Sign in to follow this  
Azazello1313

the pope on love and sex

Recommended Posts

So a surgeon who studies for 8-12 years to become a surgeon can't speak about surgery unless he actually performs surgery?

 

1288453[/snapback]

 

 

 

You're pretty clearly in a defensive posture here. Priests DO NOT marry and the supposition must be that they do not therefore have experience of marriage and the every day stresses and strains it brings with it, not the least of which is children, which priests also do not have. Your analogy is flawed because surgeons train to be surgeons and have done everything except the surgery. They then move on to that in a natural progression. Priests don't even begin the training.

 

That is singularly one of the most retarded opinions I have ever heard leveled at the Catholic church. So in your world, a priest is sitting there thinking, "man I need to get laid...but I'm not supposed to because I took a vow of celibacy. Maybe if I doink some little kid, that won't really count".

 

Heterosexuality nor homosexuality have no bearing on pedophilia whatsoever. Being married or unmarried have no bearing on being a pedohile.

 

Your point on celibacy is certainly open for debate. Read Paul's letters, you'll find out why celibacy exists. But being celibate does not trigger some "pedophile molecule" that laid dormant until some priest got a case of the blue balls.

 

I normally enjoy your posts Ursa, but you're way out in left field on this one.

 

1288464[/snapback]

 

 

 

Deacon, you addressed but one of the four points I made and even forgot to acknowledge that I put (or it may not) after the pedophilia point, thus stating that I did not know either way. As Az pointed out a little later, it is not that much of a stretch to think that celibacy may be a driver. However, I do not know and I stand by my other three points completely. Celibacy is impractical, it reduces life experience and it removes otherwise excellent priestly candidates from the field. Celibacy is a defiance of nature.

 

As for Paul, what he wrote 2000 years ago does not necessarily have relevance today. If the Catholic Church sees fit to pontificate on marriage, it is reasonable to expect that it should have experience of that institution.

 

Would you take financial advice from someone that has no experience of investments?

Edited by Ursa Majoris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the Catholic Church sees fit to pontificate on marriage, it is reasonable to expect that it should have experience of that institution.

 

Would you take financial advice from someone that has no experience of investments?

 

1288656[/snapback]

 

 

 

Does this mean that untateve has to go become criminally insane himself or else he can't be good at what he does?

...

:D (or maybe untateve already is criminally insane) :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this mean that untateve has to go become criminally insane himself or else he can't be good at what he does?

...

:D (or maybe untateve already is criminally insane) :D

 

1288738[/snapback]

 

 

 

No-one is asking Untateve to take advice from a homicidal nutcase on how to become one. If they were, then the homicidal nutcase would be an excellent choice.

 

The celibate church is asking it's flock to take advice on sex and marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're pretty clearly in a defensive posture here.  Priests DO NOT marry and the supposition must be that they do not therefore have experience of marriage and the every day stresses and strains it brings with it, not the least of which is children, which priests also do not have.  Your analogy is flawed because surgeons train to be surgeons and have done everything except the surgery.  They then move on to that in a natural progression.  Priests don't even begin the training.

 

1288656[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure this is a fair analogy. Going to medical school teaches you nothing about practicing medicine. Going to law school teaches you nothing about practicing law. If marriage is a spiritual union then on what grounds is the clergy unqualified to speak on it?

 

I'm not saying that the Catholic Church's track record on healthy sexual sexual expression, reproduction, or divorce is above board but that doesn't invalidate their opinions on the relationship between marriage and sex.

Edited by billay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast to the Church's strictures on sex, the latter part of the article contains this:

In the encyclical, Benedict said the church's work caring for widows, the sick and orphans was as much a part of its mission as celebrating the sacraments and spreading the Gospels. However, he stressed that the church's charity workers must never use their work to proselytize or push a particular political ideology.

 

"Love is free; it is not practiced as a way of achieving other ends," he wrote.

 

"Those who practice charity in the church's name will never seek to impose the church's faith upon others. They realize that a pure and generous love is the best witness to the God in whom we believe and by whom we are driven to love."

 

He rejected the criticism of charity found in Marxist thought, which holds that charity is merely an excuse by the rich to keep the poor in their place when the wealthy should be working for a more just society.

 

While the Marxist model, in which the state tries to provide for every social need, responded to the plight of the poor faster than even the church did during the Industrial Revolution, it was a failed experiment because it couldn't meet every human need, he wrote.

 

Even in the most just societies, charity will always be necessary, he said.

 

"There will always be suffering which cries out for consolation and help. There will always be loneliness. There will always be situations of material need where help in the form of concrete love of neighbor is indispensable," he said.

 

Benedict stressed that the state alone is responsible for creating that just society, not the church. "As a political task, this cannot be the church's immediate responsibility," he said.

 

However, he said the church wants to help "form consciences in political life and stimulate greater insight into the authentic requirements of justice as well as greater readiness to act accordingly, even when this might involve conflict with situations of personal interest."

 

He said the church was "duty-bound" to offer such a contribution, and that the lay faithful, who as citizens of the state, are duty-bound to carry it out through works of charity.

 

"We do not need a state which regulates and controls everything, but a state which ... generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need," he wrote.

I would have no problem at all with any of that, though I doubt it's what our fundie friends would want to hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Going to medical school teaches you nothing about practicing medicine.  Going to law school teaches you nothing about practicing law.  If marriage is a spiritual union then on what grounds is the clergy unqualified to speak on it?

 

 

1288835[/snapback]

 

 

 

Um, I think both those schools thoroughly ground you in those skills. Internships, residencies, whatever, it's on the job training. Priests don't do on the job training for marriage, if you'll pardon the expression. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sores
Um, I think both those schools thoroughly ground you in those skills.  Internships, residencies, whatever, it's on the job training. 

 

1288964[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Gee...think so Ursa? (and in no way am I belittling you here)

 

Thank you for pointing out the obvious to someone who is blind to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Um, I think both those schools thoroughly ground you in those skills.  Internships, residencies, whatever, it's on the job training.  Priests don't do on the job training for marriage, if you'll pardon the expression.   :D

 

1288964[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

They ground you in knowledge of the material, but not the execution of it. I didn't mention interships or resedencies on purpose and the schools don't teach you the day to day grind of how to cope with the profession, hence my use of the word practicing> The clergy doesn't have to know anything about the daily struggle between a man and wife in order to have an informed opinion about the nature of spiritual relationships.

Edited by billay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I wouldn't take advice from the inmates/detainees I evaluate because if they were any good, they wouldn't have been caught.

 

Second--I have read one theory that the reason there appears to be a large number of pedophiles in the catholic church is that the offenders knew before becoming priests that they had a problem/conflict in this area. They immersed themselves in religion in order to combat the feelings/urges but this was largely unsuccessful. As a result, children were victimized.

 

Please, without anyone's panties getting in a bunch, know that this is only one hypothesis and I know of no data/research that has been done to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.