underhi2p
Sep 23 2005, 02:31 AM
Vatican set to ban gay men joining priesthood
MARGARET NEIGHBOUR
HOMOSEXUALS, even those who are celibate, will be barred from becoming Roman Catholic priests under stricter rules soon to be released, according to reports yesterday.
A Church official "with authoritative knowledge of the new rules" was quoted as saying the question was not "if it will be published, but when", referring to the new ruling about homosexuality in Catholic seminaries.
The official, who did not wish to be named, said that while Pope Benedict XVI had yet to sign the document, which will apply to the Church worldwide, it would probably be released in the next six weeks.
Although work on the document began years ago under Pope John Paul II, who died in April, its release would be a defining act in the young papacy of Benedict.
The new Pope is a conservative who said last spring that there was a need to "purify" the Church after deeply damaging sex scandals of the last several years.
The official told the New York Times that the ban would pertain only to candidates for the priesthood, not to those already ordained. He also said the document did not represent any theological shift for the Church, whose catechism considers homosexuality "objectively disordered".
He added that the new rules called for barring even celibate men who considered themselves homosexual because of what he contended were the specific temptations of seminaries. "The difference is in the special atmosphere of the seminary," he said. "In the seminary, you are surrounded by males, not females."
A Vatican official confirmed a document on the issue would be released in the next few weeks which would reaffirm the Catholic Church's belief that homosexuals should not be ordained priests and also included some new guidelines.
The "instruction" from the Vatican's Congregation for Catholic Education would contain "some new things and some old things", the official said.
Catholic World News, a news agency, reported earlier this week that the document had actually been in the works since 1994.
The agency said the new document would indicate that men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained even if they are celibate "because their condition suggests a serious personality disorder which detracts from their ability to serve as ministers".
In an apparently new element, the agency said the document would also say that already ordained priests, if they have homosexual tendencies, would be "strongly urged to renew their dedication to chastity and a manner of life appropriate to the priesthood".
Archbishop Edwin O'Brien, the American prelate overseeing the evaluations, said earlier this month that most gay candidates for the priesthood struggle to remain celibate, but stressed that the Church was not "hounding" gay men out of the priesthood.
SRX
Sep 23 2005, 02:50 AM
Does this nix the plans of anyone here?
Will there be anyone left in the priesthood in ten years?
Friend Judy
Sep 23 2005, 03:10 AM
Wow. I'm reallly gonna get flamed here.
That said, Catholics shoud do whatever the Pope says. That IS they stated belief, that God informs the Pope, and the Pope tells the rest of us.
That is, if I correctly understand the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
(Though, if I understand it correctly, the new Pope hasn't invoked papal infallibility, he's just making a routine adminstrative rule as is required in any large bureaucracy, and hasn't as yet said a thing about "God says...")
Repub_Bub
Sep 23 2005, 03:12 AM
QUOTE(underhi2p @ Sep 23 2005, 02:28 AM)
HOMOSEXUALS, even those who are celibate, .....
Talk about something hard to get your head around.....
underhi2p
Sep 23 2005, 03:15 AM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 22 2005, 11:07 PM)
Wow. I'm reallly gonna get flamed here.
That said, Catholics shoud do whatever the Pope says. That IS they stated belief, that God informs the Pope, and the Pope tells the rest of us.
That is, if I correctly understand the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
(Though, if I understand it correctly, the new Pope hasn't invoked papal infallibility, he's just making a routine adminstrative rule as is required in any large bureaucracy, and hasn't as yet said a thing about "God says...")
[right][snapback]129324[/snapback][/right]
You fargin drunk again?
SRX
Sep 23 2005, 03:17 AM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 22 2005, 08:07 PM)
Wow. I'm reallly gonna get flamed here.
That said, Catholics shoud do whatever the Pope says. [right][snapback]129324[/snapback][/right]
Sounds about right.
What do the rest of us do?
Bart Katz
Sep 23 2005, 03:27 AM
QUOTE(Repub_Bub @ Sep 22 2005, 10:09 PM)
Talk about something hard to get your head around.....

[right][snapback]129325[/snapback][/right]
That's for sure.
Friend Judy
Sep 23 2005, 09:30 AM
QUOTE(Repub_Bub @ Sep 22 2005, 09:09 PM)
Talk about something hard to get your head around.....

[right][snapback]129325[/snapback][/right]
OK, I gotta ask. Why is it harder to get your head around a man attracted to men who isn't having sex with anybody than to get your head around a man attracted to women who isn't having sex with anybody?
Repub_Bub
Sep 23 2005, 09:43 AM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 23 2005, 09:27 AM)
OK, I gotta ask. Why is it harder to get your head around a man attracted to men who isn't having sex with anybody than to get your head around a man attracted to women who isn't having sex with anybody?
[right][snapback]129363[/snapback][/right]
It has something to do with how you use your head.
Friend Judy
Sep 23 2005, 10:31 AM
Ah, I see. That was just junior high bathroom humor, not political commentary.
Repub_Bub
Sep 23 2005, 10:59 AM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 23 2005, 10:28 AM)
Ah, I see. That was just junior high bathroom humor, not political commentary.
[right][snapback]129365[/snapback][/right]
A telling observation....your estimation of political commentary.
gtessex
Sep 23 2005, 11:38 AM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 23 2005, 06:28 AM)
Ah, I see. That was just junior high bathroom humor, not political commentary.
[right][snapback]129365[/snapback][/right]
Actually that has reached down into the 4-5-6 grade levels now!
davisął
Sep 23 2005, 12:07 PM
Humor impaired indeed.
Human Ills
Sep 23 2005, 02:56 PM
The Catholic Church previously looked the other way when gay men wanted to become priests?
Don't ask don't tell.
It works wonders for secular soldiers.
Friend Judy
Sep 23 2005, 03:38 PM
Yes. For about 30 years, it's been Catholic policy to put the emphasis on celibacy, rather than on which gender one is being celibate from.
SpaceCowboy
Sep 23 2005, 04:14 PM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 23 2005, 10:35 AM)
Yes. For about 30 years, it's been Catholic policy to put the emphasis on celibacy, rather than on which gender one is being celibate from.
[right][snapback]129457[/snapback][/right]
One suspects that the Roman church has been a de-facto haven for homosexual men since the ban on priests marrying.
Friend Judy
Sep 23 2005, 04:28 PM
There seems to be some sort of odd thought floating around here like you're not gay if you only lust but don't participate.
Human Ills
Sep 23 2005, 04:34 PM
QUOTE(Friend Judy @ Sep 23 2005, 08:25 AM)
There seems to be some sort of odd thought floating around here like you're not gay if you only lust but don't participate.
[right][snapback]129489[/snapback][/right]
LOL and what does that tell you about the folks that say such things?
Human Ills
Sep 23 2005, 04:35 PM
QUOTE(SpaceCowboy @ Sep 23 2005, 08:11 AM)
One suspects that the Roman church has been a de-facto haven for homosexual men since the ban on priests marrying.
[right][snapback]129482[/snapback][/right]
I don't see how that "naturally" follows.
Repub_Bub
Sep 23 2005, 04:38 PM
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Sep 23 2005, 04:32 PM)
I don't see how that "naturally" follows.
[right][snapback]129493[/snapback][/right]
"Naturally", now there's the rub.
SpaceCowboy
Sep 23 2005, 04:45 PM
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Sep 23 2005, 11:32 AM)
I don't see how that "naturally" follows.
[right][snapback]129493[/snapback][/right]
I'm not saying that the church sought gay priests, rather that in a social context in which smart, successful men typically married by middle age, gay men would find the priesthood a useful public explanation for their (closeted) sexuality.
Some gay folks marry opposite sex partners as "beards", for example.
Human Ills
Sep 23 2005, 04:58 PM
QUOTE(SpaceCowboy @ Sep 23 2005, 08:42 AM)
I'm not saying that the church sought gay priests, rather that in a social context in which smart, successful men typically married by middle age, gay men would find the priesthood a useful public explanation for their (closeted) sexuality.
Some gay folks marry opposite sex partners as "beards", for example.
[right][snapback]129497[/snapback][/right]
Ok now I understand.
Makes sense.
SRX
Sep 24 2005, 04:30 AM
QUOTE(SpaceCowboy @ Sep 23 2005, 09:42 AM)
I'm not saying that the church sought gay priests, rather that in a social context in which smart, successful men typically married by middle age, gay men would find the priesthood a useful public explanation for their (closeted) sexuality.
[right][snapback]129497[/snapback][/right]
It's a symbiotic relationship that worked out well for a long time. The church may not have sought, but they didn't avoid either.
Banning gay men is going to have consequences if they really mean it. I have my doubts they do.
Friend Judy
Sep 24 2005, 04:47 AM
The could solve the problem by allowing priests to marry, as they originally did.
SRX
Sep 24 2005, 05:27 AM
It might be a little late for that. They've been networking and covering for each other for so long I can't imagine the culture changing much just because they could marry if they wanted to.
Bart Katz
Sep 24 2005, 08:41 AM
No gay priests? What about prevert priests?
SpaceCowboy
Sep 24 2005, 09:17 AM
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Sep 24 2005, 03:38 AM)
No gay priests? What about prevert priests?
[right][snapback]129623[/snapback][/right]
They're still in like Flynt.
Human Ills
Sep 24 2005, 02:16 PM
I think they are trying to get the pedophiles out by telling gay men they aren't welcome.
Human Ills
Sep 24 2005, 02:17 PM
Would everyone feel better if priests started taking to molesting little girls instead of little boys?
Arturo_Vandelay
Sep 24 2005, 03:40 PM
I'd be fine if they'd stick to buggering each other.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.