Religion
Related: About this forumPope Signals Openness to Gay Priests
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324354704578635401320888608.htmlPontiff's Comments Suggest Greater Acceptance of Homosexuality Among Clerics
By STACY MEICHTRY
European Pressphoto Agency
Pope Francis held a press conference on the flight back to Italy after departure from Rio de Janeiro Sunday.
ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE Pope Francis opened the door on Sunday to greater acceptance of gay priests inside the ranks of Roman Catholicism as he returned to the Vatican from his maiden trip overseas.
Fielding questions from reporters during the first news conference of his young papacy, the pontiff broached the delicate question of how he would respond to learning that a cleric in his ranks was gay, though not sexually active. For decades, the Vatican has regarded homosexuality as a "disorder," and Pope Francis' predecessor Pope Benedict XVI formally barred men with what the Vatican deemed "deep-seated" homosexuality from entering the priesthood.
"Who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord?" the pontiff said, speaking in Italian. "You can't marginalize these people."
Never before had a pope spoken out in defense of gay priests in the Catholic ministry, said Vatican analysts. Past popes have traditionally treated homosexuality as an obstacle to priestly celibacy, and the Vatican has sent extensive instructions to Catholic seminaries on how to restrict gay candidates from the priesthood.
more at link
DURHAM D
(32,595 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)Here is the quote from him:
And then he goes on to talk about "clerics" who are gay, but celibate.
I am wondering if he meant this to be more inclusive than it is being reported, but it's hard to tell.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I think this may be a media issue.
http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/07/29/pope-francis-gays-should-not-be-marginalized/
DURHAM D
(32,595 posts)You are right the media is messing with the message. TV is also reporting it as "priests" only.
The Pope also took questions about the role of women in the church and he said that JPII settled the matter and they can't be priests but they do need a larger influence in the church. Won't hold my breath.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I feel optimistic about his statement about giving women more authority. Perhaps he is cautiously moving towards a compromise of some sort.
I also will not be holding my breath. Although I find the direction he is facing to be positive in many ways, the hurdles seem insurmountable.
okasha
(11,573 posts)"persons" includes women.
moobu2
(4,822 posts)homosexuality is an "intrinsic moral evil" ? I thought they were supposed to be infallible or whatever. If they were wrong before when claiming homosexuality was evil then why couldn't they be wrong now when he says this? Since it seems that it just depends on the opinion of whoever the Pope is then why couldn't they be wrong about everything? Anyway, words are cheap as they say.
okasha
(11,573 posts)only when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and doctrine. Neither the previous couple of popes nor the current one spoke ex cathedra on this matter, which is not in any case a matter of faith or doctrine. Rug should be able to clarify this more fully.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I guess technically he could be wrong as well, but he certainly is saying something that I want to hear him say.
Unfortunately, he apparently reiterated the church's stance on female priests.
I see them more as political leaders within a religious organization and not as infallible authorities.
But, then again, who's to say that god can't change his/her mind, lol?
rug
(82,333 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,150 posts)is something that might get overturned. And also saying those with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" cannot be priests:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
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, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture".
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html
rug
(82,333 posts)By the end of 1986 it had been removed. I expect this type of language will be abandoned as well. The RCC has no particular competence in determining what is a disorder.
Regarding gay priests, there is no per se bar. The problem with this document, as with others, is that it nowhere defines what a "deep-seated . . . . tendency" is. If the concern is that a person put his vocation to the priesthood foremost, that hedging language would also apply to any candidate who has a strong "tendency" to any other goal, be it women, gambling, drink, drugs, or expensive cars.
For an organization that prizes itself on the specificity of language, when it comes to homosexuality, it finds itself time and again relying on sub rosa assumptions and code. That may be changing, as the OP suggests.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,150 posts)and it still calls the 'tendencies' 'objectively disordered'.
Since we see that Cardinal Dolan immediately hit the morning show circuit to deny that anything has changed apart from 'tone':
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/07/30/dolan-reacts-to-pope-francis-comments-on-gay-priests/
http://www.today.com/news/cardinal-dolan-popes-gay-remarks-we-can-judge-actions-not-6C10791364
it looks like the US isn't planning on ordaining any gay but celibate priests in a hurry. The Onion may have been extremely close to reality:
VATICAN CITYFollowing Pope Francis tolerant remarks Sunday about homosexuals and the Catholic Church, Vatican officials reportedly went into crisis mode, announcing that the Popes thoughtful message of understanding was clearly taken out of context. It is not the official stance of the Pope or the Catholic Church that all people of good will who seek the Lord, especially gay people, should be accepted by Christ, a visibly nervous Vatican spokesman told reporters, adding that the Holy Father was clearly tired after his long trip to Brazil and never meant for his comments to sound caring or realistic. Homosexuality is a disorder. And this in no way means that, going forward, the Catholic Church will be an open-minded, more sensible organization. I assure you we are just as prejudiced and backward today as we were yesterday. Thank you. According to an anonymous source close to the Vatican, the Pope is currently being yelled at by Church officials, who are telling him, You dont just go off script like that. Who the fuck do you think you are?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/vatican-quickly-performs-damage-control-on-popes-t,33292/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023371513
rug
(82,333 posts)And the church is ordaining gay priests every year, most unknowingly. The key is celibacy. Father Mychal Judge was one of the better known gay Catholic priests.
The revelations about Judge's sexual orientation were not without controversy, however. Dennis Lynch, a lawyer, wrote an article about Judge that appeared on the website catholic.org. Lynch claimed that the priest was not gay and that any attempt to define him as gay was due to "homosexual activists" who wanted to "attack the Catholic Church" and turn the priest into "a homosexual icon".[44]
Others refuted Lynchs claims with evidence that Judge did, in fact, identify himself as gay, both to others and in his personal journals.[45][46]
Judge was a long-term member of Dignity, a Catholic LGBT activist organization that advocates for change in the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality.[47][48] On October 1, 1986, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued an encyclical, On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,[49] which declared homosexuality to be a "strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil". In response, many bishops, including John Cardinal O'Connor, banned Dignity from diocesan churches under their control. Judge then welcomed Dignity's AIDS ministry to the Church of Saint Francis of Assisi, which is under the control of the Franciscan friars, thereby partially circumventing the cardinal's ban of Dignity.[50]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mychal_Judge#Gay_orientation_and_affiliations
rug
(82,333 posts)Words to live by.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Words of your pope.
rug
(82,333 posts)prefunk
(157 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)but it says "move" of the prince of lies in this letter.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/03/letter-of-cardinal-bergoglio-to.html
rug
(82,333 posts)I have to read it more closely. This is a letter sent to cloistered Carmelite nuns which may explain his otherwise inexcusable language. I'm trying to dig up the letter he wrote on behalf of the Argentine bishops around the same time. That letter was intended to be read at Masses at the time same sex marriage was being considered in the legislature. I'm familiar with how the USCCB operates but not the Argentines. That type of overt politicking is far more dangerous.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)its bigoted, hateful, and I don't care if he was writing a letter to Jesus himself, that doesn't excuse it.
rug
(82,333 posts)Something of more interest to cloistered nuns than same sex marriage.
If you want to work yourself up into a righteous froth, find the letter he wrote on behalf of the Argentine bishops.
moobu2
(4,822 posts)I could have told him he wasn't anyone to judge anybody years ago.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)skepticscott
(13,029 posts)want to be married in the Catholic Church, who is he to judge?
Oh...wait...
More empty platitudes from the pope who is a master of them. Very big of him to say that he's Ok with gay priests when he already knows that the priesthood is rife with gay men that the Catholic Church doesn't dare try to root out. What will come next? His encyclical proclaiming that there is absolutely nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexual acts...or a bunch of Vatican lawyers issuing a statement "clarifying" what the pope really meant?
trotsky
(49,533 posts)1) The shortage of priests
2) What to do with homosexuals (men in particular) in the church
So you tell gay men they won't be judged, so long as they don't engage in any sexual acts. Oh hey, did I mention we have a job position for which you will then qualify? Let me tell you all about it!
Strange - the new pope still denies homosexuality is natural and normal, and liberals are praising him. I don't understand.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)He's aware of what fence Catholics and Catholic apologists desperately want to hear, and he's letting them hear it. Ignored of course is the massive unlikelihood of there being any actual change to fundamental Catholic doctrine or policies. The vague mouthings of feigned liberality make them feel warm and fuzzy and wanting to stay.
He knows how to make people think he's leaning without actually moving his feet one inch from the status quo
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)activism to within the Catholic Church. But no, this asshole tried to influence law in his native country, fuck him.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Is a gay person who denies their sexuality, according to the official RCC teachings.
But hey, let's spin that as being "accepting" of homosexuality. Makes for great PR!
okasha
(11,573 posts)Francis spoke in this interview about acceptance of gay priests. His position on this issue is a 180 turn from the unlamented Benedict's attempt to exclude gay men from seminaries and the priesthood. That's an improvement.
What an awful man he must be not to have reformed the RCC completely in four months.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Though less of an issue in the past, I think it may mean a great deal to some.
okasha
(11,573 posts)instead of "man." No doubt the ultra-consesrvatives will see it as a toe in the door that leads to women's ordination, though. (That will put Mel Gibson and the allegedly liberal Catholic-haters in bed together. Phew. I prefer not to imagine.)
cbayer
(146,218 posts)okasha
(11,573 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)conversation he had with one of his girlfriends.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,150 posts)He said: If a person is a Pope but has good will, who am I to judge them?
...
Speaking from behind the vaguely pulpit-like oven at the restaurant where he works, Logan said: Its fine for a man to have Pope-ish feelings, as long as he does not act on them in any way. Or lobby for religion.
...
Logans colleague Emma Bradford said: Because Toms very sexually frustrated hes gone a bit funny and developed a weird belief system. Basically he thinks he is a spokesman for this invisible being called Gorgonzola.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/who-am-i-to-judge-the-pope-says-gay-man-2013073077345
Via Slacktivist, who has more to say on this.
gopiscrap
(23,674 posts)to priestly marriage and to a greater role for women in the Church