'I’m gay and I’m a priest, period.’

[otjm]

There is no ambiguity in church teaching regarding homosexuality. While we are commanded to be merciful, we are clearly instructed that carnal activities between members of the same sex are abominations in the sight of God.

God declared the veracity of these things to man both in the Law, and by His Holy Word( Jesus). Homosexual priests, like the moneychangers in the Temple, would be removed by Christ from His Holy Church in much the same way. Our Lord was very clear in His actions and His deeds. Jesus and th Church are ONE: that is why we kneel before His Holy Alter.

You see, Jesus Christ, Son of God, reached out to repentant sinners with an unmatched mercy, but to those who would defile a Holy Place, he was clear in His negative reaction.

Homosexual priests upon His Holy Alter, officiating at Mass, must be a great affront to Him. We should ALL feel the shame. There is no place in our Church for such things. It is a grave offense to the lord.

In part, you are conflating two issues - same sex attraction, and same sex activity.

I am not in disagreement with you as to activity; they absolutely should be removed. and as rapidly as possible.

However, as to attraction, if a priest is chaste - that is, he is not sexually active, it is unlikely that the priest will be removed from the priesthood, any more than a priest who has heterosexual attraction being removed if he is chaste.

Not long after the John Jay report came out, there was a spate of guessing how many priests had same sex attraction, To the best of my knowledge, there has not been any valid study indicating what percentage of priests have this, but the guesses were ranging from 10% to 80%.

Whether or not the Church will ordain an individual with SSA I will leave to others to discuss; the rules can be read two ways. However, those priests who were ordained before the rules came into existence have about zero likelihood of being removed, if they are chaste, if for no other reason than we have a shortage of priests and that is not getting better. Currently there are a little less than 1 priest per parish (per data from CARA); the Church is extremely unlikely to start any sort of investigation into each and every priest’s attraction unless a priest is found to be unchaste, and that in itself presumes the information would ever get to a decision maker.

That is just reality. That is not to say that if tomorrow, we all could start from ground zero, that different decisions might be made as to given individuals. But we are not starting from there. And as best I can ascertain, there is no rule on the books that an individual already ordained could be removed from the priesthood, for ssa, if he lives a chaste life - whether he openly admits to having ssa, or not.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

In part, you are conflating two issues - same sex attraction, and same sex activity. I am not in disagreement with you as to activity; they absolutely should be removed. and as rapidly as possible.

However, as to attraction, if a priest is chaste - that is, he is not sexually active, it is unlikely that the priest will be removed from the priesthood, any more than a priest who has heterosexual attraction being removed if he is chaste.

I don’t think one can equate the two attractions that the Church says one of them is disordered. I will probably get flak for this but the attraction is only a part of a package. If that were not true, then there would not be a much higher rate of suicide, substance abuse, violence, promiscuity and disease than in the rest of society.

 

[otjm]

I don’t think one can equate the two attractions that the Church says one of them is disordered. I will probably get flak for this but the attraction is only a part of a package. If that were not true, then there would not be a much higher rate of suicide, substance abuse, violence, promiscuity and disease than in the rest of society.

I am not arguing about how the Church characterizes ssa. I am responding to a specific post.

Some people seem to feel that any priest with ssa should be removed from the priesthood. Perhaps that is not what their post meant to say, but that is how it came across. And as I noted, it is at a minimum highly unlikely that a chaste priest with ssa would be removed.

I am well aware of other issues; they were not the subject of that post. I am aware of studies having to do with the sexually active homosexual population, but since I am not speaking about sexually active people, your comment doesn’t seem to have any bearing.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I am not arguing about how the Church characterizes ssa. I am responding to a specific post.

Some people seem to feel that any priest with ssa should be removed from the priesthood. Perhaps that is not what their post meant to say, but that is how it came across. And as I noted, it is at a minimum highly unlikely that a chaste priest with ssa would be removed.

I am well aware of other issues; they were not the subject of that post. I am aware of studies having to do with the sexually active homosexual population, but since I am not speaking about sexually active people, your comment doesn’t seem to have any bearing.

It does have bearing because of the wrongness of equating the two attractions. Simply put, one is geared towards procreation, the other isn’t.

 

[Thorolfr]

I don’t think one can equate the two attractions that the Church says one of them is disordered. I will probably get flak for this but the attraction is only a part of a package. If that were not true, then there would not be a much higher rate of suicide, substance abuse, violence, promiscuity and disease than in the rest of society.

You’re analysis is always so simplistic. A lot of the statistics on issues such as suicide, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc. are probably outdated and these issues do not necessarily arise from someone’s sexual orientation but from the fact that many LGBT people have been rejected by their families, still suffer from oppression and prejudice, can be fired from their jobs for being gay, etc. Every gay person in the US doesn’t have liberal parents and relatives who are accepting of a gay family member and weren’t raised in a faith tradition that is welcoming to LGBT people. Every gay person in the US does not live in a city like San Francisco where it is much easier to be openly gay, even in your work place.

 

[gus]

While I’m not at leisure to find the data at present, I believe the vast majority of the sex abuse cases were pederasty.

In a 50 year period there were about 10,000 reported cases of sexual abuse .
It’s true in cases where the victims where between 12-17 the overwhelming majority were of victims were boys .
In younger children ,what would be defined a true pedifile , the mix was closer to even.
That indicates a strong homosexual case in the the older population.
The other anomaly is that of the 4,000 accused priests over 2,000 of them had only one complaint. That runs contrary toe the profile of a true pedifile.
To put the abuse crisis in perspective there are 400,000 reported cases of abuse annually
With some estimates as high as ten time that number.

 

[crai7]

'I’m gay and I’m a priest, period.’
WASHINGTON POST

God, what are you calling me to do here, prayed the priest. Come out, or stay in the closet ?

After 23 years in Chicago parishes, the question had pushed its way to the surface.

He weighed his options. He thought about his parishioners. Many, he knew, were accepting of gay people, even of same-sex marriage, but others — less so. He had grown up in a large Catholic family; he understood what people’s faith meant to them. He didn’t want to harm his flock, or the Catholic Church.

He wondered if he could be penalized in his job. And, in truth, he considered his status. He knew many Catholics had what he might call a romanticized view of the priesthood: Priests are supposed to be pure, almost above the world of sexuality, selfishly willing to give up creating a family of their own to serve God. This would mean falling from that pedestal…MORE:

How does one determine they are gay unlesss they know they have a sexual attraction toward males? If they have attraction toward males shouldn’t this condition disqualify them from entering into ministry since the all male environment would increase their temptation?

**Homosexual practice was banned for a reason. **The rectal cell wall is only one cell layer thick, it is easily damaged - meaning viruses and bacteria enter the bloodstream with ease. Additionally, ejaculate itself is immunosuppressive and sperm can enter the bloodstream directly. Add to this the frequent tearing and fecal matter, and you can imagine the results.

This is supported by empirical evidence in terms of disease prevalence. Homosexuals are far more likely to spread disease according to the Centre for Disease Control. In fact, certain STDs are almost unheard of outside the homosexual population.

So no, he shouldn’t be in the priesthood, since he will potentially cause extensive harm.

SOURCES:

catholiceducation.org/en/marriage-and-family/sexuality/the-health-risks-of-gay-sex.html

healthland.time.com/2012/07/20/hiv-continues-to-spread-among-gay-men-studies-show/

cdc.gov/msmhealth/std.htm

 

[Thorolfr]

**Homosexual practice was banned for a reason. **The rectal cell wall is only one cell layer thick, it is easily damaged - meaning viruses and bacteria enter the bloodstream with ease. Additionally, ejaculate itself is immunosuppressive and sperm can enter the bloodstream directly. Add to this the frequent tearing and fecal matter, and you can imagine the results.

This is supported by empirical evidence in terms of disease prevalence. Homosexuals are far more likely to spread disease according to the Centre for Disease Control. In fact, certain STDs are almost unheard of outside the homosexual population.

So no, he shouldn’t be in the priesthood, since he will potentially cause extensive harm.

SOURCES:

catholiceducation.org/en/marriage-and-family/sexuality/the-health-risks-of-gay-sex.html

healthland.time.com/2012/07/20/hiv-continues-to-spread-among-gay-men-studies-show/

cdc.gov/msmhealth/std.htm

Annal sex is not only a “homosexual practice.” Plenty of straight couples do it to. According to Psychology Today:

How prevalent is heterosexual anal sex? No one knows. Anal sex has long been considered taboo–and in some quarters, still is–so people may not be honest when surveyed about it. But since the early 1980s when receptive anal intercourse was identified as a key route of HIV transmission, research into anal sex, including heterosexual anal, has increased substantially, and all credible evidence suggests that hetero-anal has become increasingly popular.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

You’re analysis is always so simplistic. A lot of the statistics on issues such as suicide, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc. are probably outdated and these issues do not necessarily arise from someone’s sexual orientation but from the fact that many LGBT people have been rejected by their families, still suffer from oppression and prejudice, can be fired from their jobs for being gay, etc. Every gay person in the US doesn’t have liberal parents and relatives who are accepting of a gay family member and weren’t raised in a faith tradition that is welcoming to LGBT people. Every gay person in the US does not live in a city like San Francisco where it is much easier to be openly gay, even in your work place.

No, you’re the one spreading simplistic notions. Countries that celebrate homosexuality have high rates of the same. The argument that they are abusing drugs, etc., because society doesn’t accept them is grossly outdated. Your other contention that hetero couples engage in sodomy is not relevant either since they are not the population infested with HIV. However, it is known that male bi’s do infect their female spouses or partners.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

**Homosexual practice was banned for a reason. **The rectal cell wall is only one cell layer thick, it is easily damaged - meaning viruses and bacteria enter the bloodstream with ease. Additionally, ejaculate itself is immunosuppressive and sperm can enter the bloodstream directly. Add to this the frequent tearing and fecal matter, and you can imagine the results.

This is supported by empirical evidence in terms of disease prevalence. Homosexuals are far more likely to spread disease according to the Centre for Disease Control. In fact, certain STDs are almost unheard of outside the homosexual population.

So no, he shouldn’t be in the priesthood, since he will potentially cause extensive harm.

Oh gosh, thanks so much for bringing this up. It is really central to all the puddle jumping around the squeamish reality of what happens when you put the reproductive system into the digestive. They were not made for one another, if we’re talking only about natural law and not religion!

The mass media propagation of this lifestyle is reminiscent of when they were promoting “Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should”. The reality: not only did it initially taste bad but it became the passport into lung cancer and other dreadful health disorders. However, smoking tobacco actually pales in contrast to the dangers of STD’s, colon and oral cancers.

Thus, I was not surprised to read but gratified that someone actually admitted it, the extra work for doctors and ER’s during and after so-called Pride events. People only see the glitter and are stupid enough not to imagine the reality.

 

[Thorolfr]

No, you’re the one spreading simplistic notions. Countries that celebrate homosexuality have high rates of the same. The argument that they are abusing drugs, etc., because society doesn’t accept them is grossly outdated.

Which imaginary countries are you talking about which “celebrate homosexuality” and where LGBT no longer suffer from oppression and homophobia? Are you referring perhaps to a county such as the Netherlands?

According to an article from 2013 with the title, “Reflecting on 12 years of gay marriage in the Netherlands”:

Homophobia remains
Twelve years of same-sex marriage did not wipe out homophobia from society. For instance, Yunus, now 9, and his adoptive mothers had to go into hiding, fearing for their safety.

Bullying and victimisation also still occurs on a daily basis. A recent study by Dutch and American scientists concluded that lesbian, gay and bisexual youths are still victims of stigmatisation in their families, schools and neighbourhoods.

These words and acts have tragic consequences: almost 64% of the surveyed LGBT 18-24-year-olds in the study reported thinking about suicide and almost 13% of them attempted suicide. For straight Dutch youths of the same age group, the figures are respectively 10.3% (thought about suicide) and 2.2% (attempted suicide). The study suggests that ongoing persecution, especially at school and by the parents, are linked to increased risks in suicidal thoughts and attempts.

Chambon notes that there have been a handful of lesbian couples who had to move because of negative and aggressive reactions from their neighbours. But, he says, those are “marginal epi-phenomena”, equivalent in numbers to the occurrence of migrant families who had to move because of racism in their neighbourhoods. However, he recalls that, when looking for a new flat with his husband, several people strongly recommended against moving to a few districts in Amsterdam because they fear the locals’ reactions. Proof, if need be, that equality is only real when the mindset, not only the legal framework, changes too.

euronews.com/2013/04/01/reflecting-on-12-years-of-gay-marriage-in-the-netherlands/

Also, people who have suffered from homophobia for decades are not going to suddenly be healed in a decade just because things are slightly better now than what they were.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Which imaginary countries are you talking about which “celebrate homosexuality” and where LGBT no longer suffer from oppression and homophobia? Are you referring perhaps to a county such as the Netherlands?

According to an article from 2013 with the title, “Reflecting on 12 years of gay marriage in the Netherlands”:

euronews.com/2013/04/01/reflecting-on-12-years-of-gay-marriage-in-the-netherlands/

You know with real problems in the world like real persecution of Christians and sects like Yazidi’s where they are routinely tortured and killed, driven from their homes and/or sold into slavery, I can’t really bother so much about snubbing that only hurts the ego.

Quite frankly, I wouldn’t want a couple like the one you mentioned with a child next door to me. Removal of social disapproval has allowed this Trojan Horse into the city. Homophobia, that is, fear of homosexuality per se, is not such a bad thing if it puts us on guard against its real and present dangers.

 

[otjm]

**Homosexual practice was banned for a reason. **The rectal cell wall is only one cell layer thick, it is easily damaged - meaning viruses and bacteria enter the bloodstream with ease. Additionally, ejaculate itself is immunosuppressive and sperm can enter the bloodstream directly. Add to this the frequent tearing and fecal matter, and you can imagine the results.

This is supported by empirical evidence in terms of disease prevalence. Homosexuals are far more likely to spread disease according to the Centre for Disease Control. In fact, certain STDs are almost unheard of outside the homosexual population.

So no, he shouldn’t be in the priesthood, since he will potentially cause extensive harm.

SOURCES:

catholiceducation.org/en/marriage-and-family/sexuality/the-health-risks-of-gay-sex.html

healthland.time.com/2012/07/20/hiv-continues-to-spread-among-gay-men-studies-show/

cdc.gov/msmhealth/std.htm

Unless there was something in the article that indicated he was sexually active, you are going beyond any evidence. Perhaps I missed it in the article; if so, please note. Otherwise, your comment is completely out of line.

 

[otjm]

Annal sex is not only a “homosexual practice.” Plenty of straight couples do it to. According to Psychology Today:

And I will reiterate: perhaps I missed something in the article indicating this priest was sexually active; if so, please note.

Otherwise this post is essentially irrelevant.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Unless there was something in the article that indicated he was sexually active, you are going beyond any evidence. Perhaps I missed it in the article; if so, please note. Otherwise, your comment is completely out of line.

I don’t believe so. There is a picture in the article of an elderly priest with a child. If the message is “I am gay, dearie, but I am still a priest”, the kid is going to wonder 1) what is that exactly? and 2) if he is a priest, it must be OK. What would be the difference for a child to understand if he is acting on his desires or not?

As with cigarettes, the risks involved with condoning this lifestyle should also be made known quite clearly without all the sugar coating and white washing.

 

[clem456]

Which imaginary countries are you talking about which “celebrate homosexuality” and where LGBT no longer suffer from oppression and homophobia? Are you referring perhaps to a county such as the Netherlands?

According to an article from 2013 with the title, “Reflecting on 12 years of gay marriage in the Netherlands”:

euronews.com/2013/04/01/reflecting-on-12-years-of-gay-marriage-in-the-netherlands/

Also, people who have suffered from homophobia for decades are not going to suddenly be healed in a decade just because things are slightly better now than what they were.

People who suffer from homophobia are confused about human nature.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

People who suffer from homophobia are confused about human nature.

Again, phony science and hijacking of language - there is no pathological condition called “homophobia”.
It’s as if you don’t agree with naked pride parades, YOU must be sick!
Phobia means"fear of", and there is plenty to fear from this movement.
So even if someone if afraid (and what Christian should be?), there is some rational basis for it.

 

[clem456]

Well aren’t I in an odd position here…

 

[crai7]

Unless there was something in the article that indicated he was sexually active, you are going beyond any evidence. Perhaps I missed it in the article; if so, please note. Otherwise, your comment is completely out of line.

Whether or not this specific individual practices or not is irrelevant. If the intent of this individual is to ‘normalise’ homosexuality in the priesthood/clergy, then that is a step too far. An environment that says it is normal or okay, is an environment that makes it that much easier to sin. Detailing the problem makes the consequences of this sin clearer.

 

[crai7]

Oh gosh, thanks so much for bringing this up. It is really central to all the puddle jumping around the squeamish reality of what happens when you put the reproductive system into the digestive. They were not made for one another, if we’re talking only about natural law and not religion!

The mass media propagation of this lifestyle is reminiscent of when they were promoting “Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should”. The reality: not only did it initially taste bad but it became the passport into lung cancer and other dreadful health disorders. However, smoking tobacco actually pales in contrast to the dangers of STD’s, colon and oral cancers.

Thus, I was not surprised to read but gratified that someone actually admitted it, the extra work for doctors and ER’s during and after so-called Pride events. People only see the glitter and are stupid enough not to imagine the reality.

You’re exactly right, the perceptual distortions generated by the media are central. Another area where there is a major distortion is in relation to the percentage who are gay. According to the CDC, only 1.6% of the population identifies as gay/lesbian, and yet when Americans are asked what percentage of their fellow citizens are gay/lesbian they imagine the number is closer to 23% (Gallup)!