In Strong Terms, Rome Is to Ban Gays as Priests

New York Times ^ | 11-23-05 | IAN FISHER and LAURIE GOODSTEIN

[sageb1]

Good.

[Neanderthal]

Amen.

[TASMANIANRED]

Good.

[billybudd]

I guess GM isn't the only organization laying off tens of thousands this week.

[ncountylee]

Equal rights for sodomites....NOT.

[weegee]

banning in strong and specific language candidates "who are actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called 'gay culture

A candidate who is actively homosexual is not celibate.

A priest who encourages homosexuality in the "gay community" encourages sin.

A priest who has homosexual tendencies has a burden of temptation but he may keep it in check. It is questionable to put him in a position of authority where he may manipulate someone into an affair, but I don't know how common that is.

If he acts on any of his sexual desires, he has sinned (regardless if it is with a man or a woman, an adult or a child). If thoughts of his carnal desires dominate his day, then he will probably not be a good moral leader. If he finds men more attractive than women but does not ever bring it up or act on that desire, I don't know that there is a problem.

I say this because if the position is to urge that sinners "go forth and sin no more", what sin is the priest committing? Lust? Depends on how much he thinks about it.

[Steely Tom]

I'm glad to hear this, but I think we should be prepared to be outraged by litagation that will result from this. Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America. Considerable amounts of tax money are given to the Church for its work with the poor, especially in big cities. This will be the hook, as will (possibly) be tax exemptions.

I hope I'm wrong.

[shaggy eel]

,,, window dressing from Rome, nothing more. It's clear from the full article that priests or intending priests would move to the likes of Rochester or Spokane for tea and sympathy and the ability to dodge mainstream Church policy.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Antonio Gramsci is deeply saddened.

[Dustbunny]

Finally

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Sounds good. But what do I know? One poster thinks it's window dressing. To me, it sounds quite definite. My question is does it apply to men who are already ordained? Are homosexuals going to be flushed out of the priesthood? I hope with every fiber of my being that it will happen. For the good of the Catholic church and the rest of the world.

Freepmail me and DirtyHarryY2K if you want on/off this pinglist.

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America.

Actually, religious positions have always been exempt from overview by the Department of Labor, and to a lesser extent, the IRS. The "free exercise thereof" clause of the first amendment to the Constitution has been successfully applied in cases like this, as well as the "free association" phrase.

In short, the position of a priest is a specific, controlled, personal, and optional post that is wholly controlled by the religious organization sponsoring it. They would have absolutely no case.

Rest easy, it's been tried with Baptist and Protestant pastoral positions previously and has been quashed without exception.

[babygene]

bump for a later read.

[ZULU]

Good news.

Now if we could only get the Methodists, Prebyterians and Epicopalians to do the same thing, we'd be in good shape.

[jec1ny]

"I'm glad to hear this, but I think we should be prepared to be outraged by litagation that will result from this. Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America. Considerable amounts of tax money are given to the Church for its work with the poor, especially in big cities. This will be the hook, as will (possibly) be tax exemptions.

I hope I'm wrong."

Permit me to set your mind at ease. Even the ACLU would rally to the Churches defense. No court would ever allow outsiders to dictate matters of faith to any church. Your concerns are baseless. The 1st ammnd protects churches from regulation in such matters.

[blondee123]

"who are actively homosexual,

This is the part that disturbs me! What if they are not "active" homosexuals, but are still homosexuals, do they get to be priests???

Too little, too late if you ask me. About 50 years too late!!!

[jec1ny]

"Now if we could only get the Methodists, Prebyterians and Epicopalians to do the same thing, we'd be in good shape."

I can not speak to the Methodists or Presbyterians as I am not familiar with their views. And in any case there are many branches of these ever multiplying denominations. As for the Episcopalians; that church is apostate and I do not regard them as being Christian.

[nickcarraway]

If this is true, this is a liberalization of the current (if not followed) policy.

[AmericaUnited]

SUPER! The Catholic Church has decided to follow God's Word. We have a real breakthough!