(First time anywhere on the internet!) 1961 Vatican guidelines on homosexuality and the priesthood

Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders (S.C. rel., 2 Feb, 1961) pp 452--486

29. Importance of this point; young persons are to be properly instructed and warned of its dangers

Among the proofs and signs of a divine vocation the virtue of chastity is regarded as absolutely necessary “because it is largely for this reason that candidates for the ranks of the clergy choose this type of life for themselves and persevere in it.” Consequently:

a) “Watchful and diligent care is to be taken that candidates for the clergy should have a high esteem and love for chastity, and should safeguard it in their souls.

b) “Not only, therefore, are clerics to be informed in due time on the nature of priestly celibacy, the chastity which they are to observe (cf. can 132), and the demands of this obligation, but they are likewise to be warned of the dangers into which they can fall on this account. Consequently, candidates for Sacred Orders are to be exhorted to protect themselves from dangers from their earliest years.”

c) Although virginity embraced for the kingdom of heaven is more excellent than matrimony, nevertheless, candidates for Sacred Orders should not be unaware of the nobility of married life as exemplified in Christian marriage established by the plan of God. Therefore, let them be so instructed that, with a clear understanding of the advantages of Christian matrimony, they may deliberately and freely embrace the greater good of priestly and religious chastity.

d) But should superiors find a candidate unable to observe ecclesiastical celibacy and practice priestly chastity, then, completely ignoring any other outstanding qualities, they should bar him from the religious life and the priesthood (cf. Stat. Gen., art.: 2,4), confirming to the following directives and using all prudence and discretion in the application of the same, namely:

1. A candidate who shows himself certainly unable to observe religious and priestly chastity, either because of frequent sins against chastity or because of a sexual bent of mind or excessive weakness of will, is not to be admitted to the minor seminary and, much less, to the novitiate or to profession. If he has already been accepted but is not yet perpetually professed, then he should be sent away immediately or advised to withdraw, according to individual cases, no matter what point in his formation he has already reached. Should he be perpetually professed, he is to be barred absolutely and permanently from tonsure and the reception of any Order, especially Sacred Orders. If circumstances should so demand, he shall be dismissed from the community, with due observance of the prescriptions of canon law.

2. Consequently, any candidate who has a habit of solitary sins and who has not given well-founded hope that he can break this habit within a period of time to be determined prudently, is not to be admitted to the novitiate. Nor can a candidate be admitted to first profession or to renewal of vows unless he has really amended his ways. But if a novice or a temporarily professed religious gives evidence of a firm purpose of amendment with good grounds for hope of success, his probation can be extended as provided for in canon law (canons 571----)

Well-grounded hope of amendment can be provided by those youths who are physically and psychically normal or endowed with good bodily and mental health, who are noted for solid piety and the other virtues intimately connected with chastity, and who sincerely desire the religious and priestly life.

3. A much stricter policy must be followed in admission to perpetual profession and advancement to Sacred Orders. No one should be admitted to perpetual vows or promoted to Sacred Orders unless he has acquired a firm habit of continency and has given in every case consistently proof of habitual chastity over a period of at least one year. If within this year prior to perpetual profession or ordination to Sacred Orders doubt should arise because of new falls, the candidate is to be barred from perpetual profession or Sacred Orders (cf. above, no. 16) unless, as far as profession is concerned, time is available either by common law or by special induct to extend the period for testing chastity and there be question of a candidate who, as was stated above affords good prospects of amendment.

4. If a student in a minor seminary has sinned gravely against the sixth commandment with a person of the same or the other sex, or has been the occasion of grave scandal in the matter of chastity, he is to be dismissed immediately as stipulated in canon 1371, except if prudent consideration of the act and of the situation of the student by the superiors or confessors should counsel a different policy in an individual case, sc., in the case of a boy who has been seduced and who is gifted with excellent qualities and is truly penitent, or when the sin was an objectively imperfect act.

If a novice or a professed religious who has not yet made perpetual vows should be guilty of the same offense, he is to be sent away from the community or, should the circumstances so demand, he is to be dismissed with due observance of canon 647... If a perpetually professed religious is found guilty of any such sin, he is to be perpetually excluded from tonsure and the reception of any further Order. If the case belongs to the external forum, he is to receive a canonical warning unless, as provided for in canons 653 and 668, there be grounds for sending him back to the world.

Lastly, should he be a subdeacon or deacon, then, without prejudice to the above-mentioned directives and if the case should so demand, the superiors should take up with the Holy See the question of his reduction to the lay state.

For these reasons, clerics who in their diocese or religious who in another community have sinned gravely against chastity with another person are not to be admitted with a view to the priesthood, even on a trial basis, unless there be clear evidence of excusing causes or of circumstances which can at least notably diminish responsibility in conscience (Circular Letter of S.C. of the Sacraments, n. 16; Canon Law Digest, 4, p. 314).

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

5. Very special investigation is needed for those students who, although they have hitherto been free of formal sins against chastity, nevertheless suffer from morbid or abnormal sexuality, especially sexual hyperesthesia or an erotic bent of nature, to whom religious celibacy would be a continual act of heroism and a tryring martyrdom. For chastity, in so far as it implies abstinence from sexual pleasure, not only becomes very difficult for many people but the very state of celibaby and the consequent loneliness and separation from one’s family becomes so difficulty for certain individuals gifted with excessive sensitivity and tenderness, that they are not fit subjects for the religious life. This question sould perhaps receive more careful attention from novice masters and superiors of scholasticates than from confessors since suce natural tendencies do not come out so clearly in confession as iin the common life and daily contact.

In addition, special attention must be paid to those who give evidence of neuropsychosis and who are described by psychiatrists as neurotics or psychopaths, especially those who are scrupulous, abulic, hysterical, or who suffer from some form of mental disease (schizophrenia, paranoia, etc.). The same is true of those whohave a delicate constitiution or, particularly, those who suffer from weakness fo the nervouse syastem or from protracted psychic melancholia, anxiety or epilepsy (can. 984, 3) or whoare afflicted whith obsessions. Similarly, precautions are needed in examinining the children of alcoholics or those tainted with some hereditary weakness, especially in the mental order (cf. Stat. Gen., art 33; 34, :1). Finally, those young men are in need of special attention who manifest exaggerated attachment to the comforts of life and worldly pleasures. Superiors should carefully examine all these types and subject them to thorough examination by a prudent and expert Catholic psychiatrist wh, after repeated examination, will be in a position to determine whether or not they will be able to shoulder, with honor to that state, the burden of religious and priestly life, especially celibacy.

I found The Canon Law Digest, Volume 4, in a local Catholic university library (St. Vincent's, Latrobe PA) and had my secretary transpose pages 468-472, the entire segment dealing with chastity/homosexuality in the priesthood. This is a hand typed copy of the original photocopy from the book, The Canon Law Digest, Volume 4, 1963, and I have reviewed it for typographical and copying errors, but there may still be a few. This 4 page excerpt should be posted on the www.diocesereport.com website tonight. The entire 34 page document should be posted at the www.rcf.org web site on Friday according to the notice on their web site.

Just FYI, Catholic journalists and leaders all across the USA have been searching everywhere for this document. To my knowledge, here on Free Republic, with this thread, this is the first time any large excerpt of it has appeared in public or on the internet, though it has been sitting in dusty bookshelfs in Catholic universities across the country for decades.

For these reasons, clerics who in their diocese or religious who in another community have sinned gravely against chastity with another person are not to be admitted with a view to the priesthood, even on a trial basis, unless there be clear evidence of excusing causes or of circumstances which can at least notably diminish responsibility in conscience (Circular Letter of S.C. of the Sacraments, n. 16; Canon Law Digest, 4, p. 314).

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

Which part of this do our bishops not understand?!?

This is not the same document that has been discussed, I don't believe. SMEDLEY BUTLER posted a link to or reference from the specific document which addresses Religious Orders not to admit homosexuals to the ministry or to vows. It was issued by John XXIII, and dealt specifically and exclusively with homosexuality.

Although virginity embraced for the kingdom of heaven is more excellent than matrimony, nevertheless, candidates for Sacred Orders should not be unaware of the nobility of married life as exemplified in Christian marriage established by the plan of God. Therefore, let them be so instructed that, with a clear understanding of the advantages of Christian matrimony, they may deliberately and freely embrace the greater good of priestly and religious chastity.

Thank God this medieval notion has been consigned to the dust bin of history. I would wager the New Code doesn't say anything like this.

Sure it is. See post 6. We were told where to find it directly by a "friend" in the Vatican, because our Papal Pro-Nuncio refused to release it to laity even after written requests.

Conservatives in the Vatican realize the ONLY HOPE for the Church in the USA lies in the hands of the laity! Pope John Paul II fully expects the faithful orthodox laity here to be the ones to bring about the purging because the bishops won't do it and the priests either cannot or will not.

Pick up the banner and fight, folks! Our Pope is begging us to do it. Just how does anyone think the laity found this obscure Canon Law Journal if the orthodox conservatives at the Vatican didn't intervene and tell us!!!

It was issued by John XXIII, and dealt specifically and exclusively with homosexuality.

You don't know what you're talking about. I have a copy of the 34 page document right here in front of me. It is titled Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders and was promulgated February 2, 1961 and published in this 1963 Volume V of THE CANON LAW DIGEST.

It deals with all aspects of selection of candidates.

Before Tuesday, no one in this country had read this document in 40 years. How would you know if it dealt specifically and exclusively with homosexuality?

Thanks for the very interesting reading. Obviously, Church leadership has failed in their duty to the Church and to those individuals who should never have been allowed to become priests, but who were permitted to take Holy Orders even though not temperamentally suited for it.

The Church has been in a bind. When the number of priest candidates dropped, they lowered the standards and let practicing homosexuals in. Once the standards were lowered, and the priesthood gained a reputation as a "gay" vocation, recruitment suffered even more as strong heterosexual candidates were "called" to other vocations (marriage or other churches). This made the recruiting crisis worse, led to even lower standards, more gay priests, etc., etc... It is a downward spiral.

Although it would hurt in the short term, the best thing the Church could do is reaffirm its commitment to celibacy, kick out those who have habitually (no pun intended) broken their vow of chastity (hetero- or homosexual), and restore the priesthood to the place of respect it once occupied.

The second-best thing the Church could do is allow married men to join the priesthood. Right now, heterosexual men are not willing to give up their sexuality to join the Church when they know that the Church is completely hypocritical on the topic of celibacy. "I can't enter the sacrament of marriage and live a sexual life that is good in God's eyes, but I can join the priesthood and then sin all I want." It is such a contradictory message that it is no wonder the numbers of priests are critically low.

I somehow get the idea that there's another document out there, issued by the Congregation for Religious.

At least,THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER gives that impression, with quotes like the following:

Scholars said the decree, developed by the Sacred Congregation for Religious, does not apply to diocesan seminarians. According to Catholic News Service, Vatican officials are considering updating and reissuing the document as part of their internal discussion about whether to impose standards for selection and training of priests.

I'm quibbling with you, I realize, but apparently the decree is out there somewhere.

That is a more recent, separate document, not sure of the actual date. Here's a little more info:

Papal Nuncio refuses to release copy of 1961 directive to laity

Before you explore any other pages on our site–

RCF's Newsletter,
A.M.D.G.

Read our philosophy statement

How to become a member

Make a donation

Past news items

Search our site

On May 8, RCF attorney and board member James Bendell wrote the following letter to the papal nuncio: (please be patient with load times if you are running slower connections)

On May 11, Bendell was sent the Nuncio's reply:

Not only does this prove that the 1961 letter does in fact exist, it also shows that the Papal Nuncio is refusing to give us Catholic parents a copy.

Website design and maintenance by Catholic Web Services

I am strongly opposed to homosexuals in the clergy, as boy scout leaders, or as teachers. That said, the first sentence,

Says to me,

"Proof of the chastity requirement is that people who apply for this job want the chastity requirement."

Circular arguement. No proof at all.

Ok, thanks. I've seen it quoted numerous times, but the ONLY quotes from it I ever saw, were these parts of two paragraphs:

SMEDLEYBUTLER,

Care to clarify?

Thank God this medieval notion has been consigned to the dust bin of history

Seems like a pretty natural notion to me. I know for me personally celibacy would be a sacrifice beyond imagining. If I could take on such a burden to focus on a ministry for my Lord and God, He would certainly know the immense I sacrifice I was making for Him.

I agree with the statement, unfortunately I know I could never keep such a commitment which is why I wisely chose to pursue a life of worshipping My Lord as a lay person, a loving father and a faithful husband. Too bad all the offenders we read about today weren't honest enough to admit that they weren't cut out for a life of celibate service to the Lord.

re:"5. Very special investigation is needed for those students who, although they have hitherto been free of formal sins against chastity, nevertheless suffer from morbid or abnormal sexuality, especially sexual hyperesthesia or an erotic bent of nature, to whom religious celibacy would be a continual act of heroism and a tryring martyrdom."

The things we so infrequently here about the 1960s! This really should be clear - "abnormal sexuality". Everybody got that? Does it need to be spelled out anatomically? Too bad Weakland managed to sneak through. Milwaukee's out $450,000 and tons more for the iconoclastic wreckitecture. None of this had to happen. I hope ALL future seminary training includes a long and thorough course on canon law which covers this clause in detail, complete with accounting forms itemizing how many hundreds of millions it cost the Church when this was not followed carefully, judiciously, and prudentially.

What purpose would Montalvo be serving by not releasing the document? It's out there; you managed to get it.

It reads like everything else written in a pre-Vatican II Church, especially stuff like this which reveals some archaic ideas of certain dispositions:

The same is true of those whohave a delicate constitiution or, particularly, those who suffer from weakness fo the nervouse syastem or from protracted psychic melancholia, anxiety or epilepsy.

I had a classmate who was ordained who had epilepsy; it affected his ministry not one bit.

But, other than the language, its provisions would basically hold true still.

Good that you're getting it put up at rcf.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.