Half Of Priest And Bishops Are Gay

[Freedom]

Link please.

[bardegaulois]

4 minutes ago, PhuturePriest said:

Wouldn't it be more fair to say that perhaps in some dioceses half of priests are gay, but that it's a magnanimous statement which requires a lot of hard data to claim this is true of the Church as a whole? I have no doubt some dioceses have been dreadful. The Archdiocese of Miami is notorious for it. But I think we should be very reserved and careful when we make such big statements.

But you're presuming half as an upper limit in any diocese. I'm sure there are some in which it's an absolute majority, a supermajority even. Likewise there is some dioceses in which there are few or even no gay priests. It's impossible to know the true figures; some researcher could try a survey, but no one is ever completely truthful on surveys. Would half be a reasonable collective mean across all dioceses of the United States, or even of the entire Western world? Just based on what I've seen in my travels, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that were conclusively proven to be the case.

[Nihil Obstat]

33 minutes ago, PhuturePriest said:

Wouldn't it be more fair to say that perhaps in some dioceses half of priests are gay, but that it's a magnanimous statement which requires a lot of hard data to claim this is true of the Church as a whole?

You need to study harder in Composition.

[PhuturePriest]

1 hour ago, bardegaulois said:

But you're presuming half as an upper limit in any diocese. I'm sure there are some in which it's an absolute majority, a supermajority even. Likewise there is some dioceses in which there are few or even no gay priests. It's impossible to know the true figures; some researcher could try a survey, but no one is ever completely truthful on surveys. Would half be a reasonable collective mean across all dioceses of the United States, or even of the entire Western world? Just based on what I've seen in my travels, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that were conclusively proven to be the case.

That's a pretty big stretch, and I don't think it's reasonable to believe in such a thing unless presented with solid evidence. 

[Amppax]

50 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

You need to study harder in Composition.

Or

[PhuturePriest]

14 minutes ago, Amppax said:

Or

I don't think this meme is as magnanimous as you think it is.

[veritasluxmea]

An adult I respect on FB "believes in" this article (not sure how else to put it) and is talking about how seminaries are suffering from a homosexual activity problem and the whole nine yards. I just... ugh. Not something I want to see on my feed. 

[superblue]

proof, proof, proof, proof ! everybody wants proof. This study shows this, this one shows that, you can trust this study but not that study, agenda, agenda, agenda.  A bad priest or bishop , is just that, regardless of sexual orientation.  The rules are the problem and the double standards. We are being taught and teaching that you can be a homosexual, just don't act on those homosexual tendencies; and you can be a homosexual priest if you do not act on those tendencies  AND if you do not acknowledge that you are indeed a homosexual, not matter how obvious it may or may not be. THOUGH, do not mention heterosexual priests ever being able to be married, and do not quote history and the priests, bishops, and past Popes that have been.  When the rules become grey, and exceptions are constantly being made, and nothing is clear, trouble happens.  Either homosexuals are able to be in the priesthood, with out having to hide their sexual orientation, or they should not be allowed in at all, that to me should be the issue; not an issue of crimes by priests. A crime is a crime and you can put any sexual orientation, or race, it is still a crime one is talking about.

If the church leaders really wanted to emphasis welcoming homosexuals into the church, then do it, stop making those with SSA hide, and let them be an example of celibacy. An let those homosexual priests be the example to others facing SSA and wanting to be Catholic. Instead of letting the media dictate how they should feel about the Church and having congregations and clergy confused as on how to approach the situation because leaders at the top send mixed messages or completely ignore and hide from the situation that they in part helped create.

[PhuturePriest]

5 minutes ago, superblue said:

proof, proof, proof, proof ! everybody wants proof. This study shows this, this one shows that, you can trust this study but not that study, agenda, agenda, agenda.  A bad priest or bishop , is just that, regardless of sexual orientation.  The rules are the problem and the double standards. We are being taught and teaching that you can be a homosexual, just don't act on those homosexual tendencies; and you can be a homosexual priest if you do not act on those tendencies  AND if you do not acknowledge that you are indeed a homosexual, not matter how obvious it may or may not be. THOUGH, do not mention heterosexual priests ever being able to be married, and do not quote history and the priests, bishops, and past Popes that have been.  When the rules become grey, and exceptions are constantly being made, and nothing is clear, trouble happens.  Either homosexuals are able to be in the priesthood, with out having to hide their sexual orientation, or they should not be allowed in at all, that to me should be the issue; not an issue of crimes by priests. A crime is a crime and you can put any sexual orientation, or race, it is still a crime one is talking about.

If the church leaders really wanted to emphasis welcoming homosexuals into the church, then do it, stop making those with SSA hide, and let them be an example of celibacy. An let those homosexual priests be the example to others facing SSA and wanting to be Catholic. Instead of letting the media dictate how they should feel about the Church and having congregations and clergy confused as on how to approach the situation because leaders at the top send mixed messages or completely ignore and hide from the situation that they in part helped create.

Who said anything about making priests with SSA hide? No one here has said that. I have no issue with a priest being open about his SSA. So long as he remains faithful to his promise of celibacy, I think such a thing would be a great inspiration for others who struggle. I can't wait for the day we canonize the first saint who openly had same-sex attraction and used it to inspire others who struggle with it to strive for holiness. 

[CatherineM]

No idea who or what Voris is. 

[Papist]

15 hours ago, Papist said:

I am very curious to hear how a priest's sexual desire for adolescent boys goes away by simply being married to a woman? 

 

15 hours ago, Josh said:

Most and I stress the word MOST men who are married to woman (attracted to women) aren't attracted to any males whether they are boys or teenage boys. Or adults. I'm from the Midwest. That's the way it is here. Maybe it's different other places.

That is very interesting about most men. But, I am still curious to hear how a priest's sexual desire for adolescent boys goes away by simply being married to a woman? 

[bardegaulois]

To add a follow-up regarding married or homosexual priests, Sandro Magister talks a little bit about that today: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351206?eng=y

I certainly hope Pope Francis has learned from the lesson of the last synod and, for the sake of the unity of the Church, doesn't call another one on this topic.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Papist said:

 

That is very interesting about most men. But, I am still curious to hear how a priest's sexual desire for adolescent boys goes away by simply being married to a woman? 

You're confusing me? Why are you under the assumption that most or a majority of married men are attracted to males? You keep saying adolescent boys as if the victim being male has nothing to do with it. I like women. I'm attracted to women. Males are not attractive to me. Never. Not even one day a year. Most men who are married may deal with the temptation of cheating with another woman but usually not another guy. Unless they're gay. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this? Sincerely 100% straight men are never attracted to grown men,teenage men or boys. I'm not attacking gay people. I understand it's a very difficult cross. They have my prayers. Although I don't think gay men should be Priest. Even if they're celibate.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Guest

[KnightofChrist]

20 minutes ago, Josh said:

You're confusing me? Why are you under the assumption that most or a majority of married men are attracted to males? You keep saying adolescent boys as if the victim being male has nothing to do with it. I like women. I'm attracted to women. Males are not attractive to me. Never. Not even one day a year. Most men who are married may deal with the temptation of cheating with another woman but usually not another guy. Unless they're gay. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this? Sincerely 100% straight men are never attracted to grown men,teenage men or boys. I'm not attacking gay people. I understand it's a very difficult cross. They have my prayers. Although I don't think gay men should be Priest. Even if they're celibate.

What Papist is asking is how do you fix the problem of the homosexual desire for adolescent boys by some priests with allowing priests to marry?

Also, allowing priests to marry will not fix the problem. If allowing priests to marry would fix the problem, other christian sects where pastors are allowed to marry, wouldn't have the same problem of sexual abuse of minors.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/29/protestants-abuse-catholics-methodist-church

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/01/protestant-sex-abuse-boz-tchividijian_n_4019347.html

http://shoebat.com/2014/05/06/sexual-abuse-protestant-churches-catholic/

Edited January 12, 2016 by KnightofChrist

[bardegaulois]

18 minutes ago, Josh said:

You're confusing me? Why are you under the assumption that most or a majority of married men are attracted to males? You keep saying adolescent boys as if the victim being male has nothing to do with it. I like women. I'm attracted to women. Males are not attractive to me. Never. Not even one day a year. Most men who are married may deal with the temptation of cheating with another woman but usually not another guy. Unless they're gay. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this? Sincerely 100% straight men are never attracted to grown men,teenage men or boys. I'm not attacking gay people. I understand it's a very difficult cross. They have my prayers. Although I don't think gay men should be Priest. Even if they're celibate.

Why is it then that you said earlier: "I've wanted married Priest to be allowed for awhile now. I think it would help this problem [homosexual or pederastic clergy] greatly"? Because now you're saying in the above that it won't. It's hard for me to see what it is that you are actually asserting here.

[superblue]

14 hours ago, PhuturePriest said:

Who said anything about making priests with SSA hide? No one here has said that. I have no issue with a priest being open about his SSA. So long as he remains faithful to his promise of celibacy, I think such a thing would be a great inspiration for others who struggle. I can't wait for the day we canonize the first saint who openly had same-sex attraction and used it to inspire others who struggle with it to strive for holiness. 

i forgot where I was, and that everything said on here is taken as being exactly literal, yes you are right, no where is it written in bloody stone that homosexuals are forced to hide while in the seminary or priesthood.

you want a few homosexual saints ...Saints Sergius and Bacchus, and Saint Sebastian ( though Sebastian is more of an unofficial patron saint for homosexuals ) Though for some reason I have to imagine this is not what you meant and are meaning recent history or currently in the world.There was at one point blessings for homosexual couples, though that I only found out through a priest through a brief discussion and would have to go through extra lengths to prove he actually said so now it is just hearsay .  The bolded, is where the problem with the faith is. An is exactly emphasizing a larger issue. That homosexuality is an " it " that homosexuals are "struggling" with. An points back to the confusion that the Church constantly teaches and the double standards it emphasizes.   I may have confused the debate by adding the comment on heterosexual priests marrying, and that was not intended, but an emphasis that society tries to use that as the answer to ending crimes committed by homosexual priests / clergy. This debate and the guilt behind it will never end because justice will not be served, until all involved are tried in a court and put behind bars for some period of time and removed from all positions in the Church.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, bardegaulois said:

Why is it then that you said earlier: "I've wanted married Priest to be allowed for awhile now. I think it would help this problem [homosexual or pederastic clergy] greatly"? Because now you're saying in the above that it won't. It's hard for me to see what it is that you are actually asserting here.

I'm more confused now lol I think it WOULD help. More straight men as Priest. Less Gay men as Priest. If half the clergy are truly homosexual then we need to find more straight men to be Priest. Most (not all) married men don't like guys. So that's why I think married Priest is a good idea. Knight has some studies above that supposedly say otherwise. I haven't had time to check them out yet.

[bardegaulois]

What's wrong with just insisting Catholic priests be chaste and celibate, rather than having a sexual orientation? That's the way it stands now; why convolute it further? Celibacy, moreover, confers amazing blessings with it. Allowing priests to marry would just make them more worldly, and I dare say they're worldly enough to begin with nowadays.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, bardegaulois said:

What's wrong with just insisting Catholic priests be chaste and celibate, rather than having a sexual orientation? That's the way it stands now; why convolute it further? Celibacy, moreover, confers amazing blessings with it. Allowing priests to marry would just make them more worldly, and I dare say they're worldly enough to begin with nowadays.

Well what's wrong is the major scandal and cover up that happened and the assertion by Voris that HALF of the Priest are gay. Maybe Voris is wrong and that's not the case. I don't know. The reason I support married Priest is because it's a clear strategy at getting straight men into the Priesthood. I don't think ANY homosexuals should be Priest. If I'm incorrect in thinking this I'm humble enough to be corrected. Again I'm not trying to come off as anti gay. My prayers are with my homosexual brothers and sisters. Although this whole situation is really embarrassing not to mention all the pain it has caused the victims.

[PhuturePriest]

16 minutes ago, Josh said:

I'm more confused now lol I think it WOULD help. More straight men as Priest. Less Gay men as Priest. If half the clergy are truly homosexual then we need to find more straight men to be Priest. Most (not all) married men don't like guys. So that's why I think married Priest is a good idea. Knight has some studies above that supposedly say otherwise. I haven't had time to check them out yet.

But allowing priests to marry does not fix the problem of pedophile priests. All allowing priests to marry would do is allow the heterosexual ones to marry. The pedophiles would remain celibate, or even if they didn't, they would still abuse children. So unless you are proposing mandatory marriage on priests, allowing priests to marry does not help the issue whatsoever.

In all honesty, I think you are simplifying a very complex issue. Pedophiles can be both straight and gay. Pedophilia is a sexual disorder.

Edited January 12, 2016 by PhuturePriest