Earlier I had made mention of the Cathoilc priests pedophelia, to which I was corrected, and told it was homosexual tendencies rather than this. Well, I read on another members thread about the sins of each Commandment. One of them was about being gay and having homosexual tendencies. Can someone please explain, if priests are breaking a Commandment rule and this is obviously something that can’t be fixed through counseling or confession because the problem never truly goes away. At least not to my knowledge, why they are still allowed to work with childern in the Church?
Thank you for clearing up my questions.
Please no one take offense to this posting, I’m merely out to have my questions answered. Have a wonderful day!
First, if priests with problems of this sort are being allowed to work with children (or possible to work with anyone at all), there is a mistake. This is not supposed to happen. So if they are “being allowed to” then it’s because the person doing the allowing needs a metaphorical kick in the pants.
Second, homosexual tendencies are not considered sinful. Acting on them is.
Also, I am not sure whether the primary issue among abusive priests is homosexuality or pedophilia, but I’m also not sure it is actually relevant to the issue of how they should be dealt with. Could be that I’m missing something.
There’s a variety of things the Church can do and nothing is really black and white. If one is convicted, then they could be defrocked and handed over to authorities. I could imagine some would be truly repentant and perhaps the Church can offer them to live a life of a monk and either withdraw from the world or live within a community. They won’t normally say Mass to the public anymore. So there’s a lot of things the Church could do, and it may depend on each case.
We’re conflating two ideas here: the first is homosexuality, and the second is pedophilia.
They are distinct.
All homosexuals are not pedophiliacs, and all pedophiliacs are not homosexual.
Some claim that homosexual men have a greater tendency toward pedophilia, but whether this is a cultural of lifestyle risk factors is open to question. Predictably, the medical establishment seeks to distance homosexuality per se from pedophilia. Statistically, there is a correlation between male homosexuality and pedophiliac crimes.
As you probably know, the vast majority of abuse cases in the Catholic Church concerned relations with teenage boys, aged 11 to 17.
A non-pedophiliac, chaste priest could conceivably work around children. Non priest, homosexual non pedophiliac men are permitted to teach in public schools and hold public office.
That said, I believe that the Catholic Church is erring on the side of caution, and that new guidelines place homosexual priests and brothers in jobs where they do not work with children as a rule.
Pedophilia is a mental illness or disorder that can in fact be controlled. Many states spend millions of dollars per year to do so, and the evidence is that people who receive treatment are far less likely to repeat child-sex crimes than people who receive no treatment.
Priests accused of these acts are removed from any position working with the public, and must receive treatment. The norm now is for dismissal from the priesthood.
First of all, I don’t know why any priest who truly has homosexual tendencies ever feels the need to express this to anyone. If a priest has heterosexual tendencies I don’t see him telling everyone how attracted he is to women. If they are supposed to live a life of chastity and don’t have sex, then why should it matter their orientation? They took a vow, just like a married person does. Granted, not all priests or married people abide by the vow they took. Further, why should a priest with homosexual tendencies be a threat to children? Are you saying all homosexuals are potential pediophiles? People need to understand–homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things. Let’s keep that in mind here…
Everyone seems to misunderstand I’m not discussing the pedophelia issue. That was a separate thread I started that was cleared up. I’m just disucussing the homosexuality part, why they act upon it, and aren’t thrown out of the Church. Sorry for the misconception.
So you are asking why a priest is not thrown out of the Church if he has a homosexual relationship with an adult male? How would this differ from a straight priest having an affair with an adult woman. I’m curious as to why you are focussing on the homosexual aspect.
Sorry if we all misunderstood, but you did ask why they were still allowed to work with children. I don’t understand why you would mention this unless you felt the children were at risk. It’s one thing to wonder why they aren’t released from the priesthood, it’s another to specifically say “why are they still allowed to work with children”.
Don’t misunderstand me, I’m not disagreeing with you, necessarily. I just feel a pedophile undertone in this thread and we covered that in your other post, I think.
Yes, because they are acting on their homosexual tendencies. They are supposedly raping and molesting children and in my last post, everyone said that it was because they were gay more than pedopheliacs. So, I was asking why they are still allowed to work with them if they are gay and are acting upon their homosexual feelings?
I’m focusing on it because my last post members said the priests weren’t pedophiles, they were more gay than anything. So, my question is why are they still working kids if they are gay, and molesting boys because of it. It said in another members post that it was a sin under the “Sixth and Ninth Commandments,” saying “Engaged in homosexual activity? (Sexual activity with someone of the same sex.)” So, if they are commiting a sin so serious as this, why should they still be allowed to be a priest at all?
Please do not speak of Catholic priests as if they all have abnormal sexual tendencies and/or have acted upon them. The number of priests who have commited crimes is so minute compared to men of other religions and organizations. Most Catholic priests are “normal” , not homosexual nor pedophile. Also, the Catholic Church has the most strict guidelines and programs in place today of any other religion or organization when it comes to protecting children and others against sexual abuse.
I do not understand how you could get that impression about priests from reading a detailed examination of conscience, an aid to help all of us to examine our own conscience.
I’m not sure what previous conversation you’re referencing, so I may be misunderstanding this, but I just want to point out that homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things. Homosexuals don’t molest children – pedophiles do. Most gay people would find pedophilia just as offensive as straight people do, and they should not be used as a scapegoat. Most gay people, just like straight people, are attracted to others around their own age… the only difference is the sex of the person to whom they’re attracted.
Within the context of this discussion, a practicing homosexual and practicing pedophile are exactly the same thing: incompatible with the priesthood. Breaking solemn vows should never be viewed as acceptable under any circumstances.
In fact, homosexuals DO molest children, in some of the most vile ways. Those who commit sexual crimes should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, regardless religious status.
The assertion that, " Most gay people, just like straight people, are attracted to others around their own age…the only difference is the sex of the person to whom they’re attracted.", is not useful to this discussion in the least. Many people - regardless of orientation - are attracted to those half their age.
Is the post you’re referring to is the one about priests getting married in order to stop child molestations? If so, I did respond in that thread and I never said that pedophilia had anything to do with homosexuality. Pedophilia is a mental disorder. You said that “everyone said that it was because they were gay more than pedopheliacs”. Which thread are you referring to?