Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did John Paul II Solve the Pedophilia Crisis Before We Even Knew About It?
Analysis of USCCB National Review Board report ^ | 3/8/05 | Dangus

Posted on 03/08/2005 5:08:12 PM PST by dangus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 last
To: patrick317
If the Vatican doesn't want homosexual men in the priesthood then I will agree with their position

I just showed you the Vatican position, it is not vague except to those with an agenda to present it as such, and the delusions on this thread belong to neither myself nor dsc. Thanks for sharing.

101 posted on 03/10/2005 6:11:26 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel (Rule One! No Poofters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: dsc
but no man who suffers from same-sex attraction disorder can be trusted with an adolescent boy.

That is the bottom line. And some folks at the Vatican know it and want to prevent homosexuals from being ordained, while other folks at the Vatican know it and want to perpetaute their "boy's club."

Both sides know it full well in other words. Who wins determines the direction of the Church for the foreseeable future. The anticipated Vatican document on ordaining homosexuals will tell much about which faction has more power in the Curia.

102 posted on 03/10/2005 6:28:07 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel (Rule One! No Poofters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: dsc
First of all, for the sake of the room, and since I'm a newbie, I'll make this remark and then call it a day with you.

you said "pervofascist activists", well I'm not a gay activist by any means, in fact I have defended the right and the Church for many years to people like me who are so disordered.

And by the way, nope, I'm not attracted to 14 year olds, I know there are grown men and woman who are, I'm not one of them, sorry to disappoint!

Your vast knowledge on this topic, and strong assumption that perverts like myself must be attracted to such age ranges ends with a one possible conclusion. Perhaps you are among the disordered who has such inclinations and feel we must all be the same. Either way God Bless You, all good fun, in time, we'll all know the truth. I guess the fact that your concerned about our Church is a positive.

As far as the rest of the thread, that Vatican document from 1961 seems pretty clear that gay men should not be allowed in the priesthood, I agree, so why has it been allowed, is it that the word "should" is not concrete? If it is so clear than why must the Vatican make further comments? This is a legitimate question, is it not?

Anyway, speaking for myself, I'm sick of the topic, I imagine the Vatican is too!
103 posted on 03/10/2005 8:29:56 PM PST by patrick317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: patrick317

“I'm not a gay activist by any means”

Didn’t say you were.

”And by the way, nope, I'm not attracted to 14 year olds”

Yeah. Uh, huh. (Yawn.)

“Your vast knowledge on this topic”

Vast is a bit too much. “Considerable” would be a better choice of words.

“strong assumption”

Sorry, no assumptions there anywhere. Just observations and conclusions drawn from them.

“Perhaps you are among the disordered”

My, you are determined to bring every possible cliché into this, aren’t you. Yes, yes, we all know that everyone who fails to think SSAD is wonderful is just a “repressed homosexual.” (ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz)

“If it is so clear than why must the Vatican make further comments? This is a legitimate question, is it not?”

I suppose. Pope St. Pius X told us that there are enemies working within the Church. One of their programs has been to obfuscate this issue by ignoring or contradicting the teachings of the Church, with the result that many are now misinformed or confused. It is the Vatican’s duty to guide these people with strong, unequivocal teaching, and to defrock and excommunicate the wolves in sheep’s clothing.

”I imagine the Vatican is too!”

Not sick enough of it, IMO.


104 posted on 03/10/2005 9:19:37 PM PST by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: dsc
“Perhaps you are among the disordered”

My, you are determined to bring every possible cliché into this, aren’t you. Yes, yes, we all know that everyone who fails to think SSAD is wonderful is just a “repressed homosexual.” (ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz)

LOL! If it wasn't such a tired cliché, this might be a humorous exchange. Surely they can come up with something new?

Then again, we must be careful, he might actually catch on and stop showing his hand on his first few posts on every forum he visits...

Rule One! No Poofters!

105 posted on 03/11/2005 1:35:10 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel (Rule One! No Poofters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel

OK. A council in 300 AD noted it as a problem. In 1000 AD it was seen as a problem. In the 15th century it was a problem. In the 20th century it was a problem. Are you suggesting that something that has cropped up throughout recorded history just vanished for hundreds of years at a time. You have tremendous faith, and are, IMHO, quite naive.

I don't know about you, but I'm awake and smelling the coffee.

And please, no more with the tired "it's anti-Catholic to suggest those things". A religion with, what, a billion adherents playing the victim card. I'm not buying it.



106 posted on 03/30/2005 12:41:30 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: dmz
Are you suggesting that something that has cropped up throughout recorded history just vanished for hundreds of years at a time.

Yep. Fads and particularly fashionable sins come and go, increase and decrease in prevalence, but always against a background level of sinsulness that has been with us since the Garden. Or are you telling me you still wear your polyester leisure suits?

107 posted on 03/30/2005 12:51:39 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel ("Vigilate et orate ut non intretis in tentationem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel

So you do think that there has been a constant supply of gay clergy in the Catholic church, you're simply contesting the relative percentage? So it's a continuous, though not in your view, universal problem.

Reminds me a bit of the joke, a guy asking a woman to sleep with him for a million dollars, and she say's yes, so he asks, would you sleep with me for a dollar, and she says, what kind of girl do you think I am. His response, we've already determined that, now we're just haggling over price. You're just haggling over percentages, it seems.

I never had polyester leisure suits, I was an anti-Disco kid of guy through the 70's. LOL. I dress almost exactly the same now as I did then, jeans, tshirts and bare feet (when it's warm).


108 posted on 03/30/2005 1:05:16 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: dmz
So you do think that there has been a constant supply of gay clergy in the Catholic church,

No, I think they were usually screened out, though some may have slipped through throughout history. However, there were particular times and places in which the number of pederast priests was higher, due to iniquity of the leaders at the time and other lax morals.

you're simply contesting the relative percentage?

All men have sinned. All professions have had sinners. Sometimes general laxity in morals, and perversity in particular times and places, are far out of proprtion to the norm. This is one of those times in history, i.e., the number of active homosexuals in the priesthood has been way above the backgrounds levels of general society, for the last 45-50 years or so. It will return to its normal (i.e., homosexual priests are rare and if present celibate) as soon as the current crop of liberal, dissenting and corrupt leaders and priests go on to their eternal reward.

109 posted on 03/30/2005 1:14:17 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel ("Vigilate et orate ut non intretis in tentationem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel

You say no to a constant supply of gay clergy throughout history, but then suggest that "some may have slipped through throughout history". Sounds more like a yes to me.


110 posted on 03/30/2005 1:43:31 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel

"This is one of those times in history, i.e., the number of active homosexuals in the priesthood has been way above the backgrounds levels of general society, for the last 45-50 years or so. It will return to its normal (i.e., homosexual priests are rare and if present celibate) as soon as the current crop of liberal, dissenting and corrupt leaders and priests go on to their eternal reward."

What makes you so sure there is not a steady supply of corrupt leaders to take their place? Cardinal Mahony has actively promoted the ordaining of homosexual men in the Los Angeles diocese for many years now. The Modernists that Pope St. Pius X warned about went underground for a few decades then gradually resurfaced, especially before, during and after VatII. Seminaries don't really teach much Catholicism anymore (neither do parochial schools), so the formation of priests is a joke. The present pontiff has practically stacked the ranks of bishops and cardinals with just such men.

Are they all going to drop dead all of a sudden? I guess that's possible, but I would like to know if that's what you figure is going to happen. And if so, then who is going to fill the void?


111 posted on 03/30/2005 2:17:25 PM PST by donbosco74 ("Men and devils make war on me in this great city." (Paris) --St. Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
What makes you so sure there is not a steady supply of corrupt leaders to take their place?

The virtue of "Hope"?

112 posted on 03/30/2005 3:19:15 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel ("Vigilate et orate ut non intretis in tentationem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel

Well, you have a lot of spunk. The "unsinkable Molly Brown" had a similar outlook.

As for me, I hope you're right.


113 posted on 03/30/2005 3:25:08 PM PST by donbosco74 ("Men and devils make war on me in this great city." (Paris) --St. Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: dmz

Yes, but only insofar as "some may have slipped through throughout history" everywhere in every profession in every culture, pagan or Christian. The rates of pederasty in the priesthood are higher right now because they stopped actively screening out homosexuals 50 years ago. Before that, the rates were most likely lower than any secular profession, with the notable exception of specific times and places throughout history when morals and discipline were poor.


114 posted on 03/30/2005 3:25:36 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel ("Vigilate et orate ut non intretis in tentationem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: donbosco74
As for me, I hope you're right.

"Is there much hope for Frodo and Sam?"

"There never was much hope, just a fool's hope."

115 posted on 03/30/2005 3:32:00 PM PST by St. Johann Tetzel ("Vigilate et orate ut non intretis in tentationem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
And you are free to fantasize that an all-male celibate profession does not attract homosexuals.

Allowing priest to marry doesn't seem to help much. The Anglican Church is rife with homosexuals.

116 posted on 03/31/2005 9:51:41 AM PST by mandatum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Homosexuals have always been in the priesthood, and will always be in the priesthood, no matter what the Vatican says or does.

Speaking of wishful thinking!

117 posted on 03/31/2005 9:57:34 AM PST by mandatum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
he helping professions have always attracted homosexuals. Thus it has been, and thus it will always be.

Sink, you wouldn't be quite so annoying if just once you were to back up your sweeping pontifications with some actual facts. As yet I have yet to see any. Just endless bloviating that corresponds to the latest conventional wisdom.

118 posted on 03/31/2005 10:02:52 AM PST by mandatum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Whatever was done was done secretively. The statistical reversal is simply too sharp and drastic to ascribe merely to general societal trends. The dawining of the MTV era hardly represented a sudden re-establishment of societal morals about sexuality.


119 posted on 05/02/2005 10:36:54 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-119 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson