FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Irish Bishop "Embarrassed" to kiss the Pope's ring.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/...89675.html  I wonder if his Excellency would have felt better knowing that with the knowledge of the Irish episcopate's utter failure in reigning in the pederasts et al, the Holy Father wasn't exactly comfortable in having his ring kissed by these men either?
From my recollection of this meeting, Bishop Willie Walsh (A.K.A Wishy Washy) was the only Bishop not to kiss the Papal ring. This is the same Bishop who wants homosexuals in communion with the Church and Women Priests. Thankfully he's due to retire this summer.

Our Bishops have totally and utterly failed the Irish People. They are an embarrassment of the highest order throughout this whole scandal.

We are in the process of trying to get them to admit that the problems stem from them ordaining homosexuals throughout the 60s,70s,80s and 90s and even today
(03-06-2010, 07:52 PM)Fatherof2 Wrote: [ -> ]From my recollection of this meeting, Bishop Willie Walsh (A.K.A Wishy Washy) was the only Bishop not to kiss the Papal ring. This is the same Bishop who wants homosexuals in communion with the Church and Women Priests. Thankfully he's due to retire this summer.

Our Bishops have totally and utterly failed the Irish People. They are an embarrassment of the highest order throughout this whole scandal.

We are in the process of trying to get them to admit that the problems stem from them ordaining homosexuals throughout the 60s,70s,80s and 90s and even today

Well, what do you mean when you say "homosexuals"?  Are you referring to persons who publicly identify themselves as homosexuals, or simply everyone with a homosexual orientation?  In the latter case, there's no way to know if someone is a closeted homosexual unless they're willing to admit it.

People with homosexual orientation aren't by definition interested in children sexually anymore than straight persons are. Truth be known, a number of the greatest popes and saints in history may have been homosexual without anyone knowing, but they remained chaste and never had homosexual relations.  Many Catholics with a closeted homosexual orientation join the ministry realizing they'll never marry a woman or have a family and decide to devote their lives to a good purpose.  And there's nothing wrong with that.
(03-07-2010, 02:37 AM)59zvc Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-06-2010, 07:52 PM)Fatherof2 Wrote: [ -> ]From my recollection of this meeting, Bishop Willie Walsh (A.K.A Wishy Washy) was the only Bishop not to kiss the Papal ring. This is the same Bishop who wants homosexuals in communion with the Church and Women Priests. Thankfully he's due to retire this summer.

Our Bishops have totally and utterly failed the Irish People. They are an embarrassment of the highest order throughout this whole scandal.

We are in the process of trying to get them to admit that the problems stem from them ordaining homosexuals throughout the 60s,70s,80s and 90s and even today

Well, what do you mean when you say "homosexuals"?  Are you referring to persons who publicly identify themselves as homosexuals, or simply everyone with a homosexual orientation?  In the latter case, there's no way to know if someone is a closeted homosexual unless they're willing to admit it.

People with homosexual orientation aren't by definition interested in children sexually anymore than straight persons are. Truth be known, a number of the greatest popes and saints in history may have been homosexual without anyone knowing, but they remained chaste and never had homosexual relations.  Many Catholics with a closeted homosexual orientation join the ministry realizing they'll never marry a woman or have a family and decide to devote their lives to a good purpose.  And there's nothing wrong with that.

Our current Pope has reaffirmed the practice of not allowing homosexuals into the seminaries, at least those with "deep seated tendencies''. And those who may well persevere against temptation and remain chaste (even to the point of reaching great levels of holiness) can also fall into this category, and are inadmissible for seminary.

And it goes beyond the need to combat pedophilia committed by the clergy. Because the person with those tendencies has the necessary natural foundations for priesthood turned upside down. And since the priesthood is a supernatural vocation by which grace especially builds on nature, if nature is perverted in a deep seated sense, it cannot be elevated in this regard towards the priesthood. Normal attraction to the opposite sex is the norm for human nature, and for men, so is the ordering towards fatherhood; the call to celibacy builds on that ordering towards the ''other'' (except now it is supernaturally and directly ordered towards the ultimate good, God; not via an intermediary - the sacrifice of a legitimate good for a greater good), and the ordering towards fatherhood is supernaturally elevated by being a spiritual father to many, not a carnal father to a few. Whereas the natural notions of being ordered to another, and consequently the concept of fatherhood, is deeply skewed in the psychological make-up of one with deep seated homosexual tendencies; so nature cannot be built upon (not in the sense that person cannot become holy; but in the sense that the supernatural vocation of the priesthood simply is not for him, since the natural foundations are wanting). 
(03-07-2010, 03:18 AM)Lagrange Wrote: [ -> ]Our current Pope has reaffirmed the practice of not allowing homosexuals into the seminaries, at least those with "deep seated tendencies''. And those who may well persevere against temptation and remain chaste (even to the point of reaching great levels of holiness) can also fall into this category, and are inadmissible for seminary.

And it goes beyond the need to combat pedophilia committed by the clergy. Because the person with those tendencies has the necessary natural foundations for priesthood turned upside down. And since the priesthood is a supernatural vocation by which grace especially builds on nature, if nature is perverted in a deep seated sense, it cannot be elevated in this regard towards the priesthood. Normal attraction to the opposite sex is the norm for human nature, and for men, so is the ordering towards fatherhood; the call to celibacy builds on that ordering towards the ''other'' (except now it is supernaturally and directly ordered towards the ultimate good, God; not via an intermediary - the sacrifice of a legitimate good for a greater good), and the ordering towards fatherhood is supernaturally elevated by being a spiritual father to many, not a carnal father to a few. Whereas the natural notions of being ordered to another, and consequently the concept of fatherhood, is deeply skewed in the psychological make-up of one with deep seated homosexual tendencies; so nature cannot be built upon (not in the sense that person cannot become holy; but in the sense that the supernatural vocation of the priesthood simply is not for him, since the natural foundations are wanting).   

The term "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" is a vague reference to individuals who have a deep-seated tendency to 'act' in a homosexual manner, not necessarily sexual intercourse, but perhaps actively in other ways as well (dating, flirting, exhibiting homosexual qualities such as speaking or acting in an effeminate or flamboyant manner, etc), which is why it's ambiguously stated.  But it is a reference to active homosexuality, or rather those who have such a deep-seated tendency towards some aspect of an identifiable homosexual lifestyle that it wouldn't be appropriate to consider them for ministry.     

I believe this is the language used:

"“cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called 'gay culture'."

There's a list of three here, and all three are referring to active homosexual attributes.

The policy does not forbid a chaste, closeted homosexual from entering the seminary, although some of them may be if they present with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies".  There is incorrect information on the web about this, and it's caused confusion for bishops.  One person advertising herself as a licensed canonist on the web states the policy excludes anyone with a homosexual orientation. It is again due to misinterpretation of the phrase "deep-seated homosexual tendencies."
It always comes down to justifying ordaining homo priests on these threads..........what gives?

But just to be clear, all this gay priest apologia is the very thing driving young,strong,straight men away from Catholicism.

Congratulations.
59zvc Wrote:The policy does not forbid a chaste, closeted homosexual from entering the seminary, although some of them may be if they present with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies". 

Whether one is practicing or not, all homosexuals have "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" in the same manner as all heterosexuals have "deep-seated heterosexual tendencies". What exactly are you using here as your "distinction" between a man's identity as a homosexual and his resulting inclinations?
(03-07-2010, 07:24 AM)alaric Wrote: [ -> ]It always comes down to justifying ordaining homo priests on these threads..........what gives?

But just to be clear, all this gay priest apologia is the very thing driving young,strong,straight men away from Catholicism.

Congratulations.

BS.
(03-07-2010, 08:02 AM)Joshua Wrote: [ -> ]
59zvc Wrote:The policy does not forbid a chaste, closeted homosexual from entering the seminary, although some of them may be if they present with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies". 

Whether one is practicing or not, all homosexuals have "deep-seated homosexual tendencies"

No, they don't.

Joshua Wrote:in the same manner as all heterosexuals have "deep-seated heterosexual tendencies".

A false comparison because heterosexuals implicitly embrace their orientation, and not all homosexuals do. You're basically twisting this in a subtle fashion to make it conform to what you'd like it to mean. 

Homosexuals are the cause of over 90% of the sex abuse scandal in the Church. The homos are the biggest problem in the Church today.

Pages: 1 2