In new book, Pope Francis says he is worried about homosexuality in the priesthood

  Pope Francis is pictured as he leaves his general audience in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican Nov. 21. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has been quoted in a soon-to-be published book as saying that having gays in the clergy "is something that worries me" and remarking that some societies are considering homosexuality a "fashionable" lifestyle.

Italian daily Corriere della Sera's website Saturday ran excerpts of the book in the form of an interview that Francis gave about religious vocations. Francis was quoted as describing homosexuality within the walls of seminaries, convents and other religious places where clergy live as "a very serious question."

Advertisement

Francis was quoted as describing homosexuality within the walls of seminaries, convents and other religious places where clergy live as "a very serious question."

"In our societies, it even seems homosexuality is fashionable. And this mentality, in some way, also influences the life of the church," Francis was quoted as telling his interviewer, a Spanish-born missionary priest, Fernando Prado.

The book, based on four hours of conversations the two had in August at the Vatican, will be published in 10 languages next week. Its Spanish title is "La Fuerza de la vocacion," ("The Strength of Vocation").

Francis reiterated past Vatican pronouncements about the attention that must be given to selecting men for admission to seminaries, saying "we must very much take care of human and sentimental maturity" when training future priests.

Separately, the Italian news agency ANSA quoted Francis in the book  as commenting on a clergyman who had told him that having gays in Catholic religious housing "isn't so grave" because it's "only an expression of affection."

"In our societies, it even seems homosexuality is fashionable. And this mentality, in some way, also influences the life of the church," Francis was quoted as telling his interviewer.

That reasoning "is in error," Francis said. "In consecrated life and priestly life, there is no place for this kind of affection."

He said candidates with "neuroses or strong unbalances" should not be accepted "to the priesthood nor to (other forms of) consecrated life."

Still, Francis, as he has in the past, stressed that gay Catholics contribute to the life of the church. He said the church must always remember that "they are persons who will live in the service of the church, of the Christian community, of the people of God. Let's never forget this perspective."

Francis in his papacy has sought to stress that while obeying church teachings, the faithful must also be compassionate and open to others with different views.

Catholic teaching considers homosexual activity sinful, and that everyone, except married heterosexual couples, should abstain from sex.

Mike Theman
1 week 1 day ago

I saw that he was quoted elsewhere regarding homosexual priests, "It is better that they leave the priesthood or the consecrated life rather than live a double life." Why wasn't that quoted here, I wonder?

arthur mccaffrey
1 week 1 day ago

wow! who am I to judge?

Bev Ceccanti
1 week ago

Who's judging? Vows are vows. Are you Catholic?

Lenore Chernenko
1 week ago

Bev . . . I believe that Arthur is referring to a thought previously attributed to Pope Francis.

Bev Ceccanti
1 week ago

I know what the pope said. All of us have different sins. Who are we to judge each others sins?. Who are we to judge anyone, even the those who murder or practice adultery or have abortions. But if we murder, we can spend a lot of time in jail because there are laws pertaining to it.. When a man takes a vow of chastity, for purposes of receiving Holy Orders, he is under Cannon law. If he is persistent in this activity, for whatever reason, he must remove himself from near temptation, or be removed. The deliberate positioning of oneself in near temptation is a sin itself. A sincere Confession, another sacrament, will absolve the murderer and the abortionist and the adulterer alike To commit a mortal sin,one which causes death to the soul, there are 3 necessary conditions. It must be a serious offence, it must be known to the person that it is a serious offense, and the act must be committed. To take this Catholic concept to its logical extension, we can't really know for sure the state of Hitler's soul at the time of his death, since we can't see inside the soul of any human being, no matter how satanic he may appear.( He might have been completely out of his mind and unconscious of his actions) Of course I believe he will forever rot in hell, but the key word is 'believe' as opposed to 'know'. The bottom line is you misunderstand and misinterpret the Pope's statement.

lynne miller
6 days 21 hours ago

Bev, you are exactly right. Any priest, gay or heterosexual, can violate his vows. A gay priest may be more tempted by being placed in close quarters with other men most of the time, but many gay priests maintain their celibacy. Rather than refusing the priesthood to gay men, teach them, as others are taught, the value of their vow and how to maintain it. And for heaven's sake, people need to stop conflating homosexuality with child abuse. It's not the same thing.

Tim O'Leary
6 days 15 hours ago

Lynne - homosexuality and pedophilia are certainly not the same thing. Homosexuality includes the abuse of post-pubertal minors and young men in seminaries and pedophilia pre-pubertal minors. The latter accounted for 20% of all sex abuse case in the Church (John Jay report) and have dramatically decreased, as has the abuse of teenagers. The issue today is with sexual activity in the seminaries and among clergy, which is necessarily homosexual. Indeed, I expect most clergy with same-sex attraction are being faithful to their vows, but the question is are they policing others who are not? Are they covering for others? Are they teaching the fullness of the Catholic faith? Are they turning a blind eye on the likes of McCarrick, or even supporting their advancement in the Church? Are they too enamored by the lies of the secular world? I wish the salvation of all men & women and believe the departure from the fullness of the faith is resulting in many being lost. That is the real tragedy.

J Brookbank
3 days 12 hours ago

Tim,

Homosexuality does NOT "include" sexual abuse of anyone.

Heterosexuality does NOT "include" sexual abuse of anyone.

A person who is a sexual abuser may also be gay. S/h may also be straight. S/he may also have brown hair. S/he may also have a green ring around the iris of one eye. S/he may be drive a Ford truck. S/he may be an owner of hedgehogs. S/he may live in Wichita Falls.

You are engaged in a disinformation campaign.

Tim O'Leary
2 days 8 hours ago

Brookbank - The APA uses the terms (for men) "heterosexual pedophilic orientation", to prepubescent females; and "homosexual pedophilic orientation", to prepubescent boys. For an orientation or abuse of post-pubescent boys who are still minors, you can substitute the word ephebophilic for pedophilic. While a large majority of ephebophilia in general society is of the heterosexual kind, in the Church, it is homosexual ephebophilia that forms the majority of the abuse. That is all I was saying. References below:
https://www.theravive.com/therapedia/pedophilic-disorder-dsm--5-302.2-(f65.4)
http://jaapl.org/content/42/4/404

J Brookbank
1 day 9 hours ago

Tim, you are correct re: the above use of these words as adjectives.

In no way does the APA language support or justify your previous claim that sexual abuse is "included" in homosexuality.

Your statement is part of a pattern in which you misuse information on this topic.

Tim O'Leary
15 hours 4 min ago

Brookbank - How do you define the same-sex abuse of post-pubescent minors? This, is the vast majority of abuse that afflicted the Church in the 70s and 80s, and is thankfully decreasing. The homosexual abuse of seminarians is the topic of today, that you and others still either deny of try to cover-up under a clericalism cloak.

J Brookbank
4 hours 51 min ago

It is called sexual abuse, Tim.

Bev Ceccanti
6 days 4 hours ago

I'm not conflating.. The practice of adultery among those who have taken vows is abhorrent. It compromises any vestige of moral authority and sickens the Church. The pedophilia problem is being addressed on many fronts. I am not talking about that problem here.

Frank T
1 week ago

Countering the system that moved offending priests from one parish to anthers an excellent idea. Allowing for oversight of bishops by lay people is another great idea. However, the toxic homophobic American culture that pushed many of these men into the priesthood originally
has rapidly changed. Every Catholic high school and university should have gay-straight alliances that counter the shame and isolation that so many young kids are faced with. If Catholic families are warm and open to their gay kids, and these kids are given support through their catholic educational process, I am guessing that this problem will largely disappear. We should all remember that shame can be inculcated into children from the beginning of their lives and once rooted has devastating potential.

Fred Keyes
6 days 18 hours ago

"However, the toxic homophobic American culture that pushed many of these men into the priesthood originally..."

Frank T, explain please? Your statement seems counterintuitive. How does a homophobic culture push young men into the priesthood?

Frank T
6 days 11 hours ago

The priesthood (at one time, at least) was seen as a place of safety. A place without expectation that one marry. A place of relative social standing within a community. A place of fitting in. In short, a fairly safe place to hide.

Michael Barberi
1 week ago

Some surveys estimate that up to 15% of the priesthood are homosexual or have such tendencies. Nevertheless, I think the more important message, not mentioned, is that any homosexual or heterosexual priest who cannot abide by their vows of celibacy should leave the priesthood.

Also not mentioned is the fact that the majority of priests who are homosexual are faithful to their vows of celibacy and are good priests. I also noticed that there was no mention of nuns break their vows of celibacy or priests who abuse nuns. I assume Pope Francis does not think this is a big issue.

Based on this article about Pope Francis's new book, I don't believe the section of the report on the Synod on Young Catholics devoted to homosexuality will say anything new. More importantly, I seriously doubt if this report will provide guidelines for priests and bishops to treat homosexuals with respect, compassion and sensitivity. I do hope that I am wrong. In truth, the heirarchy has no idea how to do this or what this means. For example, in Amoris Laetitia Pope Francis said, in paraphrase, that Catholics, including priests and bishops, must never discriminate against homosexuals. This seems to be a contradictory statement because the Church clearly discriminates against homosexuals in the areas of employment, adoption and lay ministries. I wish the Church would clarify how these behaviors and policies can exist along side of this non-discrimination statement.

Tim O'Leary
1 week ago

Michael - he did include "men and women religious". See link below. Amoris Laetitia (250-251) spoke of "unjust discrimination... particularly any form of aggression and violence" but also said homosexual unions could never be considered "in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family." (250-251). Furthermore, in this interview, regarding expressions of homosexual affection, Pope Francis said: "In consecrated and priestly life, there's no room for that kind of affection. Therefore, the Church recommends that people with that kind of ingrained tendency should not be accepted into the ministry or consecrated life. The ministry or the consecrated life is not his place.”

We “have to urge homosexual priests, and men and women religious to live celibacy with integrity, and above all, that they be impeccably responsible, trying to never scandalize either their communities or the faithful holy people of God by living a double life. It's better for them to leave the ministry or the consecrated life rather than to live a double life.”

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/in-new-book-on-clergy-and-relig…

Michael Barberi
6 days 13 hours ago

Tim - Most of comments made in many articles about his book were excerpts and sometimes expressions like the one you mentioned gets lost. I know what Pope Francis said about homosexuality and homosexual acts. Nevertheless, I have my concerns over the way homosexuals are treated (not) with respect, compassion and sensitivity, and the requirements for their salvation (e.g., lifetime sexual abstinence while denying them any sense of a marriage or permanent, faithful and loving relationship). I know this subject is very complex and I wish I had the answers. Despite these complexities, I believe much can be done to improve the teachings on homosexuality, and I don't wish to repeat my past arguments here. Thanks for your comments.

Bev Ceccanti
6 days 4 hours ago

Michael,.......How about the young woman or man whose spouse in the Sacrament of Matrimony has abandoned them? They, too, are called to a life of celibacy till the spouse that God has joined to them passes away. What about them? They can't remarry.

Michael Barberi
5 days 12 hours ago

Bev - Amoris Laetitia (AL) permits Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried under certain circumstances. AL does not change the teaching on marriage, or the Letter of the Law, but it is a significant change in the pastoral application of this teaching (the spirit of the law). Also remember that St. Paul provided an exception to the ancient laws at that time by permitting a spouse who was not a follower of Christ to divorce her/him under certain circumstances as well (thereby permitting remarriage). Finally, take notice of Matthew's 'exception clause' permitted divorce for adultery. In other words most Biblical scholars intrepret the Greek word 'pornea' as sexual immorality and adultery. While the Catholic Church interprets the word 'pornea' differently (a marriage between spouses too close in relationship) from the overwhelming percent of Biblical scholars, the issue of divorced and remarriage remains controversial. My point is this: the teaching on marriage or its pastoral application has been developed as well as the requirement of a life of celibacy. Even a priest who takes a vow of celibacy before God can get a dispensation, marry someone, and have sexual relations. No dispensations or pastoral exceptions exist for homosexuals. They have no choice between a marriage or celibacy, as everyone else has,...they have only one choice a lifetime of sexual abstinence.

Tim O'Leary
4 days 12 hours ago

Michael - you are taking great liberty with AL, and always make these statements without quoting the text. The only possible statement in your favor is footnote 351, which mentions "with the help of the sacraments." Yet, you use it as a basis for trying to overthrow much of moral doctrine. That is not a judicious or a fair reading. AL argues at length against divorce and even includes this scriptural quote (in 123): "Let none be faithless to the wife of his youth. For I hate divorce, says the Lord” (Mal 2:14-16) & in 246 states that: "Divorce is an evil and the increasing number of divorces is very troubling. Hence, our most important pastoral task with regard to families is to strengthen their love, helping to heal wounds and working to prevent the spread of this drama of our times. In 241, it discusses separation as a necessary tragedy and "last resort" for the good of the children (abuse, etc). A separated or divorced person who has not remarried can of course licitly receive Communion. 243 & 244 speak to annulments.

Michael Barberi
4 days 11 hours ago

Tim - You are the one who is denying what AL says, what Cardinal Schonborn, Pope Francis's designated voice on AL said, and what Pope Francis himself said when he approved the guidelines of the Argentina Bishops, namely, that they interpreted AL correctly, in fact he said it is the only way...thus, providing a pathway for Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried "without an annulment". You also fail to mention the correct reading of AL by Bishop McElroy, Cardinal Cupich and Cardinal Tobin. In these dioceses Holy Communion can be given to divorced and remarried Catholics according to AL. So, kindly stop calling into question my integrity by falsely claiming I am trying to overthrow much of moral doctrine. I have studied moral theology for 6 years and I am a published author. Also, your quoting of Scripture as one of your arguments is called proof texting. FYI, there is much disagreement within the Catholic Church about Matthew's exception clause....despite the fact that it is not found in the other Gospels. If you want a more detailed explanation, see the two books by Todd Salzman and Michael Lawler, "The Sexual Person" and "Sexual Ethics". These moral theologians are not the only moral theologians who question such an issue, nor are the bishops I mentioned above the only bishops who read AL correctly...which you seem to overlook. Lastly, let me be clear as day: divorce should be avoided. Too many people marry young, are not mature spiritually, are often ignorant of the teachings on marriage and they make mistakes. Divorce is the last option for a couple whose marriage is in distress. AL provides a pastoral pathway for those who have committed sin, made mistakes, divorced and remarried, have a successful second marriage and want to come back to the Church. While some bishops disagree with other bishops on the interpretation of AL, it is clear that doctrine has not changed. What has changed is the pastoral application of doctrine. This is the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. If you have an issue with AL, that is your right. But, the facts I said in paraphrase about AL is correct, namely, under certain circumstances, and without an annulment, divorced and remarried Catholics can receive Holy Communion.

Tim O'Leary
4 days 8 hours ago

Michael - the only Scripture I quote is in the very document AL, so it is ridiculous to call it proof-texting, since the Pope selected it. You always seem to over-interpret your views in what Pope Francis says or writes. That is why you keep getting surprised when you think he is contradicting himself, as in this book about homosexuality, which is consistent with his statement in May 2018 (that men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies should not be seminarians https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/report-pope-francis-affirms-chu…, and his approval of Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis re priestly life in 2016 http://www.clerus.va/content/dam/clerus/Ratio%20Fundamentalis/The%20Gif…

Regarding AL, you say Cardinal Schonborn agreed about “providing a pathway for Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried "without an annulment". Where does Cardinal Christoph Schönborn say this? In his interview with NCR, he never said that. In fact, he said: “It’s a continuation of what John Paul II made in his catechesis on marriage and family. In St. John Paul’s catechesis, it’s very much focused on the couple. Pope Francis has the couple in view, but he doesn’t repeat what John Paul II has already taught in his lengthy catechesis.” He also spoke about a marriage between a man and a divorced women who had 8 children. “He approvingly Now they continue to abstain from receiving Communion but have eight children who are well educated in the faith.” http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-schoenborn-says-amoris-la…

Here is the footnote in full: "In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. Hence, “I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber, but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy” (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium [24 November 2013], 44: AAS 105 [2013], 1038). I would also point out that the Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak” (ibid., 47: 1039).

Anyway, this article is not about AL so I will end this thread here.

Michael Barberi
3 days 14 hours ago

Tim - See below Pope Francis's approval of the guidelines of the Argentina Bishops. It is "the authentic magisterium". Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried Catholics is permitted without an annulment under certain circumstances. Therefore Amoris Laetitia opens up the possibility of access to the sacraments of reconciliation and the Eucharist. This is what I have been saying. I rest my case on the words of Pope Frances. Let's face it Tim, you don't want to accept the interpretation that Pope Francis himself has proclaimed or Bishop McElroy, Cupich, Tobin and other bishops. This is my last comment.

"In September 2016, the pope sent a private letter to bishops in Buenos Aires to clarify his teachings on the issue, which he had expressed in his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Now, the pope declared this letter to be his “authentic magisterium,” which means it is one of his official teachings.

The pope’s letter approved of the guidelines formulated by Argentine bishops in Buenos Aires on how Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics should be handled. The guidelines assert that, in certain circumstances, a person who is divorced and remarried and is living in an active sexual partnership might not be responsible or culpable for the mortal sin of adultery, “particularly when a person judges that he would fall into a subsequent fault by damaging the children of the new union.” The guidelines add that “Amoris Laetitia opens up the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.”

Bev Ceccanti
1 day 23 hours ago

Michael, divorce may be necessary to protect one's life. If the Sacrament of Matrimony was duly received (ie all elements of the Sacrament were in place), then the couple is still married in the eyes of God, regardless of a legal status of divorce. If either party remarries, it can't be recognized in the eyes of the church because the Sacrament holds' as long as they both shall live'......for better or worse. Any sexual union outside the original union is an act of adultery. The cause or necessity of the divorce does not matter. Even the victimized spouse is called to celibacy till the other spouse has passed. Period. . It is what it is. Period.

Michael Barberi
1 day 13 hours ago

Bev - I guess you disagree with Pope Francis's Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (AL), as he made it clear that Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried is possible under certain conditions (e.g., his letter to the Bishops of Argentina on their guidelines). Pope Francis has also made it clear that this interpretation of AL is the correct and only interpretation and it is his 'authentic magisterium'.
AL is not changing doctrine on marriage, it is changing the pastoral application of it. AL is not about the law, it is about
"the culpability of sin in moral dilemma". It is about the internal forum and discernment, mercy and forgiveness. It is about the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. Hence, it is not about rigidly abiding by the law and disregarding complex circumstances where there is no right answer without serious moral consequences. It is clear that we are witnessing a crisis in truth among the bishops and between some bishops and Pope Francis on the question of Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried under certain circumstances. IMO, this will abate over time. I don't disagree with most of your comments, but your comments are missing the point about what AL is all about. Thanks for your comments.

Bev Ceccanti
1 day 8 hours ago

I don't disagree with any truly ex Cathedra (infallible) statement by a Pope (which this is not, by the way). You play fast and loose with your interpretation of a pastoral statement . Innovation is not a characteristic of Christianity. The Church's position on any mortal sin, including adultery, is that three conditions must be met for the person to have committed it: 1) the act must be a serious offence, 2) it must be known to the person that it is a serious offense 3) the person must actually do the act .( We must be sure we are not lying to ourselves in this matter). Was the Pope trying to clarify this issue? Was he taking into account that some people did not validly receive the Sacrament of Matrimony in the first place, ie one or more of the elements of the Sacrament was missing? Or one of the parties was fraudulent? Were the parties poor and unable to hire cannon lawyers to do an investigation necessary for an official annulment? Any interpretation of a Papal statement must be made in the light of the existing understanding of the Church , . (Even if your literal interpretation of what was stated is correct in the first place.)

Tim O'Leary
15 hours 2 min ago

excellent response, Bev.

Michael Barberi
11 hours 35 min ago

Bev - You made an irresponsible and unsubstantiated statement, namely, you said: "You (I) play fast and loose with your (my) interpretation of a pastoral statement". Then you said "....even if your (my) literal interpretation of what was said is correct in the first place". Honestly, your statements are perplexing.

To be clear Bev, many bishops, moral theologians and Curia officials have correctly interpreted what Pope Francis has written and said when it comes of Holy Communion for the divorce and remarried. Pope Francis is not committing heresy. Nor are all the bishops misleading Catholics by implementing Pope Francis's approved guidelines.

As to your rhetorical questions, Pope Francis makes clear that he was not talking about whether couples did not validly receive the Sacrament of matrimony. The guidelines he approved, and said was the correct and only interpretation, focused on couples who were married, got divorced and then remarried without an annulment. Obviously, if one or more elements of the Sacrament were missing, the couple would be a candidate for an annulment and there would be no issue about receiving Holy Communion. Under these circumstances the first marriage would be null and void....it essentially never happened, was never was consummated, licit or valid in the first place. Pope Francis did not have to write AL if all he was talking about was what you presume or question. Hence, you argument makes no sense.

Lastly, I believe you are significantly minimizing or refusing to accept what is happening in our Church today, in particular what Pope Francis has done in terms of Amoris Laetitia (AL). Please recognize that Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried is being implement per guidelines in the U.S. (San Diego, Chicago, Newark, other cities), Malta, Germany, the Philippines, Belgium, and other countries.

You are entitled to disagree with AL and agree with people like Cardinal Burke who think Pope Francis is committing heresy. That is your right. However, if you think that Pope Francis is going to reverse these guidelines he approved and not permit Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried under certain conditions, you are misleading yourself.

I think we need to end our discussion for now Bev as I don't think further discussion will be productive.

Tim O'Leary
12 hours 46 min ago

Michael - glad to see you want to follow the "authentic magisterium" (the same authority four popes reiterated for Humanae Vitae). But, again, you are not reading the guidelines of the Argentina Bishops closely enough to see their highly qualified position. Some quotes (# from their document):
4) This path does not necessarily end with receiving the sacraments, but may lead to other ways of achieving further integration into the life of the Church: a more active presence in the community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, or giving time to church activities etc. (cf. 299).
5) Whenever feasible, and depending on the specific circumstances of a couple, and especially when both partners are Christians walking together on the path of faith, the priest may suggest a decision to live in continence. Amoris Laetitia does not ignore the difficulties arising from this option (cf. footnote 329) and offers the possibility of having access to the Sacrament of Reconciliation if the partners fail in this purpose (cf. footnote 364, recalling the teaching that Saint John Paul II sent to Cardinal W. Baum, dated 22 March, 1996).
6) In other, more complex cases, and when a declaration of nullity has not been obtained, the above mentioned option may not, in fact, be feasible. Nonetheless, a path of discernment is still possible. If it comes to be recognized that, in a specific case, there are limitations that mitigate responsibility and culpability (cf. 301-302), especially when a person believes they would incur a subsequent wrong by harming the children of the new union, Amoris Laetitia offers the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and Eucharist (cf. footnotes 336 and 351). These sacraments, in turn, dispose the person to continue maturing and growing with the power of grace.
7) But we have to avoid understanding this possibility as an unlimited access to the sacraments, as if all situations warrant it. The idea is to properly discern each case. For example, special care is called for in “a new union arising from a recent divorce” or in “the case of someone who has consistently failed in his obligations to the family” (298). Also, when there is a sort of justification or ostentation of the person’s situation “as if it were part of the Christian ideal” (297). In these difficult cases, we should be patient companions, looking for ways of integrating them (cf. 297, 299).

Note the emphasis on responsibility and culpability, complexity and discernment to follow what God wants, not what the individual wants, and the expectation that this is an aid to a more mature (meaning more true) faith. Finally, I have no problem accepting this teaching in its highly limited context, even if it was delivered in an odd indirect way (footnotes, followed by private letter later made public, etc.).

https://cvcomment.org/2016/09/18/buenos-aires-bishops-guidelines-on-amo…

Michael Barberi
11 hours 17 min ago

Tim - Nothing in the Argentina Bishops guidelines is news to me. I read them carefully when they were published and fully understand them. I have also read many articles written on this subject.
As expected, these guidelines are carefully worded to balance what is being said and not misleading Catholics to think that Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried Catholics can be permitted for any reason. However, let's get real here. These guidelines make clear how Holy Communion is possible for many divorce and remarried Catholic without an annulment. I am glad that you have no problem accepting this teaching.

As for your reference to HV, you seem to ignore the issue of an informed conscience as well as the many historical arguments I have made disputing this teaching (in particular in my published essay). Let's be clear here Tim: My arguments about HV have "never" been about the 'authentic magisterium'...never. Equally important, please recognize that none of my arguments concerning AL are about the authentic magisterium either. Your forgetfulness (I am being kind) seems to be your argumentative style. I am not going to debate you further on this.

Molly Roach
1 week ago

More to the point, worry about all priests, bishops and religious who ignore their vows and act out sexually.

Dennis Hayes
1 week ago

primacy of the priesthood of believers, francis, let's have a run at that, do away with seminaries, and the clerical caste.

Paul Hierholzer
6 days 19 hours ago

Agreee Dennis, but we would still need trained leaders to carry the original message of Jesus, and the good parts of the tradition. Married priests and women priests would facilitate that, and solve most of the problems with the clergy and hierarchy.

Fred Keyes
6 days 18 hours ago

Yes Paul, but there's always that scriptural observation by St. Paul that a married man's attention will always be divided. A consecrated single life will always be more disciplined and focused on his/her mission. St. Paul's observation is spot on.

Richard Markiewicz
1 week ago

Homosexual priests are not the problem. It’s those priests, whether gay or straight, who abuse children or other individuals. Blaming the gays is not going to solve the problem.

Stephen Shore
1 week ago

Most of us have known for YEARS that alot of priests were homosexual. It is really not that hard to figure that part out.

The question that no one asks, is WHY a larger than normal percentage of seminarians are drawn to the priesthood. It might be because the answers to that question may make more than a few of us uncomfortable - and by that I mean on both sides of the liberal / conservative spectrum.

However, the answers to that question I believe would lead to a total reformation of the Catholic priesthood, which is exactly why those questions will never be asked.

Tim O'Leary
1 week ago

Stephen - the best quantification of the % priests who are homosexual was done by the LA Times. The sociologist Father Paul Sullins did a statistical analysis of that data and the John Jay College data and the recent PA Grand Jury results and recently published his findings (link below). The central thrust of the report is that the share of homosexual men in the priesthood rose from twice that of the general population in the 1950s to eight times the general population in the 1980s, a trend that was strongly correlated with increasing child sex abuse (0.98). At the same time, a quarter of priests ordained in the late 1960s report the existence of a homosexual subculture in their seminaries, rising to over half of priests ordained in the 1980s, a second trend that was also strongly correlated with increasing child sex abuse.
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/is-catholic-clergy-sex-abuse-relat…

Michael Barberi
6 days 12 hours ago

Tim - The only recent survey I am familiar with is the 2002 Survey of U.S. Priests by the LA Times. I believe it reported up to 15% of priests were homosexual or had homosexual tendencies. What source are you quoting that concluded that 25% of priest ordained in the 1960s and 50% of priests ordained in the 1980s were homosexual.

Tim O'Leary
6 days 10 hours ago

It is from the LA Times details. All of this is available in the research paper which can be linked from the article I attached above. There is a distinction between the % homosexuals entering the priesthood, and the % active in the priesthood at any time. The latter is of course dependent on the former. You need to read the research paper and not just the news article.

Michael Barberi
6 days 10 hours ago

I have the 2002 LA Times Survey, so I know all the details of this survey and its findings. Incidentally, it breaks down the findings between all priests, older and younger priests (those ordained less than 20 years). I will stick with the results of this survey as they did the same survey 10 years earlier, so trends can be determined. I am highly skeptical that the percent of priests are as high as your survey asserts. The 2002 LA Times survey said up to 15% of U.S. priests are homosexual or have such tendencies.

Michael Barberi
5 days 12 hours ago

Tim - This is what you wrote that I had an issue with. Based on your clarification, we agree about the 15%. Thanks for your comments.
"At the same time, a quarter of priests ordained in the late 1960s report the existence of a homosexual subculture in their seminaries, rising to over half of priests ordained in the 1980s, a second trend that was also strongly correlated with increasing child sex abuse."

Tim O'Leary
2 days 15 hours ago

Michael - glad we cleared that up. The LA Times said "half of priests" believed there was a homosexual subculture, as I quoted. 15% claimed to have SSA themselves. This is why Dr. Plante's third to half figures are part of a misinformation campaign.

Frank T
6 days 11 hours ago

This data of course is brought to us from the same people who praised the hypocrite and evil-doer Vigano.

Tim O'Leary
6 days 10 hours ago

Frank - I do not know of any connection between Vigano and the Ruth Institute or the PA Grand Jury. Perhaps, you have information that has not yet reached the public? Note the leader of the Ruth Institute has said: “Some of the holiest men I know are men who have experienced same-sex attraction as an ongoing inner reality in their lives. They have made a decision not to act on their same-sex desires. Their holiness stems precisely from the challenge this decision presents. They know they need God. And like Mary Magdalene, they love much because they have been forgiven much.” Jennifer Morse https://www.crisismagazine.com/2016/50-shades-of-gay

Karl Miller
1 week ago

Speaking of which, Pontifex, any word on Cardinal McCarrick?

I thought so.

Advertisement

The latest from america

President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House on Nov. 26. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
A recent disruption of the balance of power between a chief executive and the Fourth Estate was the Trump administration’s revocation of CNN reporter Jim Acosta’s White House “hard pass.” The action was met by unanimous opposition from the press.
Ellen K. BoegelDecember 10, 2018
How should Christians interpret and implement the Gospel mandate to bring the good news to all peoples and nations?
James T. KeaneDecember 10, 2018
I for one have never known a mind more brilliant, more beautiful, more serious, more playful. The energy behind it was immeasurable, and the capacity for love.
Mark Van DorenDecember 10, 2018
Our deepest desires are God’s desires dwelling within us: desires for peace, for love, for hope, and, most of all for God. So this Advent, this season of desire, ask God to reveal to you your deepest desires.
James Martin, S.J.December 10, 2018