Has there actually been a shift in RC policy and practice?
Are the statements by the Popes contradictory?
More from the writer
“The comments rai.se questions about long-standing Vatican policies that are spiritually and emotionally abusive. The predecessor of Pope Francis, Benedict, said homosexuality, is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” “
“Of course, science has long rebutted the notion homosexuality is a disorder. “
I hope this is erroneous reporting of a blabbermouth Pope who needs to watch his diarrhea of the mouth
If only the orientation is present, and not the behavior or the self-advertising, then there is nothing to be observed, judged, or objected to.
This article is trash
Look for the Pope to restate his position which is the Catholic position and always has been
This article staes that there is hatred in the conservative circles of the Church
This is ignorant beyond reason for any journalist
There is no such thing as a coservative circle in the Church. It is not a democrat organization
It’s members do mot get to opine nor onfluence it. When they don’t like that they can separate from the Church in disobedience and free (but not God’s) will
Second, there is no hatred toward people in the Church. It unwaveringly states that homosexual acts are sin, bit that those who have mere temptation without acting on it are not in sin
It’s in the Catechism
It isn't my place to judge, but I have questions.
Who benefits by this opinion? Is it for the gay priests' benefit or for the lost sheep and lambs? Or something else?
Can the gay priest speak to everything that Scripture teaches with the same spirit, conviction and intent as the Original Teacher, so that his flock isn't lead astray?
To what end is this designed to lead Peter's Church to?
Because of course NAMBLA was founded by heteros, and 98% of the priestly molestation cases were not adult males fondling adolescent altar boys.
A link to the catechism statement on homosexuality
It’s no different from what the pope said
The news will have a whole month of fodder over this and the sweet pope will clarify and regret trusting the media to exhibit intelligence and logic
Free Republic will post these anti Catholic sources gleefully
Trust National Catholic Register not Reporter and EWTN.
The Vatican did not “shift” at all. It as always been the policy that if someone suffers from a homosexual orientation, it’s like any other problem (for example, being born with a birth defect that leaves one crippled) and is a cross that must be dealt with. A person who is crippled cannot let himself be swamped by anger and bitterness or attempt to cripple other people of jealousy; a person who has homosexual tendencies (which I think are the result of upbringing) cannot let them take him over and cannot act on them.
Obviously, acting on a homosexual tendency would be a sin and encouraging it would be a sin, as he clearly points out. But people can fall and repent and come back again, and this has ALWAYS been the position of the Church. And it was not up to him to judge them (because only God can judge). That was all he was saying, not that homosexuality was ok.
I also think he wants to avoid having witch-hunts in the Church (he was asked about this in connection with the charges that an appointee of his was homosexual, which he had investigated and found without cause).
In addition, he made the point that when people become a “lobby,” they are essentially leaving the Faith for some cause of their own, and setting it up to the destruction of the Church.
Remember when Benedict said that some people argued that condom use was permissible in Africa (because of AIDS) but that they were not even useful in preventing AIDS - and the press came out saying that BXVI had announced that condoms were ok?
I think Pope Francis should be more careful about what he says, but at the same time, there’s really no way to keep the press from twisting his words, no matter how bland or neutral they may be.
Of course this spin is just malicious propaganda, but it illustrates why a Pope must be very careful in both his official pronouncements as well as his off the cuff remarks and interviews.
Will the Vatican now take a dont ask, dont tell approach to the priesthood? Will it permit celibate, but openly gay priests to serve? What message does it send to LGBTQ Catholics long marginalized by orthodox Catholics and conservative hierarchs, if openly, celibate gay priests serve the holy sacraments? If a gay or straight priest acts on a need for physical intimacy and companionship, what makes it a sin, breaking the vow given to the church over celibacy? If an openly gay, celibate priest is worthy to serve Eucharist, solemnize straight marriages, and perform the last rites at someones bedside, how is it possible two parishioners of the same gender cant have a blessing of their union, though not called a marriage? Will gay, celibate priests be able to speak out against such injustices as discrimination in housing and employment due to sexual identity? Will a lesbian teacher now be allowed to keep her job at a Catholic school? Does acceptance of gay priests finally break the ugly, hateful stereotype someone gay is inclined to be a pedophile, long perpetuated by conservative elements in the Catholic Church, but disavowed by science?
What does a celibate-but-openly-gay priest look like?
The Pope just split his britches on that one. Nevermind what he privately thinks, the perception of his comment is very damaging.
If that is true, I have just lost my trust of Pope Francis.
What a way to begin His Papacy.
Sad, Sad , Sad..h
I witnessed in horror the Southern Baptist Convention meeting with radical homosexual activists last year at their national convention, and I was disheartened beyond telling. Merely giving them a place at the table was a major victory for the sodomites, even though they didn't get the answer they wanted. They operate by microscopic incrementalism.
Of course, 'science' has done no such thing.
I don’t think this was meant to be a shift at all. He was just saying he can’t judge them soley on their orientation, if they are a priest now. That doesn’t mean they should be ordained going forward.
Cristian Brothers and Priests praying(D’oh) on young people Part II