Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Strong Terms, Rome Is to Ban Gays as Priests
New York Times ^ | 11-23-05 | IAN FISHER and LAURIE GOODSTEIN

Posted on 11/22/2005 11:31:08 PM PST by jec1ny

In Strong Terms, Rome Is to Ban Gays as Priests By IAN FISHER and LAURIE GOODSTEIN ROME, Nov. 22 - A new Vatican document excludes from the priesthood most gay men, with few exceptions, banning in strong and specific language candidates "who are actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called 'gay culture.' "

The long-awaited document, which has leaked out in sections over the last few months, was published Tuesday in Italian by an Italian Catholic Web site, AdistaOnline.it.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholic; gay; homosexual; homosexualagenda; popebenedictxvi; sin; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-255 next last
To: RobbyS

Please, don't be fooled by this. Look at the paragraph in the 1961 statement and the current statement. Filter out what the media is telling you.


221 posted on 11/23/2005 10:15:56 PM PST by nickcarraway (I'm Only Alive, Because a Judge Hasn't Ruled I Should Die...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I am not impugning anything dishonorable. I do not agree with you. But I also do not agree with most liberals (church or secular). You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. But I think you are wrong and I have not read a single opinion here or even in the main stream press that comes close to your interpretation of this document. There is no doubt that there will be some who will attempt to look at this from your point of view or something similar.

I already mentioned the usual suspects on that list. But they do not represent the direction the church is going in (DEO GRATIAS). You mentioned collegiality in an earlier post. That is a term which has been much abused by church liberals over the years. Every imaginable abuse and heterodoxy has been defended on some level by an appeal to collegiality against the imperial papacy. I think that the days where bishops could hide behind that term while undermining the doctrine of the church is coming to an end. Ask the former bishop of Lindz. Even in the cases where they take care to doing something that would obviously provoke their immediate dismissal, this pope is showing much greater care in selecting new bishops then his predecessor (of blessed memory). Time and attrition are working against the liberal hold overs from the 70's.
222 posted on 11/23/2005 10:19:09 PM PST by jec1ny (Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domine Qui fecit caelum et terram.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: sageb1
Awesome. www.adistaonline.it

Se un candidato pratica l'omosessualità o presenta tendenze omosessuali profondamente radicate, il suo direttore spirituale, così come il suo confessore, hanno il dovere di dissuaderlo, in coscienza, dal procedere verso l'Ordinazione.

"If a candidate practices homosexuality or presents a deep tendency to homosexuality, then his spiritual directors or confessors must disuade him, in conscience, from proceeding to Ordination."


Loving. Logical. Accurate. And only a fool would dare reject the above.
223 posted on 11/23/2005 10:48:22 PM PST by Falconspeed (Keep your fears to yourself, but share your courage with others. Robert Louis Stevenson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
Re: post #34... Thank you. I was about to write the same.

The Catholic Church formed the bible, translated it in various languages before anyone else, came up with chapters and verse numbers, and studies the Scriptures from Tradition very seriously.
224 posted on 11/23/2005 10:53:10 PM PST by Falconspeed (Keep your fears to yourself, but share your courage with others. Robert Louis Stevenson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
Rome must always ignore what scripture plainly teaches in order to implement her religious novelties.

Wow. It is amazing when you meet someone who knows so much about Rome, the Eternal City, the land of catacombs, cathedrals, Papal states, canon law, contract law, and hermenuetics. As you know, St. Paul writes, "He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God" (I Cor 7: 32). Celibacy has been a feature of some Catholics since the resurrection of the Lord.
225 posted on 11/23/2005 11:13:35 PM PST by Falconspeed (Keep your fears to yourself, but share your courage with others. Robert Louis Stevenson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush; Knitting A Conundrum
Rome must always ignore what scripture plainly teaches in order to implement her religious novelties.

Wow. It is amazing when you meet someone who knows so much about Rome, the Eternal City, the land of catacombs, cathedrals, Papal states, canon law, contract law, and hermenuetics. As you know, St. Paul writes, "He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God" (I Cor 7: 32). Celibacy has been a feature of some Catholics since the resurrection of the Lord.
226 posted on 11/23/2005 11:14:36 PM PST by Falconspeed (Keep your fears to yourself, but share your courage with others. Robert Louis Stevenson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
they're already squacking but I could care less....at least we're getting our Church back...

the whole pedophile business with the priests...minority that they are...is deeply seeded with the entry into the priesthood of gay men.....

sometimes what passes for pedophilia is simply homosexual advances......

the other thing is, if a priest is truely a pedophile...goes after very young children of either sex.....there is a covert relationship between him and gay priests because they have the "goods' on each other......there is a cover-up and a willingness to let things just pass....

227 posted on 11/23/2005 11:21:35 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
This is also why Protestants and, more recently, Baptists and evangelicals still reject the Apocrypha from the inspired canon. Rome only added them to the canon after the Council of Trent (1546)

This is a myth that always comes up but is simple to answer. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

Further, if Catholics added the deuterocanonical books in 1546, then Martin Luther beat us to the punch: He included them in his first German translation, published [before] the Council of Trent. They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before Trent). In fact, these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. It is historically demonstrable that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out.
--- How to Defend the Deuterocanonicals


Some of the earliest official canon lists--along with quotes from the Church Fathers, whose writings referenced the deuterocanonical books just as they did the protocanonicals--can be found here: OLD TESTAMENT CANON

It should also be noted that the first-century Christians-including Jesus and the apostles-effectively considered these seven books canonical. They quoted from the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures that contained these seven books. More importantly, the deuterocanonicals are clearly alluded to in the New Testament.
--- Who Changed the Canon?

Extra credit deutero-links: ;)
Missing Books and Invisible Churches
In the Crosshairs of the Canon: Protestants Find History Aimed against Them
228 posted on 11/24/2005 12:45:36 AM PST by AHerald ("Truth is not determined by a majority vote" - Cardinal Ratzinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: NYer
As is Archbishop Jadot , Paul VI's apostolic delegate, who is responsible for the many bad bishops inflicted on US catholics.

,,, the Pope needs to pour more acid on Bishops to keep them accountable. Each one has a virtual franchise and it should perform to the rules laid down. After all, it's a pecking order and the Pope doesn't make mistakes. Priests and Bishops should tow the line or do the Martin Luther trick and go their own way

229 posted on 11/24/2005 1:16:22 AM PST by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: redhead
by making these declarations, the Church can and does state clearly what her position is on this kind of behaviour.

,,, that's it. There's been a real need to reset the moral compass and this is a start, but there has to be action beyond the decree. Some hard arsed Cardinal should be appointed as a hatchet man to weed out those who should be weeded out - any doubts about what's what for him, he can check the Bible. I was a Catholic for 46 years.

230 posted on 11/24/2005 1:21:42 AM PST by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: weegee
If you cause one of these children to sin, you may as well put a millstone around your neck and cast yourself into the lake. Seems I've heard that somewhere before?

We are all sinners. I do know one thing for sure, Jesus had a heart for children. I would not want to stand before the creator and have to explain being a priest/child molester/homosexual.

I've heard the argument that male/male pedophilia is not necessarily homosexual---yea right. I think the Vatican has learned a lesson here. In the search for priest, they allowed this evil to enter the church. It didn't raise it's ugly head for sometime. Now God is saying enough is enough!---then comes the purge. Glad to see it. The Vatican is headed in the right direction by banning gays.

That just creeps me out big time. You go to a priest for spiritual guidance and all the while he is plotting to take advantage of your weakness.

OK--disclaimer: The majority of priest are fine godly men who seek only to serve the Lord in their ministry.
231 posted on 11/24/2005 1:47:00 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Good for y'all. My family is still embroiled in the Episcopal thing. Can't wait to see how it all comes out.


232 posted on 11/24/2005 1:50:18 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Falconspeed

What amazes me is:

1) how people ignore the reality of history. I mean, the evidence is there. The church from soon as they started writing about things, clearly believed in the role of bishops, the real presence, the veneration of saints, praying for the dead, the special role of the Blessed Mother, the primacy of Rome. When they didn't have enough water, they would do baptism by pouring. These things were written about before the year 200, every one of them, and most a good bit earlier. These are the people the Romans persecuted, who were executed public in torturous ways, who went to their deaths gladly for the glory of God.

2). How they think that God could set up a church that would go apostate when he PROMISED the gates of hell would not prevail against it (boy, this one says God is mall and insufficient to guard what he died so hard for). It's used also as the excuse for whatever their founding members believe is the correct approach to Christianity, no matter how far from the original reality they believe it to be. Some groups have favorite apostate times, like with the death of the last apostle, or the council of Nicea, or some other thing, that after this point the church is apostate because of some idea or other.

3). How they think it's their duty to come to threads that have nothing to do with evangelism, but instead, Catholic culture or current events to tell us what horrid apostates we are, how what we believe even if it goes back in unbroken succession to the beginning of the church is wrong, is wrong, that the scriptures we collected and were guided by the holy spirit to save, preserve and put into the canon tell them that we are great sinners, and do everything wrong.

Amazing.


233 posted on 11/24/2005 4:51:35 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Falconspeed
Celibacy has been a feature of some Catholics since the resurrection of the Lord.

No doubt. That wasn't the point.
234 posted on 11/24/2005 5:06:54 AM PST by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: AHerald
The mere fact of labelling the Apocrypha as deuterocanonical demonstrates they were never in the ancient canon. One can admire the cleverness with which such arguments are constructed but that doesn't make them true. But perhaps we should look at this declaration from the fourth session of the Council of Trent:

FOURTH SESSION: DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES: "If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts [the 66 books of the Bible plus 12 apocryphal books, being two of Paralipomenon, two of Esdras, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Sophonias, two of Macabees], as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA."
At any rate, I'm not interested in debating it on this thread. If you want to, I'm sure quite a number of people would love to discuss it on a thread in the Religion Forum.
235 posted on 11/24/2005 5:17:48 AM PST by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

Thanks for your kind words. On this day of Thanksgiving my wife and I want to wish you, and everyone, God's blessings and, for you especially, God's continued support to carry you through your church's struggles. We have friends who struggle with this in the ELCA and know how trying it is.


236 posted on 11/24/2005 5:21:45 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: jec1ny
Or simply adopt with some minor modifications the English Missal long used by Anglo-Catholics

There is a rich English liturgical tradition of 450 years to draw upon.

It is not surprising that the 1928 BCP as adapted for Anglican Use parishes works better than a bad 40 year old translation developed and promoted by change the Church types.

237 posted on 11/24/2005 5:24:40 AM PST by Jim Noble (Non, je ne regrette rien)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
the Pope needs to pour more acid on Bishops to keep them accountable.

Good news! Earlier this week, the pope met with 3 groups of bishops on their 'ad limina' visits. He took the Australians to task and have ordered them to clean up their dioceses. When the Brazilians noted a loss of 1% in their catholic population, B16 asked them to name the most popular Marian shrine in Brazil. He then told the bishops that he will be thre in May 2006. They were left speechless :-).

Each one has a virtual franchise and it should perform to the rules laid down

According to some bishops, they want more decentralization of power! During the papal conclave, catholic callers to a local radio talk show, spoke of the need for bishops to make more decisions without permission from the Holy See. In this diocese, that would have meant an increase in "gender neutral" liturgical texts. Needless to say, they were most upset when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected pope. B16 has now accelerated the process of tightening up the liturgy specifically to prevent tampering with these sacred texts.

How many in the media termed the new pontiff an "interim pope". Lol!

238 posted on 11/24/2005 6:18:16 AM PST by NYer (“Socialism is the religion people get when they lose their religion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.

God will see us through, can't wait to witness his glory.


239 posted on 11/24/2005 6:24:24 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Your scenario sent chills up my spine. I usually would have laughed it off, but after the CFR debacle, I don't put anything past our courts anymore.

(Of course, assuming Alito is confirmed, we might have a different court, but still my confidence is shaken.)


240 posted on 11/24/2005 6:29:21 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-255 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson