The Pope and gay Priests

[UDS]

@Chickenwrangler

Some interesting insight on the subject.

Yes my OP was inspired by a q-and-a session with the Pope with reporters on his flight back from attending World Youth Day in Brazil.

I understand that things go on behind closed (Church) doors and no doubt many priests are homosexual but the Clergy are not supposed to have ANY sexual orientation.

The press naturally want to create news and given recent events in the Church and the general drift towards gay awareness it’s a question they would ask.

Within the Church the question whether a priest is heterosexual or homosexual should never come up. So why would the Pope even entertain the question?

Your assumption that the clergy are not supposed to have any sexual orientation is wrong.

They are supposed to be celibate. But they are also supposed to be healthy mature men, and that includes having a healthy, mature and well-integrated sexuality. They are not supposed to be asexual; just celibate.

Which raises the question, can a healthy, mature and well-integrated sexuality be consistent with a homosexual orientation?

There’s a strong view - not an unquestioned view by any means, but a strong view - in the Catholic tradition that the answer is, basically, no. Homosexuality is not oriented towards the good of procreation; therefore it is in some (important) sense deficient. On this view, we all ought to be heterosexual; those of us who aren’t are, in some sense, “broken”. (Just to put that in context, we’re all “broken” in Catholic thinking; gay people would be “broken” in this particular way, but not uniquely “broken” compared to the rest of humanity.)

The question is, is this particular “brokenness” something which should be a bar to a man becoming a priest? Mostly the church has tried to fudge this issue; on the one hand, you have your purists and puritans who would be horrified if the answer was no, it shouldn’t; on the other hand you have those who would be horrified if the answer was yes, it should; on the third hand you have the practical reality that, if you succeed in barring all gay candidates, you have a lot fewer priests; on the fourth hand you have the practical reality that, in an institution with a well-established don’t-ask don’t tell culture, how can you exclude all gay candidates? And if you can’t enforce such a rule, what is the point of having it?

But relatively recently, Pope Benedict did come down on one side of this question; men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” should not be ordained. General delight in certain quarters; general dismay in others. And the subtext behind all these questions to Pope Francis is, does he agree with Benny’s position? Is he going to change the way the position is stated? Is he going to change the way it’s implemented? Is he going to support it, publicly reverse it, quietly bury it, something else? And the existence of a widely-spoken-of “gay lobby” within the Vatican provides journalists an opportunity for raising the issue.

[sisu]

@Inner_Stickler

That reads to me like, don’t be femmy limp-wrist and don’t march in any pride parades. Someone who’s gay, celibate, and wears just enough flannel shouldn’t pose a problem.

Why am I singing the Lumberjack Song after reading this?

@Ferret_Herder

My wild-ass guess: because some people believe that even being homosexual is sinful, which could be seen as being incompatible with the priesthood. The Pope apparently does not agree.

Remember we are all sinners, not being flippant but if JC could talk to prostitutes etc then who is the Pope to judge. He is trying to not exclude people from approaching the church and entering into a conversation. The church may think that certain acts are sinful but we can all be redeemed.

[sisu]

@UDS

But relatively recently, Pope Benedict did come down on one side of this question; men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” should not be ordained.

My reading on that was that anyone with deep seated sexual tendencies should probably address those before entering the priest hood, all we need is a bunch of randy priests running around.

[UDS]

@sisu

My reading on that was that anyone with deep seated sexual tendencies should probably address those before entering the priest hood, all we need is a bunch of randy priests running around.

Well, possibly, but I’m not so sure.

The instruction offers three bars to ordination; practising homosexuality, presenting “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” or supporting “the so-called ‘gay culture’”.

I think the first criterion rules out candidates who are sexually active (with men). The second criterion, it seems to me, is aimed at men who are not sexually active at all, and indeed who may be committed to celibacy, but who nevertheless have an already-established gay/homosexual identity or orientation.

“Deep-seated” doesn’t seem to mean “compelling sexual activity”. In the instruction, it’s opposed to “transitory”. So, if you fooled around with other boys during adolescence, but now you’er an adult and identify as straight, not a problem.

[Captain_Amazing]

@Chickenwrangler

Within the Church the question whether a priest is heterosexual or homosexual should never come up. So why would the Pope even entertain the question?

The whole thing came up (and the Vatican issued the "no gay priests’ rule) after a scandal at an Austrian seminary in 2004, when an Austrian magazine uncovered a bunch of pictures of professors at the seminary groping and kissing students. A further investigation revealed a lot of gay porn on the school’s computers. That was the proximate act that led to the decision.

[monavis]

If one reads John, he calls himself the disciple that Jesus loved. One could take that to mean Jesus was gay. Because it would seem Jesus loved all people. So John would be considering himself s a special kind of love?

[monavis]

I have a nephew who is a RC priest and he has had several break downs, perhaps celibacy Is too difficult?

[Munch]

@Chickenwrangler

Within the Church the question whether a priest is heterosexual or homosexual should never come up. So why would the Pope even entertain the question?

Why “should” it never come up? Your underlying assumption that since celibacy is a rule therefore sex simply doesn’t exist within the clergy is incorrect. Remove that assumption, and you have your answer.

[Ulfreida]

Homosexuality within the priesthood is a big festering issue in the Catholic Church. Remember that the priesthood as a product of European and North American Catholic culture is, essentially, dying. Most priests from these cultures are aging. They became priests at a time when one absolutely had to hide one’s homosexuality, and if marriage was out of the question for you, becoming a priest was a fairly common respectable hideout.

There are a LOT of gay priests. It wouldn’t surprise me if it was above 50% (including both celibate and active). That would be my guess for my own diocese, anyway.

The hardening of policy against homosexual priests is recent, and corresponds to the ascendancy of conservative power in the hierarchy. But everyone who is newly enforcing these policies must be perfectly aware of the real situation.

So, politically, Francis appears to be trying to ease the stranglehold the conservatives have gained over the hierarchy of the church, this being one example.

I wish him all the luck in the world.

[Bullitt]

Reported.