ministers simply to run amuck -- in which case my hat's off to the Catholic Church for doing something about their problem. I don't believe I have an agenda, except I would like to know more.
I don't think anyone has enough evidence out there to do anything but make guesses based on anectdotal evidence and potentially flawed surveys. It would be nice, however, if a highly supportable survey showed all of these others not to be true. The hard thing -- for both sides -- is determining how to get priests (or anyone, for that matter) to answer questions about their sexual preference honestly (other than the celebrity slut-of-the-week, who will likely announce things on the six o'clock news that I don't want my children to hear).
Sorry I p*ssed you off. If you understood me to have an agenda, then I must have overstated one side of the argument without spending enough time on the other side. I did take offense to the Hermann Goering remark, but I guess you interpreted my post in a different spirit than which it was offered.
All of that said, what would you guess the percentage of homosexual and bisexual priests to be in the United States -- and on what experience, data, or anectdotal evidence would you base that estimate?
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
Last ping'o'the night. Discussion follows, read at your own risk. Rock on, Pope Benedict!*
Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.
*Forgive my levity.
You're being sarcastic, right?
And all the teachers molesting kids would stop if teachers could marry?
Yepper !!!
But I do believe that homosexuals, practicing or other wise should not be allowed to have contact with boys under the age of 21.
Yes, sexuality is unique and so is every other passion and temptation.
There is absolutely NOTHING that says experiencing a homosexual temptation makes one "gay" anymore than anger and violent impulses make one a "murderer".
There is no distinction made in God's Word when it comes to our personal identity.
All men are born with a sin nature. It's the choices we make and decisions we follow that determine who we are in our heart of hearts before God.
What is your name for people who are sexually attracted to their own sex? You may think that everyone feels these attractions. I don't think this is true.
There are all different degrees of attraction in different people.
We can see something and be tempted and stop it there.
Or we can play with the thought in our mind for a moment and then decide it is wrong and dismiss it.
Or we can go on to fantasize about it but refuse to act on it. Though this is drawing the line awful close to accepting it in our heart.
At what point do we decide that it is one's identity?
I don't know. But I one thing I do know is that a temptation or tendency doesn't automatically equal personal identity.
It is the decisions one makes in his heart and soul that ultimately determines one's identity. At least before God.
Agreed.
I say, "Back in the Closet"!
I agree and would add that all kinds of desires pop up in the mind. And your point about fantasizing is a good one - and if someone watches movies with a lot of sexual content (what to speak of porn) naturally more desires of a similar nature will pop up in the mind. If someone knows that he/she has a weak area, the intelligent thing to do is avoid activities which aggravate that weakness. People trying to avoid alcohol shouldn't go to bars. People trying to avoid same sex desires should avoid "gay" bars. People trying to avoid smoking marijuana should avoid Humboldt County. People trying to avoid illict sex or overwhelming thoughts of naked women should avoid strip clubs. People trying to avoid chocolate should avoid hanging around the counter at Mrs. See's.
Etc. And the interesting thing is that the more we use our God-given sense of discrimination and our free will to avoid that which tempts us, the less the unwanted desires enter our minds...
The sin would begin with something like, "boy. would I like to...". The sin then would continue on as imagination. IOWs, the heart welcomes the "reality" of the imaginaiton. The person avoids, or refuses real engagement, simply to hide what's in the heart.
" My point was that a person who has homosexual temptations but resists should NOT base their personal identity on that"
Again you're not being clear. Homosexuals are attracted to the same sex. It's not simple temptation. It's the same as with heteros and temptation. The object of the attraction and the temptation for engagement are separate.
Homosexuals can also be simply attracted to sex and like roosters w/o hens aren't all that particular about what they go after. This is the common homo. The object of attraction in this case is fundamentally sexual activity. Otherwise the gender attraction can be anywhere, for different reasons, at different times. Still, the gender attraciton is what defines homo, hetero and bi.
No. Just Fr. Spitzer is at Gonzaga. He is the president who is trying to turn it around.
Fr. Fessio is at Ave Maria.
Fr. Pacwa is at EWTN
All snideness aside, you should run a clinic on classy behavior on FR.
I overreacted to something you said.
I slammed the crap out of you.
You came back with calm and reason and reserve and an extended hand.
Okay. My anectdotal experience on priest observation, being 57, a lifelong Catholic, having grown up in a Pennsylvania farming town but having lived in many, many places, including LA and NYC...I would say that up to ten percent may be gay or bisexual. Possibly a little more.
I believe, as you suggested, that there may be some effeminate men who have become priests who aren't gay per se, but who could "pass." The truth is, just because they don't brim with testosterone doesn't necessarily mean they're gay. It might also be a condition of asexuality. Perhaps they didn't feel ANY particular sexual pull, growing up, and felt the priesthood was the path for them (the Lord working in mysterious ways?).
Another aspect I've given thought to is: The homosexual man who enters the priesthood not because of "opportunity," but because he CHOOSES to live a life in service to God, rather than indulge his sexual urges. In other words, a vow of chastity is just that: a vow to not engage in any sexual activity. If the vow is held, then the proclivity is actually moot, isn't it?
Consider a homosexual Catholic man who is nevertheless religious. He sees his future, outside the priesthood, and realizes that is a path he doesn't want. He enters the priesthood--not just to "hide from the world," but to live a life that he knows will be far better than the one he has had glimpses of. Trouble comes, down the road, when one of these priest-types cannot pray his urges away. But I believe there are many, many priests--and excellent ones--whose path mirrors this one, but who have succeeded--through will, prayer, character--in having a successful priesthood. Of these "types," I further believe that more have succeeded than have not. But it's all anecdotal, isn't it?
To put it as simply as possible: I actually believe a man who is a homosexual (but nonpracticing, of course) can be an excellent priest, and that his parishioners respect and love him, because he is so selfless in his service to them and the Lord. (And all the old ladies would never believe that of him anyway.) I have known several priests who qualify.
I'm hoping this discussion is not noticed by too many others, as it provides a golden opportunity for the gay- AND Catholic bashers. I am driven to rage over the MSM and Catholic bashers piling on whenever an incident comes to light (and yes, yes, of course, let's get it out of the way: even one incident is one too many), because their goal is to paint every priest with the same scandal brush.
And I apologize for the Goering insult.
I have always maintained that not all Priests are homosexual but many homosexuals become Priests. It is possible for a homosexual to not practice being a homosexual. I am happy the Pope has come out with the ruling about homosexuals and the Priesthood.
I wonder how exagerated the numbers really are.
I bet they homosexuals lurking in the priesthood are trying to imply enforcing proper christian requirements will devastate the number of priests.
The elimination of homosexuals provides only benefits and zero detriments.
Oh, gee I think that Jesus was a normal heterosexual male who lived a celibate life.
Don't you?
"Makes me wonder if they are going into the Priesthood because they truly want to devote their lives to GOD or find it a good place to hide that they are perverts and want easy access to little boys."
Truly, truly thoughtless and offensive and stereotypical. An example of lazy thinking and profiling that I thought was far below you, db. Take a look at my long post just before yours, for stuff to mentally chew on.
You frosted my cheese. You are better than this.
But Safe Travel just the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.