A Religious Liberal Blog

This site hopefully can provide some vehicle by which I can comment, complain, and once in a while praise the state of religion in this country and around the world from a liberal protestant perspective.

Tuesday, September 06, 2005

The pope is considering a plan which would ban all celibate gay men from studying at Catholic seminaries to become priests. This should do some work in drying up the possibilities of new priests in the middle of a horrendous shortage in the US. What is more worrisome is the sort of ecclesiastical aparatus which would be needed to oversee schools in a manner which could enforce such an edict.

12 Comments:

At 1:51 AM , Blogger Elizabeth said...

thanks for posting this. how discouraging! if only it were also surprising.

 
At 7:43 AM , Blogger Revwilly said...

don't you think the Pope is trying to stem the tide of child abuse(particularly boys)?

 
At 9:23 AM , Anonymous Lara said...

Any pope that abuses young boys, does not do so because he is gay.

 
At 11:26 AM , Blogger CK said...

Despite the fact that the abuse between priest & children generally occurs from a priest of the same gender, self-identified "gay" priests are not typically the abusers.

Statistically, most abusers are heterosexual.

The real problem here is not the presence of gay or straight men in the priesthood, it is the presence of men with psychological problems. That is the sort of oversight needed, not a snooping into closets (how are they going to determine someone is gay if the seminarian does not disclose it himself, and is celibate?).

 
At 12:14 PM , Blogger Dwight said...

revwilly
If so, it's a poor method

Elizabeth
Thanks..btw enjoyed the faith and justice page

CK
Indeed

 
At 10:00 PM , Anonymous Richard B. said...

The quote from the article I found really interesting was:

"The instruction tries to dampen down the controversy by eschewing a moral line, arguing instead that the presence of homosexuals in seminaries is 'unfair' to both gay and heterosexual priests by subjecting the former to temptation."

The temptation to cross parishoner/priest boundries is there for all of us in ministry - and all of us in general - whether gay, lesbian, bi, or straight.

 
At 9:43 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boy, you people are so confused. I think you should all pick up JPII's Theology of the Body and read it so you actually have an understanding of sexuality. You see, because the priest is the bridegroom and the Church is his bride it makes no sense for a homosexual man to be a priest - it ruins the whole analogy, how can a gay man "marry" a feminine bride (the church)? It doesn't make sense.

Also, we know that, contrary to what some of your commenters have said, the sexual abuse scandal is and was a homosexual problem. The majority of priests who have abused admit that they are gay. It's the facts folks. Deal with it.

 
At 10:25 AM , Blogger Dwight said...

Anon
-it's almost on par with saying since men are the overwhelming source of sexual abuse of the young that men in general should not be priests

-I wonder if metaphors and analogies are good ways to prescribe the boundaries of doctrine and practice.

 
At 8:31 AM , Anonymous Jeff said...

"I wonder if metaphors and analogies are good ways to prescribe the boundaries of doctrine and practice."

Hmm. Rum thing about all them parables of Jesus, then, eh?

It swings on whether you think the church is a sacramental community or not. Certainly faith and theology are inescapably metaphorical. Turner, in "The Literary Mind" discusses at length how thinking itself is metaphorical.

Are you sure you're not being a little too Hellenistic on Anonymous?

 
At 9:33 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do not get it.

The church is a woman? The relationship of marriage is not just spiritual, and loving (although until a couple hundred years ago love had less to do with marriage than it did with arrangement), but also sexual.

OK. I buy this. But when you remove the sexual, as all priests must...it seems to me that homosexuality would be a non-issue.

The issue should not be sexual preference, but sexual dysfunctions related to issues of power and/or mental and behavioral flaws.

Homosexuality is neither. It seems to me that if gay men are a threat to little boys (which I seriously question), are hetero men then threats to little girls?

And what of bisexuals?

Life-ling celibacy, while in my mind an unnatural state of human existence, seems to be something that would not be broken by anyone 'orientation' quicker than the other.

This is what happens when you pick a former Nazi as a pope, IMO.

 
At 11:47 AM , Anonymous Tanya-J said...

Jeff, Dwight was not denying the importance or extent of metaphor in language, and he certainly said nothing to dismiss the parables. Metaphors certainly permeate language and have the power to enlighten. That said, when taken literally or stretched too far, problems ensue. The person Dwight was responding to did just that.

 
At 10:29 PM , Blogger Craig Moore said...

Maybe the Catholic church wants to avoid further legal exposure by ordaining gay priest, who if recent history is any indicator of reality, pose a high liability risk for the church.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home