In 1564, Pope Pius IV founded the Congregation for the Clergy in order to ensure that Catholic values were not compromised and to guide priests in proper conduct.
It is likely that Pius would have been disappointed this past Saturday when the Vatican had to announce that it was suspending Monsignor Tommaso Stenico for, in a phrase, gay sex.
The case is yet another that highlights the conflict between the character of certain religious officials and the codes of conduct required by their profession.
Stenico has vehemently denied any homosexual activity, claiming that he is a psychoanalyst who was aiming to expose “harmful” gays in and around the Church.
Such a claim is condemnable on the accounts of Stenico’s witch-hunt mentality; since Saturday, he has said that he was trying to “clean up” the church and that he was seeking out gays, who, Stenico claims, are detrimental to the faith.
The monsignor told an Italian television network that he “didn’t feel like he was sinning” while engaging in intercourse with gay men.
The Agence-France Presse reports that Stenico, once exposed, furthered his story by adding that he “said (he) was gay in order to unmask those who really are.”
Apparently, saying that he enjoyed having sex with gay men did not qualify him to be “really gay.”
He was exposed via the network’s airing of the program, which includes interviews with gay priests.
Although his voice and face were distorted, officials recognized the office in which the interview was conducted ““ after all, it must have been just down the hall.
Prior to being suspended, Stenico was a “top official” in the Congregation for the Clergy, according to the Associated Press.
Although Catholicism has been making news in the past few years, it is far from the only faith to be assailed by poor conduct.
Islam has certainly been plagued with countless cases of exploitation as certain clerics have used the faith as an excuse for violence and human rights depravation.
Last year, the Daily Bruin reported on an incident involving the director of Hillel at UCLA. The rabbi, in his own words, “hit, kicked, and scratched” a journalist.
What makes this case different, however, is that Stenico has neither apologized for his actions nor offered anything resembling an olive branch.
Instead, he has condemned those who engage in the very same acts that he, while under the comforting blanket of anonymity, willingly admitted to committing.
According to Google’s search engine cache, Stenico maintained a Web site with Biblical quotes and blessings of Mary’s virginity.
The Web site has since been taken down amid Stenico’s claims that he has not only never engaged in homosexual activity but also stayed celibate his whole life.
In direct contrast, Stenico was reported to have asked the young male reporter if he found the him attractive.
The question at hand is not Stenico’s sexual orientation. The issue is the conflict between the official’s public, staunch stance against gays (and, by extension, same-sex marriage) and his actions.
The incident is vaguely reminiscent of America’s own gay-roast, the Sen. Larry Craig debacle. In both situations, the men involved claimed to be heterosexual and held positions of respect and authority, using these roles to deny any gay advances on their parts.
The difference is that Craig did not spend his life working for an organization that publicly and officially refers to homosexuality as a sin.
Nor did Craig maintain that his actions were meant to expose “those who damage the image of the Church with homosexual activity” ““ the justification Stenico gave for frequenting gay chat rooms and meeting with gay men.
It is understandable that the Church would not support a cleric who was openly engaging in promiscuous homosexual activity, especially in light of the Vatican’s teaching that homosexual activities are “intrinsically disordered.”
The Catholic Church should continue with its investigation.
However, regardless of whether or not Stenico is (or could be shown) to be gay, he should not be allowed to return to his post within the Church.
The vile nature of Stenico’s actions stems from neither heterosexual nor homosexual tendencies but rather from the reprehensible justifications he used for his so-called psychoanalytical experiment.
Do you believe that priests moonlight as psychoanalysts pretending to be gay? E-mail Makarechi at kmakarechi@media.ucla.edu. General comments can be sent to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.