Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

[CutlerB]

That’s ridiculous. We’re all sacrificing to do what we’re called to do. And who is to say that a priest is giving up anything? What makes you think he would find a mate? That’s all speculative.

Living a Christian life is a sacrifice in and of itself. We sacrifice our own wills for God’s will. You can’t sit there and put one priest over another one based on the scenario you put forth.

I’m sorry, but I don’t see the point. Whether a priest or not, he is called to resist sin, and sin is itself evil. A heterosexual is not giving up something which he is called to give up anyway, but something that is intrinsically good. That is certainly a difference.

Neither do I see why finding a mate makes something more or less sacrificial. It’s the possibility he’s giving up, which applies universally.

 

[ThinkTwice]

I heard the same thing on CBS news this morning and nearly fell on the floor when they said our Pope said he wont Judge Gay Priests"
Which is why I am on line here at Catholic Answers,I need answers and understanding. For me I do not trust the content of the above comment ., but I did hear it with my own two ears.

I look forward to be better understanding of what he means.

That’s the way I read it but I think the Pope was referring to having a gay attraction.

But it seems to me whether heterosexual or gay priest if they fail in there vows to abstain from sex its no biggie.

 

[Kamaduck]

But it seems to me whether heterosexual or gay priest if they fail in there vows to abstain from sex its no biggie.

I have no idea what you’re talking about. Neither is allowed, and a mortal sin is the complete opposite of “no biggie”.

 

[The_Bucket]

So a heterosexual priest is giving up something that he could have otherwise chosen. That’s true enough. But to that end I say… so what? And I don’t mean that in a way that’s dismissive. I mean it literally. So what? What if Pope JP2 had same-sex attraction? Would that be relevant? Would that change the fact that he was a saint?

What if one of the blessed Apostles personally wrestled with same-sex attraction? We don’t know if they did or did not; we do know that it’s also not relevant because they lived saintly lives!

If the Church wants to more carefully scrutinize someone entering the seminary because he has same-sex attraction, that’s fine with me. Why? Because he’s surrounded by a bunch of other men and some of them may share his inclination. That’s potential trouble… for their own souls.

But outside of that environment, what does a priest’s personal sexual inclination have to do with their living out his vows and exercising his faculties? Nothing. It makes him no more or less likely to violate his vows with other adults and certainly no more or less likely to commit egregious crimes like sexual abuse.

 

[maryjk]

Father Jonathan is on Fox News right now explaining what was said.

 

[JontheMaronite]

One inclination is correctly ordered and one is disordered. To put them on the same moral plane is very wrong.

Nailed it. And Pope Francis has not put them (the inclinations) on the same moral plain. The sinners are on the same moral plain, the sins are not. Yet, dispositions towards disorders (just like alcoholism, etc) are definitely examined and weighed as part of the criteria of the process toward the priestly vocation. The Bucket is treading on very thin ice, and I advise him to take care.

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

It does when one is considering the priesthood.

The priesthood, at it’s nature’ is sacrificial. It involves sacrifice.

When a heterosexual priest gives up the Natural Good of marriage for the sake of the priesthood, that is a sacrifice. Something Good is given up to in exchange for a life of service to others.

In the case of a homosexual priest, there is no Natural Good given up in choosing to be celibate, there is not the level of sacrifice that is entailed with the heterosexual priest.

There really IS a difference in celibacy in a heterosexual priest and a homosexual one. One gives up a Natural Good in order to serve, the other is doing what they are called to do anyway.

The Eastern rite priests have no mandate for celibacy, though they may voluntarily practice it. So that strikes away the main substance of what TheBucket is arguing. Celibacy is sacrificial, a vocational sacrifice beyond the sacrifices expected of each member of the church, so his reply to your point is a non-sequitor. Celibacy is simply to remain unmarried, and thus to abstain from sexual intimacy. Chastity is sexual fidelity to God in one’s chosen state of life. Thus, for a man with homosexual attractions to become priest, his celibacy merely fits within his dedication to chastity and is not a vow or voluntary promise beyond that chastity to offering up the moral good of marital union.

 

[The_Bucket]

I have no idea what you’re talking about. Neither is allowed, and a mortal sin is the complete opposite of “no biggie”.

Yeah no kidding. It’s easy to get caught up in the narrative the press is using here, but take the Holy Father’s words as they were delivered. He noted that St. Peter committed terrible wrongs but was still given the papacy… and in that way pointed out that even clergy who commit terrible sins like fornication and sodomy can be forgiven and have their responsibilities restored.

Then he went on to explain that clergy members cannot be restored if they have committed crimes like sexual abuse. What’s hard to understand here?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

It does when one is considering the priesthood.

The priesthood, at it’s nature’ is sacrificial. It involves sacrifice.

When a heterosexual priest gives up the Natural Good of marriage for the sake of the priesthood, that is a sacrifice. Something Good is given up to in exchange for a life of service to others.

In the case of a homosexual priest, there is no Natural Good given up in choosing to be celibate, there is not the level of sacrifice that is entailed with the heterosexual priest.

There really IS a difference in celibacy in a heterosexual priest and a homosexual one. One gives up a Natural Good in order to serve, the other is doing what they are called to do anyway.

Well, sure, a homosexual is giving up a counterfeit good. But giving up an apparent good is no less a sacrifice – in terms of difficulty – than giving up a real good. It is a HUGE sacrifice for a person to give up heroin, even though heroin is not good for them.

 

[Megan7]

Before your side breaks out the champagne and before my side gets our knickers too much in a bunch, why don’t we wait until an actual transcript comes out.

The secular media has been wrong about the Church, in general, and this Pope, specifically, too many times to accept this report at face value.

As Archbishop Chaput said a couple of years ago,

We make a very serious mistake if we rely on media like the New York Times, Newsweek, CNN, or MSNBC for reliable news about religion. These news media simply don’t provide trustworthy information about religious faith—and sometimes they can’t provide it, either because of limited resources or because of their own editorial prejudices. These are secular operations focused on making a profit. They have very little sympathy for the Catholic faith, and quite a lot of aggressive skepticism toward any religious community that claims to preach and teach God’s truth.

I think his admonition would include ABC, as well.

Thanks.

 

[CutlerB]

So a heterosexual priest is giving up something that he could have otherwise chosen. That’s true enough. But to that end I say… so what? And I don’t mean that in a way that’s dismissive. I mean it literally. So what? What if Pope JP2 had same-sex attraction? Would that be relevant? Would that change the fact that he was a saint?

That’s got nothing to do with it. No one is disputing that people with same-sex attraction can be saints, as long as they don’t act on it and die in that state, of course.

 

[CutlerB]

Well, sure, a homosexual is giving up a counterfeit good. But giving up an apparent good is no less a sacrifice – in terms of difficulty – than giving up a real good. It is a HUGE sacrifice for a person to give up heroin, even though heroin is not good for them.

True, but he’s not supposed to be doing it in the first place. As Brendan says, it’s not a Natural Good being given up. Difficulty is not the same as sacrifice, I believe.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

But outside of that environment, what does a priest’s personal sexual inclination have to do with their living out his vows and exercising his faculties? Nothing. It makes him no more or less likely to violate his vows with other adults and certainly no more or less likely to commit egregious crimes like sexual abuse.

As a man with same-sex attraction, I disagree. Men with SSA are more likely, in the priesthood, to violate their vows. Why? Because they are told to hide their attractions even from close friends, and what is hidden breeds sin. There is a reason that gay men “hook up” FAR more than heterosexual men. It is because they do not live in the light. Shame creates an environment where sin grows.

That is, until a hero like Francis turns on the light!

(Caveat: I don’t think a gay man living in the light is more likely to violate his vows than any other man. All the more reason for us to allow these men to be unashamed of their temptations).

 

[Prodigal_Son]

True, but he’s not supposed to be doing it in the first place. As Brendan says, it’s not a Natural Good being given up. Difficulty is not the same as sacrifice, I believe.

But the temptation of a man with SSA lies to him, telling him that the good of homosexual actions is authentic. So it is experienced as a sacrifice.

 

[ThinkTwice]

Yeah no kidding. It’s easy to get caught up in the narrative the press is using here, but take the Holy Father’s words as they were delivered. He noted that St. Peter committed terrible wrongs but was still given the papacy… and in that way pointed out that even clergy who commit terrible sins like** fornication and sodomy can be forgiven and have their responsibilities restored.**
Then he went on to explain that clergy members cannot be restored if they have committed crimes like sexual abuse. What’s hard to understand here?

Oh cool a priest can go screw someone wife get some time off and have his priesthood restored. What a joke

 

[MyMy123]

What does that mean, “judging?” I’ve been thinking a lot lately about tons of different topics and one of the questions I keep asking myself about lots of different topics is, “What does that even mean?” Imprecise language is the death of reasonable conversation and all argument. I’m not putting down what the Pope said, but I just wish we would all define exactly what we mean, either explicitly or implicitly, before we say it.

Agreed. But the Pope to me seems to want to just become famous. Deep down it seems like he just wants to get popular as the guy who is making changes. He probably feels that the imprecise language helps in that regard. Meanwhile, some poor souls will be lost because of his imprudent thinking.

 

[CutlerB]

But the temptation of a man with SSA lies to him, telling him that the good of homosexual actions is authentic. So it is experienced as a sacrifice.

I understand your point, really I do. But somehow I also understand the other side. One should still make a distinction between an actual sacrifice and an experienced one, at least the term would suggest that to me.

The Oxford Dictionary of English defines sacrifice as the following:

an act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy:

Now, if you are a faithful Catholic (which you should and most likely would be if you want to become a priest), you wouldn’t value SSA, would you? How then, would that fit the sacrifice? (cf. “experienced sacrifice”)

 

[CutlerB]

Oh cool a priest can go screw someone wife get some time off and have his priesthood restored. What a joke

Your comments are a joke, would you please leave. Good day. :knight2:

 

[RKO]

Before your side breaks out the champagne and before my side gets our knickers too much in a bunch, why don’t we wait until an actual transcript comes out.

The secular media has been wrong about the Church, in general, and this Pope, specifically, too many times to accept this report at face value.

As Archbishop Chaput said a couple of years ago,

We make a very serious mistake if we rely on media like the New York Times, Newsweek, CNN, or MSNBC for reliable news about religion. These news media simply don’t provide trustworthy information about religious faith—and sometimes they can’t provide it, either because of limited resources or because of their own editorial prejudices. These are secular operations focused on making a profit. They have very little sympathy for the Catholic faith, and quite a lot of aggressive skepticism toward any religious community that claims to preach and teach God’s truth.

I think his admonition would include ABC, as well.

What about FOX News?

 

[MyMy123]

Father Jonathan is on Fox News right now explaining what was said.

Well why do we need another man to explain what the Pope said? All we get now is ambiguity. Some will believe that Father Jonathan is right and some will not and have their own view.

What the Pope did is unacceptable in my book. He continues to be flamboyant without any regard or thoughts of prudence to what he utters.

 

[KrazyKat]

Well why do we need another man to explain what the Pope said? All we get now is ambiguity. Some will believe that Father Jonathan is right and some will not and have their own view.

What the Pope did is unacceptable in my book. He continues to be flamboyant without any regard or thoughts of prudence to what he utters.

Just read all your posts. Are you a TROLL, or do you just enjoy bashing Pope Francis?