Pedophiles, Homosexuals and Ordination

[InThePew]

This is tough. If the sacrament is invalid but, the person goes around taking confession and giving Mass - what of the validity of those sacraments? What is this canonical process that is rarely used?

The sacraments are valid on the principle of ex opere operato - meaning “from the work worked”. In other words the work of the sacrament come from the action of the Sacrament and not from the priest. as for the canonical process, while it’s possible to investigate the circumstances surrounding a person’ ordination and conclude that it was invalid, this would be extremely complicated and reliant on the cooperation of the one ordained. It’s also generally presumed that, if a person applies for ordination (not to mention all of the preceding steps) saying that he’s doing it of he’s own free will, then he’s not being coerced! It’s easier and quicker just to defrock them.

Is the Church authority drowning in a glass of water with this whole pedophile and homosexual problem in the ranks of priests? Maybe it is high time to come down hard and make the priesthood unappealing for sexual predators.

Short answer is no. The John Jay report showed that pedophilia is no more prevalent in the Catholic priesthood than in any other group in society - if anything, slightly less than average. It also found that “Men who were seminarians during the period of a
reported increase in homosexual activity did not go on to abuse minors in any substantial number.” I’m always suspicious of books such as Goodbye good men which are basically pushing a point of view rather than taking an objective approach. I’m especially suspicious of those written by ex-seminarians since their experiences are not always representative and it’s also unclear whether the authors have come to terms with their own departure from the seminary. Still, in fairness, homosexuality was a considerable problem in seminaries in the 1970’s and '80’s - as acknowledged in the John Jay report. The bigger problem was a lack of action when allegations of abuse were reported and one of the major moves taken by Benedict XVI was to require all cases involving such allegations to be referred to Rome rather than being dealt with locally.

What do you (my reader if I have any, ) think about the following as a possible solution:

1. All priests upon ordination become citizens of the Vatican City State.

All priests upon ordination become part of a diocese or religious order - that is, part of the local Church. To make them citizens of Vatican City state (of which, incidentally, there are very few) would risk undermining this local aspect of the Church

1. Crimes of pedophilia committed by priests will be handled by the Vatican court. Countries would have to be signatory to a convention type of document.

The Vatican simply doesn’t have the resources to handle the costs and logistics of seeking the extradition of such priests and attendance of witnesses, let alone the ability to seek the agreement of every country where the Church is present (which is pretty much all of them). There is also the important principle that all crime is local - offences should be dealt with in the community where they were committed since justice should be seen to be done.

1. Change canon law to note that if a priest is found guilty of hurting children the sentence if life in a prison in Italy.

Again, the costs of keeping such priests in prison for life would be enormous and utterly prohibitive. Without reimbursement, Italy would refuse to incarcerate them.

If people never cared for the priesthood in the first place and only used it to gain access to vulnerable children or to be around males etc… they probably couldn’t care less about the defrocking.

Defrocking is the least of their worries - the criminal justice system (not to mention the criminal world) doesn’t take too kindly to those that prey on the vulnerable!

Finally, as far as screening is concerned, my own experience is probably fairly illustrative: my initial interview was with the vocations director and another priest and involved answering a number of questions about my life. I was then required to undergo a psychological assessment, involving a one on one interview with a clinical psychologist and completion of a questionnaire; before meeting with the bishop. During my time in the seminary, I have had one on one meetings with the formation director (who lives on site) approximately each month in which we discuss anything of concern (from my point of view or his). The rector also prepares a report on me each year which is sent to my bishop. Finally, progression to significant milestones within the seminary formation process requires a vote of confidence in me from the staff. All in all it’s more than a bit intense but that is of course deliberate if men are going to be adequately formed to be competent and useful priests.

 

[Abba]

Finally, as far as screening is concerned, my own experience is probably fairly illustrative: my initial interview was with the vocations director and another priest and involved answering a number of questions about my life. I was then required to undergo a psychological assessment, involving a one on one interview with a clinical psychologist and completion of a questionnaire; before meeting with the bishop. During my time in the seminary, I have had one on one meetings with the formation director (who lives on site) approximately each month in which we discuss anything of concern (from my point of view or his). The rector also prepares a report on me each year which is sent to my bishop. Finally, progression to significant milestones within the seminary formation process requires a vote of confidence in me from the staff. All in all it’s more than a bit intense but that is of course deliberate if men are going to be adequately formed to be competent and useful priests.

Thank you InThePew for participating in my little thread. I am honored. May God bless you and guide you in your journey.

The sacraments are valid on the principle of ex opere operato - meaning “from the work worked”. In other words the work of the sacrament come from the action of the Sacrament and not from the priest. as for the canonical process, while it’s possible to investigate the circumstances surrounding a person’ ordination and conclude that it was invalid, this would be extremely complicated and reliant on the cooperation of the one ordained. It’s also generally presumed that, if a person applies for ordination (not to mention all of the preceding steps) saying that he’s doing it of he’s own free will, then he’s not being coerced! It’s easier and quicker just to defrock them.

I don’t understand, ex opere operato - “from the work worked”. I thought that in order for certain sacraments to be valid, e.g. confession, the confessor must be a validly ordained priest. Of course, the principle of ex opere operato would resolve the problem caused by an invalidly ordained priest receiving confessions and the faithful walking away thinking they have actually received a valid sacrament. Of course, Jesus, would resolve that problem Himself, by actually forgiving the persons as it was their intention and they thought they were actually receiving a valid sacrament. http://thebabywearer.com/forum/styles/smilies/headscratch.gif So, the sacraments do not require administration from a validly ordained priests (leaving out baptism and marriage)?

 

[Abba]

The seminarians are not being very welcoming.

I thought I could be a gay Jesuit priest. I can’t believe how wrong I was.
washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/09/17/i-thought-i-could-be-a-gay-jesuit-priest-i-cant-believe-how-wrong-i-was/

Yeap, it looks like the seminaries are no longer the place to go and hang out and put life on cruise.

I don’t have any updates on the situation with the seminaries and convents of Puerto Rico, but I sure do hope Pope Francis is making sure it is taken care.

 

[InThePew]

Thank you InThePew for participating in my little thread. I am honored. May God bless you and guide you in your journey.

Thank you - the Lord has led me safe thus far!

I don’t understand, ex opere operato - “from the work worked”. I thought that in order for certain sacraments to be valid, e.g. confession, the confessor must be a validly ordained priest.

Sacraments do need to be administered by a validly ordained priest but it’s presumed that the priest was validly ordained unless shown otherwise. The Point of ex opere operato is that even when there’s something lacking on the part of the priest God basically fills in the gaps since it is He not the priest who is the source of grace in the sacraments.

The seminarians are not being very welcoming.
washingtonpost.com/postev…w-wrong-i-was/

Clearly there was a significant gulf between his expectations (not to mention his knowledge of Church teaching) and reality. What I think he didn’t seem to realise is that there’s a difference between being a gay seminarian and a seminarian who happens to be gay; the former are allow themselves to be defined by the sexuality, while the latter don’t. From reading between the lines, I’d also say that he also into issues around chastity - given his reference to homosexual relationships (a google search confirms this). Sadly for him, he was evidently in the wrong place for the wrong reasons. Certainly every person, regardless of his/her sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his/her human dignity and received with sensitivity and great care in both the Church and society. That doesn’t mean however that someone who is not emotionally mature in their sexuality (be they gay or straight) should be accepted into a seminary or order - or continue for that matter.

 

[808Catholic]

You may not have an issue with it, but the Church forbids it.

The Church does not forbid drinking and if people do it in excess well, that’s not good. Priests need to work out their own salvation that’s part of their journey.

I don’t know what the position of the Church is with people with homosexual tendencies who are already in the priesthood. How does the Church handle this?

“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[9], 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”” vatican.va/roman_curia/co…uzione_en.html

@Abba
I think you answered your own question.

“practise homosexuality” means actively engaged or engaging in homosexual activities/sex. Again, priests have a vow of celibacy whether they are heterosexual or homosexual.

“present deep-seated homosexual tendencies” means priests cannot be outwardly homosexual. By implication, I believe this means they cannot be outwardly heterosexual as well. I recall my years as a Boy Scout adult leader and our policy was no Public Displays of Affection (PDA). That meant, for adult leaders, when our spouses came to summer camp, a short peck on the lips might be okay but no long lingering kissing. Also meant no prolonged hugging and definitely no lap sitting! And this was addressed to married adult scout leaders. If you have a girl friend, forget about it. My point being, the Scouts knew who was married and looked to us as role models. We are in love but don’t have to be intimate in EVERY setting. Proper time and place for everything. Because a priest has a very visible leadership role, more so for him.

"support the so-called ‘gay culture’ " means you cannot publicly post comments or espouse the “gay culture”. This would be true for a priest who doesn’t get along with his Bishop or the Pope. You may not like them but you cannot go around telling others you don’t like them or, God forbid, think they are bad people. There are behavioral norms to being Catholic and we must accept them if we want to be and remain faithful Catholics.

 

[Abba]

@Abba
I think you answered your own question.

“practise homosexuality” means actively engaged or engaging in homosexual activities/sex. Again, priests have a vow of celibacy whether they are heterosexual or homosexual.

“present deep-seated homosexual tendencies” means priests cannot be outwardly homosexual. By implication, I believe this means they cannot be outwardly heterosexual as well. I recall my years as a Boy Scout adult leader and our policy was no Public Displays of Affection (PDA). That meant, for adult leaders, when our spouses came to summer camp, a short peck on the lips might be okay but no long lingering kissing. Also meant no prolonged hugging and definitely no lap sitting! And this was addressed to married adult scout leaders. If you have a girl friend, forget about it. My point being, the Scouts knew who was married and looked to us as role models. We are in love but don’t have to be intimate in EVERY setting. Proper time and place for everything. Because a priest has a very visible leadership role, more so for him.

"support the so-called ‘gay culture’ " means you cannot publicly post comments or espouse the “gay culture”. This would be true for a priest who doesn’t get along with his Bishop or the Pope. You may not like them but you cannot go around telling others you don’t like them or, God forbid, think they are bad people. There are behavioral norms to being Catholic and we must accept them if we want to be and remain faithful Catholics.

I am getting the impression that there seems to be an ongoing trend in this matter of rationalizing the teaching of the Church and providing little explanations here and there to close the deal. It may even be the case that this trend is being practiced at the seminaries. It makes it all fine and well for people suffering from SSA to be priests. it’s okay as long as you don’t show it and hide it well.

I think the state quoted above is self explanatory and expressed for all to understand clearly. Specifically the part that says people with 'deep-seated homosexual tendencies". By this phrase, it is not meant those who cannot hide it well. Instead, as other church document reveal, it is meant by those who are not merely suffering a teenage/youthful identity crisis which will pass.

There is a whole theology backing the reason for this statement which is not done away with by rationalizing and explaining away the statement. People who suffer from SSA effectively suffer from a disorder of sexual identity. This disorder renders them unable to fully participate in the father role a priest fulfills - a priest serves as a spiritual father figure and this creates a problem for someone who considers themselves a female in a robe trapped in the body of a male etc…

 

[808Catholic]

I am getting the impression that there seems to be an ongoing trend in this matter of rationalizing the teaching of the Church and providing little explanations here and there to close the deal. It may even be the case that this trend is being practiced at the seminaries. It makes it all fine and well for people suffering from SSA to be priests. it’s okay as long as you don’t show it and hide it well.

I think the state quoted above is self explanatory and expressed for all to understand clearly. Specifically the part that says people with 'deep-seated homosexual tendencies". By this phrase, it is not meant those who cannot hide it well. Instead, as other church document reveal, it is meant by those who are not merely suffering a teenage/youthful identity crisis which will pass.

There is a whole theology backing the reason for this statement which is not done away with by rationalizing and explaining away the statement. People who suffer from SSA effectively suffer from a disorder of sexual identity. This disorder renders them unable to fully participate in the father role a priest fulfills - a priest serves as a spiritual father figure and this creates a problem for someone who considers themselves a female in a robe trapped in the body of a male etc…

I may not have communicated my thought clearly so I’ll try again. I don’t believe the Church has anything “against” homosexuals just as they don’t have anything “against” heterosexuals. The Church sees all as children of God and does not see them based on their sexual preference or identity. If a priest showed too much affection for a woman, I believe the Church would be just as concerned as if another priest showed too much affection for a male. Does that help clarify my earlier response?

 

[CatholicSheila]

Actually, that I know of, I don’t hate anyone. I try to be generous with forgiving, it’s good for the soul. The ‘as we’ from the Our Father has always caught my attention. We ask to be forgiven as we forgive. I try to be generous so Our Lord will be generous with me. I also know that it is good for all when we forgive and I am into it.

Lumping someone in with paedophiles isn’t generally something we do to people we like. Even if you mean no offence, I don’t know a single gay person that wouldn’t take offence. How would you feel if someone lumped you in with paedophiles?

Telling them how generous you are with forgiving won’t really help. Unless you are saying you are forgiving them for something. What do you have to forgive them for? They haven’t sinned against you by been gay.

 

[Abba]

Lumping someone in with paedophiles isn’t generally something we do to people we like. Even if you mean no offence, I don’t know a single gay person that wouldn’t take offence. How would you feel if someone lumped you in with paedophiles?

Telling them how generous you are with forgiving won’t really help. Unless you are saying you are forgiving them for something. What do you have to forgive them for? They haven’t sinned against you by been gay.

Just one questions: Did you exchange pms with pianistclare?

 

[CatholicSheila]

Just one questions: Did you exchange pms with pianistclare?

Um… no. That’s a strange question.

Why would you even think that? He (I think he) has only made one comment in this thread and it had nothing to do with lumping paedophiles and gays together.

Even if I had, for whatever reason, why would that be relevant?

 

[Abba]

Um… no. That’s a strange question.

Why would you even think that? He (I think he) has only made one comment in this thread and it had nothing to do with lumping paedophiles and gays together.

Even if I had, for whatever reason, why would that be relevant?

Oops, pasted the wrong name. Pardon me. The question has been posed and here is the correct name: agnes therese

 

[Abba]

I may not have communicated my thought clearly so I’ll try again. I don’t believe the Church has anything “against” homosexuals just as they don’t have anything “against” heterosexuals. The Church sees all as children of God and does not see them based on their sexual preference or identity. If a priest showed too much affection for a woman, I believe the Church would be just as concerned as if another priest showed too much affection for a male. Does that help clarify my earlier response?

808Catholic,

My understanding is that a priest should never being showing interest in a male because a person that has SSA should not be a priest. The theology behind this is pretty much the same as the one which does not permit women to be priest. Neither a homosexual person nor a woman have the capacity to fulfill the role of priest (and on the side there are the problems the presence of homosexual persons in the priesthood, seminaries, monasteries and the Vatican has caused).

 

[808Catholic]

808Catholic,

My understanding is that a priest should never being showing interest in a male because a person that has SSA should not be a priest. The theology behind this is pretty much the same as the one which does not permit women to be priest. Neither a homosexual person nor a woman have the capacity to fulfill the role of priest (and on the side there are the problems the presence of homosexual persons in the priesthood, seminaries, monasteries and the Vatican has caused).

@Abba
That is not my understanding but I respect your opinion. Have a great Independence Day weekend!

 

[Abba]

@Abba
That is not my understanding but I respect your opinion. Have a great Independence Day weekend!

It’s not my opinion, itt is the teaching of the Church and it is for the good of all. I wish you a pleasant weekend as well.

Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.

Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem - for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

1. Discernment by the Church Concerning the Suitability of Candidates

There are two inseparable elements in every priestly vocation: the free gift of God and the responsible freedom of the man. A vocation is a gift of divine grace, received through the Church, in the Church and for the service of the Church. In responding to the call of God, the man offers himself freely to him in love[11]. The desire alone to become a priest is not sufficient, and there does not exist a right to receive sacred ordination. It belongs to the Church - in her responsibility to define the necessary requirements for receiving the sacraments instituted by Christ - to discern the suitability of him who desires to enter the seminary[12], to accompany him during his years of formation, and to call him to holy orders if he is judged to possess the necessary qualities[13].

The formation of the future priest must distinctly articulate, in an essentially complementary manner, the four dimensions of formation: human, spiritual, intellectual and pastoral[14]. In this context, it is necessary to highlight the particular importance of human formation as the necessary foundation of all formation[15]. In order to admit a candidate to ordination to the diaconate, the Church must verify, among other things, that the candidate has reached affective maturity[16].

The call to orders is the personal responsibility of the Bishop[17] or the major superior. Bearing in mind the opinion of those to whom he has entrusted the responsibility of formation, the Bishop or major superior, before admitting the candidate to ordination, must arrive at a morally certain judgment on his qualities. In the case of a serious doubt in this regard, he must not admit him to ordination[18].

The discernment of a vocation and of the maturity of the candidate is also a serious duty of the rector and of the other persons entrusted with the work of formation in the seminary. Before every ordination, the rector must express his own judgment on whether the qualities required by the Church are present in the candidate[19].

In the discernment concerning the suitability for ordination, the spiritual director has an important task. Although he is bound to secrecy, he represents the Church in the internal forum. In his discussions with the candidate, the spiritual director must especially point out the demands of the Church concerning priestly chastity and the affective maturity that is characteristic of the priest, as well as help him to discern whether he has the necessary qualities[20]. The spiritual director has the obligation to evaluate all the qualities of the candidate’s personality and to make sure that he does not present disturbances of a sexual nature, which are incompatible with the priesthood. If a candidate practises homosexuality or presents deep-seated homosexual tendencies, his spiritual director as well as his confessor have the duty to dissuade him in conscience from proceeding towards ordination.

**It goes without saying that the candidate himself has the primary responsibility for his own formation[21]. He must offer himself trustingly to the discernment of the Church, of the Bishop who calls him to orders, of the rector of the seminary, of his spiritual director and of the other seminary educators to whom the Bishop or major superior has entrusted the task of forming future priests. It would be gravely dishonest for a candidate to hide his own homosexuality in order to proceed, despite everything, towards ordination. Such a deceitful attitude does not correspond to the spirit of truth, loyalty and openness that must characterize the personality of him who believes he is called to serve Christ and his Church in the ministerial priesthood. **

Conclusion

This Congregation reaffirms the need for Bishops, major superiors and all relevant authorities to carry out an attentive discernment concerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders, from the time of admission to the seminary until ordination. This discernment must be done in light of a conception of the ministerial priesthood that is in accordance with the teaching of the Church.
Let Bishops, episcopal conferences and major superiors look to see that the constant norms of this Instruction be faithfully observed for the good of the candidates themselves, and to guarantee that the Church always has suitable priests who are true shepherds according to the Heart of Christ.

The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, on 31 August 2005, approved this present Instruction and ordered its publication.

Rome, 4 November 2005, Memorial of St Charles Borromeo, Patron of Seminaries

Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski
Prefect

J. Michael Miller, C.S.B.
Tit. Archbp. of Vertara
Secretary

 

[lalindsay225]

I am tired of seeing ill-informed people put those who experience SSA in the same category as those who molest children. FWIW, many pedophiles are married men who present to the world as straight. The people I know who experience SSA are just as disgusted by pedophiles as the rest of us.

If a man with SSA can be chaste, just like his heterosexual brethren, and meet all other criteria for entering a seminary, why should he be excluded?

 

[Abba]

I am tired of seeing ill-informed people put those who experience SSA in the same category as those who molest children. FWIW, many pedophiles are married men who present to the world as straight…

FYI, 70% of the child molestation committed by priests was done by priests who suffer from SSA.

It bothers you to see pedophiles linked to homosexuals? Allow me to inform you that it deeply troubles and hurts millions of Catholics to see pedophiles and homosexuals linked to ordination. Millions of Catholics still do not have access to the internet. I think it is thousands every day who begin to use the internet. There are isolated regions still which have not bee exposed to the scandals. They will come to know. The shock and pain continues.

It has not only been the children who were actually molested who were victimized. The children who come to know or those who in their adolescent years come to know are also victims. I have a neighbor who left the Church because of the scandal and says he wants nothing to do with a religion with such sick problems. His children were very young when he left the Church and he, of course, is not raising them in the faith. Those children along with all the other children who have been deprived of the faith and baptism and some day receiving the Eucharist are victims as well. Will they ever find their way to the Church? How about their children and their children’s children? Are you lamenting for them?

Do you feel sorrow for the millions of faithfuls who have been hurt by the scandals? I don’t know about you, but it hurts me to the bones. I mourn, I lament and am sorrowful. “Comfort, comfort my people” (Isaiah40:1).

John 16:20
Very truly I tell you, you will weep and mourn while the world rejoices. You will grieve, but your grief will turn to joy.

Revelation 7:17
For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; ‘he will lead them to springs of living water.’ ‘And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.’"

These are indeed, painful days for the faithfuls, but we are a people of hope. I hope for that ‘cascade’ and the tender love of God to heal the wounds caused by the scandals.

The prophet Isaiah is addressing a people that has been through a dark period of exile, a very difficult trial. But now the time of consolation has come for Jerusalem; sadness and fear must give way to joy: “Rejoice … be glad … rejoice with her in joy,” says the prophet (66:10). It is a great invitation to joy. Why? What is the reason for this invitation to joy? Because the Lord is going to pour out over the Holy City and its inhabitants a “cascade” of consolation, a veritable overflow of consolation – such that it will be overcome – a cascade of maternal tenderness: “You shall be carried upon her hip and dandled upon her knees” (vv. 12). As when a mother takes her child upon her knee and caresses him or her: so the Lord will do and does with us. This is the cascade of tenderness which gives us much consolation. “As one whom his mother comforts, so I will comfort you” (v. 13). Every Christian, and especially you and I, is called to be a bearer of this message of hope that gives serenity and joy: God’s consolation, his tenderness towards all. But if we first experience the joy of being consoled by him, of being loved by him, then we can bring that joy to others. This is important if our mission is to be fruitful: to feel God’s consolation and to pass it on to others! I have occasionally met consecrated persons who are afraid of the consolations of God, and … the poor things, they were tormented, because they are of this divine tenderness. But be not afraid. Do not be afraid, because the Lord is the Lord of consolation, he is the Lord of tenderness. The Lord is a Father and he says that he will be for us like a mother with her baby, with a mother’s tenderness. Do not be afraid of the consolations of the Lord. Isaiah’s invitation must resound in our hearts: “Comfort, comfort my people” (40:1) and this must lead to mission. We must find the Lord who consoles us and go to console the people of God. This is the mission. People today certainly need words, but most of all they need us to bear witness to the mercy and tenderness of the Lord, which warms the heart, rekindles hope, and attracts people towards the good. What a joy it is to bring God’s consolation to others!

Pope Francis.

 

[Abba]

If a man with SSA can be chaste, just like his heterosexual brethren, and meet all other criteria for entering a seminary, why should he be excluded?

He does not meet all the other criteria and we do not determine what those are or should be according to some other worldly profession etc…

No one has a RIGHT to the priesthood. It is a divine calling and the Church has the power and duty to discern and properly train those who are suitable. People who suffer with SSA are not suitable as they are unable to reach the emotional maturity required to serve in persona Christi and in persona Ecclesiae.

Isaiah 66:2
Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "These are the ones I look on with favor: those who are humble and contrite in spirit, and who tremble at my word.

Sometimes, we need to put ourselves aside and pray asking the Holy Spirit to enlighten us and then go back to the Church document and read it over. The document quoted is brief because the subject has already been addressed in other Church documents. There are churches and religions who refused to even acknowledge let alone address the question. CONGREGATION FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION
Instruction
Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations
with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

Some people who suffer from SSA may be sad to learn they do not fulfill the requirements for the priesthood but there are many other ways in which they can participate in the life of the Church which they would be most suitable. What we need to do is to support our brothers and sisters who suffer from this disorder, love them and guide them. We can also pray that our shepherds guide them well in their needs and how and the laity and families members on how best to guide and support with love and respect.

Peace.

 

[CatholicSheila]

Oops, pasted the wrong name. Pardon me. The question has been posed and here is the correct name: agnes therese

No. I haven’t pm’ed her either. Or anyone else in this thread. I don’t even recognise her name.

You are been a tad paranoid. 2 people agreeing with each other doesn’t mean they’re colluding against you. Go into any thread on this board and you will likely two people who agree with each other.

My statements are completely in line with what I have said previously on this board. In this case, agnes therese and I just happen to both think you are been offensive.

I find it interesting that despite been so supposedly full of charity (going by you’re “i’m very good at forgiving” line) you are so quick to assume people are working against rather than actually considering what they’re saying.

I want gays in the Church. Following Church teaching. Do you really think saying something that is seem as incredibly offensive to them is going to open any doors? Is someone going to be willing to have a discussion about the truth of Catholicism with you after you make such a comment about them? Seriously consider if you would have a civil conversation with someone after they associated you with a paedophile.

In the past week a friend of mine informed me he is walking away from the Catholic Church. He is a celibate gay man. He said that he can’t handle the nastiness any more. He’s now trying to find a gay friendly Church. He isn’t looking for someone to tell him it’s okay to act on his feelings. He wants a Church where he feels safe. Where he isn’t scared that when he goes to the service he will be informed that he is a danger to children. Where he knows his fellow parishioners won’t treat him like dirt. That is what he now associates Catholicism with. Not a beautiful religion full of reverence for the Lord, but a religion where people want to and do hurt him. Comments like yours have pushed him out of the Church. They tell him that he isn’t welcome with us. I repeat HE IS CELIBATE. He is not looking for a relationship. Yet we’re still hurting him and you don’t care. Why is that?

It’s hard for me to argue with him. I can’t tell him he’s wrong. He’s not wrong to be hurt. I’m not often lost for words but I don’t now how to respond. I can explain until I’m blue in the face what the Church teaches but I can’t argue with how Catholics treat him. I can only tell him you’re wrong and the Church does want him. It’s not very convincing when I’m the only person saying it and every one else is either silent or attacking him. What you are doing is an attack. I don’t know a single man that wouldn’t be deeply offended to be associated with paedophiles. There are very few men who wouldn’t feel attacked and go on the defensive after such a statement about them. Consider that there are few things (is there anything?) worse in society than harming a child. Especially sexually. You are associating gays with the people considered to be the worse our civilization has.

Stand by Church teaching. I do. That is hard enough for many gays to accept especially in the current environment where anything goes. Please don’t make it even harder for us to have a conversation with them. I don’t want to see any more of my friends leave the Church. If you care even one iota about the salvation of gays, then you will cease to lump them in with paedophiles.

 

[Abba]

I don’t see this as a viable solution for several reasons.

1. people will view it as the Vatican trying to protect the priests from the local law. When a criminal breaks local laws, the local jurisdiction usually want to punish the criminal using their laws so the local victim feels a sense of justice.
2. Every time an innocent priest is found innocent, the court of public opinion will say "there is the Vatican protecting another pedophile.
3. Italy is not going to want to be responsible for worldwide pedophile priests.

Additionally, I don’t think this will be as much of an issue moving forward for several reasons:

1. Most of pedophile priests are older, born before the sexual revolution
2. Back in those days, being gay was 100% taboo and man being single was very suspect. So it was easy for a gay man to hide in the priesthood. Many of these gay, pedophile priests joined the priesthood to hide from shaming their family for being gay. Being a priest would protect them all the questions regarding why they were staying single.
3. Today, gay men do not have the same social pressure to stay in the closet, so they have less reason to hide. Also, it’s not considered countercultural for a man not to marry either anymore. So the attraction of the priesthood for gay men, is not what it once was. And knowing Church teaching, it really isn’t a place that most gay men would want go if they plan on committing sexual sin.

Nice post.

Thank you for contributing your thoughts, you have made good points. It’s true, the attraction to ‘hide’ in the priesthood would not be as predominant now given the social acceptance of people suffering from SSA.