https://m.jpost.com/christianworld/christianity-news/article-837257

Ok, so yeah, must remain celibate, can't "demonstrate their sexuality"

Footnote I do not think the percentage of seminarians or priests who are gay will change that much

Genuinely curious on some folks take on this, on this board specifically. In.

PabloSerna said:

---

Serious question, how is this any different than taking a vow to live a chaste life as a heterosexual?

---

Didn't comment on it one way or another, bro

But it is a change. What do you think about it?

So far, the source document from the Vatican is only in Italian. However here is a key translated quote from your link, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly,"

I have had an opportunity to visit with novices and professed clergy in the Order of Preachers. Kind of up close, behind the doors kind of thing. They are regular young men trying to live this very calling as dedicated as possible. For some, it is too much. They fail, they try again. Maybe some don't struggle at all? However, it is a mistake to think that they enter this calling with this aspect all worked out (remember we are talking about new priest in formation, most likely not ordained).

Some struggle with pride, with sex, with substances, and on.

It is right to pray for them, because this is a great calling that takes everything to meet. However, God gives them the grace to overcome.

I did notice something, that they are very comfortable around men. Not in a overt sexual way, but in a way that I could not as a man called into marriage. It makes sense to me that they have this quality, because they will spend probably the next 50 years or more living with other men.

The Banned said:

---

1. Pope wasn't apart of this. Italian bishops conference. They just use his picture for clicks.

2. This is the key line:

During clarifications on admission criteria, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly," said the Italian Bishops' Conference, according to RPP Noticias. The guidelines added that "the Church, while deeply respecting the people concerned, cannot accept into seminaries and holy orders those who lead a homosexual lifestyle, reveal rooted homosexual tendencies, or support what is called the gay culture,"

What they're saying is that if you have homosexual attractions, it isn't an automatic disqualifier but if you are acting on it, have acted on it, trying to run from it in the priesthood, etc, then it is still a disqualifier.

Now will this be stretched by certain seminaries? Most likely. But they're already doing that anyway so idk. The pope said there is too much "f*ggotry" (his word, not mind) in the seminaries so this isn't coming from him (for once)

---

Yeah, I was just reviewing this, and you are correct. I conflated the bishop of Rome with authority over other bishops in Italy. My bad

I do have a question for you, aside from the fact that this is an Italian bishop group, rather than the Vatican itself, would this go a step further than the 2005 directive?

https://www.katholisch.de/artikel/58780-italienische-bischoefe-oeffnen-priesterseminare-fuer-homosexuelle

PabloSerna said:

---

So far, the source document from the Vatican is only in Italian. However here is a key translated quote from your link, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly,"

I have had an opportunity to visit with novices and professed clergy in the Order of Preachers. Kind of up close, behind the doors kind of thing. They are regular young men trying to live this very calling as dedicated as possible. For some, it is too much. They fail, they try again. Maybe some don't struggle at all? However, it is a mistake to think that they enter this calling with this aspect all worked out (remember we are talking about new priest in formation, most likely not ordained).

Some struggle with pride, with sex, with substances, and on.

It is right to pray for them, because this is a great calling that takes everything to meet. However, God gives them the grace to overcome.

I did notice something, that they are very comfortable around men. Not in a overt sexual way, but in a way that I could not as a man called into marriage. It makes sense to me that they have this quality, because they will spend probably the next 50 years or more living with other men.

---

Well, that's pretty much the crux of it, isn't it?

You asked how it's different from heterosexual celibacy. In the case of a Catholic seminary, it's a lot different. Gay men in a Catholic seminary, or in constant quarters with other gay men. These are not heterosexual men and women in close quarters. Women aren't in the seminary

But also I would ask you, homosexual conduct is a disqualifier. You seem to indicate that it goes on anyway. Should this be disqualifier? Do you think the Vatican needs to change its position on this?

Captain Pablo said:

---

The Banned said:

---

1. Pope wasn't apart of this. Italian bishops conference. They just use his picture for clicks.

2. This is the key line:

During clarifications on admission criteria, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly," said the Italian Bishops' Conference, according to RPP Noticias. The guidelines added that "the Church, while deeply respecting the people concerned, cannot accept into seminaries and holy orders those who lead a homosexual lifestyle, reveal rooted homosexual tendencies, or support what is called the gay culture,"

What they're saying is that if you have homosexual attractions, it isn't an automatic disqualifier but if you are acting on it, have acted on it, trying to run from it in the priesthood, etc, then it is still a disqualifier.

Now will this be stretched by certain seminaries? Most likely. But they're already doing that anyway so idk. The pope said there is too much "f*ggotry" (his word, not mind) in the seminaries so this isn't coming from him (for once)

---

Yeah, I was just reviewing this, and you are correct. I conflated the bishop of Rome with authority over other bishops in Italy. My bad

I do have a question for you, aside from the fact that this is an Italian bishop group, rather than the Vatican itself, would this go a step further than the 2005 directive?

---

I was away from the church in 2005, so I'm not familiar with it.

The Banned said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

The Banned said:

---

1. Pope wasn't apart of this. Italian bishops conference. They just use his picture for clicks.

2. This is the key line:

During clarifications on admission criteria, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly," said the Italian Bishops' Conference, according to RPP Noticias. The guidelines added that "the Church, while deeply respecting the people concerned, cannot accept into seminaries and holy orders those who lead a homosexual lifestyle, reveal rooted homosexual tendencies, or support what is called the gay culture,"

What they're saying is that if you have homosexual attractions, it isn't an automatic disqualifier but if you are acting on it, have acted on it, trying to run from it in the priesthood, etc, then it is still a disqualifier.

Now will this be stretched by certain seminaries? Most likely. But they're already doing that anyway so idk. The pope said there is too much "f*ggotry" (his word, not mind) in the seminaries so this isn't coming from him (for once)

---

Yeah, I was just reviewing this, and you are correct. I conflated the bishop of Rome with authority over other bishops in Italy. My bad

I do have a question for you, aside from the fact that this is an Italian bishop group, rather than the Vatican itself, would this go a step further than the 2005 directive?

---

I was away from the church in 2005, so I'm not familiar with it.

---

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church

Captain Pablo said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

The Banned said:

---

1. Pope wasn't apart of this. Italian bishops conference. They just use his picture for clicks.

2. This is the key line:

During clarifications on admission criteria, "The aim of priestly formation in the affective-sexual realm is the ability to welcome celibacy as a gift, to choose freely, and to live this responsibly," said the Italian Bishops' Conference, according to RPP Noticias. The guidelines added that "the Church, while deeply respecting the people concerned, cannot accept into seminaries and holy orders those who lead a homosexual lifestyle, reveal rooted homosexual tendencies, or support what is called the gay culture,"

What they're saying is that if you have homosexual attractions, it isn't an automatic disqualifier but if you are acting on it, have acted on it, trying to run from it in the priesthood, etc, then it is still a disqualifier.

Now will this be stretched by certain seminaries? Most likely. But they're already doing that anyway so idk. The pope said there is too much "f*ggotry" (his word, not mind) in the seminaries so this isn't coming from him (for once)

---

Yeah, I was just reviewing this, and you are correct. I conflated the bishop of Rome with authority over other bishops in Italy. My bad

I do have a question for you, aside from the fact that this is an Italian bishop group, rather than the Vatican itself, would this go a step further than the 2005 directive?

---

I was away from the church in 2005, so I'm not familiar with it.

---

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church

---

I'll go read the whole directive. Based on that wiki article, it's seems like this most recent directive seems to be super redundant.

747Ag said:

---

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2025/01/no-italian-bishops-did-not-change.html

---

This was my take away. I'm sure the Italian conference is trying to virtue signal for whatever reason (probably pope Francis's comments) but it appears to be wasted ink. They're just saying what is already in effect.

"But also I would ask you, homosexual conduct is a disqualifier. You seem to indicate that it goes on anyway. Should this be disqualifier? Do you think the Vatican needs to change its position on this?"

This sounds like a one or two strike rule, maybe not?

What the document is clear about is that the "lifestyle" that includes sex is not allowed. Just the same for heterosexuals- not allowed, even if they are with consenting adults. This is obvious for the moral implications that the Church espouses regarding the gift of human sexuality given to us from God.

To your other point of how it is different, because they live "in constant quarters with other gay men" is to assume that the gift of celibacy is unattainable in spite of grace. I say that because it is attainable, even for homosexual persons (religious men and women) IF they are willing to accept the gift and live it out.

So, it comes back to our free will. If we can align our will with the calling that God has given to each of us, we can endure- because God wills it. The whole Our Father part of "thy will be done"- has to be a daily commitment.

"This sounds like a one or two strike rule, maybe not?"

I'd say one strike is enough for seminarians and clergy

PabloSerna said:

---

Serious question, how is this any different than taking a vow to live a chaste life as a heterosexual?

---

Maybe it's different for Catholics, but a sinful desire is still sin, regardless if you act on it. Jesus' teaching on lust and adultery, for example.

The Banned said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Serious question, how is this any different than taking a vow to live a chaste life as a heterosexual?

---

Maybe it's different for Catholics, but a sinful desire is still sin, regardless if you act on it. Jesus' teaching on lust and adultery, for example.

---

Personally I think the seminary is ill suited for men attracted to other men. I don't think me living with a bunch of women would be good for me from a "near occasion of sin" standpoint, and I assume it would be similar for men attracted to other men.

---

This is common sense and should in my opinion DQ those that have that struggle. Above reproach.

I would be very curious to know how it all works behind the scenes. Is it something that is being addressed via accountability or just something that gets self reported, or what.

Thank you for that summary.

I had honestly blown it off as there have been many documented instances in the past where the media has conflated something the Pope has said and/or attributed to him something that he never said. I guess we can add that to the list. I say all of that as someone who is happily Catholic despite some of the things this Pope has actually done and said. I mean, I can disagree with my wife half of the time but I'm not planning on leaving that relationship anytime soon.

There is definitely a gay subculture in seminaries and the priesthood. I know two current bishops who were the spiritual director and vice-rector of a seminary. They stood by and did nothing when it was known by all that several seminarians were engaged in homosexual relationships.

"Personally I think the seminary is ill suited for men attracted to other men."

This sounds like God's grace and will are insufficient for me to live a chaste life? I personally know men and women religious that have accepted the gift from God to live a celibate life. This is a daily commitment no doubt, but for God nothing is impossible, right?

Even as a married man, who spends most of my days, M-F, around attractive women at my office, I must live a chaste life and be cognizant of my gaze.

There is an abundance of information about living a life of celibacy on the internet, so it is not as impossible as it may seem. I do think that this needs to be worked out before ordination and the church is right to scrutinize candidates at that level. We should keep them in prayer, but I believe men and women religious can and have done this very life before.

PabloSerna said:

---

"Personally I think the seminary is ill suited for men attracted to other men."

This sounds like that God's grace and will are insufficient to a chaste life and I personally know men and women religious that have accepted the gift from God to live a celibate life. This is a daily commitment no doubt, but for God nothing is impossible right?

Even as a married man, who spends most of my days, M-F, around attractive women at my office, I must live a chaste life and be cognizant of my gaze.

---

Hence the reason I didn't say they must be excluded. It is my personal opinion, but it's not something I'm militant about, as long as the above protocols are being followed, as were told they are.