The Roman Catholic Church Bans Gays as Priests

[AGBF]

Well, the new Pope's promised document appears to have been disseminated. Most homosexual men will now not be "qualified" to be priests. That will mean, in the United States, that most men who might have joined the priesthood will be technically unqualified for it. I do not know, in the real world, if this will affect who joins the priesthood, however.

Also: I mean no diesrespect to Roman Catholics by saying that most priests are currently homosexual. I believe it to be an indisputable fact and one I know from my close associations with one priest and many Third Order Franciscans and brothers of the Missionaries of Charity. It is the new definition of homosexuality that makes so many of these men, who are or who try to be celibate in their actions, technically ineligible.

The new document will exclude "from the priesthood most gay men, with few exceptions, banning in strong and specific language candidates 'who are actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called "gay culture."' "

It is the phrase, "have deep-seated homosexual tendencies" which, I think, would affect the most men, if taken seriously.


Rome is to Ban Gays as Priests

 

[Rank Amateur]

It is difficult to say what effect this will have in the Catholic "real" world since the Catholic hierarchy does not live in the "real" world. I find it fascinating how the RC church''s positions, while reasonably consistent and defensible, are a huge detriment to the church''s development.

Add this ruling to the heap of things on which the Catholics won''t/can''t follow through because if they did it would be the end of their denomination as they know it.

 

[rubydick]

I suspect this issue will finally be decided by biologists and other scientists, rather than theologians. Just as study of the fossil record and other discoveries have convinced a majority of the scientific world that the planet is more than 5000 years old, it seems likely that scientific study will eventually discover strong evidence that sexual preference is determined more by genetics than some sort of learned behavior.

This is not just a seat-of-the-pants ramble. My brother is gay and he came out to me when I was 20 years old. At that time, my only reference to gays was a German businessman I traveled with on a bus from Istanbul to Kabul who was said to enjoy boys. When I moved into my brother's place in Hollywood in 1978, I was introduced to the "gay" lifestyle. Through meeting many of my brother's friends, I discovered this alternative world and became comfortable in it, despite the fact that I like girls. I learned what it's like to exist as a minority.

Shortly thereafter, I returned to Thailand, a country which has a completely different attitude towards gays. While I cannot say that gays/lesbians have full human rights, in Thailand they are treated in a far more decent manner than any other country I've visited.

Let me put this into USA perspective. Imagine you walk into Denny's and your waitress arrives at your table. He is obviously a man, but wears mascara, his nails are long and beautiful and he is wearing lipstick. He is all that and more. In Thailand, this is normal and accepted; in today's America, it is considered an outrage, the decline of civilization.

Obviously, in America, such a person would never be hired. But in Thailand this is generally accepted. I'm not trying to paint Thailand as some sort of paradise; the Land of Smiles has problems like anyplace else. But in Thailand, people of different sexual orientation are treated far better than most locales. The gay relative is not the complete black sheep, but just a lighter shade of gray. Witness the Chinese opera, where gays play most of the parts. For those who never saw it, an awesome movie is M. Butterfly.

Studies of twins separated at birth have suggested that, if one twin is gay, there is an increased chance the other twin will also be gay. It is research such as this that will finally disprove such religious/political dogma that sexual preference is a "choice." In my opinion, scientific studies such as these will eventually tip the balance, they will eventually convince a majority of people that sexual orientation is not a choice, but something that that comes naturally, no different from my attraction to the female sex. And arguments otherwise will become just as repugnant as those that were once advanced that the white race is somehow genetically "superior."

In summation: Don't look to the Catholic Church for revelation. How many years did it take to admit that the world is round?

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/23/2005 11:50:11 PM
Author: Richard Hughes

In summation: Don''t look to the Catholic Church for revelation. How many years did it take to admit that the world is round?

Gee!

that makes a pretty good argument ...

Do you think they even care what the background of the matter is? There is so much laundry to bleach about men in Catholic frock, that dogma may have just taken a flexible step back. The ban begs the question of enforcement. It is not that before it gay men would have been accepted - if anyone would have had any interest to act according to the rules.

 

[Rank Amateur]

Women held much of the power in the early church (i.e. first three centuries). They have been attempting a comeback for 1600 years, yet the Catholic Church has always lead the brigade to keep women down.

While women are demonstrably different when it comes to genetics it sure hasn't given them a foothold in the control of the RC church. Demonstrating that gay people are genetically different doesn't seem likely to gain them access to the Priesthood any time in the foerseeable future either. Especially with the frank and specific condemnation of male homosexuality in the OT.

I am not convinced that we will find a gene predisposing us to homo- tendencies. I suppose it would take us dissecting down to the level of personal preference (in all regard not just mating) and determining how much is arbitrary, nature, and nurture.

 

[fire&ice]

Why is this any significant development? Most churches have bans on gays even belonging to the church. The Catholic Church has never stopped gays from worshiping.

And, R/A - pray tell - what church/religion is so open to women? I know of Episopal Churches that ban women "priets".

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/25/2005 11:14:27 AM
Author: fire&ice
Why is this any significant development? Most churches have bans on gays even belonging to the church. The Catholic Church has never stopped gays from worshiping.


And, R/A - pray tell - what church/religion is so open to women? I know of Episopal Churches that ban women ''priets''.

united methodists have had woman pastors for years.
I dont see that as a problem.

I do see letting active gays in as priests as a very very bad thing.
The OT is very clear on it.

in-active not working with kids I see no problem with it.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/25/2005 12:25:42 PM
Author: strmrdr
I do see letting active gays in as priests as a very very bad thing.

The OT is very clear on it.


in-active not working with kids I see no problem with it.

Once again, someone has to point out that homosexuality is not synonymous with pedophilia. There are homosexual and heterosexual pedophiles. A homosexual who is not a pedophile poses no more risk to a child than does a heterosexual who is not a pedophile. I believe that the reason most cases of pedophilia by Roman Catholic priests which have come to light is the abuse of boys is the result of how drawn homosexual men in the United States are to the priesthood. In other words, the pedophile and the non-pedophile priests will all be preponderantly homosexual. It is the pedophiles, in my opinion, who should be weeded out, not the homosexuals!

Yes, the Catholic Church can demand celibacy of its priests. What bothers me is that it seems inconsistent to imply (as Roman Catholicism does) that any sin can be forgiven and yet that some people, due to innate character, not thoughts or actions, should be less worthy of the priesthood than others. (This reasoning, that one is pre-ordained to be saved or not, sounds positively Calvinistic in fact!) I find that inconsistent and consistency is the one thing I think we can ask of any religion.

I agree with R/A that the Roman Catholic Church is usually consistent in its reasoning, whether one agrees with it or not.

 

[rubydick]

Deb,

Thanks so much for stating the obvious.

How about if we wrote it thus: "Negros are far more likely to rape white women."

We''ve mostly gone beyond that with regard to race relations. But when it comes to a discussion of gays, we are right back into the realm of strange fruit.

i expect I''ll be long gone before any change really comes. but this doesn''t mean we should quit. this planet is such a glorious place, each corner reveals some new secret. i''ve met so many who feel all is known. not me. as i trace lines, contours, ride the ripples,

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/25/2005 11:56:45 PM
Author: Richard Hughes

this planet is such a glorious place, each corner reveals some new secret. i''ve met so many who feel all is known. not me. as i trace lines, contours, ride the ripples,

Funny saying in this context...

... because the church does claim to know quite a bit. Comparative religious studies do not feed back into their subject - it would be inconceivable.

 

[fire&ice]

Priest ARE celibate. I don''t understand why sexual orientation should be an issue.

Historically, Methodist have been the most liberal, especially in regards to women. That was one of the reasons the "conservatives" did not like Bush''s 1st Sup. court nomination. She was a Methodist and as such - is viewed as more liberal. But, I still see most religions/churches as sexist.

 

[movie zombie]

Date: 11/25/2005 12:25:42 PM
Author: strmrdr

I do see letting active gays in as priests as a very very bad thing.
The OT is very clear on it.

and the OT is also very ok with slavery, multiple wifes, stoning, etc.....practices which we don''t condone in this day and age, thankfully!

peace, movie zombie

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/26/2005 10:19:29 AM
Author: fire&ice
Priest ARE celibate. I don''t understand why sexual orientation should be an issue.

Well...some are and some are not, but as long as the Catholic Church continues to forgive sin, a lapse in celibacy (confessed and repented for) should, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, be regarded like any other sin for which forgiveness has been asked and granted. As far as I understood it, the Catholic Church condemned some actions (and inactions) and some thoughts. It did not condemn a person for innately being of a certain nature.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 11/27/2005 2:35:16 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/26/2005 10:19:29 AM
Author: fire&ice
Priest ARE celibate. I don''t understand why sexual orientation should be an issue.

Well...some are and some are not,

They are *supposed* to enter into a life of celibacy. PERIOD. It''s a vow taken. Having a "policy" is nuts because it states upfront that the vow will be broken.

One can argue all day about the attraction of pedifials or homosexuals - but the truth be that most of the sexual abuse was man on man/boy. And, being a Catholic all my life - it''s not a leap of faith that the "policy" (as crazy as it may be for a number of reasons) is a direct result of the sexual abuse scandal.

 

[Rank Amateur]

Is certainly is true that some demoninations don''t allow female ordained ministers. And I''ll grant that I don''t know the numbers, but I''ll say that most Protestant denominations DO allow women as ordained ministers. A UCC (United Church of Christ) congregation near me has a female associate pastor who was ordained as a Presbyterian. The Methodist church I once attended has a woman as its District Superintendent. I''ll even go so far as to guess that women are getting close to being the majority of those in Seminary. Women (ordained or not) may hold all the top posts in many Protestant local or national churches and have a meaningful votes in decisions.

Women (in fact all lay people) in the RC church have only the power given to them by the (self-ordained) men. This is tantamount to having no real power at all. To me, it''s a strange thing.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/28/2005 9:58:56 AM
Author: fire&ice
They are *supposed* to enter into a life of celibacy. PERIOD. It's a vow taken. Having a 'policy' is nuts because it states upfront that the vow will be broken.

I am not sure that the new policy assumes that the vow will be broken, only that humans are fallible and that, therefore, it is possible a vow will be broken. To avoid all the scandals involving homosexual pedophilia the church is attempting to get rid of homosexual priests in case (being human) they sin and break a vow. As I said, it would be better advised to be rid of pedophiles, whether they prefer boys or girls!