# Gays now excluded from Catholic priesthood -- WTnonF? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 1, 2005, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614 "2005-12-01T20:41:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/21 "2005-12-02T01:10:28Z")
> [@cbarnes](#): > > Based upon their own criteria they should allow gay men into the priesthood. Then again, Catholicism isn’t well known for consistency. Assuming that the man does not indulge in sex, then there is no reason by their own canonical law that they would ban homosexuals. As a mentionned in another thread, on the basis of linked text, the idea seems to be that people with deep-seated homosexual tendencies would be affectively immature, hence unable to fulfill their duties as “fathers” of their communities. Like \*\* Captain Amazing \*\* noted, this decision appears to be a fallout of the Austrian seminary scandal. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/22 "2005-12-02T01:51:49Z")
Well homosexuals can be admitted in to the priesthood if they demonstrate that their homosexual urges have gone away. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/23 "2005-12-02T05:23:48Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > Well homosexuals can be admitted in to the priesthood if they demonstrate that their homosexual urges have gone away. Priest: You were in the restroom rather a long time, my son. Bob: Never mind. Let’s start this interview again, and hurry! ---
**Author:** ![irishgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8edcca/32.png) [@irishgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/irishgirl)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/24 "2005-12-02T10:51:43Z")
AFAI understand it this is the Church’s response to all the child abuse scandals. Yep, they’re mixing up paedophilia and homosexuality again. This is honestly what the Chuch thinks an appropriate response to child abuse and the Austrian seminary scandal consists of. If a religion demands celibacy and male gender as pre-requisites for membership of the priesthood, well and good, if it demands celibacy and that should you have any sexual desires that they only be for women…well that’s a little weird. The vast majority of Irish Catholics are just as :rolleyes: :dubious: 😕☹ about this as anyone here. Nobody except the people who wrote it seem to think that this is a good idea. The Church is facing a problem of not recruiting enough priests in the West. There just aren’t enough straight, male, devout Catholics who want to become priests. This is not going to help. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/25 "2005-12-02T15:24:50Z")
> [@irishgirl](#): > > AFAI understand it this is the Church’s response to all the child abuse scandals. > Yep, they’re mixing up paedophilia and homosexuality again. > > This is honestly what the Chuch thinks an appropriate response to child abuse and the Austrian seminary scandal consists of. The Austrian scandal wasn’t really a child abuse scandal or a pedophilia scandal, though. Yes, there was some child pornography, but the sexual contact that appears to have occurred was between the teachers and the seminarians, who would have been in their late teens and early twenties. And I think it was the seminary thing that led to this decision a lot more than the pedophilia scandal in the US and elsewhere. The Vatican apparently also issued, along with this, a directive that gay priests shouldn’t be assigned to teach at seminaries. ---
**Author:** ![firespinner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8baadc/32.png) [@firespinner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/firespinner)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/26 "2005-12-02T16:18:00Z")
[QUOTE=irishgirl] The vast majority of Irish Catholics are just as :rolleyes: :dubious: 😕☹ about this as anyone here. QUOTE] Thats because most Irish Catholics are Á la Carte Catholics. The only ones who stll follow the church completely are Dana Rosemary Scallion and her ilk ---
**Author:** ![firespinner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8baadc/32.png) [@firespinner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/firespinner)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/27 "2005-12-02T16:19:18Z")
That was meant to be in a box ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/28 "2005-12-02T16:33:50Z")
I think you might want to read more closely - From the linked article: > [@](#): > > are actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called gay culture What this means, probably (I Am Not A Mind Reader), is that they will look more closely at applicants and seminarians to make sure they are not mamboing, ifyaknowwhatImean. If they aren’t going to control themselves in conjucntion with religious beliefs, they ought not to be take up the mantle of priest. The gay culture bit is mostly about the rather free-lovish random hookups thing which remains fairly common in certain cities, even after the AIDS crisis broke. ---
**Author:** ![ImaginalDisc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a88e57/32.png) [@ImaginalDisc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ImaginalDisc)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/29 "2005-12-02T16:45:56Z")
> [@smiling bandit](#): > > The gay culture bit is mostly about the rather free-lovish random hookups thing which remains fairly common in certain cities, even after the AIDS crisis broke. Not to hijack, but do you have any basis for this idea that gays behave this way more than straights? They’re not allowed to get married before sex, remember? ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/30 "2005-12-02T16:49:49Z")
> [@smilingbandit](#): > > If they aren’t going to control themselves in conjucntion with religious beliefs, they ought not to be take up the mantle of priest. But as the OP said, that doesn’t make a lot of sense. If this decree only prohibits homosexual behavior, then its redundent, since priests take a vow of chastity anyways. Given this, and the parts of the catecisim cited earlier, I’d say “deep seated homosexual tendencies” means simply that they’re gay (as opposed to say “experimented in college” or whatever). ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/31 "2005-12-02T19:07:43Z")
Has an official copy of the Vatican document been released yet, rather than something leaked? The idea of scrutinizing those who \<\\> makes sense to me. Being sexually active, gay or straight, is obviously an issue. Supporting gay culture in terms of being politically active in areas that contradict the Church’s teachings would be an area of concern. And finally, the process of discernment of a religious vocation always involves exploration of the person’s sexual orientation. If the idea of “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” means that the person has not come to terms with their orientation and is not at peace with what celibacy will mean, they wouldn’t be ready to make a commitment. Maybe it’s too much to ask, but can we keep the pedophile jokes to a minimum? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/32 "2005-12-02T19:23:30Z")
> [@ImaginalDisc](#): > > Not to hijack, but do you have any basis for this idea that gays behave this way more than straights? Umm . . . glory holes? :o ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/33 "2005-12-02T19:27:40Z")
I freaking hate the [del]embarassment[/del] blowjob smiley. Anyway, search and the shall find many, many examples of heterosexual debauchery. Roman orgies, love ins, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/34 "2005-12-02T19:30:18Z")
> [@gigi](#): > > Has an official copy of the Vatican document been released yet, rather than something leaked? I don’t think so, I’ve been looking for it online with no luck. > [@](#): > > Being sexually active, gay or straight, is obviously an issue Of course. > [@](#): > > Supporting gay culture in terms of being politically active in areas that contradict the Church’s teachings would be an area of concern. I agree, and think that this is closer to what the Chuch meant here then Smiling Bandit’s “random hookups” thing. The Church does not belive people should pursue a gay lifestyle, and so thinks it’s clergy shouldn’t support such a thing. > [@](#): > > And finally, the process of discernment of a religious vocation always involves exploration of the person’s sexual orientation. If the idea of “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” means that the person has not come to terms with their orientation and is not at peace with what celibacy will mean, they wouldn’t be ready to make a commitment. This is a streach. Your reading a lot into “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” that isn’t in the text. Again given the quotes above from the Catecism, I think it’s pretty clear “no deep-seated homosexual tendencies” = “no gay priests” regardless of the degreee with which they’ve come to terms with their orientation or celibacy. > [@](#): > > Maybe it’s too much to ask, but can we keep the pedophile jokes to a minimum? For a thread involving priests and sex, this _is_ the minimum of pedophile jokes. The maximum? Well the maximum is much much higher. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/35 "2005-12-02T19:52:05Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > I don’t think so, I’ve been looking for it online with no luck. It’s been released, and is on the Congregation for Catholic Education’s website (only in Italian, Portugese and Spanish, though, so if somebody can read any of those languages) [http://www.vatican.va/roman\_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/index.htm](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/index.htm) And looking further, this seems to be the English version: [http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/ccehomosex.HTM](http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/ccehomosex.HTM) From the English translation: > [@](#): > > The candidate to the ordained ministry, therefore, must reach affective maturity. Such maturity will allow him to relate correctly to both men and women, developing in him a true sense of spiritual fatherhood towards the Church community that will be entrusted to him. > > . . . > > Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter.7 > > In the light of such teaching, this dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question,9 cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or who support the so-called ‘gay culture’. > > Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. > > Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem - for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/36 "2005-12-02T20:27:19Z")
Thanks **Captain Amazing**. Your google-fu is strong. I was hoping the text would have a deeper explanation of why gays weren’t allowed in the clergy, but the closest they came was this: > [@Church](#): > > Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. It doesn’t say _why_ someone with such tendencies would be gravely hindered from relating to men and women. Why I’m sure a sexual attraction by a priest to a parishener would be a problem, this can happen just as easily to those of us with deep hetrosexual tendencies. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/37 "2005-12-02T23:35:23Z")
Andrew Sullivan is goung nuts. Why is he suprised? > [@](#): > > Smear all gays as a threat to priestly life; but keep up the closet for the thousands of gay priests who are still functioning. That sounds like an institution with “affective maturity,” doesn’t it? In practice, the only gay priests who will make it through the screening process in future will be those who have so thoroughly repressed their homosexuality that they are barely aware of it, and will seek in the newly butched-up clergy a way to live lives of self-deception. Eventually, of course, like those screwed up homosexuals ordained in the 1950s and 1960s, they may well go on to act out on their stunted sexual and emotional development, and abuse minors and children. But self-aware, well-adjusted, openly gay men who vow celibacy will be excluded. This will compound the problem of child abuse, not resolve it. It will preserve the self-loathing, clericalism and repression of dialogue that made the abuse possible in the first place. [http://www.andrewsullivan.com/](http://www.andrewsullivan.com/) ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/38 "2005-12-02T23:38:53Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > Andrew Sullivan is goung nuts. Why is he suprised? He’s a gay Catholic, so I’d imagine he’s feeling kind of unhappy about the whole thing. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/39 "2005-12-02T23:42:48Z")
Did anyone see the cartoon in today’s paper: One priest is giving his confession (he’s in a closet, not a confessional) and says “Bless me father for I was born”. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2005, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614/40 "2005-12-04T18:11:01Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > This is a streach. Your reading a lot into “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” that isn’t in the text. Again given the quotes above from the Catecism, I think it’s pretty clear “no deep-seated homosexual tendencies” = “no gay priests” regardless of the degreee with which they’ve come to terms with their orientation or celibacy. Reading the subsequent text, I’m disappointed to see that your interpretation is correct. No one person, regardless of their orientation, is going to be able to relate to all parishioners and their situations. As far as understanding men and women, surely everyone has had some role model for a healthly hetero pair, and understands the idea of a complementary universe. > [@Malodorous](#): > > For a thread involving priests and sex, this _is_ the minimum of pedophile jokes. The maximum? Well the maximum is much much higher. You’re probably right. I guess it’s just fatigue from seeing them everywhere they are even remotely related. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-now-excluded-from-catholic-priesthood-wtnonf/333614.md?page=3)