World Net Daily September 19, 2005
Applicants with ‘gay’ tendencies won’t be admitted to seminaries
Pope Benedict XVI has given his approval to a new Vatican policy document that bans men with homosexual tendencies from being ordained as priests, reports Catholic World News.
The policy statement is a direct result of the pope’s concern about the pedophilia scandal in the church – especially in the U.S.
The new document, prepared by the Congregation for Catholic Education in response to a request made by the late Pope John Paul II in 1994, will be published soon. It will take the form of an “Instruction,” signed by the prefect and secretary of the congregation: Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski and Archbishop Michael Miller, according to the report.
The report was first referenced on Joseph Farah’s nationally syndicated radio program last week by Raymond Arroyo, author of the new book “Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve and a Network of Miracles.” Arroyo has covered the papacy more than any other journalist
The text, approved by Benedict at the end of August, says that homosexual men should not be admitted to seminaries even if they are celibate, because their condition suggests a serious personality disorder that detracts from their ability to serve as ministers, says the CWN report.
Priests who have already been ordained, if they suffer from homosexual impulses, are strongly urged to renew their dedication to chastity and a manner of life appropriate to the priesthood.
The “Instruction” does not represent a change in church teaching or policy, according to the Vatican.
Catholic leaders have consistently taught that homosexual men should not be ordained to the priesthood. Pope John XXIII approved a formal policy to that effect, which still remains in effect. However, during the 1970s and 1980s, that policy was widely ignored, particularly in North America.
The Congregation for Catholic Education prepared the “Instruction” after soliciting advice from all of the world’s bishops, from psychologists and from moral theologians. A draft was then circulated among the Vatican dicasteries concerned with the issue, notably including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The pending release of the “Instruction,” in the face of certain criticism from liberal forces in America and Western Europe, demonstrates the determination of the Vatican to improve the quality of priestly ministry and to protect the church from some of the scandals that have recently shaken the Catholic community – and no doubt deterred many men from entering priestly training.
Informed sources in Rome indicate that the “Instruction” probably will be made public after the Synod of Bishops, which meets in Rome Oct. 2 through 23.
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
If I’m to read this correctly, what the RCC is saying is that heterosexuals can squeak into the priesthood with hubris and a prayer (since technically, they can be burdened with alcoholism, a raging libido, a short temper and a whole host of other character flaws and still make it in).
To the gays, they’re saying that one must already be a saint it appears, and must be burdened with no personal temptations, flaws or past peccadilloes of ANY kind.
Is this not a double standard? And what about monastic vows?
Admission to the Priesthood is not a Right
Decisions such as these always involve a balance. It is better to turn away a few people who might have made good priests than to take the chance of admitting someone who will be a bad priest. The RCC has the right to make that balancing decision. The open acceptance, and the lack of condemnation of the gay lifestyle, in many quarters of the American RCC has seriously degraded its standing in America. See Goodbye, Good Men by Michael S. Rose, who wrote an entire book on the topic of the acceptance of homosexuality in the American RCC.
Being a priest is not a “job.” It isn’t like public accountancy or carpentry. A person doesn’t have a legal or moral right to be priest. This isn’t an occupational group that is covered under laws seeking to eliminate illegal discrimination in employment. No one may sue the RCC because they think that they have been unjustly deprived of an employment opportunity.
Priests should be worthy of the highest level of trust. Parents entrust children to the care and supervision of priests on a routine basis. If one is to err, it is better to err in favor of safety of children. Before you reply with the usual outrage that homosexuals are supposedly no more likely to commit child sexual abuse, I may remind you that 80% of the RCC sexual molestation victims were boys. 80%.
If you argue that men with heterosexual orientations also have to abstain from sex, I would say yes, but, living in communities comprised of men creates a special temptation for priests with homosexual tendencies that does not exist for heterosexuals.
Lastly, there also exists substantial evidence that gays have engaged in concerted effort to exclude straight male candidates for the priesthood. See the book, Goodbye Good Men on this topic.Michael Rose argues that the predominance of gays in the RCC priesthood drives away straight candidates and suppresses the number of men willing to become RCC priests.
Think of it this way. Most of us commit the sin of lying from time to time. We all have to resist impulses to lie. However, there does exist a group of people who can fairly be called pathological liars, for them, the urge to lie, the inclination to lie or the habit of lying is STRONGER than in the average person. It may not be impossible for pathological liars to control themselves, but it is much more difficult. It may be possible for a man with a homosexual orientation to control himself and resist sin, but it is much more difficult, as evidence by literally 100’s of abused boys. If this evidence didn’t exist, this policy would be far less defensible.
Single sex communities
The advantage of single sex communities is the reduction or elimination of the temptation to sexual sin. If homosexuals are admitted to single sex communtities that advantage is destroyed and a higher than average opportunity for temptation and sin is created.
Missourian says: “We all have to resist impulses to lie. However, there does exist a group of people who can fairly be called pathological liars, for them, the urge to lie, the inclination to lie or the habit of lying is STRONGER than in the average person.”
So, what of same-sex attracted nuns? There seems to be no Vatican ruling on them.
But back to the lying thing. I think we can say that we can tell who a pathological liar is by the fact that they lie, and frequently at that. Show me an honest person and I defy you to tell me they are a pathological liar. I was not aware that we are to judge others by what they feel like doing and not what they do. Also, the pathological liar (based on inclination) who refrains from lying may be more virtuous than yourself simply for “holding out” against temptation more frequently, no?
Likewise, show me what a “homosexual” is for the sake of argument: one who fantasizes MOSTLY about women but maybe had a same-sex tryst three years ago? One who has 300 female sex partners and maybe one male sex partner? What about one who has no sexual drive whatsoever towards women? Are they necessarily gay? Christ spoke of “eunuchs” for the kingdom of Heaven. Where do they come in?
I find this topic irritating for several reasons.
First of all, if someone told me that they were going to create an assessment of me based not only on the mistakes I’ve made in the past but on the negative things I feel like doing every day or am tempted to do every day, well, I’d have to humbly suggest they were looking through a very narrow prism indeed. Those weaknesses/flaws may exist, but those are not *all* that there is to me. It’s only a very small part of the picture. I don’t think that this approach of the Vatican is either very Christian or even very human to those whose “flaws” simply do not coincide with the peccadilloes of the majority. I’d be annoyed if someone told me they weren’t going to hire me as a contractor simply because they knew I *felt* like surfing the net on company time (even if, technically, I worked every second on “real work”!!)
Secondly, I feel it’s a fundamentally dishonest stance from an organization who purports to seek the Truth, mostly because I think it arises less from real charity than simple laziness. I realize that we humans must often “generalize” about others to create some sort of order in a chaotic universe. However, people do not often live up to these generalizations. Sometimes they’re worse, but oftentimes they are quite capable of defying these stereotypes and becoming heroic examples of courage, faith or charity. I expect common folk to mindlessly insist on the reliability of these stereotypes. I expect a little more from the RCC.
JamesK, you write, “I expect a little more from the RCC.” Why should you? Why do you? Certainly, individual Catholic believers are quite capable of the discernment you believe should be the norm, but I sincerely doubt that any vertically integrated institution of any type has that capability. Certainly, nothing in the history of the RCC as in institution with which I am familiar shows it to have ever had such an ability.
Actually, in the current environment I don’t see how any RC priest maintains his celibacy. There is little or no ascetic community from which they can gain strength, they are often severely alone. The culture at large often looks at even the best and most holy of them with suspicion. They may even look at one another with such suspicion. For any priest to function to his fullest, he must be a welcome part of the parish community–respected and followed unless their is a clear reason not to. Often the reverse is true, the priest is suspected and ignored unless there is a clear reason to follow him and listen to him.
Perhaps the action of the Vatican is an attempt to protect the celibate priesthood from even greater pressure. In any case, that is the Vatican’s call. There is really no foundation for anyone to question the decision. Clearly, the Vatican (and Orthodox bishops) should also take steps to quickly remove any priest who is defective for any reason. A bad priest hurts so many people for such a long time. Perhaps the decision by the Vatican is an honest, if some what blunt and belated attempt to do so.
Romans and “Feelings” and Passions?
James, I need to refer to someone more knowledgable than I in these matters, but, doesn’t St. Paul refer to the “passions” leading to homosexual conduct as evil in themselves. So, I think if you were to think about this in Christian terms you wouldn’t use the common “therapeutic” approach and talk about feelings, but St. Paul’s approach which identifies the passions themselves as illicit and evil in nature.
I don’t think St. Paul would have accepted the idea that “orientation” is somehow neutral and only “conduct” is sinful. Rapidly getting over my head here, but I think this is correct.
Human passion can generate powerfully selfish and destructive urges, those passions themselves are evil. Most of us can control or reject them when they arise in us. We can also pander to our lower urges and passions or we can seek to subdue then and deny them control over our lives.
Note 6: We have heard much criticism about social programs which allocate funds to individuals without regard to whether the individual is truly in need or is simply slacking or abusing the system. For this reason, it has been said that the Church cannot endorse these programs because they can only be applied to a collective group. The very capacity for prudence in determining what is “best” for the individual in question must necessarily be ignored.
Same here. What is “best” for this applicant or that applicant? The Vatican doesn’t really care … there’s just a collective “they”. The same care given when determining who is eligible for social benefits apparently doesn’t need to be extended to those wishing to enter the priesthood. This is an inconsistency of belief, though I realize that consistency in this matter would be to defy the party line.
What is “best” for someone who at 21 years of age has maintained their chastity but has the distinct disadvantage of having a predeliction for Broadway musicals (which I’m certain will, along with owning a Barbara Streisand album, be a prime indicator of one’s homosexuality)? How can there be any pastoral care for the church’s gay population when the Vatican has given them a vote of “No Confidence” in a) being able to abstain or b) having any other virtues worth mentioning? Are they just going to tell them to go become a hairdresser or something more “befitting” their “swishy” inclinations?
As far as the difficulties of celibate life … you’re correct. It would seem prudent for the Vatican to address the complexities of human relationships in a manner a little more specific than “avoid sin”. Great. However, there’s an enormous spectrum within relationships that are not clear cut and can cause problems to those who are ill-prepared for these challenges. Some may be caught off-guard by a romantic attachment towards a parishioner (possibly even a married one). This needn’t be an opportunity for breaking one’s vows, however.
I hear that they have improved in this area from the 60’s.
James, 80% of the sexual molestations were boys. This is a bit more serious than “a predeliction for Broadway musicals.”
But the problem I think you really have with the entire issue is the implicit conclusion that homosexuality represents a psycho/emotional disordering of the individual. Yet that is what the Catholic Church teaches. Expecting them to conform policy in ways that contradict their teachings is not reasonable. In fact, many critics, including many RC’s, argue that ignoring their teaching on homosexuality is what led to problems with the molestations in the first place.
Note 7: Missourian, which passions might you be referring to? Anger? Envy? Sloth? Greed? Gluttony? Lust? Which ones are “tolerable”? As an attorney, I’m sure you’ve heard (maybe exhibited?) many “heated” outbursts in the courtroom. (Didn’t Christ say, “He who is angry with his brother is in danger of hellfire”?)
I don’t know you, so I would not suggest you are anything but completely “passion-less”. If so, congratulations, really. For the rest of us poor slobs, can you tell us what the hierarchy is as far as what’s “ok” and “not ok” to have and still be considered a “Christian”? Also, how often can I “feel irritated” with a friend or relative? Are all married men doomed because that 1/2 second glimpse at Carmen Electra excited them just a wee too much?
I’m not being sarcastic. My point is that we all (well, maybe except you) have transitory and illusory “feelings” and “desires” that we can either master or allow ourselves to be mastered by. To deny this is to deny reality.
Well it’s about time! This is EXACTLY what needed to be done!
The sex-abuse scandal of 2002 is often mislabeled at a scandal of “child molestation,” when in reality it was a scandal of teenage molestation. There is a difference. Child molesters are primarily interested in preadolescent children (12 years of age and under), and they are often indiscriminate between boys and girls. In the case of teenage molestations by adults, sexual orientation plays a much bigger role.
The overwhelming vast majority of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church occurred between clergy and teenagers (not preadolescent children), and of those case, homosexuality played a dominating role. A recent study by Brian W. Clowes and David L. Sonnier gives us some details and insight on this. You can view the full study in PDF format here.
The Pope is not messing around. He knows that the overwhelming number of cases involving sexual abuse in the American Catholic Church involved homosexual relations between “gay” priests and teenage boys. In taking this action, the pope is chomping a huge bite out of the problem. The numbers don’t lie. View the study by Clowes and Sonnier to see for yourself.
Issue isn’t what is best for the applicant
JamesK, I suggest that you have the issue exactly backward. You open a paragraph with the question:
Same here. What is â??bestâ?? for this applicant or that applicant? The Vatican doesnâ??t really care â?¦ thereâ??s just a collective â??theyâ??. T
The issue ISN’T “what is best for the applicant.” The proper issue is what is best for the Church and the Body of Christ. Again, you have a very persistent individualistic “human rights” orientation which simply does not apply here.
The office of priest is not equivalent to holding a position as a carpenter or an accountant. People have no “right” to become priests. The Church has every right and a sacred duty, in my opinion, to carefully screen people who make application for the priesthood, because some very unbalanced people can be attracted to the priesthood.
People can serve the Lord in many different ways besides being a priest. The Church’s first duty, in my opinion, is to protect itself and believers from people not properly suited or qualified to be priests because of the incredible damage that bad priests can do.
Certainly you agree that the child molestation scandal in the RCC church has hurt the RCC very badly and to some extent, all of Christianity in the view of non-Christians.
Note 10: What I object to is saying that some are disordered in a way that matters while others are not. Perhaps I’m just completely ignorant to what a Christian “should be”. Aren’t we all “disordered” to varying degrees? Some people are emotionally cold and distant. Others are short-tempered. Others are simply much less empathetic than others. Some just live for their own pleasure (even within the convents and monasteries!!) Are these “disorders”? I don’t know.
I guess I have yet to meet this “perfect harmonious balance” of all the passions …
Note 7. Missourian, let me clean this up a bit. Passions are not in and of themselves evil. In fact, the Fathers say that the desire that underlies all desire (even inordinant desire), is ultimately a desire for God. Evil enters when that passion is directed towards action (“when sin has conceived..” James 1:15*), and that action is against the truth, when it masquerades as truth, when it is a lie (hence Satan as “the father of lies”).
*But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.
Concerning Paul: Paul makes no distinction between “orientation” and behavior. In fact, it’s questionable whether such a thing as “orientation” even exists psychologically. Rather, for Paul, desire and behavior are very closely related (not mediated through or grounded in any concept of “orientation”).
This is also the approach that reperative therapies take. The operative psycological/emotional dynamic of same-sex attraction is the ruptered relationship with a same-sex parent from which the desire springs (the desire for same sex activity is on a deeper level the longing to heal that rupture). Once the conflicts are resolved (often a difficult and painful process), the heterosexual desire that lies below the homosexual desire can emerge while the homosexual desire abates, and even disappear.
Regarding the larger issue of homosexual priests, it’s not good to ordain men who do not have these conflicts resolved.
JamesK: Nonsense about courtroom behavior
Re your note 10: Single topic: Courtroom behavior
Courtroom conduct: Movies and TV provide a very distorted view of what actually occurs in a courtroom. The rule of conduct in a courtroom mandates courteous and restrained behavior from everyone with respect to everyone else. This rule is binding on judges, court officials, attorneys, witnesses and public observers. Judges customarily have a bailiff, sheriff’s officer or marshall in the courtroom to help ensure order.
Lawyers who fail to address anyone courteously and calmly can be directly and immediately sanctioned by the judge. Non-lawyers who misbehave in any fashion can be physically removed from the courtroom. Lawyers can also be removed from the courtroom physically if the matter evers gets to that point. In more than twenty years of practicing law I have never seen a laywer physically removed from a courtroom.
Federal judges ALWAYS have federal marshals in the courtroom with them. If you want to see how fast a very large man with a gun can move, try being disrespectful to a judge in a federal courtroom. You will be in the hallway with cuffs on in about 3 minutes.
Your comments shows that you have led a good life because you obviously haven’t spent any time in court, you have just watched alot of movies.
Thank you
I said I was over my head.
Passions are not “balanced,” they are transformed. If all desire is ultimately a desire for God, than inordinate passion can ultimately be directed toward God, which implies a fundamental reorientation of the person. In Orthodox history we see this with St. Mary of Eqypt. C.S. Lewis talks about how lust, when it is curbed and finally mastered, transforms sexual desire and energy, into channels that makes the individual more creative.
Sexual energy differs from other passions not in measure of “sinfulness” or disapproval, but in measure of its native power. Sexual energy is an integrative energy that brings together the body, mind, and emotions in ways that are either personally destructive or regenerative (depending on whether that energy is lawfully or unlawfully directed), in ways that other passions don’t. Hence the potential damage can be greater as well, as we witnessed in the abuse scandals in the RCC, or the epidemic of STD’s in the teen population, etc.
Note 13: I think you’ve lost me.
Allow me to provide an analogy, if I may. I don’t personally consider the desire for worldly success to be an intrisically bad thing. To appreciate the craftsmanship of a Georgian mansion and the time and effort it takes to construct and put one together and to desire to have one for oneself is, IMO, an okay thing. Maybe morally ambiguous, but not a bad thing. However, if one desires this because they wish to prove themselves better than, say, one’s brother or to simply put down a flag of superiority over others would be a less moral reason. It would also be “disordered” to want this not because of some sense of appreciation but to be rid of feelings of inferiority given through an abusive relationship with one’s parents.
Unfortunately, I think that most of us are unaware of these motives, though as Christians I think we are obliged to at least attempt to become aware of them. In no place am I aware of anyone successfully eradicating all false/evil motives and conflicts from their minds and souls.
The best I think we can hope for is:
a) the knowledge of our own mis-directed motives for even good things
b) the awareness of why we are motivated towards evil
c) mastery over the impulses that lead us towards wrong actions
Can we ever be completely free of conflict? I guess my point is that I wasn’t aware that was possible in this life.
Note 17 Church’s fiduciary duty
People trust their Church to select qualified individuals for the priesthood. Once a priest is selected people place almost boundless trust in them. Given this, the Church has a very sacred fiduciary duty to select only qualified individuals for this very special role.
The proper question is whether admitting someone to the priesthood is good for the Church. It is better to err on the side of caution if there is any doubt as to suitability. I am not suggesting that there shouldn’t be thought given to the best interests of the applicant, but that the interests of the applicant are subordinate to the interests of the Church as a whole.
JamesK,
Romans Chapter 1:17-27 puts homosexuality in a category very similar to idolatry. Idolatry is far more serious than our ordinary day to day passions, even severely disordered ones. If a man is caught up in idolatry, how can he be a priest of God, a living icon of Christ, handle and distribute the Sacred Body and Precious Blood of our Lord, God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
However, I agree with you to a point. IMO, those who have had homosexual temptations and in all other ways have proven themselves, are under spiritual guidance, and have an honest vocation should not, on that basis alone be denied entry into the priesthood. But such pastoral decisions can only be made in an enviroment that supports the continual spiritual work required to overcome such temptation. If a man has ever gone beyond just the temptation and nurtured that temptation in anyway, he has, IMO, commited an act of idolatry.
There is at least one saint who was a powerful and wicked sorcerer before becoming Christian, St. Cyprian. When he was unable to defeat a poor helpless girl who made the Sign of the Cross as he attempted to attack her, St. Cyprian repented, publically burned all of his books, ran to the nearest Church, chained himself to the alter and demanded to be baptised. Given the current cultural attitude toward homosexuality, it becomes quite difficult for men to engage in the full, complete and deep repentance for their sin. Homosexuality is not even considered a sin any more, culturally speaking, as fornication is not and a host of other deeply repugnant sexual behaviorsâ??its just behavior. I see in your posts JamesK a certain unwillingness to acknowledge the profound sin such lust is which is representative of the cultural attitude. If the Church does not proclaim the truth about such sin in an unequivocable way, she is enabling people to deny their sin, refuse repentance and loose salvation.
Romans 1:28-32 also includes the following in roughly the same category as homosexuality: fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder, debate (perhaps the origin of the Orthodox canon barring practicing lawyers from the priesthood?), deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, covenant breakers, implacable, unmerciful, without natural affection. So the scripture supports your sensible position that the ban ought to extend to other types of passions as well. There is some discussion in some of the early literature of the Church that only those who have achieved an obvious state of theosis should be priests and bishops. Unfortunately, that is quite impractical as we would end up with few priests indeed. Where to draw that line, how, and under what circumstances is a pastoral decision that only those granted the authority within a communion can make. It was not so long ago that the Methodists would not allow homosexuals to be ministers, I think they still have that prohibition. I even knew a gentleman who had been expelled from the Methodist ministry because he was an admitted homosexual. He went into the theater. He was a member of the resisdent company at a graduate theater school I attended for awhile.
If the RCC’s action is effective, it will strengthen the entire Church. If it is not, the number of RC priests will continue to decline. We will see what happens. May God have mercy.
Which translation?
Michael, which translation are you quoting from? I don’t have the word “debaters” in mine, not being overly senstive here, mind you. (SMILE)
Missourian: King James Version …
“full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers”
While you’re fretting about the “debate” thing, I’m hoping the “whispering” doesn’t include time spent in libraries!
😉
I looked up debate in the Greek and it means strife, contention, or quarrel. Given that Paul debated the Athenians and we have a record that debate, the term does not seem to apply to reasoned discourse but uncontrolled contention driven by anger or some other passion not in service to discerning the truth.
the term does not seem to apply to reasoned discourse but uncontrolled contention driven by anger or some other passion not in service to discerning the truth.
Phew – good thing none of us are never guilty of *that* …
Michael, I agree with much of what you’ve said. Couple things:
a) Is this “theosis” considered to be something that one simply “is” all of a sudden (or is fortunate to have been born with) or what one “becomes” (sanctification)? Moreover, how does one know when one has attained this? I would think that were one to step back and say, “Yeah, I’m pretty God-like now. I’m charitable, I’m chaste, I don’t become outraged when people cut me off on the freeway” that they’re being pretty presumptuous.
b) Idolatry. Is it possible NOT to be idolatrous? We conceptualize and compartmentalize God in our minds. This seems necessary since we have no experiential knowledge of Him. We seem to be at the distinct disadvantage of being required to have an objective appreciation and knowledge of God while simultaneously having no other means of acquiring this knowledge than subjective ones!! Quite a conundrum.
JamesK: Theosis in Orthodox practice is union with God, a recapitulation on a personal level of the Incarnation. We are born with the seeds of it since the we are still in the image and likeness of God. We enter into it only by the grace of God, but it does require our cooperation through worship, repentance, fasting, and almsgiving. Actually, one never “attains” it in the sense of reaching a static goal, one is always in the process of attaining it. At its foundation it is an ontological experience of and acceptance of God. Sanctification is another word that can be used, but it is really much more than that.
Orthodox would emphatically disagree with the last part of your statement b). The life of the Church is the means by which we can and do experience the energies of God. The documentation provided to us by the saints and others through out the years is quite consistent as to what that expeience is, what it is not and how one can tell the difference. The mind is part of the experience, but the least significant. The spiritual path taught and practiced in the Orthodox Church naturally brings one into that experience. Often times it is like the story of the man who wanted to be a jade master. He was accepted as a student by a master and was told to come everyday to the master’s house. Everyday, the master gave the student a piece of jade and told him to hold it in his hand. The master then proceeded to talk with his student about one thing and another, never about jade. After several months of this, the student finally asked the master when he was going to start learning about jade. The master simply replied, come back tomorrow. The student did as instructed. The master handed the student a stone that looked like jade. As soon as the student touched the stone he exclaimed, That’s not jade!. So it is with the sacramental life of the Church. To the extent that we enter into it and are obedient to what the Church asks of us throughout the year, we are transformed. Some alot, some a little, some not a all because they choose not to be. The saints are on the far end of that spectrum due to their love of God which as they put it into action is returned to them 10 fold and more. They are participants in the Heavenly Kingdom while still here on earth. For “real smart people” like me, it takes longer, like Thomas, I want everything proved to me the hard way.
Now to the first part of your section b: The more we are able to enter into the life of the Church, the less we have any traces of idolatry. We may still choose not to really submit ourselves to the living God, but we know who He is. Even the demons known as Legion in the Bible new who Jesus was, they just refused to submit to God. Our fallen state certainly can make idolatry much easier, but I don’t think it is true that we all are idolators. It is the difference between holding a mistaken or heretical belief and being a heretic. To be a heretic requires a steadfast refusal to repent when confronted with the truth. That leads me back to my statment in the last post about the need for homosexuals to acknowledge their sin as sin, and confront it in spiritual warfare under the guidance of spiritual father or experienced priest. As Fr. Hans pointed out, the nature of the sexual impluse is such that often times deeper work is required to really overcome the temptations consistently and/or to repair the damage done by previous indulgence. Homosexuality has an even more difficult problem because of the totally unrighteous focus of a God given gift.
As a catholic with homosexual tendencies who CHOOSES not to act on them, I am both offended, hurt, and scared by this. I know a priest who similarly combats this temptation. He is my confessor. I don’t know what I would do if there wasn’t someone to council me in this matter who knew about it from experience.
In my 7 years of catholic school, I was taught that action and intentional thoughts are sins, not temptations, after all, Jesus was tempted by Satan in the Bible, and He is the epidomy of sinlessness.
Men who have homosexual temptations are no more sinful or unqualified than someone who is tempted to heterosexual misconduct (there are more female church employees than male), lying (leading a congregation astray), laziness…or any sin for that matter. Everyone has a sin that the fall to-that is our fallen human nature. The sin of homosexuality is not greater than these sins.,
If a man who has had homosexual thoughts or temptations is called to the priesthood and will uphold the church’s teachings, his celibacy and the purity of his flock, it would be sinful of us to deny him the plan God has for him. Until there are no more bad heterosexual priests and no more good priests with homosexual tendencies (note how I won’t use the term GAY. To be gay means you accept this lifestyle, not just tempted by it) I will never support this…However, let us not forget that this document has not been released yet and all of this is just hearsay right now. Christ will protect Peter.
This development has thrown a lot of people. As a practicing RC I have frequent contact with priests and count them among my friends. Some are obviously homosexual in orientation, some heterosexual and others fall into a grey area of asexuality where their life of celebacy ha rendered them almost sexless. But the finest priest i’ve known was obviously homosexual and the priest who I found least charitable was heterosexual and eventually left the priesthood after an affair with a woman. The recent sex scandals in the church in ireland have being devastating but the most infamous case of all was that of Fr. Smyth who had a fatal pedophile leaning towards young girls. Other high profile deceivers were also heterosexual, with mistrresses and children in tow while preaching chastity as a virtue. Surely sin is sin in whatever form it takes and we are all subject to Adam’s fall and carry the weight of origianl sin within us. Christ died for all of us and His grace overcomes all sin, no matter how great – if the person allows the action of God’s grace to transform their being. Is saying that one sin is greater and less subject to the saving action of our redeemer not contrary to faith or worse an act of faithlessness? We are all sinners. C.McG
Just saw this Reuters report from Vatican City, via NRO’s The Corner:
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – The Vatican will allow gay men into the priesthood if they can show they have been celibate for at least three years, leading Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported on Friday. But it said the Vatican will ban men who “publicly manifest their homosexuality” or show an “overwhelming attraction” to homosexual culture “even if it is only intellectually.”
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1191944