Pope Ratzi moves closer to banning gay priests
“A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency, is not fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.”— from the long-awaited Vatican document on the admission of gays to seminaries.
[UPDATE: Freeperland inanity added below…]
Back in July, I posted about the document on Pope Ratzi’s desk that basically says homos, even celibate ones, are disqualified from serving as priests (“Is the Catholic church ready to purge the homos?”). Benedict has not yet decided what will happen with this document in terms of public adoption, but an article in today’s Guardian talks about the latest actions. The Vatican is sending an investigative team Stateside to see just how bad the potential situation may be — if this edict goes into effect, I wonder what percentage of those in seminary will have to be “re-evaluated” in regards to their orientation.
The controversial document, produced by the Congregation for Catholic Education and Seminaries, the body overseeing the church’s training of the priesthood, is being scrutinised by Benedict XVI. It been suggested Rome would publish the instruction earlier this month, but it dropped the plan out of concern that such a move might tarnish his visit to his home city of Cologne last week.
The document expresses the church’s belief that gay men should no longer be allowed to enter seminaries to study for the priesthood. Currently, as all priests take a vow of celibacy, their sexual orientation has not been considered a pressing concern.
…As the former head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican body charged with looking into the abuse claims, Benedict, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, was made acutely aware of the scale of the problem. He is thought to have made clearing up the scandal one of the key goals of his papacy.
Next month the Vatican will send investigators to the US to gauge the scale of the scandal. More than 100 bishops and seminary staff will visit 220 campuses. They will review documents provided by the schools and seminaries and may interview teachers, students and alumni, then report directly to the Vatican, which could choose to issue the instruction barring homosexuals from entering the priesthood as part of its response.
Studies show that a significant proportion of men who enter seminaries to train for the priesthood are gay. Any move signalling that homosexuals will not be allowed to join the seminaries, even one couched in the arcane language of the Vatican, could reduce the number of recruits to the priesthood. [Duh. And will they “grandfather” the queer among them now, and how on earth will that be handled?]
In a further sign of the instruction’s deeply controversial nature, it is expected the document would be signed by a cardinal rather than the Pope himself if the Vatican decides to publish it.
As I said in my last post on this…
The alternative is that the church will adopt the policy and create some sort of laughable continuum of sexual behavior that is deemed OK versus disqualifying. Can you have homosexual fantasies? Is that OK? How many, how often? Or will we get to the point that men entering the seminary will need to undergo some sort of sexual response testing — attach electrodes to their genitals, show them pornographic images of men having sexual encounters and boot out any that become aroused?
Also related, “ Pope Ratzi wants Bush to give him immunity.”
If the Holy Father is going to do this…AWESOME!!!”
“My daughter was telling us about a friend of hers whose father became a priest. He was the only non-homosexual in a seminary class of 30. I found this amazing, and sad.”
“It will not say “homosexuality is immoral”.
“Why not? Bet it doesn’t contain the words, “mortal sin,” “anathema,” or “excommunication,” either…I guess there’s just something about a desire to avoid controversy in a leader that rubs me the wrong way. Leaders are supposed to lead the way into controversy, sword drawn and held high.”
“He might be overestimating the number of homosexuals. There has developed a culture of effeminacy in many seminaries which is a separate vice from homosexuality.”
“This is where I get confused. If you’re celibate, does it matter who you lust for as long as you don’t act on it? How is it different if you lust for a woman or a man? Doesn’t man-on-man sex count as breaking the vow of celibacy? It seems the remedy to the problem is to enforce the no-sex-for-you rule. Personally, I don’t want to think of my priest as a sexual man – either hetero or homo.”
“The Vatican has been carefully trying to soften Benedict’s image since he was elected earlier this year. In recent weeks he has reached out to the Jewish and Muslim communities as well as young Catholics during the church’s World Youth Day. The initiatives have been seen as a significant PR success. For whose sake does the Pope need PR?? Or do they mean to say some “truths” need to be “softened”? I can’t imagine the Apostles fretting about “softening” Jesus Christ’s “image.””
“Yes, because lust for other men is a symptom of a mental disorder, and mental disorders cannot be compartmentalized. Further, it is difficult for a man with normal sexuality to remain celibate; if you’re starting with a man who suffers from a sexual disorder to begin with, you might as well expect a snake to tapdance as to expect him to keep his vows.”
“”Don’t want to think of my priest as a man” — No. Did you see the bio on John Paul last night on Hallmark? What a manly man, full of fire!! That’s what we need in priests. It makes for a true leader.”
“I think if the seminaries are cleaned up, straight men will be more attracted to the priesthood. Michael S. Rose’s exposee’ on the seminaries showed them to be anything but attractive to hetero, orthodox men. That this is one of the goals of B16’s papacy is so refreshing.”
“Just one more reason hordes of believers are leaving the Universal Cult. Repent and receive Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior before it’s too late. God’s principles do not change simply because people suddenly find them unpopular.”
“The homosexuals have turned the Catholic Church into Boys Town since Vatican II and its lax attitude towards the Scripture. I’d rather have 40 true priests than 40,000 non-belivers posing as priests in the US.”
“Why may I ask does B16, who at least is doing something about this horror and sinful actions of the Bishops for their knowlingly consecrating seminarians who are gay, when there is Canon Law FORBIDDING it already? Do not the Bishops even know their own Canons or are they homosexual as well? Is it because it is not the “new and improved JPII” version that looks the other way and is inclusive for all”? This ia just another plain defection and the Bishops, Cardinals and the Papacy should all be held accountable for ordaining openly gay seminarians with coming out parties and the Pink Palace, etc when Canon Law Prohibits this action, and little children paid the price, and now the church is by having to sell of church after to church-but the Cardinals serve no time, JPII gave Cardinal Law a nice cushy job, so there is no fear of being a pedophile except when they die and as Our Lord says in S
cripture “it is better a millstone be tied around the neck of one who harms the innocent children”. And is it not a mortal sin for one to be an accomplice to ones sinful actions? And there are those on this board and the Vatican themselves are still calling our past Pope JPII the Great, saint , martyr when he knowingly knew what was taking place and permitted these atrocities to continue.”
“Despite the risk of offending, yes it does matter. We have been created by God to have heterosexual attractions. Homosexual attraction are a sign of a disordered psychology. While the attraction of itself is only a temptation rather than a sin, a person with a homosexual attraction already shows a critical flaw in his personality. We should treat them the same as we would treat someone with other psychological disorders.”
“Prohibiting of Homosexual and Gay ordination has been Canon Law since 1961 but shelved for the spirit of liberalism, as the heterosexual priest did not fit nicely into the “springtime” agenda and hence the floodgates were let open to “open minded” seminarians, many of whom were Gay, and open to Woman Ordination and Married Priests, which was the goal of the radicals at the Council and still is. The priest shortage just play further into these liberal modernizers hands demanding for married and woman priests.”
“B16 is only pretending this never existed. Try visiting www.rcf.org as this organization has exposed the coverup from the begining,and B16 is just throwing things out there like he does with the TLM to get all of the Orthodox Catholics hopes up and then he does nothing. “
“I’m going to step out of bounds here and suggest something quite radical. The sex abuse scandal has actually been good for the Catholic Church. It has forced the liberal element to change its admission standards, as well as their formation programs in the seminaries. Beginning in November, a Vatican delegation will begin visiting and evaluating each and every Catholic Seminary in the US, to ensure that these measures have not only been approved but are in place.”
“Look around you at the other mainstream christian denominations. The ECUSA ordained an active homosexual to bishop; the Methodist Church now allows lesbian ministers to cohabitate and the Anglican Church has also given the nod to ‘celibate’, cohabitating homosexual clergy ;-). Even the Lutherans are rethinking their position on this issue. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, is cleaning up its seminaries and, if what this article purports to be true is a reality, will enact measures to screen out homosexual applicants. While it’s not yet time to crack open the Champagne, mine is chilling in the refrigerator.”
“Gays are more lable to act on their impulses in a seminary because it’s an all-male instutution.”