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 ...
The Catholic Church has always banned homosexuals from the priesthood; unfortunately, certain bishops disregarded that ban.
What is the ECLA? A Lutheran Group?
Your church did not write, canonize or preserve my Bible...And my Bible is quite clear in it's position on queers...
"Your church did not write, canonize or preserve my Bible"
Then, from whom did you receive this Bible if it wasn't the Church? What divinely-inspired table of contents guided you in recognizing which books should be included in the canon?
Oh. Your comment seemed to me like a derisive comment about the Church:
I'm amazed it took them so long to decide that the Bible is correct and that they ought to adhere to its standards...The Church has always know that "the Bible is correct," since the Church wrote, preserved and canonized it.
From 1 Timothy, about who should be the overseers/teachers in the Church:
1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer,[a] he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife,
This was meant in the sense of not having been married more than once. And celibacy has always been seen as desirable for religious, since celibacy was endorsed by Jesus and Paul.
As you can see, it is clear that overseers/deacons are to be followers of God's Word and worthy of our respect, and above falling into the devil's trap - if that doesn't preclude homosexuals from serving as deacons/ministers/priests, what does?
Did the Church ever formally endorse the ordination of homosexuals? No. The latest statement simply reaffirms constant Church teaching and tradition.
The practice of ordaining overt homosexuals has been a sinful practice, and as we know, the tares will grow up with the wheat.
The point he was making is that the NYT was pulling a Clinton. Depends on what the meaning of "is" is...In other words, it may be technically true that molesting teenage boys is not pedophilia in the strict sense of the word, if it is taken only to refer to younger children. So the Times is trying to confuse and protect its favored group, as usual.
This is the correct result for a church that considers homosexual acts to be a moral abomination. Fitting and proper.
But there is another very practical reason. The sexual abuse scandal in the Church has been disingenuously blamed on "pedophiles" by the wymmins movement, in order to fraudulently remove the onus from homosexuals, who were the true culprits in almost all the cases. By removing homosexuals from the seminaries and from the parishes, the Church will substantially reduce the likelihood of another monumental disaster like the one we are now in, thanks to letting homosexuals flood the clergy.
DA740
It seems a little difficult to determine sexual orientation among people who don't have sex.>>>>>>>>>>
And just what percentage of priests do you suppose actually have NO sexual activity whatsoever? I would wager it is so near zero as to be indistinguishable from zero.
Are you suggesting the Catholic Bible was divinely inspired???
If you make it to heaven, I can't wait to see the look on your face when you realize there are millions of non-Catholics already there...
There's a critical point here, which I hope has not been overlooked.
The document does not say (as was previously widely reported) that homosexual activity must have ceased three years prior to ordination, or that the candidate must have remained celibate for 3 years.
It states quite clearly that homosexual tendencies must have been overcome. Big, big difference.
This is a critical point which must not be glossed over. It means, in effect, that nobody with homosexual tendencies can be ordained. That includes the celibate homosexual.
This instruction is good. Very good. As always, the problem will be implementation.
Oh?
The document isn't so much of a big deal. It's certainly not the solution. It stops the tied of homosexuals entering the clergy only if it's obeyed which it won't be by gay bishops.
The church needs to purge the bad apples, then they will be addressing the problem.
God Bless
And why did you come to a thread about Catholic church discipline to just tell catholics how wrong they are?
And yes, the New Testament was codified by people who considered themselves Catholic, and believed in the Real Presence at Communion, and believed in having unmarried Bishops, and who prayed the Lord's Prayer as a special prayer, and venerated the saints, and called Mary the Theokotos and who practiced both infant baptism and adult baptism, by various methods, especially immersion and pouring.
These are the people who collected, preserved, passed on, and argued about whether the writings belonged in the canon or not. And they read them in their meetings, and argued about their meaning, and knew they were holy and passed them down, and came to a consensus about what was divinely inspired and what wasn't.
And that's how you got the New Testament. And the doing is historically documented. And it was done by Catholics.
Denying the reality won't change what happened.
1 Timothy 3:2 (KJV)Far from demanding celibacy of bishops, the Bible requires that they be married to a single wife. Regardless of the opinions of a Pope Gregory. But then, Rome must always ignore what scripture plainly teaches in order to implement her religious novelties.
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
ELCA: Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. The Synod was formed from a union of the American Lutheran Church and Lutheran Church in America some decades ago. Along with the LCMS: Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, it is one of the largest Lutheran organizations.
Some years ago the ELCA formed a evangelical partnership (for want of a better word) with the Episcopals and have followed suite in the Episcopal acceptance of the homosexual agenda.
That's already pretty clear to most of us. The only potentially open question concerns a man who has homosexual inclinations, but leads a chaste life. (And, as GWB points out, how do you necessarily even know who those men are?)
The prior teaching, which was ignored, especially in the US, was that such men are still not fit for the priesthood. (That's why I call it a "potentially" open question -- it wasn't really open.) This document mostly reiterates that teaching.
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.