Talk:List of sexually active popes

Clerical celibacy is not a doctrine!

The article states "According to the doctrines of the Catholic Church, the pope (along with other clergy) is expected to be celibate, and is expected to be chaste as well." This is factually incorrect because clerical celibacy is not a doctrine. It is a discipline, imposed on priests of the Latin Rite, and some *BUT NOT ALL* of the Eastern Catholic Churches. In some of the Eastern Churches, married men may be ordained to the priesthood. (But, a single man, once ordained, cannot marry afterward.)

(EDIT -- I just made a correction to above noted sentence in the article, 19 Apr 2005, 18:02 EDIT)

Also it should be noted that for a single person, chastity and celibacy are the same thing. But for a married person, chastity is faithfulness to one's spouse, and responsible use of the gift of sexuality. WhFastus

VfD

On April 27, this article was nominated for deletion. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of sexually active popes. The result was keep. —Xezbeth 09:31, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Rejected allegations

Someone has gone through this article and added footnotes sporadically where they believe that "modern historians" have rejected claims of sexual activity. This won't do. By all means state which "modern historians" have challenged the view and why as part of the section discussing each of the claims. But without having a source that says specifically "modern historians have generally rejected this claim about pope x" then we are reinforcing bias. Particulalrly concerning where the "modern historians" cited turn out to be Catholic priests (!) - hardly impartial and reliable sources to fall back on. I accept some editors get uncomfortable with this topic but let's try and be as neutral as we can shall we?Contaldo80 (talk) 00:31, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi friend! Yes I did add these footnotes.

I hear your concern that without having a source that says specifically "modern historians have generally rejected this claim about pope x" then we are reinforcing bias. That is why I have weakened the language somewhat, in the places I've reinserted footnotes. We shouldn't say "generally" without a source confirming there is a majority consensus disputing, I completely agree. That was a poor wording on my part. However, I still think the footnotes are a good idea as readers who are scrolling through the list can see them and then refer to the details for more information about which modern historians dispute the claim..

Side note: I think mentioning that one historian is a Catholic priest is a good idea, so thank you for adding that. But saying that by virtue of his position his work is {{hardly impartial and reliable sources simply reinforces bias in the other direction, so priesthood is no reason to exclude reputable historians. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 09:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Clement VII

Removal of some material in this article is being done on wooly grounds. There is a source that makes the claim he has a son. Yet an editor has removed it after referring obliquely to other "modern historians". Provide the source and let's consider how to address this section. Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 01:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi. That reason for that removal was that his inclusion was based on a passing reference about a noble who was allegedly his son. However as I explained in the edit summary of the removal, a quick look at Alessandro de' Medici, Duke of Florence's (the noble in question) article calls this allegation a "minority view" which other authors disputed. Source:

I will be honest, at the time I felt that justified a removal. However, I don't feel strongly about it and am happy to leave the content included. Hope this helps, definitely did not intend to remove anything obliquely or improperly. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 09:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Paul VI and his alleged homosexuality

Rumours of homosexuality and denial

In 1976 Paul VI became the first pontiff in the modern era to deny the accusation of homosexuality. On 29 December 1975, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a document entitled Persona Humana: Declaration on Certain Questions concerning Sexual Ethics, that reaffirmed church teaching that pre- or extramarital sex, homosexual activity, and masturbation are sinful acts.[152][153] In response, Roger Peyrefitte, who had already written in two of his books that Paul VI had a longtime homosexual relationship, repeated his charges in a magazine interview with a French gay magazine that, when reprinted in Italian, brought the rumours to a wider public and caused an uproar. He said that the Pope was a hypocrite who had a longtime sexual relationship with an actor.[154][155][156] Widespread rumours identified the actor as Paolo Carlini,[157] who had a small part in the Audrey Hepburn film Roman Holiday (1953). In a brief address to a crowd of approximately 20,000 in St Peter's Square on 18 April, Paul VI called the charges "horrible and slanderous insinuations" and appealed for prayers on his behalf. Special prayers for the Pope were said in all Italian Catholic churches in "a day of consolation".[155][157][e] The charges have resurfaced periodically. In 1994, Franco Bellegrandi, a former Vatican honour chamberlain and correspondent for the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, alleged that Paul VI had been blackmailed and had promoted other gay men to positions of power within the Vatican.[159] In 2006, the newspaper L'Espresso reported that the private papers of police commander General Giorgio Manes accepted the blackmail story as true, and that they claimed Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro had been asked to help.[157][160]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Paul_VI#Rumours_of_homosexuality_and_denial — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:20:704C:19F2:D0AA:EAFF:FE77:5570 (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)