Time For Cardinal Bertone To Administer A Choke Hold
Or by it's technical term - an Ecclesiastical Corrective Restraining Maneuver
Helmet tip to Dad29
Little more than a handful of days after The Vatican issued specifics on homosexuals being admitted to the seminary, the Lavender Mafia fires back.
Here's some of this sad story from Catholic World News; (Emphasis and comments mine)
Celibate homosexuals can be priests: Filipino cardinal
Manila, May. 21, 2008 (CWNews.com) - A leading prelate in the Philippines has said that homosexual men can be ordained to the priesthood, despite a Vatican statement to the contrary.
Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales of Manila told reporters that homosexuals who do not "act out" can be good priests. His statement came immediately after the release of a letter in which Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (The timing was no accident), the Vatican Secretary of State, confirmed that a Church policy barring homosexuals from priestly training applies to all the world's seminaries.
Speaking on Radio Veritas in the Philippines, Cardinal Rosales said that the Vatican did not intend to ban chaste homosexuals from the seminaries. "A homosexual inclination is not bad (How does the catechism describe homosexuality? "A grave moral disorder"? Yeah... that's it) but acting it out is an entirely different matter, and that is what is written in the sacred scriptures,” he said. OK fellow Bloglodytes. I've only got a Bachelor's degree, so I'm not really all that smart. But what part of the following doesn't Cardinal Rosales understand? The Church... cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called 'gay culture. And also that this ban is universal and without exceptions. And this is from a cardinal from a so-called "conservative" Catholic nation? All Cardinal Rosales has done is steel the resolve of the homo-friendly Roman Protestants seeking to destroy The Church from within.
Hold on to your hats. This is just going to get worse.
Or by it's technical term - an Ecclesiastical Corrective Restraining Maneuver
Helmet tip to Dad29
Little more than a handful of days after The Vatican issued specifics on homosexuals being admitted to the seminary, the Lavender Mafia fires back.
Here's some of this sad story from Catholic World News; (Emphasis and comments mine)
Manila, May. 21, 2008 (CWNews.com) - A leading prelate in the Philippines has said that homosexual men can be ordained to the priesthood, despite a Vatican statement to the contrary.
Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales of Manila told reporters that homosexuals who do not "act out" can be good priests. His statement came immediately after the release of a letter in which Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (The timing was no accident), the Vatican Secretary of State, confirmed that a Church policy barring homosexuals from priestly training applies to all the world's seminaries.
Speaking on Radio Veritas in the Philippines, Cardinal Rosales said that the Vatican did not intend to ban chaste homosexuals from the seminaries. "A homosexual inclination is not bad (How does the catechism describe homosexuality? "A grave moral disorder"? Yeah... that's it) but acting it out is an entirely different matter, and that is what is written in the sacred scriptures,” he said.
Hold on to your hats. This is just going to get worse.
posted by Kevin Whiteman at
6:14 AM
7 Comments:
Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales of Manila told reporters that homosexuals who do not "act out" can be good priests.
Indeed? What are their names? We keep hearing this line, but nobody ever offers examples to prove their point. And how good can a priest be if accepts ordination in contravention of Vatican policy. Sounds to me like he'd be more selfish than selfless.
Memo
To: Cardinal Rosales
From: Cardinal bertone
"What part of NO! don't you understand?"
(To repeat what I said in my comment on your previous post.)
Seriously, Cavey, I suspect he understands it just as well as you do, he just doesn't want to accept or obey.
You think Cardinal Rosales might be a sodomite? Hmmm? My guess would be, well, I won't say. It might be a sin.
Cardinal Rosales is clearly teaching a dissident doctrine. Anyone with a well-formed conscience will courteously disagree with him, point out his error, and agree with Cardinal Bertone.
That last part looks pretty clear to me...Conservative, ha! apparently H.E. didn't understand the CAN NOT ADMIT part of the Vatican's statement.
You're right, it's going to get worse...
This is exactly why good vocation directors make it a point to delve into great detail about a young man's dating history, and why they WANT young men who've been to the prom...with a girl...entering the priesthood. (Sad that you have to make that last point these days...)
That said, I will not entirely discount the possibility that men who recognize those tendencies in themselves but truly NEVER have or will "act out" on it might make good, even great priests - in fact, I'm quite sure some walk among us in cassocks.
I think this is what Rosales is talking about in principle, but again - if a young man announces his tendencies as he's going into seminary but promises not to "act out," that's the red flag those such as Rosales are willing to ignore. That's where he's very, very wrong.
In answer to Paul's rhetorical question, I think we don't "know their names" precisely because such a man, if he truly abides by and under this premise, would never admit it.
Again, let's be clear (before you guys get mad at me!) that I believe this would be an exceptional man - not a non-existent one. However, it's like being a "dry drunk." In this day and age, it is not worth the risk to our Church for the Rosaleses out there to take them in.
I wonder what the difference would be if men with homosexual inclinations were allowed to fill seminaries and just told not to 'act out' with what has been done in the past. Were men with homosexual inclinations told before that they COULD 'act out' on their inclinations, and that's how such homosexual behavior and culture flourished in seminaries between bishops, priests, and seminarians? But now that if they're told they can't 'act out', that's going to be a tenable solution to the problem, isn't it? They wouldn't be implying that men with homosexual inclinations WERE, in the past, told they could 'act out,' are they? This approach of allowing men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies into the seminaries and telling them to keep it under wraps has already essentially been tried for decades in the Church. If seminary rectors are already going to defy the Vatican's directives and allow men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies into the seminaries, are we supposed to believe that suddenly they're going to be bulldogs in disciplining men when they do 'act out'?
Those who are fighting with the Holy Father's directives are conveniently batting around these ideas as if they were mere theory. In practice, the idea of just telling men they just can't 'act out' is a joke, and - as it's pointed out - that they haven't offered any solid examples of how such an approach can work shows that they know this. All the talk about how it's really not so bad to have homosexual inclinations and that is says so in scripture is just blowing smoke.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home