They didn't "infiltrate", like they were spies. These are men who went through training, and were ordained into positions by other men who supposedly were inspired by God to make those decisions.
And does the Catholic Church have a prohibition on Priests who confess to having homosexual urges? I didn't think so.
As to the celibacy issue, the statements made that prompted this article sure sound like giving a worldly reason for not abandoning celibacy. If you are selling celibacy as biblical, what difference does it make if having celibate priests meant you had to work harder to keep them from sexual impropriety?
Put another way, suppose hypothetically it was proven that celibate people were twice as likely to molest children. Would that mean the Church should stop ordaining celibate people? Not if the celibacy is commanded by God. So why bring it up?
We've read several time in the past month posts citing officials of the Catholic church arguing that the Catholic Priests aren't any more likely to abuse kids than Protestants, and this one had a quote from an official church source saying that priests aren't "any more likely" to be abusers than the general population. That certainly comes across as applying worldly standards as opposed to Godly ones, even if it is accompanied by contrition and statements to do better.
[quote]And does the Catholic Church have a prohibition on Priests who confess to having homosexual urges? I didn’t think so.[/quote]
Actually, the Church used to have a policy of throwing out men who even had the appearance of homosexuality. There was zero tolerance for limp wrists, lisps, effeminacy, etc.These policies were liberalized in the “sensitive sixties”.
And don’t forget that a lot of the men who were closet homosexuals didn’t have consciences-they entered the Church for a purpose, to have access to young men. Why would someone who has this motive in mind bother to confess his sins? He would conceal them in the confessional because he didn’t give a crap about the Faith.
By the way, this is not to denigrate the men who are priests who do struggle with these temptations and want to do the right thing. They should have never been ordained, but they are not in the same league as those who have no conscience and became priests for base motives(much the same way bad people want to be in politics, or teach public school girls to have access to them, or whatever).
Well, there's your problem right there.
You're wrong.
Sorry, but it's that simple.
Saboteurs would be a better analogy, though, than spies.
And does the Catholic Church have a prohibition on Priests who confess to having homosexual urges? I didn't think so.
Well, guess what?
You're wrong, again! In fact, that prohibition is not new and has been restated several times.
So why bring it [clerical celibacy] up?
Because people both inside and outside the Church are using the homosexuals' hideous misdeeds as a club with which to beat up the longstanding discipline of clerical celibacy. IOW, we didn't bring it up, our enemies did.
That certainly comes across as applying worldly standards as opposed to Godly ones, even if it is accompanied by contrition and statements to do better.
OK, that's how you see it. I see it as a reminder of that business about beams and splinters in folks' eyes. Remember that? It's in the Bible.
You are right, but as the general population isn't celibate, the priests are doing better than the gp. Not up to God's standards, I agree.
Actually, the Catholic Church officials were being kind. The actual statistics are that abuse of children by Protestant Clergy abuse children is more than three times more prevalent and inappropriate sexual contact with parishioners of all types is over ten times more prevalent. This would imply that those who feel free to engage in sexual activity should NEVER be allowed to become clergy.