Ordination to the priesthood or diaconate is a privilege, not a right. Ever. (This makes it different from, e.g., marriage.)
Someone who is seeking Holy Orders needs to be leading an exemplary Christian life. (That should be obvious, but if it isn't, I have to ask: didn't the molestation scandals teach us anything?) Someone who was directly involved in an abortion clearly wasn't leading an exemplary Christian life at that time. "Irregular for ordination" just means that those circumstances need to be investigated and considered. It's not an unconditional or permanent prohibition. If there is clearly no issue, the ordination may be permitted.
The same situation applies if a man leaves the church, becomes a Protestant minister, and then returns to the Catholic Church and seeks ordination to the priesthood. He's "irregular for ordination," meaning that that particular situation bears special consideration and investigation.
I disagree. But that’ why we live in America.
Dont bother with a retort. You’re wrong.
So I ask again: is there a similar restriction on men who have engaged in homosexual acts?
BTW, raping a child gets you assigned to a new church.
They hypocrisy and self righteousness is beyond incredible.
If I wanted to start an organization that barred from its leadership anyone who has ever stepped foot in New York or California, then those are the rules of the organization.
The priesthood is not a government job, they can set their own rules.
On the other hand, agreeing with if they should make that rule is different. I would never put myself under the teachings of someone that supports abortion. What if a person supported or participated in it and repented? “Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean.”
I guess that is a valid debate.