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
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.
"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.
''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.
"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!!
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.
Yes.
Unmarried priests is idiotic, and a blaspheme against the God of the jews, who is the God of Jesus, who is the Lord of Christians. Without marriage by priests, there would not have been a John the Baptizer to proclaim the arrival of the Messiah. I am sorry, but the Catholics are wrong on requiring chastity for Priests and Nuns, it denies the basic humanity of people, and mocks Gods command in Genesis.
The experts already helped a lot - bishops were relying on their opinions. Amd the experts proclaimed homosexuality a normal and healthy lifestyle.
To lie about such a thing would be a Mortal Sin. The novitiate would have confess and do penance.
Because homosexual men are such a tiny part of the population (maybe a percent or two), the do not account for the majority of sexual abusers of minors in the United States. However, they abuse at a rate many times that of heterosexual men.
Aren't they already banned?
I am not Catholic, so pardon my ignorance.
But shouldn't the Catholic Church ban men OR women from entering full time service if they are sexually active and single?
I don't see how this is even newsworthy.
A) The overwhelming majority of pedophiles are men
B) The overwhelming majority of their victims are boys.
The reasoning/conclusions that should follow those facts is not nuclear science.
Most male pedophiles are homosexual pedophiles. Anyone care to dispute that?