Jesuit Official Rips Expected Ban on Gays

AP Religion ^ | 9/30/2005 | RACHEL ZOLL

[NormB]

Estimates of the numbers of gays in the priesthood vary from 25 percent to 50 percent. About one-third of the 42,500 U.S. priests are members of religious orders.

[Clemenza]

Having gone to Jebbie schools, I can't say I'm surprised. Many "friends of Dorothy" in the Ignatian order.

[Clemenza]

I've known a lot of effeminate priests in my short life. Not that there's anything wrong with it. ;-)

[markedman]

"Your crack probably suggests that you are not Catholic in which case whether the Roman Catholic Church tolerates faggots in OUR priesthood is simply NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS."

You must be in bliss given all of the ignorance in what I read from your fellow Wahabbist Catholics.

But to enlighten you - although I understand that you might find that a little scary - I was born and raised in the Catholic Church and all its traditions.

My education from grammar to graduate school has been at Catholic institutions. I was an altar boy from the age of 8 until 14. My younger sister really is a 'Sister' of the SSND variety. My older brother was in the seminary. Our "family guru", a Jesuit PhD from India, has married all of my cousins and siblings - to other people - and baptized all of our children (with the exception of my Sister Sister, who doesn't have any)

For better or worse, Catholic I am and ignorant you are.

[markedman]

BlakElk: "The rules of the Roman Catholic Church on earth are largely made by the popes as Christ's Vicars on earth, whether enemies of the Roman Catholic Church like it or not. We are NOT subject to rules construed nto "existence" by every or any "reformed" Tom, Dick and Harriet with a Bible and a few reading lessons."

---

BlackElk it is eminently clear that you have NO IDEA what you are talking about and OBVIOUSLY KNOW VERY LITTLE about the history of The Catholic Church.

[hosepipe]

[ For your information I am a conservative theologian. ]

Conservative; meaning what?..
Theologian; meaning what?..

Both terms are nebulous..

[markedman]

"Who we decide to ordain and what standards for ordination we decide to enforce for our clergy is our business, not yours."

WE? WE? Who are you kidding? YOU HAVE _NO_, I repeat _NO_ influence regarding the decisions as to who is ordained or not. In fact judging from your notes on the subject it is 'protectors' like you who helped facilitate the abuse that was going on because you chose to look the other way. To quote Bishop Galante, Bishop of Camden and close to JPII, "these priest defenders have betrayed the good priest, they have betrayed The Church and the have betrayed God."

[markedman]

Scary isn't it?

[markedman]

Scary isn't it?

[MamaB]

Amen!

[maryz]

the priest answering questions had to admit to 25-50%. So those are the church's own figures.

You're not serious, are you? "The priest answering questions" (whose qualifications in sociometrics or whatever they are call it are --? ) pinpoints it at "25-50%", which you conclude represent "the church's own figures."

Estimates on this have been all over the place (Most -- but not all -- do fall within 25-50%). My own guess would be that the percentage varies widely among various dioceses/orders, and people giving estimates discuss those they're acquainted with. If anyone had any reliable figures (which they don't), the estimates couldn't possibly vary as much as they do.

[markedman]

"If anyone had any reliable figures (which they don't), the estimates couldn't possibly vary as much as they do."

Amen.

[wideawake]

WE? WE? Who are you kidding? YOU HAVE _NO_, I repeat _NO_ influence regarding the decisions as to who is ordained or not.

Apparently you are under the impression that prospective seminarians do not need recommendations when applying.

In fact judging from your notes on the subject it is 'protectors' like you who helped facilitate the abuse that was going on because you chose to look the other way.

That's a pretty strong personal accusation and I know you have no facts to back it up.

To quote Bishop Galante, Bishop of Camden and close to JPII, "these priest defenders have betrayed the good priest, they have betrayed The Church and the have betrayed God."

Says the bishop who defended two priests from his previous diocese that were involved in the "St. Sebastian's Angels" gay porn website.

Face facts: sodomites in the priesthood need to be zeroed out, period.

[little jeremiah]

I checked my comments and read this comment to me, and your freepmail.

You posted a letter supporting homosexuals in the priesthood, without any comment by yourself, so anyone would assume that is your position. If you hold a different position, now's your chance to state it. If you don't support homosexuals in the priesthood, great! Join the club, so to speak. My position is clear, but I'm not sure about yours. If you are similarly opposed to homosexuals serving as priests, I publically apologize for wrongfully assuming that you did support them in the priesthood.

What is your position, then?

[NormB]

VERY scary.
These guys are predators. The church leadership covered up for them. sickening.
Worst of all I only got about 1 10th the way through the document, I am not sure if I want to read the whole thing.

[livius]

I'd like to hear Our Lord's opinion of [their use of His name]."

Me too. The secret is, of course, that they don't believe that He exists, so they are free to attribute to Him any feelings that appeal to them. Won't they be surprised...

[livius]

which showed a prominent Jesuit was a practicing homosexual and president of a Jesuit college.

Initially, at the beginning of the homosexualization of the clergy and religious orders, the Franciscans had the highest percentage of AIDS deaths. Now that honor belongs to the Jesuits...

[little jeremiah]

I have carefully re-read the letter you posted, all your comments and freepmails to me. I do indeed apologize for assuming that the editorial was a reflection of your viewpoint. Since I am not familiar with your comments, and you made no personal comment, I assumed wrongly that you posted the editorial in agreement with your viewpoint.

If I had read the entire thread, and seen your comment about "Goodbye Good Men" I would not have assumed you supported homosexuals in the priesthood.

[But you made that comment after so that wouldn't have helped.]

Anyway, I am sincerely sorry for my mistaken assumption, but surely you can see why I thought that, since you didn't state your own position. I see plenty of odd viewpoints on some of these threads.

[twigs]

No, that's not true.

[SauronOfMordor]

I live in an area (Austin) where I can't tell who is and who isn't anymore. I just know around here the % is much higher.

Gays tend to congregate in urban areas. It makes it easier to find other gays

[Old Professer]

Celibacy is all about denial of the natural appetites, how can it serve celibacy to characterize its dimensions?