FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest (/showthread.php?tid=42374)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Catholic Johnny - 02-26-2011

(02-26-2011, 12:15 AM)St. Drogo Wrote: Well now I feel bad. Nearly without exception, I think everyone here truly admires your zeal to denounce the insidious influence of incorrigible sodomites on mother church and her clergy. What many have criticized you for--some more uncharitably than others--is getting carried away with your righteous indignation. As a matter of clarification, however, there are no Christians in Hell. Their membership in the Church terminates at death.

Thanks for the clarification.  Don't feel bad - I brought this upon myself.


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Catholic Johnny - 02-26-2011

(02-26-2011, 01:17 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: I don't feel bad for defending what the Church teaches over someone's personal indignation.  We may not like it, but it is what it is.  The Church gets to determine who her members are, not us.

Acknowledged.  Concur.

Quote:I'm also tired of the twisting of words.  Really, I am very angry about it.  No one in this discussion justified sodomitical priests.  They shouldn't be ordained in the first place, and if they are ordained, they should be laicized.  I doubt anyone that has been involved in the discussion would not say that 
Someone thinking the teaching of the Church is absurd had better remove the plank from his own eye before condemning others..

Mea culpa.  I was wrong.Please forgive me. 

Quote:You need to stop twisting things and misrepresenting what people said, as well as the Catechism.  That's lying and calumny.   Those, too, are sins.  And also stop with the personal interpretation of Scripture.  You should have given that up when you swam the Tiber.


I respectfully disagree that I applied a personal interpretation to any scripture.  If I did, I will receive correction from a competence source.

Quote:What I feel bad about is anyone reading this thread who comes away with the thought that they can't be Catholic if they suffer from homosexual tendencies.  That's not true.  The Church calls sinners to join her and repent, to struggle against their sinful natures, and to bear their Crosses.
 
Oh, there are ten thousand Catholics ready to assure them of the opposite, don't worry about that.  And I never once condemned mere tendencies.  I condemned the status of a sodomitical/homosexual person as an unbiblical, nontraditional category of personhood.  I condemned the exploitation of this doctrinal ambiguity by Modernists. 

Beloved brothers in Christ, our Lord's peace be with you.
cj


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Vetus Ordo - 02-26-2011

Let's go easy on Catholic Johnny.

He seems well-intended and his goal is good, after all.


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Melkite - 02-26-2011

(02-26-2011, 01:20 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 11:07 PM)James02 Wrote: I believe if you don't make a worthy communion once per year, you are officially an apostate.  In which case you are no longer Catholic.  Others more knowledgeable can fill in the details.

I highly doubt that is true because one apostatizes by not believing what the Church teaches, not by missing Mass.  To miss the Easter Obligation is a mortal sin, not an excommunicable act.

This is something I have wondered about.  I didn't receive communion last easter season and probably won't again this year, because I have things I would need to confess that I'm not ready to yet.  It's only because of my belief in Christ in the eucharist that I don't receive, I wouldn't dare desecrate the eucharist by receiving it unworthily.  So, in the Church's eyes, am I no longer Catholic, or in mortal sin because I refused to commit a mortal sin?  How does the Church define my status?


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - voxxpopulisuxx - 02-26-2011

The problem here is many have violated a simple rule of thumb Catholic Johnny included....................... K-I-S-S
Keep it simple stupid
Johnny was trying to say I believe (and I fully concur with) that there is no such thing as a "homosexual person" and even the term homosexual is a misnomer and neologism. And therefore a homosexual person can no more be a Christian then could  a unicorn.
The second point which showed its apparent truth in the way this thread played out.....that by inserting the term homosexual persons into the teaching documents on the subject a modernist time bomb was put in place. While many here at FE are well informed and strong enough catholics to be able to cull a orthodox meaning to the term homosexual persons be it on the basis of simple practicality so as to use modern words, or an appeal to common sense,etc...you have forgotten that FE posters are the exception. The Vast majority of people who are the face of modern catholicism will read the term homosexual persons and homosexual in the way the worldlings read it, as a special class of person who can not be justly discriminated against. And men who glom on to this term in its worldy meaning will gladly present themselves as worthy of the priesthood as any other TYPE of person. No need to deny who you are, or even who you were, you are simply a homosexual person. Just like the funny guys on that TV show you and your friends love so much, or that great pop singer whos songs you have enjoyed your whole life.
Catholic Johnny over reached ...so what...his motives were Catholic
Many of you over reacted to him or his argumentation....so what...your motives were Catholic
BUT THE SWINE who invented and inserted the term homosexual persons into the teaching lexicon of Holy Mother Church...well their motives were TO SOW DISCORD AND CONFUSION which this thread clearly shows...worked.
KISS conclusion?
The term Homosexul persons (and all its loaded implications)
and the term homosexual
need to be expunged from the lexicon of the Church
IMO


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - voxxpopulisuxx - 02-26-2011

(02-26-2011, 11:32 AM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-26-2011, 01:20 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(02-25-2011, 11:07 PM)James02 Wrote: I believe if you don't make a worthy communion once per year, you are officially an apostate.  In which case you are no longer Catholic.  Others more knowledgeable can fill in the details.

I highly doubt that is true because one apostatizes by not believing what the Church teaches, not by missing Mass.  To miss the Easter Obligation is a mortal sin, not an excommunicable act.

This is something I have wondered about.  I didn't receive communion last easter season and probably won't again this year, because I have things I would need to confess that I'm not ready to yet.  It's only because of my belief in Christ in the eucharist that I don't receive, I wouldn't dare desecrate the eucharist by receiving it unworthily.  So, in the Church's eyes, am I no longer Catholic, or in mortal sin because I refused to commit a mortal sin?  How does the Church define my status?
Different thread


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Catholic Johnny - 02-26-2011

(02-26-2011, 11:40 AM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: The problem here is many have violated a simple rule of thumb Catholic Johnny included....................... K-I-S-S
Keep it simple stupid
Johnny was trying to say I believe (and I fully concur with) that there is no such thing as a "homosexual person" and even the term homosexual is a misnomer and neologism. And therefore a homosexual person can no more be a Christian then could  a unicorn.
The second point which showed its apparent truth in the way this thread played out.....that by inserting the term homosexual persons into the teaching documents on the subject a modernist time bomb was put in place. While many here at FE are well informed and strong enough catholics to be able to cull a orthodox meaning to the term homosexual persons be it on the basis of simple practicality so as to use modern words, or an appeal to common sense,etc...you have forgotten that FE posters are the exception. The Vast majority of people who are the face of modern catholicism will read the term homosexual persons and homosexual in the way the worldlings read it, as a special class of person who can not be justly discriminated against. And men who glom on to this term in its worldy meaning will gladly present themselves as worthy of the priesthood as any other TYPE of person. No need to deny who you are, or even who you were, you are simply a homosexual person. Just like the funny guys on that TV show you and your friends love so much, or that great pop singer whos songs you have enjoyed your whole life.
Catholic Johnny over reached ...so what...his motives were Catholic
Many of you over reacted to him or his argumentation....so what...your motives were Catholic
BUT THE SWINE who invented and inserted the term homosexual persons into the teaching lexicon of Holy Mother Church...well their motives were TO SOW DISCORD AND CONFUSION which this thread clearly shows...worked.
KISS conclusion?
The term Homosexul persons (and all its loaded implications)
and the term homosexual
need to be expunged from the lexicon of the Church
IMO

Hear!  Hear!  Blessings upon you dear brother, who heard my heart and not just the letter of my words!


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Catholic Johnny - 02-27-2011

Hey Vox,
I wasn't looking for this, but my wife was reading to me out of a guidebook to Canon Law and lo and behold look what popped up:

Quote:Can.  1041 The following are irregular for receiving orders:

1/ a person who labors under some form of amentia or other psychic illness due to which, after experts have been consulted, he is judged unqualified to fulfill the ministry properly;

Keep in mind, this is the 1983 Canon Law, which revisies the 1917 Law but does not abrogate the previous Canon Law unless specifically enumerated.

Now, this also is material to our discussion:

Quote:Prior to the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders). Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from DSM-II.  The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section "302. Sexual Deviations." It was the first deviation listed. http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php

Seems that there was a change in the social sciences (albeit politically and not scientifically motivated) that has nothing to do with the tradition of the Church.  Talk about Vatican II time bombs.  Look at this:

Quote:Dr. Charles Socarides has set the record straight on how homosexuals inside and outside of the APA forced this organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. This was done without any valid scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is not a disordered behavior.

Dr. Socarides, writing in Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality writes: "To declare a condition a 'non-condition,' a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psychosexual disorders. The action was all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved an out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but also a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years…"

Socarides continued: "For the next 18 years, the APA decision served as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status.

"To some American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for, they can be lost-a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences." Dr. Socarides' report is available from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: www.narth.com.

So, let's get this straight (no pun intended).  Canon Law stipulates that someone with a psychic illness cannot receive orders.  Until 1973 the DSM unequivocally called homosexual orientation a deviation and an abnormal behavior in its catalog of mental disorders.  The 1975 SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH PERSONA HUMANA DECLARATION ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS
CONCERNING SEXUAL ETHICS calls them "homosexuals" and the 1986 CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS calls them homosexual persons.  This second document states, "Christians who are homosexual are called, as all of us are, to a chaste life."  Which is of course is the source of the 1992 CCC's 2357-2359 explanation.

So!  What does this mean? It appears to mean that the Catholic doctrinal position was modified to reflect the modifications in the DSM.  Now, this is problematic on many levels, but I shall confine myself to its implications for Canon 1041.  Sodomitical priests ordained prior to 1973 had/have a mental disorder disqualifying them for orders.  But sodomitical priests ordained after 1973 are homosexual persons who have no such malady.  In fact, the CCC and the CDF documents above state that they are Christians called to chastity (again, we were not able to define what that meant specifically for homosexual persons).  This of course sets the table for "chaste homosexual men" to lawfully submit themselves for orders.  We all know the deal - this is a Trojan Horse to smuggle sodomites into the sacred brotherhood of Catholic clergy - at least that is the end result.

Now *ahem* I believe that somebody's got some 'splainin' to do around here.   :hmmm:

Thank GOD ALMIGHTY for Pope Benedict's 2005 Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders promulgated through the CONGREGATION FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION.   It has no teeth, but at least it says a lot of the right things.

Now Vox, excuse me, I have to go and take my unicorn for a walk...   ;D


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - voxxpopulisuxx - 02-27-2011

The sin (sodomy) can cause the mental illness (same sex attraction), or the mental illness( cause by bad or evil upbringing or sexual assault)  can lead one to sin(sodomy)...its a bad thing to be.

I wonder if the Idea of marriage annulment whereby the church declares a marriage sacrament to have never occurred because an impediment can be alluded to in this instance??? The problem is if a man takes holy orders how could the laity know a valid priest from an invalid one unless he openly declares his deviance?


Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - Catholic Johnny - 02-27-2011

(02-27-2011, 12:54 AM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: The sin (sodomy) can cause the mental illness (same sex attraction), or the mental illness( cause by bad or evil upbringing or sexual assault)  can lead one to sin(sodomy)...its a bad thing to be.

I wonder if the Idea of marriage annulment whereby the church declares a marriage sacrament to have never occurred because an impediment can be alluded to in this instance??? The problem is if a man takes holy orders how could the laity know a valid priest from an invalid one unless he openly declares his deviance?

Not sure about annulments as we seem to be proceeding in an anything-goes era.  In 1968 there were less than 400 Catholic marriage annulments in the world.  Every year in the US alone there are 50,000.  Another hmmmm situation....  As far as how could the laity know, my personal belief on this is that the laity should be observing the faith and morals of the priest, particulary in his liturgical life, and draw conclusions from there.  If his doctrine is unsound (as is that of many priests regardless of so-called sexual orientation) then the faithful deserve a recourse to a pastor who's morals and teaching are sound and orthodox.  The elephant in the room that no one wants to deal with is that many of the Bishops are themselves sodomites or pro-sodomite and would never think about removing a priest for this cause (until he gets caught abusing a little boy, that is).  We see this plainly in the open resistance that Bishops are presenting to the Pope's Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.  Welcome to the People's Democratic Republic of Heaven, formerly known as the Kingdom of God.