Pope Francis Has Joined The Boy Scouts?

Pope Francis  is being hailed as the latest global icon to embrace homosexuality as just another lifestyle choice.

Well, maybe it hasn’t gone that far yet, but the Pope in some respects has fallen into the trap leftists set for every prominent public figure. Part of it is the Pontiff’s own fault. I believe that Pope Francis has become somewhat captivated regarding his public relations skills by reading too many press clippings about himself. Lauded as the “Humble Servant” and built up by the liberal press as that “breath of fresh air” for the Roman Catholic Church; the crusader for “social justice”, bringing the Church into the progressive 21st century, Pope Francis has enjoyed such favorable media coverage it is not surprising that he would fall prey to the adulatory advances of the Catholic Left  and the liberal press.

What he is reported to have actually said regarding homosexuality really seems  to be rather unremarkable, but arguably somewhat confusing.

The Pope was asked, according to most news reports, about how the Catholic hierarchy should respond to clerics who are gay, “though not sexually active”:

“Who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord”, he told a news  conference. “You can’t marginalize these people”.

We are told that never before had a pope spoken out in defense of gay priests in the Catholic ministry. This, it is said, is “likely to strengthen his hand  as he confronts myriad challenges, including alleged corruption at the Vatican bank and the sexual abuse crisis”.

Perhaps I am the only person somewhat puzzled about several aspects of the Pope’s remarks.

What is this “show of support” for “clerics who are gay”. The question the pope responded to stipulated that the reference was specifically to those who are not “sexually active”. What does it mean then? What does it mean to be “gay”?

If the person is not “sexually active”, what are the manifestations of “gay”? How does that characterization apply to clerics who are heterosexual, but not “sexually active”? The church regards celibacy as a requirement for the priesthood. If the person is celibate then what exactly is the issue regarding men “deemed to have deep-seated homosexual tendencies”?

Pope Benedict XVI is reported as having “formally barred (them) from entering the priesthood”.

Seems to me if candidates for the priesthood are willing to enter, accepting the celibacy rule, why does the subject of their “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” even come up? Is the suggestion that homosexual tendencies, when “deep-seated” enough are more irresistible then “deep-seated” heterosexual tendencies”?

The Church has defined homosexuality as an “objective disorder” and as an obstacle to priestly celibacy.

Does the gay community and their supporters condemn the church’s definition of homosexuality or do they oppose its view that celibacy should not be considered a requirement of the priesthood?

In other words, when an individual applies for priesthood, he tacitly accepts the celibacy requirement. Why then does it make any difference what his “deep-seated” sexual “tendencies” are unless those toward homosexuality are too powerful to expect a gay priest to not submit to them? If so, that seems to confirm the church’s assessment of homosexuality as an “objective disorder”.

I don’t believe Pope Francis meant to suggest that he has new found views that sexually active gay priests will be welcomed! The church has always taken the position of “condemning the sin, not the sinner.”  So, what is so earthshaking about his comments? DLH

0

0