The Elephant in the Room

Always open to life, sexual relations are exclusively reserved for wives and their husbands.  However poorly proclaimed, there is “abundant teaching” (cf, Congregation for Catholic Education, 11/4/05) on the beauty and purpose of marriage/family and human sexuality, as well as our need to genuinely love all our brothers and sisters.

Those who cherish human life from the first moment of fertilization till natural death, while acknowledging marriage to be the only appropriate place for husbands and wives to cooperate in God’s continuing work of Creation, and acknowledging the need for each conjugal act to be open to life are promised authentic happiness – a happiness finding its fulfillment in Heaven itself.  Human life is sacred; the conjugal act between husbands and wives is sacred.  All of us need to be shouting this from the proverbial rooftops! (The Compendium of the Catechism & the Theology of the Body, 6/11/2021)

Some have tried to spread the error that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is merely about ‘hospitality’….the Catechism includes Genesis 19 in it scriptural notes on the biblical basis for forbidding homosexual acts….the Bible teaches: homosexual activity is sinful, as are other sexual sins such as fornication and adultery (Msgr Charles Pope, 7/14/17).

Wisdom from the Eleventh Century till 1961 and Beyond

For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths” (2 Timothy 4: 3, 4).   

The 11^th Century certainly was a time calling for the clarity of “sound doctrine”. As per a 2015 translation and commentary on “Book of Gomorrah,” sodomy was spelled out among sexual sins:

[St Peter Damian condemns] various forms of sexual perversion, which he places under the heading of ‘sodomy,’ including contraception, masturbation, same-sex pederasty, and adult homosexual acts. He notes the severe penalties historically attached to such offenses in the Scriptures as well as the canons of Church councils, and argues that such penalties should be even stronger for members of the clergy, who are to be held to a higher standard than the laity. The strongest punishments in the Church’s historic legislation are reserved for those who abuse children and adolescents….

His counsel to prohibit the entry into the priesthood of those with sodomitic tendencies was confirmed by the Sacred Congregation for Religious under Pope John XXIII in 1961 and reaffirmed (after much painful experience following the lack of compliance with the directive) by the Congregation of Catholic Education with the express approval Pope Benedict XVI in 2005….
The relevance of the Book of Gomorrah for the modern Church is immediately recognizable to anyone even remotely aware of the compromised reputation of the Catholic clergy throughout the modern West(The Book of Gomorrah and St. Peter Damian’s Struggle Against Ecclesiastical Corruption, 2015)

Unofficial Practice Before and After 1961?

While the words may seem harsh to modern ears, the Sacred Congregation for Religious was direct in promoting priestly chastity:

Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers (Religiosorum Institutio, 1961).

How much was this selection guidance adhered to?  While the publication Slate does not seem particularly sympathetic to Catholicism, it did carry an interesting piece a few years back:

In the last half century there’s…been an increased ‘gaying of the priesthood’ in the West.  Throughout the 1970s, several hundred men left the priesthood each year, many of them for marriage. As straight priests left the church for domestic bliss, the proportion of remaining priests who were gay grew” (How the Catholic Priesthood Became an Unlikely Haven for Many Gay Men, 4/20/17).

Like the above author, Andrew Sullivan (who identifies as gay) does not appear to view the “gaying of the priesthood” as problematic, even as so many victims of reported clerical sexual abuse turned out to be male adolescents:

We have no reliable figures on just how many priests in the Catholic Church are gay…. In the United States, however, where there are 37,000 priests, no independent study has found fewer than 15 percent to be gay, and some have found as many as 60 percent. The consensus in my own research over the past few months converged on around 30 to 40 percent among parish priests and considerably more than that — as many as 60 percent or higher — among religious orders like the Franciscans or the Jesuits….

Scarred, scared men became priests, and certain distinct patterns emerged. One, as we have come to learn, was sexual acting out and abuse. To conflate sexual abuse with the gay priesthood, as many now reflexively do, is a grotesque libel on the vast majority who have never contemplated such crimes and are indeed appalled by them…. At the same time, to decouple the sexual-abuse crisis entirely from the question of gay priests is a willful avoidance of an ugly truth. Pedophilia is a separate category outside the question of sexual orientation. But some abuse of male teens and young adults, as well as abuse of other priests, is clearly related to homosexuality gone horribly astray….

[In 2005] the church said all gay priests should be fired and no gay men be admitted to the seminary … and then did nothing much about it (New York Magazine, 1/21/19).

Just What Did the Church Say in 2005?

In light of…abundant teaching, the present Instruction does not intend to dwell on all questions in the area of affectivity and sexuality that require an attentive discernment during the entire period of formation. Rather, it contains norms concerning a specific question, made more urgent by the current situation, and that is:  whether to admit to the seminary and to holy orders candidates who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies….

the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question [9] , cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture” [10] ….

It would be gravely dishonest for a candidate to hide his own homosexuality in order to proceed, despite everything, towards ordination….

Let Bishops, episcopal conferences and major superiors look to see that the constant norms of this Instruction be faithfully observed for the good of the candidates themselves, and to guarantee that the Church always has suitable priests who are true shepherds according to the Heart of Christ. (Congregation for Catholic Education, 11/4/05) 

James Martin, SJ

As Pope Benedict XVI diplomatically wrote to the Jesuits in 2008:

it might prove particularly useful for the Congregation to reassert, in the spirit of St Ignatius, its own total adherence to Catholic doctrine, especially to its key points, under severe attack today by the secular culture, such as, for example, the relationship between Christ and religions, certain aspects of liberation theology and the various points of sexual morals, especially those concerning the indissolubility of marriage and the pastoral care of homosexuals.

Other than for Pope Francis, James Martin may now be our best-known Jesuit priest; he claims to fully accept Catholic teaching:

Father Martin has sought in a dedicated way to accompany and support people with same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria.  Many of his efforts have been laudable, and we need to join him in stressing the dignity of persons in such situations.

At the same time, a pattern of ambiguity in his teachings tends to undermine his stated aims, alienating people from the very support they need for authentic human flourishing.  Due to the confusion caused by his statements and activities regarding same-sex related (LGBT) issues,[i] I find it necessary to emphasize that Father Martin does not speak with authority on behalf of the Church, and to caution the faithful about some of his claims….

Catholic teaching always requires more than polite affirmation or pro forma agreement, particularly from those who comment publicly on matters of doctrine (Archbishop Charles Chaput, 9/19/2019).

Though he never responded to a 2016 dubia from four cardinals, the Holy Father oddly sends handwritten letters to Father Martin, his fellow Jesuit:

Dear brother,

Thank you for your letter.

It is not the first time that I speak of homosexuality and of homosexual persons.
And I wanted to clarify that it is not a crime, in order to stress that criminalization is neither good nor just.
When I said it is a sin, I was simply referring to Catholic moral teaching, which says that every sexual act outside of marriage is a sin. Of course, one must also consider the circumstances, which may decrease or eliminate fault. As you can see, I was repeating something in general. I should have said ‘It is a sin, as is any sexual act outside of marriage.’ This is to speak of ‘the matter’ of sin, but we know well that Catholic morality not only takes into consideration the matter, but also evaluates freedom and intention; and this, for every kind of sin.
And I would tell whoever wants to criminalize homosexuality that they are wrong.
In a televised interview, where we spoke with natural and conversational language, it is understandable that there would not be such precise definitions.
I pray for you and for your work. Please do the same for me.
May Jesus bless you and may the Holy Virgin protect you.

Fraternally,
“Francisco”
(https://outreach.faith/2023/01/pope-francis-clarifies-comments-on-homosexuality-one-must-consider-the-circumstances)

Despite plenteous teaching on the beauty and sanctity of authentic marriage/ family, is it being undermined (perhaps inadvertently) by confusing communications?  Are we seeing a failure to fully appreciate the magnificence of authentic marriage/ family?

Conclusion

How do we encourage better proclamation?