Catholic Church suspends gay priest

[theskull1]

This is the level of hypocrisy that bugs me. If you say your an athiest why why would you lie to your kids about your beliefs? The church as you term it wouldn't be happy about you lying about anything but if your not participating in it then I can't understand why you'd be wonderng about them anyway.   

Re the original question I still don't get the whole effeminate/gay priests link in your mind. Ireland of the 50s/60s when vocations were much higher was a vastly different place and there are numerous reasons for their decline. I'm sure there were lots of lads who went into the priesthood for the "wrong" reasons with societal/family pressures etc but over the years I'd say the vast majority of these have left.

Hypocrisy..give it a break Deccy  . I lie to them because I don't want to conflict with what they are getting fed at school. Imagine the turmoil I'd create in my young children's minds if I forced my beliefs over the top of what they are learning about "god" in school. At the moment they are in a safe place and I'm happy enough with the moral teachings that they get in their early years. I intend telling them about all world religions over time to make them see that different peoples have different belief systems. They'll eventually come to their own conclusions when their older...but for now, if you don't mind, I'll raise my own kids.

And as regards me wondering about what the church would think about the mental paradox....excuse me for having a thought 

Just as an aside to the hypocrisy argument: The noted atheist Daniel Dennett, one of the worlds most brilliant minds takes his grandchildren to Sunday School...he has his reasons same as me...so shove your hypocrisy comment up your hole

Regarding you not getting the whole effeminate/gay priests link in my mind. Why do you keep suggesting that it is solely in my mind when it is perceived to be a big problem for the church itself? Quit focusing on the messenger will you?

[whiskeysteve]

Well of all the studies trying to estimate the number of priests with homsexuality orientation, the range varies from 15% to 50%. If we assume that all of the estimates are of equal validity, then about 33% of priests have a homosexual orientation -- about one in three

Can you reference these statistics?

The unique thing about abuse by priests is that their victims have been almost exclusively boys (85% ish). Don't doubt for one second though that most of the abuse is carried out by people other than priests

Can you give a reference for that statistic?

Of course its obvious you are bothered with effeminate men, else why would you spend so much time raising concerns over 'womanly' priests?

I don't believe that priests are more likely to be homosexual than the rest of the general population, as you state. I do believe that when they are, a song and dance is made about it.

There are bad eggs in every group. When one is found in the priesthood it is especially abhorrent. They should be revealed and punished.

But in all of your posts you have made one, single, grudging reference to the good work of priests, 'some priests play a positive role in their communities'.

You are focused on one small ugly facet of the priesthood (smaller than youd have us believe). You are smokescreening the fact that the vast majority of priests on a daily basis baptise our children, pray for us, hear our confessions, comfort us when we need it, support and raise funds for charity, marry us, give the dying their last rites and remember us at our funerals. A sizeable proportion go on the missions to places of famine, disease and war, to tend to desperate peoples they don't know. They build wells, houses and schools, for no personal gain. So take a look at the big picture

These people, a lot of whom are apparently effeminate as you say, actually have the balls to dedicate their lives to a greater cause because of their honest faith, while a sizeable amount of the 'manly' population go out and get pissed at the weekend, fight, contribute less to their communities. They are brave enough to take the step into becoming a force for good, no matter how testosterone fuelled they are.

Whether you intended to or not you swept that under the carpet nice and handy

[Declan]

but for now, if you don't mind, I'll raise my own kids.

Wasn't trying to suggest anything else. I take your points about your reasons for not conflicting them etc just don't agree with you.

I intend telling them about all world religions over time to make them see that different peoples have different belief systems.

You'll be glad to know that this forms part of the new religion curriculum anyway

Re the noted athiest and the fact that he takes his kids to Sunday school - each to their own I suppose but seems strange to me.
On the substantive issue of your original point I don't know how it is a perceived problem for the church itself- What is a perceived problem anyway?
It's either a problem or it isn't and I don't think it is.

Re the personal comment about shoving it up my hole.Cheers for the constructive message and you talk about me getting at the messenger 

[theskull1]

Well of all the studies trying to estimate the number of priests with homsexuality orientation, the range varies from 15% to 50%. If we assume that all of the estimates are of equal validity, then about 33% of priests have a homosexual orientation -- about one in three
Can you reference these statistics?

Knowing full well that this will not be good enough for you and will be used purely as stick to try and beat me with heres the link.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_rcc.htm

Selectively snipping my posts? I added after writing those details......"However, nobody knows with any degree of accuracy so I'm not trying to use that figure as fact.".

The unique thing about abuse by priests is that their victims have been almost exclusively boys (85% ish). Don't doubt for one second though that most of the abuse is carried out by people other than priests


Can you give a reference for that statistic?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_7_54/ai_84454915

Of course its obvious you are bothered with effeminate men, else why would you spend so much time raising concerns over 'womanly' priests?

Its called arguing your point. Stop being so f**king childish steve

I don't believe that priests are more likely to be homosexual than the rest of the general population, as you state. I do believe that when they are, a song and dance is made about it.

You think it...therefore you're right?  ....could you back that up with statistics? 

But in all of your posts you have made one, single, grudging reference to the good work of priests, 'some priests play a positive role in their communities'.

Selective again steve. I said "Some priests are still leaders in their communities btw and play a real positive role in their ministry so I'm not trying to tar every priest with this accusation."
It's not the main thrust of my argument so I don't feel the need to repeat it. Saying it once means I've said it does it not? And why would it be a grudging reference?

You are focused on one small ugly facet of the priesthood (smaller than youd have us believe). You are smokescreening the fact that the vast majority of priests on a daily basis baptise our children, pray for us, hear our confessions, comfort us when we need it, support and raise funds for charity, marry us, give the dying their last rites and remember us at our funerals. A sizeable proportion go on the missions to places of famine, disease and war, to tend to desperate peoples they don't know. They build wells, houses and schools, for no personal gain. So take a look at the big picture

Yes I am focusing on one "small" facet of the priesthood. What we are debating is just how big is the "small" and what threat does it pose long term to the health of the leadership given by church. I think it is a big enough issue to be doing damage hence why I startaed the discussion. I don't feel the need to expand on all the good things done by the church. Its not part of my argument. My argument is that the reputation of the church is seriously at risk as a result of the liberal attitude the church has had in relation to ordaining "gay priests" and no amount of the good work you talk about will bring it back. Hearts and minds. So maybe you should look at that big picture as well

These people, a lot of whom are apparently effeminate as you say, actually have the balls to dedicate their lives to a greater cause because of their honest faith,  They are brave enough to take the step into becoming a force for good, no matter how testosterone fuelled they are.

Well that is a totally opposite interpretation to my view, so I can only say I disagree

Re the noted atheist and the fact that he takes his kids to Sunday school - each to their own I suppose but seems strange to me.
On the substantive issue of your original point I don't know how it is a perceived problem for the church itself- What is a perceived problem anyway?
It's either a problem or it isn't and I don't think it is.

Well if somebody like Daniel Dennett understands why he does it, that should make you question your own thinking on the subject a bit more, then it mightn't seem so strange.
It is a perceived problem because the hard evidence is difficult to nail down and is mostly anecdotal I would think (I'm not an expert). There are enough statistics (if you care to believe them) which suggests that it is a problem. Stop trying to use semantics to win the argument

Re the personal comment about shoving it up my hole.Cheers for the constructive message and you talk about me getting at the messenger  Shocked

Agreed. That wasn't needed. Me blood was up after the hypocrite comment. That original question still stands though....why attack the messenger when it is a perceived problem by the church itself?


Put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes as tight as you can and start shouting "no no no no no no no no....."   

[Declan]

that should make you question your own thinking on the subject a bit more

I have thought about this subject a lot over the years but just cannot reconcile the fact that if someone rejects a particular belief system then actively participates in it by having his children instructed in it. Not shooting the messenger at all -you have your opinion, I have mine.

Don't understand your last comment

[whiskeysteve]

Frig me you are a stubborn boy skull!!

Thats the longest bloody post i've seen. Thanks for the references I'll get back with a proper reply after work - Don't want the boss walking in to see me looking at 'homosexuality amongst priests' now!!

I don't see how I have been 'so f**king childish' though. I think its fair to discern from your posts that you distrust effeminate men in the priesthood. Look at the lengths your going to to debate your point!!

[theskull1]

Frig me you are a stubborn boy skull!!

Thats the longest bloody post i've seen. Thanks for the references I'll get back with a proper reply after work - Don't want the boss walking in to see me looking at 'homosexuality amongst priests' now!!

I don't see how I have been 'so f**king childish' though. I think its fair to discern from your posts that you distrust effeminate men in the priesthood. Look at the lengths your going to to debate your point!!

Takes one to know one steve 

Well my contribution was 18 lines worth...only six more than your last post. You must have been spending to much time on the would you/wouldn't you thread

Well if thats how you draw conclusions about people then who am I to argue with that brilliant logic.    And stop changing the goal posts...one minute its the broad brush accusation that "Of course its obvious you are bothered with effeminate men" , then the next its "I think its fair to discern from your posts that you distrust effeminate men in the priesthood"

[The Iceman]

5% of abusers are homosexual and of those that were priests, only 5% were homosexual also.
That astounded me but did break away from the stereotypes mentioned above.

Child abuse of any kind is disgusting and God help those who have suffered at the hands of anyone.  The training session for me revealed that most abuse was by males towards little girls and sometimes older women toward little girls. 

The unique thing about abuse by priests is that their victims have been almost exclusively boys (85% ish). Don't doubt for one second though that most of the abuse is carried out by people other than priests

well i was on the course lad, not sure what you base your figures on - but I base mine on experience and statistics.