How about "outing" gay Catholic Priests?

As anyone knows, the Catholic Church, has been dumping on gay people for centuries, but more since gay rights really began in the 1970s and especially now under the former Cardinal Joe Ratzinger aka Pope Benedict . By the way, please don’t bother writing that it is the behaviour, not the person they condemn. That is like saying I have nothing against Catholics, it is just the practice of Catholicism I condemn.

If I want a course in sophistry I will take one elsewhere.

Lately, the Catholic Church has launched broadsides against the growing movement for marriage or civil union rights for gay couples. The same church that does not recognize civil marriage does not want gay couples to have a marriage they do not recognize! Go figure! The present Pope has been putting pressure on European legislators to oppose any such laws. In the US, the former Pope John Paul in the 1990s sent a letter to all Bishops saying that discrimination against gays and lesbians could be justified in employment and housing.

There is a growing desire among many gays to strike back at them the next time they attack us by “outing” gay Catholic priests.

As gay people are aware, there is a very large number of Catholic Priests who are gay and have an active sex life in secret. I do not claim it is the majority of them, and for goodness’ sake please do not ask me for a cite: that sort of thing can hardly be quantified or studied objectively. But in every diocese we see priestly hypocrites who serve their homophobic organization by day and chase around the baths and gay bars by night.

Personally, as a gay man who has been happilly married to the same guy for over 30 years, I do not frequent baths and bars, but it is a known fact in the gay community which ones are the priests in civies (or walking around in towels).

When I went on vacation to Key West a couple of years ago, there were SIX different guys at the gay resort I stayed at who admitted to me they were priests. What was really cute was watching these collaborators sneak off to Sunday Mass at “Mary Queen of the Sea” (no jokes about the name) after cruising the clubs and bars of Key West the night before. Then, when their vacation ended, they all went back to their parishes in St. Louis, New York, etc. to support the Mother Church and the Pope in their preaching of Eternal Truth and Proven Morality. What bloody frauds!

In this day and age of cell phone photography, it would not be difficult for a small and organized group of gay people to catch these collaborators “in the act”. Then, the next time Ratzinger and his friends attack, you “out” a few of his priests in Europe and America. Maybe “out” several a day in retaliation.

I would never “out” a person just because they were gay. I normally respect a right to privacy. But closet gay hypocrites like, say, Roy Cohn in the 50s, who was a hatchet man for McCarthy, or J. Edgar Hoover, who persecuted gays, are really the kind who have it coming. Catholic priests who serve one of the world’s leading homophobic organizations and then creep around feeling our asses by night after kicking us in the teeth by day are precisely the kind who deserve outing.

What do people think of this idea?

Is this a joke? If we’re not allowed to disagree with your premise, and not allowed to ask for cites supporting your argument, then what do you expect people to post in this thread? Accolades for your obvious monopoly on truth?

Outing - wasn’t that used as a tactic in the 1980’s?

If anything is better now than it was then, is any of it due to outing?

I think if you are looking for yet another way to raise ire and prejudice against the gay community, you have found it. What positive results would you forecast coming from this, for anyone? Do you think the Pope is going to change his message? To you think that the parishioners back in New York or St Louis will thank you? Maybe a nice thank you card from the priests you out?

I would not expect a thank you card or a change in the Pope’s message, no. When French resistance fighters killed Vichy collaborators and blew up German military ordinance, they were not expecting thank you cards or a change in Hitler’s thinking. They were fighting back.

Gay priests who have sex with men and then give their lives, energy and intelligence to advancing the cause of a major enemy organization are collborating hypocrites.

Oh, I suppose you could make the argument that Marshall Pétain and his gang of traitors were just nice people trying to change the Third Reich from inside. I have heard a similar rationalization often enough from gay Catholics.

You have to take the long view. Outing gay priests casts the Catholic church in a hypocritical light. As a result, perhaps fewer men become priests, more parishioners become disillusioned and leave the church, which is slowly weakened by attrition. Will this one act cause the Church to change? No, but combined with a thousand other paper cuts, the Church will either change or bleed to death.

My premise is that the Catholic Church is actively homophobic. That Bishops like Bishop Henry of Calgary appear before Parliamantary Committees in Canada (one example; I am sure I can find multiple examples in the US and elsewhere) actively opposing with their Church’s money and influence all extension of rights to gay couples, or even protection for the civil rights of gay individuals. ) That in country after country thay have opposed everything from decriminalization of gay sex to gay marriage rights. I suppose I could google you specific examples, or get them from the news service at Gay. Com or other sites, but at some point I think we can accept certain things as so evident as to be granted.

All I am doing is warning you that I will not accept as valid the old argument used by pseudo-liberal Catholics: “Hey you have it all wrong. The Catholic Church has nothing against you. Just against homosexual practices. If you are attracted to your own sex that is 100% OK with the Pope and everyone else as long as you tie a knot in your dick and spend the rest of your life taking cold showers and saying your rosary. So you see, they are not anti-gay at all.”

I am saying that that argument is as sophistic as my saying I am not against Catholics per se, only the practice of their religion.

As to numbers of gay priests who are sexually active, I am only warning you that you can hardly expect any solid data, since very few of them would be willing to supply the necessary information. But once again, there is such a thing as common knowledge even when solid numbers are not available.

Truthfully I do not disagree with you on this point. The Church has engaged and continues to engage in statements and behavior with respect to gay rights that contradict its mission of respect and compassion. As a Catholic I’m not proud of that.

I do take issue with your premise that there is an epidemic of swinging gay priests living double lives. Obviously no one could produce a complete reckoning of priests’ sexual orientations but I do think that a statement like this:

demands some form of collaboration or evidence if you want your post to be taken seriously.

Okay, so you out them. Now what?

Do you expect the Roman Catholic Church to say “Goodness, we had no idea so many of our priests were gay. We’ll have to rethink our entire position on homosexuality”?

Or do you expect the Church to say “Hey, parish priest, you’ve been outed. If it’s true, you have to choose between sticking to your vow of celibacy - no exceptions - or being kicked out of the Church”?

Well, you’ll probably make Joaquín Navarro-Valls ecstatic. He wants to purge the church of all homosexual priests, so you’d make his job a lot easier.

On the other hand, your metaphor of “war” with analogies to Vichy France is a bit strained. Basically, you want to be able to petulantly harm some person for having socially imposed conflicts in his life just because you think you can. Given that the RCC is spectacularly failing to actually influence legislation, your analogy suffers from a lack of connection to the real world. Congratulations. You have just aligned yourself with the worst bigots within the RCC.

I think this is a really, really stupid idea. In the past, I’ve argued in favor of outing closeted hypocrites who use gay-bashing to advance their personal/political agendas, and I haven’t changed from the position. But you don’t know that the priests you see at Key West are gay bashers. Yeah, maybe they go back to their parishes and preach hellfire and damnation on Sodomites. Or maybe they go back and do whatever they can to make their parishoners, peers, and superiors more tolerant and open minded. Outing them, destroying their lives, and taking away their livlihoods isn’t going to help anything. If you know of a specific priest who has persecuted gays in public and porked them in private, go after him. But just because someone wears the collar doesn’t automatically make him your enemy.

And comparing this to the French fighting the Nazi occupation is completely stupid.

And this is going to come as a revelation to who? Outing gay priests isn’t going to change anyones minds about the Catholic church. It may harden feelings against gays though. (POW. ZOOT. WHAMMO) “Teach you to make Father O’Malley look bad”

Would anyone actually consider this action if the targets were a school district and teachers?

Someone might consider it if the school district and its teachers railed against homosexuality while in the midst of practicing it. Otherwise, I don’t see the analogy?

Unless it’s the Pope himself vacationing at one of these hot spots, I agree with those other posters who say this is a stupid idea. It will only make the Church even more repressive towards gays and will accomplish nothing positive. Wouldn’t it seem that the more gays who are priests, the more likely that the various parishes are going to try and be more accepting of gays?

Firstly, I could not care less if you are interested in hearing it or not, but no, the Catholic Church does not oppose homosexuals. Our stance on homosexuality is clear. We view it (quite accurately) as an mental illness. We don’t think being schizophrenic is a sin nor do we think being homosexual is a sin.

What is viewed as sin is homosexual acts, those are sin. And people who unremorsefully practice them are sinners and are going to hell. That’s the simple truth of the matter, and I can’t imagine why the Catholic Church would want to modify its stance on this position, sinners shouldn’t be encouraged in their sin.

As for how I feel about this idea, I have mixed feelings.

On the one hand, I think a campaign of personal attacks designed to ruin the lives of another person is both immoral and wrong, no matter their political beliefs. I wouldn’t do it to another person, because my conscience wouldn’t allow it. Most outspoken homsexuals are obviously already working against morals and decency, though, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d be all for this kind of campaign.

On the other hand, I don’t want practicing homosexuals as priests. People who are active homosexuals have no business being priests, and I would not want a practicing homosexual to be my priest. So, while I think it morally reprehensible to vindictively destroy someone’s life, ultimately it would be for the best in this situation because it would help get homosexuals out of the clergy.

Being gay is not a mental illness. Please tell me you don’t believe that.

Does something have to be a mental illness to be a sin?

The Catholic Church doesn’t have anything “against” any sinners. What I will say is that no, the Church does not act out against people simply for who they are. However, the Church does act to dissuade homosexual acts in society because the Church has no desire to see millions condemned to eternal damnation, which will most assuredly happen to practicing homosexuals.

I believe the Church also recognizes that the more accepted homosexuality is as a “lifestyle” and not correctly labelled as a mental illness, the more persons who have unnatural and unfortunate desires will feel it is appropriate to explore them. The Church’s interest is in seeing that people don’t come to view homosexual acts as acceptable, because the Church does not want to lose people to sin.

I believe that is the motivation for the Church’s actions.

This Catholic, however, isn’t necessarily in favor of the Church being so outspoken in political matters. I think that some sinners are beyond help, and are best left to their own devices. But I can respect those that take the extra step to try and save others.

Oh, I certainly believe it.

And no, you don’t need to link me to the APA or any other organization which once held this stance and then backed off of it. I believe that organizations in general have felt the pressure of society and have been politically dissuaded from being mroe outspoken about the truth of the matter.

That doesn’t change my feelings on the matter.

What is the source of your belief? Do you look to the Catholic Church to be the authority on anything that relates to science?

BTW, can we have a cite that the Catholic Church considers homosexuality to be a mental illness and not just a plain ol’ sin? Does it consider thievery to tbe a mental illness? What about adultery-- mental illness, too?

Not a Catholic and not necessarily defending Martin Hyde, but you can see the difference between the ACT of thievery and the ACT of adultery, and the state of being homosexual, right?

As I understand the church’s teachings, I can really really want a flatpanel monitor, and that isn’t a sin. If I break into the local big-box electronics store and snatch one off the shelf, that’s a sin. I can really really be attracted to a man, and that isn’t a sin. If I go have have sex with him, that’s a sin.

Even if you don’t follow the belief, surely you can differentiate between the state of mind and the actual, physical act?