‘It Is Not a Closet. It Is a Cage.’ Gay Catholic Priests Speak Out

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Annie said:
We have already seen what happens when religious are replaced by people who need salaries. If we replace a celibate priest with a married priest and helpful layperson, we will have a huge increase in costs, just as we did when Catholic schools were no longer staffed by nuns and are now financially out of reach of many Catholic families.
Click to expand...
Ah. So the reason we have a celibate priesthood boils down to money.

I thought so.

Edit: I should add that most diocesan priests are not religious, they are secular and are in fact paid already.
 
Last edited:
Secular priests are paid very little.

I think it was you who mentioned there had been married priests in the Middle Ages and that had worked… Well, no, it didn’t work. One of the problems was that clergy started thinking they owned aspects of their position and wanted their sons to inherit those things.

Additionally, there can be conflicts between priestly duties and family duties as well as a host of other issues that don’t come up with celibate priests and weren’t so much of an issue in the Middle Ages.

And if you think married men don’t have issues with their sexuality,such as porn addiction, you haven’t been paying attention.
 
Thorolfr said:
But you don’t actually know, of course, that it wouldn’t work now.
Click to expand...
Which is why I said I’m really uncomfortable trying something like a married priesthood simply to see if it sticks.
Thorolfr said:
And it is possible to get some idea since Orthodox priests can be married and Protestant denominations have married clergy. They all seem to get along without any serious problems serving their congregations. Is there something that Catholic priests do in terms of how they serve the people in their congregations that is significantly different and absolutely requires them to be unmarried? Do Catholic clergy serve the people in their congregations much better than what Orthodox priests, for example, serve the people in their congregations because they are unmarried?
Click to expand...
There is a monastic history to the priesthood that’s being ignored here. Priests are not simply presiders over a prayer service.
 
OraLabora said:
So while the law remains strict, it is clear that it is also an ideal to which all are called but to which all fall short (we are all sinners) and it requires a long time, often a lifetime, to overcome our shortcomings against the law.
Click to expand...
I doubt anyone here disagrees with this. The difficulty is with the conclusion that because of this, moral standards should be changed and relaxed. That’s…not Catholic.
 
Annie said:
I think it was you who mentioned there had been married priests in the Middle Ages and that had worked
Click to expand...
It wasn’t I who said that. In fact I don’t think medieval circumstances are terribly relevant to today’s reality.

I still support the idea of married secular priests though. I think the more relevant experience is priests who are converts from other ecclesial communities as well as Orthodox and Protestant priests and pastors. They work in the same social context.
gracepoole said:
I doubt anyone here disagrees with this. The difficulty is with the conclusion that because of this, moral standards should be changed and relaxed. That’s…not Catholic.
Click to expand...
As a monk I know says, “strict in doctrine, merciful in pastoral care”.
gracepoole said:
There is a monastic history to the priesthood that’s being ignored here. Priests are not simply presiders over a prayer service.
Click to expand...
Priests are actually a relatively minor aspect of the Rule of St. Benedict, the primary rule of Western monasticism. There generally were few priests in a monastery in St. Benedict’s time. The eventual evolution into choir monks (priests or priest-candidates) and lay brothers came later, mostly around the time of Cluny when a more florid liturgy took greater precedence.

Indeed many priests were supplied by monasteries, and this continues to this day in many places.

Being close to several monk-priests though, I can say that the monastic priesthood of today (especially in the contemplative houses) is very different than the secular priesthood. The latter has evolved into something different, excluding the sacraments of course (most monastic priests do not do baptisms though).
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
There is a monastic history to the priesthood that’s being ignored here. Priests are not simply presiders over a prayer service.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church and what became the Orthodox churches in the east didn’t split until 1054 and the latter churches also had a history of monasticism. Maybe you think that they’ve ignored their history of monasticism by allowing their priests to marry?
 
Thorolfr said:
40.png
gracepoole:
There is a monastic history to the priesthood that’s being ignored here. Priests are not simply presiders over a prayer service.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church and what became the Orthodox churches in the east didn’t split until 1054 and the latter churches also had a history of monasticism. Maybe you think that they’ve ignored their history of monasticism by allowing their priests to marry?
Click to expand...
Maybe.

(10 and such)
 
gracepoole said:
I doubt anyone here disagrees with this. The difficulty is with the conclusion that because of this, moral standards should be changed and relaxed. That’s…not Catholic.
Click to expand...
I haven’t understood OraLabora to be saying that standards should be changed, only that there should be more tolerance for people when they fail to meet those standards, and people shouldn’t beat themselves up too much if they fail to meet those standards sometimes. I agree with what he says about the Law of Gradualness, although I find troubling things in Scripture on this issue that make me doubt God sometimes because I can’t believe that God would really be like this. For example, there is a story in Numbers 15:32-36 about what happened to a man who violated the Sabbath one day by picking up fire wood:
32 When the Israelites were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses, Aaron, and to the whole congregation. 34 They put him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. 35 Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him outside the camp.” 36 The whole congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.
Click to expand...
If the average person got stoned for telling a few lies sometimes or occasionally not going to church on Sunday without a good reason, there wouldn’t be many people left.
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
So you are saying that men may choose priesthood after they have a wife and kids and likely a job to support them?

I find that dubious at best.
Click to expand...
In the Orthodox Church, the candidate for the priesthood is married first, then after marriage, he is ordained.
 
gracepoole said:
I’m really uncomfortable trying something like a married priesthood simply to see if it sticks.
Click to expand...
It has been tried already. The first Pope of the Catholic Church was a married man and Jesus did not have any problem choosing him. Further, the Orthodox Churches have had a married clergy and I don’t see why that has been a problem for them?
 
MikeInVA said:
But that doesn’t mean the rules should be changed, we just have to try harder. Jesus calls us to greatness, not mediocrity.
Click to expand...
The rules were changed from how they were set up by Jesus. Jesus chose a married man to be the first Pope. The rules were changed later on to require celibacy.
 
Last edited:
That doesn’t stop people with those problems from coming in.
 
Last edited:
goout said:
A married priest is statistically more likely to have a well ordered sexual life.
Click to expand...
I’m still waiting for a definition of "well ordered sexual life. The phrase came up earlier in the thread and I inquired about it then. Could you elaborate please?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top