nekosensei (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
nekosensei) wrote2010-04-14 04:32 pm
nekosensei) wrote2010-04-14 04:32 pm
Entry tags:
And The Vatican Does It Again...
This is the reason why I'm now good and pissed off this afternoon. The Vatican is now trying to say that the reason priests are abusing children is because of homosexuality, not celibacy. And this excerpt really takes the cake:
"VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Wednesday tried to defuse growing anger over remarks by the pope's top aide that the problem behind the pedophile priest scandals is homosexuality and not the church's celibacy requirement.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See's secretary of state, outraged gay advocacy groups, politicians and even the French government with his remarks Monday in Chile.
'Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia,' the Italian cardinal said. 'But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem.'"
Um...no...in fact, most pedophiles are not homosexuals; the majority of them are heterosexuals. And it's a known fact that many pedophiles look for jobs where they can get easy access to children. What's one of those jobs? (ding! ding! ding!) You guessed it! The priesthood!
The Catholic Church not only needs to re-think the whole celibacy requirement, but they also need to consider letting women join the priesthood too. It may not solve the problem entirely, but it would most certainly help. Once you've got more priests who are parents themselves, you'll see a whole lot less of this turning a blind eye to what one's colleagues are doing / moving offending priests from parish to parish where they can re-offend again. But of course, they're never going to open up the priesthood to women and married people. And why is that? The institution is headed by old farts who are unwilling to change. Cardinal Bertone's remarks are proof that that's exactly the case.
Oh...and never mind that priests used to be allowed to marry until, I forget...when was it? The 1000s? The reason why they stipulated that they had to remain celibate? Money, land, and more importantly power. They didn't want the children of priests inheriting their father's assets, thereby removing them from Church hands.
So yeah...blame it on the gays. That's right. What ever happened to a little saying called, "Love thy neighbor?" I guess that doesn't apply if you so happen to be gay. The bigotry of some people who claim to call themselves Christian astounds me.
Sack them. Sack them all.
(wanders off to go break things)
"VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Wednesday tried to defuse growing anger over remarks by the pope's top aide that the problem behind the pedophile priest scandals is homosexuality and not the church's celibacy requirement.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See's secretary of state, outraged gay advocacy groups, politicians and even the French government with his remarks Monday in Chile.
'Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia,' the Italian cardinal said. 'But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem.'"
Um...no...in fact, most pedophiles are not homosexuals; the majority of them are heterosexuals. And it's a known fact that many pedophiles look for jobs where they can get easy access to children. What's one of those jobs? (ding! ding! ding!) You guessed it! The priesthood!
The Catholic Church not only needs to re-think the whole celibacy requirement, but they also need to consider letting women join the priesthood too. It may not solve the problem entirely, but it would most certainly help. Once you've got more priests who are parents themselves, you'll see a whole lot less of this turning a blind eye to what one's colleagues are doing / moving offending priests from parish to parish where they can re-offend again. But of course, they're never going to open up the priesthood to women and married people. And why is that? The institution is headed by old farts who are unwilling to change. Cardinal Bertone's remarks are proof that that's exactly the case.
Oh...and never mind that priests used to be allowed to marry until, I forget...when was it? The 1000s? The reason why they stipulated that they had to remain celibate? Money, land, and more importantly power. They didn't want the children of priests inheriting their father's assets, thereby removing them from Church hands.
So yeah...blame it on the gays. That's right. What ever happened to a little saying called, "Love thy neighbor?" I guess that doesn't apply if you so happen to be gay. The bigotry of some people who claim to call themselves Christian astounds me.
Sack them. Sack them all.
(wanders off to go break things)
no subject
no subject
Another Link
A bit more comprehensive with descriptions, but the thought is still the same. It was wrong. End of story.
no subject
And in case you don't know: A) if a priest finds celibacy unbearable, he can simply ask and legitimately leave and get married.
B) catholic priests of the Greek Catholic rite are allowed to marry and quite a few anglican married priests that came over to catholicism are still married and still priests.
BTW celibacy was strongly recommended from the 4th century, the First and Second Lateran Council (1123 and 1139) stongly acted in favor of it as part of the moralizing campaign put in place by the pope of that time and were about concubinage and marriage after ordination.
I hardly expect verifiable facts to change anyone's already determined views, though.
That said, I guess I'm as tired of pointing out data as you are of finding my comments on your LJ.
You have every right of writing whatever you want on your blog, of course, just as I have the right of not finding them on my friends' page. Nothing personal, Neko just fundamental disagreement on something that's important to me.
And I'd like to point out, anyway, that on the other side I totally agree with you on the fact that anyone proven responsible of abuses should rot in jail.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)