Posted on 10/17/2005 3:56:56 PM PDT by tuesday afternoon
If the Catholic Church wants to prevent sexual abuse by priests, several abuse experts said, there are better ways to do it than by trying to bar gay men from the clergy.
The church recently began checking American seminaries for ''evidence of homosexuality," and the pope is widely expected to ban actively gay men from taking holy orders.
But it will be tricky to cull gays from the priesthood, the abuse experts said this month. And it would be more effective -- and more humane -- to target likely abusers rather than all gays.
''There's no adequate way to screen out homosexuality," said Martin P. Kafka, a psychiatrist at Harvard's McLean Hospital. ''We don't have any lab tests."
-SNIP-
Still, when adults molest children past puberty, they tend to follow their sexual orientation. When the victims are older, straight men tend to molest girls and gay men molest boys. According to one survey, two-thirds of the victims were 12 or older when the abuse began.
-SNIP-
Furthermore, he said, he argued, ''If you have a policy of excluding homosexuals, all the applicants to the seminaries who are homosexual will just lie."
-SNIP-
And in current-day America, he added, gay people are much likelier to acknowledge and accept their sexual orientation, so they may present far lower risks than the repressed types of the old days
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Interesting the claim that all homosexuals will lie to become priests. So he's saying all homosexuals possess a serious moral failing? I think that's what the 1961 document from the Vatican said, too, the one barring homosexuals from the priesthood.
ping
What a scourge.
The only good thing I can see from having gays become priests is that if they follow their vow of celibacy, they will not contradict the no homosexual sex commandmant.
I'm sure I'll get flamed, just realize that I am saying that is the ONLY good thing.
In my opinion, if liberals want to say that whenever a straight guy beats up a homosexual that it is a hatecrime, then whenever a homosexual rapes a boy its a hate crime.
Rape isnt done outta love.
Well, you can always trust psychiatric experts to deal with the issue correctly.
Just like they did in assuring the bishops that therapy was the preferred course of action.
Oh, wait a minute. That didn't work out so well, did it?
It's almost like they're just guessing.
Hmmmm...yes, it is kafkaesque to rely on shrinks for any expertise in this area.
Remember, they (the shrink community) were the one's who advised the Catholic Church to "treat with therapy" the homo priests back in the "progressive, enlightened" 60's & 70's.
We've seen the results of this BS already.
Great minds......
"There's no adequate way to screen out homosexuality," said Martin P. Kafka, a psychiatrist at Harvard's McLean Hospital. ''We don't have any lab tests."
Do they have lab tests for pedophilia? There's logic for ya! This guy is a disgrace to any human that can think their way out of wet paper sack.
Can't a priest claim "celibacy" and still be a molester?
''There's no adequate way to screen out homosexuality," said Martin P. Kafka, a psychiatrist at Harvard's McLean Hospital. ''We don't have any lab tests."There is the penile plethysmograph.
"Do they have lab tests for pedophilia? There's logic for ya! This guy is a disgrace to any human that can think their way out of wet paper sack."
How should the Church screen out homosexuals?
Would you, as a heterosexual, submit to such a test in order to enter a seminary?
And, what do you use for stimulus? Would it not be an occasion of sin to use suggestive pictures of either sex? Is there a "good reason" to artificially stimulate to the point of erection?
I can't see Catholic bishops EVER approving use of such a device.
"There's no adequate way to screen out homosexuality"
And, of course, there's no effective way to profile terrorists.
So, why try? Let's just party!!
Various experts, all priests and all with seminary leadership backgrounds, estimate the number of gays in the priesthood at between 20 and 50 percent.
Yes, that's a very important issue and question there (that it's assumed and proven, even, that homosexuals will lie about their affiliation/s inorder to gain entry to the seminaries and later even during and after they falsely engage in religious vows).
There is no way someone who identifies as a homosexual, whether celibate or not (the issue here is chastity and lack of it), can morally be in respect and observance of the religious vows of the priesthood.
Which is why those in the priesthood at this present time (and including future applicants) do not belong there. They are dishonoring the vows that they say they represent. It's moral failure, it's ethical failure and it's surely failure before Christ.
Frankly I don't see any downside to barring priests who are sexually active in any way--whether it be with man, woman, child, or beast. When did celibacy stop being part of the requirements?
OK, I just kinda suspect that Mr. Goldberg here just might have an agenda that offers only Lose/Lose scenarios for the Church. Just kinda suspicious of Mr. Goldberg's motives.
Rome disagrees with you. There is ZERO chance that Benedict XVI is going to start suspending celibate homosexual priests.
None.
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.