• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Gay priests

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
jallman said:
What particularly bugs you about it?
Do they have the same requirement for straight priests? If so, then I am fine with it. If they have special rules against gay priests, it bothers me.

I wonder how many of the priests that sexually molested boys were really homosexuals. It's only been in the last 10 years that they have allowed "alter girls." The occurrences may have been based on sexual desires that needed to be acted upon.

I think the whole thing about priests not being able to get married is archaic.
 

tecoyah

Illusionary
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,428
Reaction score
3,836
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
aps said:
I think the whole thing about priests not being able to get married is archaic.

And thus....fits nicely into the direction this new Pope intends to take the Church. Honestly....there is little hope for the Catholic church in my mind, as it continues to go backwards in society.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
aps said:
Do they have the same requirement for straight priests? If so, then I am fine with it. If they have special rules against gay priests, it bothers me.

I wonder how many of the priests that sexually molested boys were really homosexuals. It's only been in the last 10 years that they have allowed "alter girls." The occurrences may have been based on sexual desires that needed to be acted upon.

I think the whole thing about priests not being able to get married is archaic.
Well its very true that the practice is not only archaic, but it is also not biblical at all. However, the Roman Catholic Church is not, nor will it ever be, a faith that has its foundations in the secular philosophy. Their stance against homosexuality is widely known and should be a consideration of the aspiring priest, not a concern of the Church. If one does not like his or her religion and wishes to serve God, then it is his/her responsibility to find an outlet for that desire that is congruent with personal faith. The Church has stood for near two millenia and to think that it will move to change its ways simply because of a shift in the secular paradigm is folly. The Church is a bastion dogma, a fortress of tradition, and a protector of its own doctrine. It was never founded on an idea of equality and it will never make a change to that effect. If one does not agree with the Church, there are many Protestant faiths to choose from.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
jallman said:
Well its very true that the practice is not only archaic, but it is also not biblical at all. However, the Roman Catholic Church is not, nor will it ever be, a faith that has its foundations in the secular philosophy. Their stance against homosexuality is widely known and should be a consideration of the aspiring priest, not a concern of the Church. If one does not like his or her religion and wishes to serve God, then it is his/her responsibility to find an outlet for that desire that is congruent with personal faith. The Church has stood for near two millenia and to think that it will move to change its ways simply because of a shift in the secular paradigm is folly. The Church is a bastion dogma, a fortress of tradition, and a protector of its own doctrine. It was never founded on an idea of equality and it will never make a change to that effect. If one does not agree with the Church, there are many Protestant faiths to choose from.
I had not thought of it this way. I was raised a Catholic and was pretty faithful until college, left it then, but came back to it while in grad school. I left it in 1996 and have never looked back. I just don't like how judgmental Catholicism is. I dont' like how throughout mass, you keep having to repeat that you are a sinner. How does that make me feel good about myself?
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
aps said:
I had not thought of it this way. I was raised a Catholic and was pretty faithful until college, left it then, but came back to it while in grad school. I left it in 1996 and have never looked back. I just don't like how judgmental Catholicism is. I dont' like how throughout mass, you keep having to repeat that you are a sinner. How does that make me feel good about myself?
I too am a Catholic and had at one time entertained thoughts of the priesthood...not to be priest of a parish, but I had my eye on the Congregation of Doctrinal Study. However, being that I am gay and knowing the stance of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, I chose a secular education after my military service ended abruptly. It is not my right to tell a private and ancient institution that they must change simply because I will it. It isnt even the right of society at large to tell a private institution to change.

Catholicism, and Christianity as a whole, is built on the premise of a final Judgement. "Secular christianity" has sanitized this idea over time, but Catholicism has not. In the end, every man will be held accountable for each and every sin he has not sought forgiveness for through Christ our Lord. To seek forgiveness with the fullness of a repentant heart is to wash away that sin and thus, make it as it never happened. That is the mystery behind Catholic doctrine...and that partaking in the eternal bread and wine of Christ's body and blood. It only stands to reason that the caring priest and the loving mother church would instill in the congregation the gravity of knowing one's sins and bringing them to God through confession and to seek absolution through the communion rite. Sin is original to man, passed down from the first knowledge that we were naked in the Garden and we were brought to that knowledge through the deception of the Serpent and Eve and the weakness of the flesh of Adam. No one can escape the sin that is woven into our very being and so, through meditation upon this sin, the congregation is more likely to seek out forgiveness in earnest.

The mass is not meant to make you feel good about yourself. It is meant to celebrate the sacrifice of Christ and to remind the body of Christ what brought the need for that sacrifice. It culminates in the partaking of the fruits of His holy gift and hopefully in the resolution to make similar sacrifice in our daily lives. The mass has nothing to do with feeling good...it has to do with honoring a gift that we truly do not deserve.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
jallman said:
I too am a Catholic and had at one time entertained thoughts of the priesthood...not to be priest of a parish, but I had my eye on the Congregation of Doctrinal Study. However, being that I am gay and knowing the stance of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, I chose a secular education after my military service ended abruptly. It is not my right to tell a private and ancient institution that they must change simply because I will it. It isnt even the right of society at large to tell a private institution to change.

Catholicism, and Christianity as a whole, is built on the premise of a final Judgement. "Secular christianity" has sanitized this idea over time, but Catholicism has not. In the end, every man will be held accountable for each and every sin he has not sought forgiveness for through Christ our Lord. To seek forgiveness with the fullness of a repentant heart is to wash away that sin and thus, make it as it never happened. That is the mystery behind Catholic doctrine...and that partaking in the eternal bread and wine of Christ's body and blood. It only stands to reason that the caring priest and the loving mother church would instill in the congregation the gravity of knowing one's sins and bringing them to God through confession and to seek absolution through the communion rite. Sin is original to man, passed down from the first knowledge that we were naked in the Garden and we were brought to that knowledge through the deception of the Serpent and Eve and the weakness of the flesh of Adam. No one can escape the sin that is woven into our very being and so, through meditation upon this sin, the congregation is more likely to seek out forgiveness in earnest.

The mass is not meant to make you feel good about yourself. It is meant to celebrate the sacrifice of Christ and to remind the body of Christ what brought the need for that sacrifice. It culminates in the partaking of the fruits of His holy gift and hopefully in the resolution to make similar sacrifice in our daily lives. The mass has nothing to do with feeling good...it has to do with honoring a gift that we truly do not deserve.
Well, jallman, I see Catholicism as very pessimistic. I am actually an atheist. I believe that when we die, that is the end of us. And I'm okay with that.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
aps said:
Well, jallman, I see Catholicism as very pessimistic. I am actually an atheist. I believe that when we die, that is the end of us. And I'm okay with that.
I, by no means, am in full agreement with the doctrine, I was only explaining the reasoning.
 

mudd

New member
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
jallman said:
Well its very true that the practice is not only archaic, but it is also not biblical at all. However, the Roman Catholic Church is not, nor will it ever be, a faith that has its foundations in the secular philosophy. Their stance against homosexuality is widely known and should be a consideration of the aspiring priest, not a concern of the Church. If one does not like his or her religion and wishes to serve God, then it is his/her responsibility to find an outlet for that desire that is congruent with personal faith. The Church has stood for near two millenia and to think that it will move to change its ways simply because of a shift in the secular paradigm is folly. The Church is a bastion dogma, a fortress of tradition, and a protector of its own doctrine. It was never founded on an idea of equality and it will never make a change to that effect. If one does not agree with the Church, there are many Protestant faiths to choose from.
I agree with your position on personal responsibility with regards to this issue.

As to gay priests, I don't see a problem with gay priests personally since they are supposed to be celibate anyway. What difference could it possibly make which gender they prefer if they never act on it? I do not believe in holding the Church at large responsible for the actions of some relatively few individuals, however I do think it is good to be seeing the Church try to assume some pro-active policies.

I think it's fair for the Church to set a time limit of celibacy, since that is a requirement for the priesthood - ideally that time limit would apply equally across the board. However, as jallman pointed out, the Church is not a secular institution.
 
Top Bottom