U.S. Catholics Are Divided Over New Directive on Gays
Darklady
from the RCC claim.
-- DL
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/national/28catholic.html?th&emc=th
The New York Times
November 28, 2005
U.S. Catholics Are Divided Over New Directive on Gays
By NEELA BANERJEE and KATIE ZEZIMA
Grappling with the implications of a Vatican directive issued last week
that would bar most gay men from seminaries, Roman Catholics at several
parishes around the country yesterday offered sharply contrasting
interpretations of its impact on the priesthood, on the potential for
sex abuse by clergy members and on the church itself.
More than three dozen interviews at churches in Los Angeles and around
Boston, Washington and Austin, Tex., underscored that Catholics were as
divided as the rest of the country in their attitudes about gay men and
lesbians. Roughly half the Catholics interviewed praised the Vatican
document as upholding church teachings, which consider homosexuality
"objectively disordered." But just as many parishioners criticized it
as unfair to gay men, saying that a priest's commitment to celibacy
should be the issue, not his sexual orientation.
Similarly, some Catholics said that because the majority of victims in
the scandals involving sexually abusive priests were boys, barring gay
men from the priesthood would reduce the likelihood of such abuse in
the future. But others said there was no link between homosexuality and
pedophilia, especially many parishioners in Boston, an archdiocese
profoundly affected by the sexual abuse scandal.
Both sides largely predicted that if the directive, or instruction, was
vigorously enforced, it would reduce the number of priests ordained in
the Catholic church at a time when it is grappling with an acute
shortage of clergy members. Yet supporters of the Vatican's stance said
that such a step was necessary to root out priests whom they considered
dangerous.
"If it is part of church doctrine, we'd be better off with 5 percent
less priests, but who conform to church doctrine, rather than a few
more," said Travis Corcoran, 34, the owner of an online DVD rental
company, as he left an early Mass yesterday at St. Agnes Parish in
Arlington, Mass., near Boston. "It's the same way if there's a shortage
of school bus drivers. If you drug-test school bus drivers and the
result is there are a few less school bus drivers, that's better."
Work on the document began years ago in the tenure of Pope John Paul
II, but last spring, Pope Benedict XVI cast the issue in terms of the
recent sexual abuse scandals, saying there was a need to "purify" the
church. The document, which was published last week on an Italian
Catholic Web site, would exclude from the priesthood men "who are
actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or support
the so-called 'gay culture.' "
It would allow into the priesthood those who had "clearly overcome"
what it deemed "transitory" homosexual impulses at least three years
before ordination as a deacon, the last step before priesthood. The
document did not define "overcome."
Bernadette Ruiz, a stay-at-home mother of three boys in Austin, Tex.,
echoed many Catholics who said they thought the directive discriminated
against gay men by targeting them for greater scrutiny and possible
expulsion.
"Once you enter the priesthood, you give up sexual activity, whether
you're straight or gay," Ms. Ruiz said as she left Mass yesterday at
St. Catherine of Siena in southwest Austin. "We're taught to love and
forgive and be open. To single out people is to go against what we're
being taught."
She added: "Some people, they make it seem like if a priest is gay,
they are less than a priest. I don't believe that."
But proponents of the instruction applauded the Vatican for reaffirming
a longstanding position on homosexuality, especially in the face of
growing acceptance of gay men and lesbians in the West. "Somebody has
to have standards, not just politically but morally," said Sharon
France, 65, a retired building supply executive from Phoenix, who
attended Mass yesterday at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in
downtown Los Angeles with her husband, Tom, 69.
Mr. France said the ban should go even further to encompass anyone who
had ever had homosexual tendencies. "I don't think you can make chicken
soup out of chicken feathers," he said. "It should be either one way or
the other."
Most supporters of the directive said they believed there was a link
between homosexuality and the sexual abuse by clergy members that has
recently rocked the church, and they said the initiative would make
such scandals less likely in the future.
"There were good intentions in the past, with people saying, 'Let's
pray for it, treat it,' and now we have to deal with it," said Robert
Searby, 49, who was attending Mass yesterday at Holy Spirit Catholic
Church in Annandale, Va., where his son, James, is a priest. "It should
be done with charity, but that doesn't mean meekness."
But many Catholics said the directive served only to scapegoat gay men,
rather than deal with what they see as the root causes of the sexual
abuse. Those Catholics say that pedophilia is not tied to sexual
orientation and that the church hierarchy is ignoring its own missteps
in the scandals.
"They're afraid to look at themselves because they allowed the abuse to
happen," said Kevin Thomas, 73, a retired social studies teacher from
Woburn, Mass, who was at coffee hour yesterday at Sacred Heart Parish
in Lexington, Mass. "All those people sent priests back in to abuse
more and more."
Some worshipers, including Paul Bjarnason, 37, predicted that the
directive, if carried out forcefully, could alienate gay Catholics.
"Any time you have something like this, there is bound to be collateral
damage," Mr. Bjarnason said as he watched his three young children play
in the entry hall to Holy Spirit Church in Annandale. "I don't know if
it changes much but it brings the issue to the fore, and so people will
probably feel more shunned because of it."
Others still said they were disturbed by how the directive could winnow
the church of good priests. "I'm disappointed in the Vatican," said
Patsy Heuchling, 80, a retiree from Winchester, Mass., at a coffee hour
after Mass yesterday at Sacred Heart Parish. "I know priests who are
gay, and I fear it will make them uncomfortable - maybe even
marginalized. I resent the missed opportunity to welcome young men who
are gay, but are put off. We may never know the good priests we have
lost from this."
Neela Banerjee reported from Annandale, Va., for this article, and
Katie Zezima from Lexington, Mass. Cindy Chang contributed reporting
from Los Angeles and Nathan Levy from Austin, Tex.
Newk Indofman
"Darklady" <dark...@darklady.com> wrote in message
news:1133202282.5...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Guess it's not as cut-and-dried as our 1-dimensional representatives
> from the RCC claim.
>
> -- DL
Cut-and-dried helps them feel more secure. The truth is most Catholics see
things very differently from our 1-dimensional reps, who line up more with
fundy Fred Phelps types and the most nastiest, codgiest, dullest old
bishops.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/national/28catholic.html?th&emc=th