[sinkspur]

To welcome into the priesthood those whose sexual orientation is intrinsically disordered while attacking abuse is analogous to campaigning for inclusive attitudes towards bank robbers while professing opposition to bank robbery.

I'm not arguing for "welcoming" homosexuals into the priesthood. What I am saying is that Bevilacqua's explanation of why homosexuals should not be admitted is weak, and flawed.

There are many homosexuals in the priesthood today. You can guess who they are as well as I can. But, most of them are also celibate, which means you will not be able to roust them out of the ministry under present canon law.

I chuckle at those who say we should use "psychological testing" to screen out homosexuals, when some of those same posters, on another thread, said it was modern psychology which has gotten us into the current mess.

[american colleen]

I chuckle at those who say we should use "psychological testing" to screen out homosexuals, when some of those same posters, on another thread, said it was modern psychology which has gotten us into the current mess.

Ironic, isn't it? However, I do think that the pyschology practiced by Fr. Groeschel is a bit different than say the psychology practiced by Hans Kung.