Posted on 11/16/2006 9:54:57 AM PST by presidio9
sw
http://www.riteofsodomy.com/
"The homosexual legacy of William Cardinal O’Connell and Francis Cardinal Spellman has followed us into the 21st century. We are currently on the third generation of clerical homosexuals and pederasts who can be directly tied to Spellman and O’Connell and other homosexual prelates of the early 20th century…and there will be many more generations of clerical homosexuals and pederasts to follow unless Rome acts to disinherit the heirs of perversion from the Catholic priesthood and religious life."
Good news I'd say. Time to get some facts in the situation.
In my mind, not in the slightest!
But I believe I have an open mind.
You choose, or propose a third hypothesis.
Hypothesis #1:
Cause: A normal healthy male joins the Church, which requires voluntary celibacy.
Effect: Celibacy effects his conversion into a homosexual, unable to resist sexually abusing boys.
Hypothesis #2:
Cause: A male with homosexual tendencies joins the Church, which requires voluntary celibacy.
Effect: He succumbs to the tendencies of his nature and is unable to resist sexually abusing boys.
Occam's Razor makes the more likely hypothesis crystal clear, as to cause and effect.
Unless you can devise a third reasonable hypothesis.
I was addressing specifically the absurd notion that celibacy causes the inability to resist abusing boys.
And then cover for them when they start using their position of trust to prey on their charges.
There is only one way to stop the spread of corruption in ANY organization. Hunt down the bad apples, out them publicly and purge them from your ranks.
God love St. Paul, but I think the unmarried man and woman is anxious about getting some action, not about the affairs of the Lord. I think getting married and having a family brings more people's thoughts to spirituality and the hereafter.
I didn't say that celibacy is intrinsically evil.
Matthew 19:12
"For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
1 Corinthians 7:8-9
Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
(Emphasis added)
Perhaps the endings of both passages should have received greater consideration before celibacy was made a requirement--as far as I know--for the Catholic priesthood. There seem to be some who are not able to meet that requirement. If the Holy Scriptures make exception for those, as they appear to, why not the Catholic Church?
I don't presume to make the decisions for the CC, especially since I'm not Catholic, but that is the subject of the thread and of this inquiry. If they're truly looking for answers, I suggest taking a harder look at celibacy.
This statement makes no sense. Celibacy is a magnet for homosexuals and pedophiles?
And don't forget married men and women...Oh, wait!
The point is that we Catholics believe that celibacy is just as noble a vocation as marriage. IWO, some are called to be celibate (and not all are priests or nuns).
Simply because some disturbed individuals, for whatever reasons (maybe using the Priesthood as an escape from their deeper issues), have violated their own celibacy doesn't mean celibacy in of itself is bad. Nor that it shouldn't be a discipline in the Church.
Many critics (wrongly) state that since it's a requirement for Priests, it's against Scripture. It's not, since being a Priest, and thus everything that goes along with it, is voluntary. Thus, to say that being a celibate Priest is immoral or somehow contrary to God's Plan for all humanity is akin to saying someone who is voluntarily celibate without being a Priest is also going against God's Plan.
Which is foolish; unless one is going to suggest a "good Christian" should NOT be celibate before marriage.
Celibacy is the reason why I didn't enter the priesthood. It's not like Latin Rite Catholics don't know that celibacy isn't a requirement for the priesthood. Those who can accept it should accept it.
There seem to be some who are not able to meet that requirement. If the Holy Scriptures make exception for those, as they appear to, why not the Catholic Church?
This is not an infallible teaching, but a disciplinary teaching, which is why Eastern Rite Catholics are, in fact, permitted to marry. Eastern Rite bishops, however, must be unmarried.
As a practical matter, is far more difficult for married priests to minister to their parishes than it is for single priests, as Paul intimates.
I don't presume to make the decisions for the CC, especially since I'm not Catholic, but that is the subject of the thread and of this inquiry. If they're truly looking for answers, I suggest taking a harder look at celibacy.
If most of the abuse victims were women or girls, you might have a point. But, in fact, 90% of the victims were teenage boys, indicating that most of the abusers were homosexuals, not frustrated heterosexuals.
I never meant to imply that celibacy is immoral. I'm simply addressing the question raised in the article.
The point is, the doctrine of celibacy has consequences. Whether it's right or wrong inherently is beside the point, in that context. It is a factor in this problem, IMO.
I think you have misread my intent.
Negative side - to choose to marry and have a family?
It is an impossible choice for some and oppression of their sexuality through abstinence can lead to psychological damage.
I am not speaking of homosexuality here at all but of normal heterosexual males - who are also completely devoted to serving their church.
Catholic bump.
Bingo! Paul was wise to caution about people who could not control their passion. I am afraid the passion of some Catholic priests finds some strange and unfortunate outlets. A health married relationship might be a better way.
You are joking, right? If the people who took the vow of celibacy voluntarily actually kept the promise, this wouldn't have been a scandal.
Additionally I disagree completely that repression of an active sexual life can "change" a heterosexual male into a homosexual male - that is incorrect and misleading.
What repressed sexuality can do is cause psychological problems for a heterosexual male, however the church has shown it to be a problem - but an insignificant one.
I cannot justify the request for "non-marriage" for priests however, but that is my belief only and I don't expect anyone here to agree.
I am really hopeful that this study will illuminate the fact that there is a high incidence of sexual abuse in the schools. I do not believe that the church has a higher incidence than the society. We are a sick society with everything being tied to sex. I am grateful for any study that brings truth to the discussion. But it is too bad the dems are in power because the liberal mindset says we have to understand the violator rather than stop him/her. We shall see how this proceeds but I am glad they are trying it. That must be the influence of the new Pope.
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.