Replies

Fornication is contrary to the law of God, regardless of whether it is heterosexual or homosexual. That having been said, sexual intercourse between a man and a woman within marriage and open to the conception of such children as God sees fit to send is quite in accordance with God's law and with the natural law. Homosexual intercourse is no more natural than intercourse between humans and sheep. It is an intrinsically disordered act.

It is intrinsically disordered (and quite prohibited by both Scripture and Tradition) for a man to have intercourse with another man or a woman with another woman whether or not one or both of the participants have become convinced that it may not be so disordered. Objective reality is objective reality. A is A. Likewise as to the sexual abuse of children (which would in most jurisdictions include those up to 17 years of age).

On many of these threads, you have eloquently argued for suppression of the abuse and the enabling of abusers. 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.

Apropos of another of your posts, the closer the bishops hew to the Bevilaqua position stated here, the less likely they are to be flat, black and glowing in the dark from a universe of attack from those ranging from Catholic to secular to outright enemies of the Church. Cardinal George is a good man but his desire to keep on board those with previous strikes will not stand. If he is not prepared to do what is necessary and purge the lavenders, all of them, from the priesthood, then it is also time for him to go.

I think Cardinal George was anticipating that which I tried to address in my post #30 something previously.There is a good chance that there would be a vindictiveness on the part of many bishops in the Lavender Mafia who would take immediate and possibly wrong action against an orthodox priest who may have committed what we used to call a venial sin while continuing to hide,stonewall and in other ways blur the activities of his fellow L.M.'s.

I am sorry that so many of you overlooked what Cardinal George said about being a spiritual father and the need to marry the Bride of Christ which would,at least to me,mean that theologically it is not possible to ordain those who prefer or are attracted to men,sinceyou would be taking a vow to act in Persona Christi,married to your Bride the Church. A man who was disordered in his sexuality would be starting out with a lie,thereby entering the Culture of Death.

He also said fidelity to Church teaching was imperative.This is significant both before entering the seminary and as an ordained priest.

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.