Skip to comments.
Catholic Church said to be struggling to keep homosexuals out
Yahoo News ^
| April 23, 2002
Posted on 04/23/2002 11:50:04 AM PDT by history_matters
The head of the US episcopal conference Wilton Daniel Gregory said there was an ongoing struggle within the Catholic Church to ensure that the priesthood is not "dominated by homosexual men".
Gregory and Chicago Archbishop, Cardinal Francis George, told reporters that the issue of homosexual priests had been discussed in a solemn morning meeting between Pope John Paul II and US cardinals on the issue of paedophile priests.
"It is an ongoing struggle. It is most importantly a struggle to make sure that the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men," Gregory told a news conference after the first session of talks which are to last until Wednesday.
"Not only that it is not dominated by homosexual men, but that the candidates we receive are healthy in every possible way, psychologically, emotionally, spiritually, intellectually."
"That is the ongoing concern of seminaries."
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cardinalgeorge; catholic; catholiccaucus; catholicchurch; catholiclist; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; pope; usbishops; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-233 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator
To: right_to_defend
Why would you wonder about what I wear? Are you some kind of weirdo?
To: skeeter
It is the sin that repels God, not the sinner.
That's what I thought. So the Catholic church isn't struggling to keep homosexuals out, it's struggling just to keep practicinghomosexuals out, right?
To: Loyalist
How can you show someone pornographic pictures as a "test?" That seems immoral in and of itself!
Comment #25 Removed by Moderator
To: Belial
Leave my family out of your discussions.
To: Stone Mountain
If they don't indulge in homosexuality at all (i.e. stay celibate) is that still an abomination? Of course, it is clear that it is the act not the person which is 'detestable'. In fact, some modern translations make that clear by translating the word "towebah" as a "detestable act" in this instance
But that begs the question you are implying. A 'priest' in the RCC is an influential person (much as a teacher in the larger society would be). And, assuming arguendo that the act is detestably immoral, then one who is inclined toward such behavior (even if he is not then practicing it) would be disqualified from that leadership role until he renounced the practice -- not just for himself but for those under his leadership.
In such an instance, he is not disqualified by his sinful act (assuming again arguendo that he has refrained from the wrongful act) but by his inclination to such sinful acts in a leadership position.
This is more than academic. With so many broken homes and accordingly so many teenage boys coming to manhood without the inlfuence of a male, sexual confusion puts more teenage boys at the margin and increases the danger of wrongful influences in positions of leadership.
That is why our society must be vigilant about homosexuals (whether practicing or of inclination) in leadership roles near young boys coming to adulthood.
Comment #28 Removed by Moderator
To: right_to_defend
All I did was post the verse. You ASSumed I supported it. I'm not a Jew so I don't follow Levitican law. Find a Jew.
To: AppyPappy
You're pretty cavalier about the people you condemn. And you're pretty arbitrary about it too.
At least stand on your own and don't hypocritically hide behind 4,000 year old scriptures.
30
posted on
04/23/2002 12:40:53 PM PDT
by
Belial
To: Belial
Who did I condemn?
To: AppyPappy
I guess I assumed you meant something when you posted in #14.
32
posted on
04/23/2002 12:42:31 PM PDT
by
Belial
Comment #33 Removed by Moderator
To: right_to_defend
Stone Mountain stated "If they don't indulge in homosexuality at all (i.e. stay celibate) is that still an abomination?"
I then posted the verse showing that homosexuality is not an abomination, the act is the abomination.
Geez, it's like teaching Special Ed.
To: Belial
Don't assume. Ask. We beat up enough strawman around here as it is.
To: AppyPappy
Do you really mean we should ask each other what we mean?
36
posted on
04/23/2002 12:48:25 PM PDT
by
Belial
To: Belial
Of course the Pappy family considers their females unclean for a week after giving birth to a male, two weeks of filth after a female!Absolutely unacceptable trash from you, Belial. The father of lies may be pleased with your post, but it has no place on FreeRepublic.
To: ikanakattara
Immoral, yes; impractical as well. The RCMP ended up shelving the "Fruit Machine" because it turned to be practically useless.
Anybody know how psychiatrists test people for sexual preference these days?
38
posted on
04/23/2002 12:49:56 PM PDT
by
Loyalist
To: right_to_defend
Because 90% of the Church's pedophile "incidents" have to do with homosexual priests seducing boys. This indicates that homosexual priests are more of a problem than non-homosexual priests
To: history_matters
The father of lies may be pleased with your post, but it has no place on FreeRepublic.
Don't get your nighties in a knot. I didn't make it up, the author of Leviticus did.
40
posted on
04/23/2002 12:53:06 PM PDT
by
Belial
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-233 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson