Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Ivanhoe and lucifershammer, are you in favor of this proposed ban on the "intrinsically disordered" and those with "perverse inclinations" entering the priesthood? Do you think it is "necessary to restore the church's credibility?"
Isn't life-long chastity often a sort of "perverse inclination" already? Certainly, it's "unnatural" in some robust sense. Mating is, for smart mammals like us, as natural as eating or drinking.
I am not sure, however, that all practitioners of life-long chastity are "intrinsically disordered". The disorder, when it is a disorder (and I don't think it always is) strikes me as more extrinsic, a product of Catholic culture.
More importantly, if it is the case that making chastity mandatory casually contributes to child molestation--by denying that subset of priests who are liable to developing sexual attraction to children any alternative avenue of sexual expression--then I believe that the Vatican is morally obliged to make chastity optional for priests.
Compare: If it were mandated, as a policy, that all males who wanted to be teachers of primary school kids could never henceforth fornicate with adults of their own age, would this increase child abuse by such teachers? And would banning all gays from teaching solve the problem as effectively as letting such teachers fornicate freely with men or women of their own age?