Posted on 07/27/2002 8:06:59 AM PDT by sinkspur
This formulation is quite widespread in defense of the proposition that gay priests per se are OK, but that "immaturity" is the problem.
What's wrong with this is that same-sex attraction and sodomy are specifically not a common "late adolescent behavior".
The Church (yes, that Church) teaches that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered and that homosexuals should not be priests.
Right or wrong, the RCC has the right to believe this, and to teach it.
Why so many gays have a longing to be priests of an organization that teaches this is, I confess, somewhat of a mystery to me.
Again, the Church teaches that gay men and women are disordered. Right or wrong, they should not have disordered men as priests.
If it is true that the Church could not function without gay priests, perhaps the formulation that they are disordered is incorrect.
Or, alternatively, it is not true that the Church could not eliminate gay priests and continue to thrive.
These two possibilities may be mutually exclusive.
Exactly, and Bishop Galante said the same thing above.
Gay or straight, if a priest can't abide celibacy he should leave the priesthood.
If a priest CAN be celibate, then who would know or care what his orientation is?
""The abuse is not coming from out priests," he said. "It's coming from tightly closeted priests who won't be targeted."
This is simply the classic liberal double talk. Give us our way and things will be better.
Let all the priests "come-OUT", you know let everyone know they are "flaming gays" and everything will be OK, then. The priests will parade around in leathers and look like the Village People and then you can trust you children with them.
They want the children because without them there won't be another generation of GAY PRIESTS!!!
Because it has nothing to do with the actual act, it has to do with the condition of one's heart. It is such a perverted thing for someone who supposedly believes in Christ to be leading people and instructing them on Christ's teaching to pervert the scriptural passages for their own justifications...DEBASED SELFISHNESS
BTW, No different for adulturer's or child molester's.
See my post #6.
It is about the next generation and that is what the RCC or any religon is all about continuing the religon. Without being able to influence the children then you don't have much of a movement.
The Gay movement in the Catholic Church is able to get to many more kids than the annual Gay Parade in San Francisco.
To some extent the gay men who are lead to the priesthood don't really understand their "calling" till much latter in their career.
If a priest is not teaching Catholic Doctrine, then he should be disciplined, or suspended.
Did you read the article? Have you been reading ANY article in the last six months? There are likely thousands of gay priests in the United States, like the one above. No one knows their sexual orientation, outside of a few. The idea of some massive witchhunt to root out gay priests who are observing the law of celibacy is absurd and is NOT going to happen.
I disagree.
I think it is possible to repent of adultery, to seek amendment of life, and in essence, to "go and sin no more".
It is most unusual (I don't think it occurs at all) for Christians who have committed this sin to preach that it is a good thing, or that the Church should bless adulterous relationships, or that it should place unrepentant and public adulterers in positions of authority and respect.
The gay priest problem is exactly this-advocates of gay priests (and of divorce) do not seek repentance and change-they want the Church to proclaim from the rooftops that bad is good.
Oh, I agree. The point I was making is sin is sin. Aldultury is no less a sin than homosexuality. A lust in the heart is a lust in the heart.
Then how can the priest in the article say this "Any priest who is gay feels at risk. We're not used to living under suspicion. We're used to being trusted." - it must be a topic of conversation among the homosexual priests or the speaker has taken it upon himself to speak for all homosexual priests.
No one knows you are homosexual or heterosexual unless you bring it up.
Adultery is no less of a sin than sodomy with a member of the same sex.
But an adulterer does not claim that he is free of sin because adultery is his "orientation" (at least, not usually). All men, and all women, are adulterers in this sense.
Doing it, OTOH, is a major sin.
The modern invention of "orientation" towards same-sex acts tries to eliminate the distinction between a tendency towards sin (which we all share) and acting out one particular sin, in this case, sodomy.
This makes no sense at all. The only "out" priests we know of are the ones who did the abusing. And we didn't know they were homosexual until they were "outed" by the victims. What other "out" priests is he talking about?
God, forbid a comment is made that pisses you off!:-) Look, whether or not Catholics know thier priest are gay and celebate is not the problem...There are too many priest already trying to pervert the word to fit their own ideas. Do you really think celibate GAY priest promote biblical teachings?
That's my point...
Well, that's the question, all right.
Can a priest inclined toward sin serve faithfully? Can there be a priest who is not so inclined?
The Bible teaches that to lie with a man as with a woman is an abomination.
If you think about it, but don't do it, and you are heartily sorry before God, I think you can be a fine priest.
If you think God is wrong about this, and you aren't-that probably limits your priestly usefulness.
Exactly my point. That's where the perversion lies for anyone claiming to think the word promotes "orientation" and it absolves you of the sin of Homosexuality.
Where is the repentance in that? Where is the "changing of one's mind?"
The "act" is not a requirement for the sin.
What are you referring too? Are you saying you can be gay and be sorry to God for being Gay, and make a fine priest?
Really?
Perhaps due to the current % actively in Holy Orders--but should Bishops actually implement the 1961 document, that will change.
As to currently-serving homosexuals: if they "act out," TOSS 'EM!
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.