9 ms·

I'd be curious to know what these gay priests are thinking exactly. Preaching the will of organization that condemns them while actively pursuing the condemned

• Traubenfuchs 4y ago
  Sometimes you want or feel compelled to one thing, but also really, really want another thing that's in (ideological) conflict with the first thing. Also, spending years as priest and then giving it up sounds harsh, they probably have no marketable skills.
  • time0ut 4y ago
    > Also, spending years as priest and then giving it up sounds harsh, they probably have no marketable skills. I've known quite a few priests. Most are intelligent and well educated. Its pretty common for them to do a lot of work that probably would translate to secular roles. For example, there's a lot of overlap in managing a parish or diocese and managing a business or division of a corporation.
• slackdog 4y ago
  [flagged]
• kodah 4y ago
  I went to Catholic school. The indoctrination is non-stop. Seminary I would gander is doubly worse. I don't know how true it is but I've long heard that many gay priests discover that fact in Seminary after they've taken a vow of celibacy. I can imagine that's a very tough place to be mentally, especially after making such a commitment.
  • giantg2 4y ago
    I went to a catholic school and the indoctrination wasn't that bad. The school would accept non-catholic pupils as well and never really pushed it on them.
    • kodah 4y ago
      My school had non-Catholic pupils as well. After leaving I realized that a lot of what Catholic religious education is centered around is "acts of contrition". You're almost always guilty of something. They use these feelings of shame, guilt, and remorse to teach a lot of Catholic values alongside very strong language around things they don't like. For instance, when I was in school there was a story out of Atlanta, I think, where two gay men had their door kicked in while they were having sex, they were charged with some absurd sodomy law that was still on the books. My religious studies teachers point was that God punished all forms of sodomy, not just anal sex, and that any time you have pre-marital or sex without the intention of reproducing that you have sinned in a major way. I was 12, maybe 13 at the time. This is a small, isolated example but it's part of a pattern I recognized later in life. The stuff really does a number on you. It is worth noting I attended Catholic school in the South, closer to the border, so the church reflected more Mexican practices in Catholicism than say one in New York. I've learned from some folks that where you're taught makes a drastic difference.
      • NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
        I was raised in a Catholic home, attended Catholic school 13 years, and lifelong Mass-goer. I don't doubt that your anecdata is valid, but it's not universal. The only place I was subjected to guilt, shame, and remorse in a negative context was in my home by (Catholic lay) relatives (and mass media). They were in a "cultural Christian" demographic, raised in utterly secular households, and though they practiced the faith vigorously, didn't really believe or follow it at home, except by coincidence. By contrast, at school I experienced respect and encouragement from women in authority, and church was full of good news, and loving, joyful men and families. Surely my experience is also not in isolation.
• Veen 4y ago
  Christopher Hitchens famously (and rather politically incorrectly) said: > Whenever I hear some bigmouth in Washington or the Christian heartland banging on about the evils of sodomy or whatever, I mentally enter his name in my notebook and contentedly set my watch. Sooner rather than later, he will be discovered down on his weary and well-worn old knees in some dreary motel or latrine, with an expired Visa card, having tried to pay well over the odds to be peed upon by some Apache transvestite. I don't understand the psychology either, but people compartmentalize and rationalize. One line of thinking might be that everyone is a fallen sinner, even priests, and so long as they repent and guide their flock in the right direction, they will be forgiven.
  • bannedbybros 4y ago
    Gotta love the casual racism/homophobia of old Hitch. \s \s \s
• kayodelycaon 4y ago
  > Do these people believe that they are intrinsically bad? I'm sure some of them do. People can think they are terrible people while continuing to pretend they aren't in public. In my experience it's quite easy. You quickly get resigned to the fact you're broken and will never be able to change. Once you accept that as truth, it's easier to just ignore it.
• 131012 4y ago
  Christianism considers everyone intrinsically bad. "Original sin is the Christian doctrine that holds that humans, through the fact of birth, inherit a tainted nature in need of regeneration and a proclivity to sinful conduct." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin
  • NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
    Only Calvinism subscribes to total depravity. Catholicism and Orthodoxy actually remind us that we are created good, holy, and innocent. Nice try tho.
    • whaaswijk 4y ago
      AFAIK original sin does teach that all men are fallen and require salvation. This doesn’t mean that human nature is all bad and it’s indeed not the same as total depravity. However it’s also not true that men are born holy.
      • JackFr 4y ago
        Indeed 'created in His image' would seem to be at odds with 'intrinsically bad'.
      • NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
        I didn't say "born holy" but if you kindly turn to Genesis you can see how the first man and woman were CREATED in Original Holiness (and Solitude, Justice, Unity). Original sin is a deprivation of these positive qualities. Mary, for example, preserved in holiness, not simply cleansed of it. Holiness is our natural state, and so baptism returns us to that preternatural holiness that Adam enjoyed when he walked with God in the Garden.
      • bitbang 4y ago
        The total in TULIP's "total depravity" is not a measure of sinfulness. It is not meant to imply that we are naturally as evil as possible in every context. The "total" is speaking in terms of the extent of depravity. That is to say, sin touches and influences every aspect of our existence. So that even in good works with the best of intentions humanly possible, there still exists an element of self exalting corruption.
• throw18376 4y ago
  There's a saint in the Catholic church named Andrew Wouters. He was a priest in the 16th century who was a major womanizer with lots of illegitimate children. He ended up getting hanged by Calvinist rebels because he refused to convert. His last words were "A fornicator I always was, a heretic I never was." Again, the pope canonized this guy. Anyway, the point is, most American-influenced "logical" people take an implicitly Protestant perspective, that religion is all about consistently following consistent doctrines. The Catholic perspective on this kind of thing is more flexible and quite strange by comparison but tolerating hypocrisy around sexual behavior is definitely not new.
  • jacobmartin 4y ago
    For sure. In this specific case, I'd add that because of Catholic belief on martyrdom (directly to heaven, no purgatory, no baptism required even), the standards are a lot lower to canonize a martyr. For instance they can (but don't always) skip directly to "blessed" status, skipping over the declaration that they were "heroic in virtue." Which makes sense--historically speaking the first saints that were involved in worship were martyrs. And many of those "converted" right before they were killed, not having led lives that were Christian at all. There is a sense one gets that martyrs are the ur-Saints and that other saints were only canonized "by popular demand." (Former Catholic but not a theologian or anything. See discussion here on how canonization is not a declaration of virtue: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm)
  • irrational 4y ago
    > Protestant perspective, that religion is all about consistently following consistent doctrines Isn't that a contradiction? I thought Protestants were all about grace over works (wasn't it Martin Luther who called James The Epistle of Straw because of it's emphasis on works?). Consistently following consistent doctrines would be works.
    • hguant 4y ago
      American Protestantism remains heavily influenced by Calvin and early Puritan groups who had very strict ideas of how one should act. One is only _saved_ by grace, but one should _live_ according to the will of God.
• jrootabega 4y ago
  The sacrament of confession is based on the idea that Catholics (and all but one human) will sin regularly, despite acknowledging that these sins are bad. It's not so much hypocrisy as it is realizing that you are imperfect people working to meet perfect ideals. So the situation you describe is not fundamentally dishonest.
• sigzero 4y ago
  As far as I know, you can be an abstinent homosexual in the Roman Catholic belief. You just can't act on it. I would guess they do think their God is right and act accordingly.
  • whaaswijk 4y ago
    I think that’s right. The analogy for straight men would be that they may want to love and sleep with many women but that it’s still wrong unless within a marriage.
  • spywaregorilla 4y ago
    This is about people who act on it though
• Bhilai 4y ago
  This applies to the entire political class as well, one hand they ll talk non-stop about conservative (or liberal) values and as it turns out eventually, the very same people forced abortions/employed illegals/molested women and so on. I think ultimately there is big difference between what people practice and what they preach and it applies to literally everyone.
  • yamtaddle 4y ago
    A really large proportion of the political class—and, I think, more of them, the higher up you go—are basically practicing kayfabe (the façade of reality that "Pro Wrestlers" and many fans engage in). They rip into each other on TV then go golfing together like nothing happened, same as a wrestling "face" and "heel" in the locker room might be cordial to one another when the cameras aren't following them. None of it's real, just an act, for lots of them, including the policies they push.
  • spywaregorilla 4y ago
    No its very different. Politicians gain considerable power and individual benefits from lying and being hypocritical. Its hard to argue the same for gay priests who only occasionally get laid as a result of their choices.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
• ilyt 4y ago
  Maybe they just treat it as normal people treat their job lmao. "Well I don't really care that much about actual religion but job is safe and pay is decent..."
• ninethirty 4y ago
  [flagged]
  • mock-possum 4y ago
    God I can’t stand communities like this.
  • oramit 4y ago
    Thanks for linking this. I needed a good chuckle this morning. On a more serious note. I'm gay and if you want to know why Pride parades, Pride month, and being out is so important, it's this sort of rhetoric. Calls for "biblical morality" and "homosexual crimes" to be punished are coded calls for our destruction. This sort of thinking is always absolutist and apocalyptic. There is nothing I can do to "tone it down" that will make them happy. They simply want us dead. Being out is the only real defense we have because we then go from a demonized other to just your friend, coworker, or family member. We're here, we're queer - fuck off.
    • PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      For anyone curious about what oramit's talking about: Gay people have tried extremely hard in the past to "fit in", especially during the AIDS crisis. Gay catholics at the time were forced to face the fact that, if they acquired AIDS (at that time known clinically as "Gay-related immune deficiency") they will have to face the horrific and slow deaths without the support of their religious leaders due to homophobia. These were churchgoing, churchfearing, model catholics who did everything they could to fit into their parish and the church turned their back on them to the point where they could not even hold bible studies amongst themselves on church grounds. Basically, the way AIDS victims were dehumanized, mistreated, overall publicly humiliated, shattered any real belief that if you just tried to fit in enough society will treat you as one of their own. Ultimately, the LGBTQ community were the only people supporting the LGBTQ community, and this required radical self-acceptance movements in the face of horrific death and apathy.
      • Connor_Creegan 4y ago
• francisofascii 4y ago
  I rarely hear priests condemn homosexuality. Some do, but most don't. Maybe because the subject is really not relevant to the core tenants of Catholicism. There is so much more to the faith than these political wedge issues. Does a dietitian have mental gymnastics from having a beer or a slice of cake every now and then?
• antibasilisk 4y ago
  No, it's just the case that everyone sins and some people's sins are worse than others. Most religions acknowledge this. Even if you murder someone that doesn't mean you're beyond forgiveness, it's about trying to be a better person.
• piokoch 4y ago
  > "organization that condemns them" Catholic Church is not condemning homosexuals. Why it should? According to Bible they were created by God, so they are good by definition. CC is condemning homosexual sex, in the same way as it condemns pre-marriage sex or killing other people. All those acts are done by people created by God, but given a free will to do the things that are wrong from the Church perspective. And that can be forgiven thanks do a deal that Jesus made with God. As far as priests are concerned it does not matter much if they are gay or not as they should not maintain sexual relationships anyway.
  • afandian 4y ago
    "I won't condemn you for an intrinsic quality you were made with, but I will condemn you for acting on it." I think most rational people would see through that, it's pretty flimsy.
    • jondeval 4y ago
      > I think most rational people would see through that ... Where is the inconsistency? A heterosexual man is called to chastity as well. If he acts against this by cheating on his spouse I don't think the CC would be 'condemning an intrinsic quality' he was made with. The teachings of Jesus should piss everyone off in some way or another.
      • Tagbert 4y ago
        Jesus never preached against gay sex
        • Connor_Creegan 4y ago
          [flagged]
          • mrguyorama 4y ago
            [flagged]
• RC_ITR 4y ago
  I think a major feature of celibacy is that it is just as hard to give up homosexual sex as it is to give up heterosexual sex. The difference is that these “monitor” groups don’t care about the priests on Tindr because their biases.
• MavisBacon 4y ago
  Some theorize that gay men historically found themselves pursuing the priesthood because this was a way to not have a romantic life with women without raising eyebrows. There’s also an element of repressed homosexuality that’s sort of difficult to communicate but it’s likely that these gay priests spend a lot of time with thoughts of self hatred, self-doubt, confusion. maybe god can save me from these thoughts?, it’s terribly complex and as much as I generally don’t tolerate Catholicism and what comes with it I truly feel for these priests
  • kilgnad 4y ago
    What about the pedophilia? You'd think they'd become teachers.
• zahma 4y ago
  The same thing happened within the American Psychiatric Association with regards to the classification of homosexuality in the DSM as a form of deviancy and therefore as a pathology. All the while, many members were themselves gay and formed some small union of activist types who sought to slowly upend the codifications from within. It’s a glacial and bureaucratic process, but they succeeded. At the same time, many of them practiced psychiatry, and I don’t doubt found meaning in their practice to help people for other issues. The DSM isn’t all bad even if it’s flawed. Now, imagine doing it for a dogmatic scripture held dearly by many millions. Sure, the Catholic Church is on the wrong side of history when it comes to gay rights, among other things, but if some people find peace and meaning in its voluminous scriptures, then there is still a leadership role for those priests. That might explain the cognitive dissonance.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• swatcoder 4y ago
  Identity is the word of the decade, and is a helpful one here. For many, one simply is Catholic and one is called to the priesthood. That you have a few “sins” to struggle doesn’t change your identity or your relationship to it, and besides — everyone has some “sins” they struggle with. As a priest, of all people, you would know that. As a whole, secular society sees sexual preference as an inflexible identity around which other things like religious affiliation or occupation might pivot. But the converse works just as well for an individual’s view of the world and is of course what many well-established traditions espouse. Catholicism, in particular, leaves room for living people being imperfect and inescapably bearing “sins” throughout their lives. It’s a core part of the theology. It’s what you do with it that becomes your profession of faith, and committing to the priesthood makes sense as a emphatic way of doing something about yours. (Which suggests that the preisthood can easily collect especially troubled “sinners” seeking to overcome their troubles… who maybe don’t always do a great job of it)
  • goethes_kind 4y ago
    I am an atheist who grew up Catholic and I find I am incompatible with a lot of the secular world, when it comes to important values to live by. For example, what is marriage, what is love, what is the meaning/value of sex, to what extent is one prepared to sacrifice themselves for others, what is family, what is money, what role should charity play in society, what is a good life well lived, the relationship between the self and society, ...honestly so many aspects of the philosophy of life to consider. I am not 100% in agreement with the official Church doctrine in all aspects, but then again no Catholic is. But I find myself much more at home with other people from a similiar background irrespective of whether they are still believers or not. I suspect these gay Catholic find themselves in a similiar situation. They probably do not share much in common with the secular world. Lots of people will immediately call this hypocrisy but they just have not put that much thought into it. There is more to life than sexual preferences.
• another2another 4y ago
  >Preaching the will of organization that condemns them while actively pursuing the condemned interests on public profiles? Dougal: But Ted, preaching against one thing in public, while secretly doing it in private, that's hypocrisy! Ted: No Dougal, I don't think so. Hypocrisy is just not something the Catholic church does, if we do something there's usually a good reason for it. Hypocrisy is something more for the common people, and you should strenuously preach against it! Dougal: Oh OK, thanks for clearing that up Ted. *My imaginary Father Ted episode, if it was still running.
• pfortuny 4y ago
  It is very easy if you read the gospels: its name is hypocrisy, nothing more. Hard words but true. No mental gymnastics needed, just a bad conscience. Now mind you: there are priests who have homosexual desires but try to live their celibacy, albeit not always successfully. These are not hypocritical, they are just human. But they do not tend to visit grindr.
• cde-v 4y ago
  [flagged]
  • heywherelogingo 4y ago
    [flagged]
• adrianmonk 4y ago
  They believe that one of the fundamental aspects of the human condition is believing that certain things are right but struggling to live up to it. They believe that everyone experiences this kind of struggle, but in different ways depending on the person, and that failing at it is inevitable. They believe there is a way for things to be OK even though you fail. They also believe in an ethical framework where you determine what is right or wrong based not on your own assessment of the pluses and minuses but by following guidance that comes (through scripture, church tradition, etc.) from a higher power whose wisdom is greater than your own. And they also believe there's some kind of grand plan behind everything, and that the way they fit into this grand plan is to be a priest. They have at some point come to the conclusion that they are supposed to be one, that it is their vocation. Or at least, within their faith, these beliefs are what is commonly accepted as the right way to look at it. An individual person may or may not actually think or feel exactly like this. Sort of like how one person may become a doctor because they like helping people and someone else may become a doctor because they don't want to disappoint their family.
  • RC_ITR 4y ago
    They also believe the sin is the act not the desire. So from their perspective, being hetero-celibate and being homo-celibate is an equal sacrifice. A major cited driver of a lot of the abuse was that exact line of thinking. Good intentioned people who knew they had bad desires would enter the Priesthood as a framework to not act on those desires, but then they see other Priests being sexually active and just give in. It also built a network of secrecy - very fine line between covering up your bosses' non-abusive (but in your mind still morally wrong) affair and asking him to cover up your abusive (but in your mind, only equally as morally wrong) activities. In general, it's one of the arguments for normalizing non-abusive fetishes in the general populace. The more secrecy there is generally, the more truly bad stuff gets covered up.
    • mrguyorama 4y ago
      Plenty of american christians seem to think the desire is also a sin.
• heywherelogingo 4y ago
  Your restraint is admirable.