That's where you lost https://slut.wtf/tags/your addiction/ i. Although your opinion is interesting, it reflects the permanent ideological side of the principal, which, in my opinion, is not based on empirical information and expediency. It looks like a religious position. Although this is enough for the enthusiastic, it is very much connected that you can disconnect it from the harsh reality of human behavior, because the player always filters a given test of behavior through the idea of \u200b\u200bwhat we "should" do in comfortable constructions. This counteracts human beings, since they are contrary to expectations, far away because of this, what they are capable of, and to be healthy. I contend that "celibacy" contributes to the neurotic reactions of the clergy, its very likely to be people in need. Sexuality is a normal expression and activity. It is dangerous and unhealthy to stigmatize this normal normal functioning as undesirable and naturally to be suppressed. Sexuality is associated with the human need for intimacy and love and the primary urge to reproduce. Take away healthy normal expressions and you can get abnormal atypical neurotic behavior. And by the way, the real issue is the "christian" way of thinking about sexuality and concrete repulsion and retreat from humanity. Sexuality is not sinful. As long as any church thinks so, people are trying to suffer.Do you think that the majority of people in every church, including the catholic one, ignore the official church teaching and still do what they want. Don't joke and you know him. The rest is just a head game.I say the above with reverence. Not intended to incite against the rk or any other church. In other regions, i have deep respect for rc.
Keep in mind your own assessment that only one quarter priests are homosexual.
This number greatly exceeds the total population, even if we use the (in my opinion, grossly overestimated) 10% number. . .
Given that most cases of child sexual abuse were homosexual in nature, and assuming that sexual perversion occurs at about the same percentage among homosexuals wearing roman collars and dark blazers at work, compared to those who wear blue jeans or ties to work and given that the clergy is a "high access" role, can you really assure that priests commit offenses at the same rate as people from in in general? Seriously?
I have to know how many homosexual young catholic males decide (sincerely, albeit wrongly) that the most attractive way to avoid the temptation of homosexual sin is to hide from their sexuality in the accepted fashion, t e. The priesthood?
I would suggest that many -- "man is not a rational animal, he is a rationalizing animal." It's human nature to try to find ways to avoid problems that are difficult to deal with.
We see examples of this kind of misguided thinking day in and day out, even among seemingly smart consumers. , Sensible and at the time mostly good.
Now, even if you consciously chose a specialty in the hope that it would allow the client to simply ignore their sexuality, chances are you are not ready to have very good coping skills configured. Which makes it more likely that you will go further down a path you never intended to.
I will go myself. I'm a horny son of a bitch. Have always stayed. No auditor has remained inclined to say the word "no" quite often (especially in my early twenties). Not dead. Given the above, i do not allow myself to deny this. With this, the risk of eating that i slip is reduced - i know that i will be tempted, and that i am especially vulnerable to pre-temptation, so i am constantly on guard against it.
I have known other married people (of both sexes) who, although they were actually quite smart and quite good people, really felt that marriage would automatically change them, so their previously promiscuous urges weren't much of a problem. And a good half of them turned out to be wrong. . .
I'm not talking about celibacy causing problems. I'm saying that some people think that abstinence will automatically solve their personal problems. . . How insects work is more vulnerable to temptation, as they discard their security barriers as "unnecessary".
Given the success of eastern rite orthodox catholics however, catholics under the pope), former anglican priests, etc. I think that priestly celibacy is definitely an unnecessary (and clearly ineffective) mandatory discipline to try to enforce. I can also say that this does reduce the number of candidates available to apply for holy orders.
Perhaps a better disciplinary rule could be considered to replace mandatory celibacy (at this very time allowing orders that choose celibacy as part of their rule to continue to behave as they exist even if celibacy was abolished here i don't see the possibility of married jesuits finally...).
Even if non-chaste (i.E. Married) priests were limited to only "priestly" functions (pastoral roles, low-level bureaucrats in the upper echelons of government) and a ban on ordination to the bishopric, this would probably widen the field of candidates, allowing the church to go through a serious process selection.
Regarding “ephebophilia”…
I would say that it needs a special word defined by men, due to the fact that heterosexual male attraction to the female equivalent (young and still culturally childish, but reproductively mature) is considered optimal and natural, without any special term. “Barely legal” and “naughty high school” porn is not sold to teenage boys, but to grown men. "American beauty" is not a story about a man whom the audience finds so strange that they should not identify with him.
Given how in biblical times girls of the same age getting married - and boys - is the same, despite the fact that the bulk of patriarchal cultures definitely favor older people with very young partners - this is still hardly a modern perversion.
The fact that i what i think is unusual is the unique attraction to young men - at least because it implies some who are not able to cope sexually with one on an equal level of strength with them. Which is really very unreasonable for the next one they might be preying on. Permissive exploitation of youth, institutionalized in many cultures with a variety of different ways of sexuality, seems to me a real moral hazard - and, functionally speaking, a problem for the church.
Geodkyt,
I agree that it is possible, in the west, to operate a serious form of extended married priesthood. But i think it's more valuable to address priestly education and focus on teaching our youth to recognize their calling (priestly or not).
Opening the priesthood to married members of the stronger sex, which of course are badly catechized like the others, and in the end, to train them with the same failed process is just asking for more trouble.
Not fashionable.”</>
Priestly celibacy is not a doctrine that sexuality is undesirable and should be suppressed. It's 100% https://slut.wtf/tags/dickherdowndaily/ the opposite. This is a discipline in which sex is such a wonderful gift from god that the specialist gratefully returns it to the producer in barter for a deeper relationship with god himself. Like any other form of "abstinence," whether temporary or permanent, it is not a question of renunciation of something sinful; it's about bringing back something good, because you intend nothing better.
“Sexuality is not sinful. If some church thinks that way, people will suffer.”
If you believe that the church preaches repressive ideas about the sinfulness of sex, you need to look into the theology of the body, which pope john paul ii codified during his pontificate. It's all about the attractiveness of the body and the language of sex.
“As you know, most of the citizens in any church, including the catholic, ignore the official church teaching and go ahead or in each case do what they want '.
And, as alan gura pointed out in mcdonald v. Chicago:"judge sotomayor, the states may be accustomed to violating the rights of american citizens, but that doesn't make those violations any- it's constitutional"
People may be used to breaking chastity, but it doesn't make it something sacred.
The argument that hyperopen sexuality - that's good, since everyone does it, of course, it should be fine, - this is a circular argument that wants to whitewash the fact that every hypersexualized culture will hurt women, men and babies, focusing on only their sexual appetites, and not on our entire being, to say nothing of our entire sexual nature.If we lived our physical lives, as modern psychology makes people live their sex lives, we'd all be fat, lazy, and at times looking for the next free lunch. Oh... Wait...
Besides, the abuse scandal bears no resemblance to celibacy, priestly or otherwise, as even married priests (which is the norm in the church east) are still called to chastity according to their position in life. It means she won't be allowed to make love to anyone outside of their own marriage. And, if the expression of sexuality in the marital bedroom were a panacea that cures any other diseases, probably even - there would be no sexual harassment in families, infidelity, pornography in the house of a married man, and married men would never go to horns or bars . Striptease club.
Labrat,
I tend to agree, but feel it necessary to mention that the church has an obligation to cherish the idea of attracting same-sex youth as distinct from attracting youth of the opposite sex , if for no other reason than as a verdict on driving everyone meets different. The church saw that it was still painting with a broad brush in this matter. I think it might be worth narrowing down the details a bit.
But i'm willing to agree that either is reprehensible and underpinned by a need to dominate and/or legal sexual immaturity.
I don't mind this, just with the idea that the attraction to youth, but also the moral crime of it, is unequivocally linked to homosexuality, "active" or not. This is due to the stereotype of "dangerous perverts"; i don't want to downplay the real dangerous perverts, or to equate the approach to drastic issues - peter's own observation of the high proportion of gays means that exploitative perverts will be more of a problem in their numbers movement. What i really want to point out is that they are no more dangerous perverts than straight people, who can be dangerous enough in their own right. Than boys. I see both as demographics, function, and morality, not sexuality.
" (For heaven's sake, i even saw a naked woman being used to advertise a farm tractor! The connection from them has not been worked out either . . . )"
Remember "fertility", and even a lot of metaphors for planting and cultivating the soil. Although i can bet that the woman in question did not have a single sign of a fertile partner - for example, wide hips.
The meaning of words is determined not by etymology, but by their use. If ephebephilia is constantly used to denote the attraction of adults to teenagers, which it is, then only here it means it, etymology has nothing to do with it. The word "hysteria" comes from the greek hysterikos, but it's not just women who suffer from hysteria.
Thanks for another great post, peter.
Thanks for writing this is. . I really learned a lot from using it.
This is what our company is all about: the angle of view. I look at things through my "glasses": upbringing, culture, faith, etc. I've never usually understood pk (pure shorthand, btw). I am a protestant (protestant) of the first order.
In order to get a better look at you, i really dug into your messages. I have learned a lot. My brother is an rc and is more active in the church. Now i know better how to communicate with us.
Thank you for lighting the light of understanding. You have a great way with words. I have been waiting for your messages for a long time, especially this one.
Stxrynn
Dantesfireringrange,
Go back and repeat - read my last sentence .
Expanding the list of available candidates means that you can be more selective in selecting all those who will eventually be selected and ordained, but multiply new priests.
I know of catholic men, the only preference that has so far remained untouched by civilization to follow the priesthood was that you were (or intended to eventually become) married and fathers of children. I realized very early (before puberty) that the priesthood was not for me, for the reason that i was called to be a father more than a father. (Sometimes he joked with a friendly group of bishops that for some reason i also dream of being an episcopalian. The joke is on me - i still became an anglican ... But mainly as a reaction to my bishop and the marxist sycophants whom he promoted for a quarter of a century. .)
Kitsune9t wrote: "the meaning of words is determined not by etymology, but by usage."
Sorry, but i couldn't help but agree more emphatically . Words have their own meanings.These meanings may change sooner or later or new meanings are added (for example, the word "gay" had one specific meaning, but in modern times it has the additional meaning "homosexual", but by no means deprived it of its original meaning). But if they meant what they mean in modern usage, it would immediately annul our constitution and the laws which are based on the original meaning of these expressions. It would also invalidate many contracts in deeds, as key terms can no longer mean the same thing. Don't become a father. In life. I must not, with a new repetition of manfred lutz's statement, the fact that "the father of a family is 36 times more inclined to abuse than a chaste priest." Lutz does not cite the specific referenced source above, and this is ridiculously easy to disprove using publicly available statistics and basic math.
Cases of confirmed sexual abuse by priests in the united states of america totaled 4,392 priests. Out of 109,694 people who served between 1950 and 2002, which is approximately four% and does not always include charges brought against deceased priests. (John ray report, 2004) with the goal that the father of the family be 36 times more prone to abuse, more than 100% (144%) are required to be abusive.
This statistic is possibly a misleading misstatement of the fact that victims of sexual assault were 36 times more likely to be abused from the side of the father of the family than from the side of the priest, however, this is not the same as the statement that the father of the family is 36 times more likely to be sexually abused. Per capita acts of individuals in your selected subpopulations indicate a higher incidence among priests (at least between 1950 and 2002 in the usa).
The incidence of child sexual abuse in the family is approximately 8.9 victims. Per 10,000 child population. (U.S. Department of justice and department of health public data) perpetrator statistics are harder to come by, but even assuming that any victim was abused by another perpetrator's relatives (99% of the majority, so let's say 100, or that they represent typical family sizes, this is still ends up per offender per capita at 0.27% one-sixteenth less than us catholic priests.
But also, a great series of articles today.
Peter, i'm new to your blog so let's start by thanking and respecting the quality of your writing and thinking.I'm not a catholic but developed in catholic schools surrounded by the turmoil of the 1970s.I felt the customs were both romantically beautiful and surprisingly irrational, but i know that most catholics think the same, that this is not unique.I am very attentive to those who are inclined to glorify god and the world through rc, provided that he and retain some confidence in their faculties of consciousness and reason. I am passionately convinced that reason and faith can and must go hand in hand.
It is this question that drew me to your wonderful comments here:
Corollary: test terrorist organizations, particularly insecure ones that ask for their members to wait for certain, certain death to complete an operation such as the 9/11 atrocities, one would imagine that this chance would deter potential recruits, but, there doesn't seem to be a shortage of volunteers. Demanding complete dedication seems to attract a higher quality of a person, be it for good or ill." Evil ending." But i don't think you've fully substantiated this side of the trustee.
What do these "bad" guys have in common with others who pursue "good intentions by this analogy? It's suspension of the mind. And the suspension of independent thinking.To follow absolutely.It is in many ways in all circumstances (not in all, depending on tradition) is often the definition of orthodoxy.
I really wish that catholics as individuals and as a community of believers would find ways to heal these wounds. (Your series of posts on the page is really fantastic, although i don't agree with the various interpretations of the facts). However, how can a catholic, priest or layman find god, or the world, or the immediate self, if the site hangs its powers of independent thinking on the ground? .But your comments calling for the recruitment of someone who is willing to fully surrender to power, as one of the solutions to the problem of the middle peasants or neurotic seminarians, i think are tantamount to this.
It won. It won't shock you that i consider myself a gnostic. My persistence in learning and passion for the lord through reason, but also faith and practice, brands me as a heretic. I can coexist with like. But how many catholics will leave their faith at all if they cannot unite their minds and hearts in unison? For your opinion. You should be aware that the only major requirement of the catholic church is that reason should go completely hand in hand with faith. I welcome you to read the encyclical fides et ratio (on relations among faith and reason) by pope john paul ii of september 14, 1998. This is very thought provoking. You have the opportunity to find it on the internet to us:
Http://www.Scborromeo.Org/docs/fides_et_ratio.Pdf
(Link to adobe document acrobat , but i'm assuming the victim has or you can download acrobat reader.)
Thanks again for your feedback.
You lost me when made it a homosexual issue. Pedophiles target children, not gender. I'm not taking the slightest vagueness here for the gay community, they have the ability to speak for themselves. The error centers on the fact that the catholic church, as an institution that tries to blame an unloved part of society, simply dismisses the real blame. An older person engaging in a heterosexual relationship with a teenager is hardly unusual, often presented as a mere fantasy.
Celibacy is a disciplinary, not a theological requirement for ordination to a catholic priesthood.</>
It is worth noting that married anglican/episcopal priests who join the roman catholic church are fed; they are fully