10 good reasons to admit to seminary a candidate with SSA--Can you make the case?

[Forest-Pine]

Interesting article on the subject; covers both sides pretty well.

An effort by the Vatican to look for evidence of homosexuality in Catholic seminaries is alarming gay rights advocates but is pleasing conservatives, who are hoping that Pope Benedict XVI will soon issue a ban on gay men as future priests.

The possible ban is complicated by a lack of agreement on how seminaries would ascertain whether an applicant was homosexual, or even how to define homosexuality for a man who professes to be celibate.

''Is it someone who is sexually active, or someone who had a fleeting same-sex attraction 20 years ago?" said John L. Allen Jr., the Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter. Allen said that some US bishops are urging the pope not to sign it, because it would lead to negative publicity and little change in policy.

 

[felra]

Pedophilia, ephebophilia, and homosexuality are three different things. Being a homosexual does not mean attraction to children or teens. As a matter of fact, it excludes it.

Different things, but all have in common are they are sexually deviant, originating from a disordered desire, and a symptom of an unresolved, untreated psychchological disorder. Homosexuality can and as we have seen in the clergy sex scandal, does mean homosexual (SSA) attraction and predation upon teenage males. We can squabble over clinical definitions all day, but the fact is, as other posters have pointed out, it is adult priests with an obvious SSA who have been preying upon teenage boys. Try convincing your regular parishioner in the pew that this is not a manifestation of homosexuality.

Homosexual tendencies is not a sin. All priests have weaknesses. Some to lies. Some to theft. Some to drinking. Some to women. All are equally detrimental to their walk in Christ. Homosexuals are no different in this regard. The sin is in acting on it, not in having the thought.

Let’s no confuse human “weakness” and “defects of character”, those adult acquired sinful tendencies and learned habits, with a disordered desire which is a symptom of an underlying psychological disorder resulting from a neglectful or abusive childhood developmental experience (acting on sin is a whole different matter). Homosexuals are certainly different in this regard. And to identify and label as anything else shows minimally a misnomer in understanding that preps for an inadequate response to a wounded individual in need of Christ’s healing love.

I know there are priests who size up the women and think terrible thoughts about them. The possibility of a homosexual doing same with a male subject is an equal sin, not a worse one. People on either side who struggle with sexual issues should be carefully screened [out[/color]

].
Yes, but given two seminarians equally struggling with lustful thoughts, the SSA lustful seminarian after demonstrating the ability to gain chasteness over his thoughts and sexual desires, is still left with a psychological disorder that many (myself included) believe if left untreated is exclusionary criteria for admission to seminary.

Having same sex tendencies does not mean the person struggles with same.** He might have come to accept it with the grace of God. It isn’t going to go away, but he can be responsible about it.**

(Just the same as heterosexual priests remain heterosexual and do not all of a sudden become asexual, but they can properly handle themselves.)
Are you suggesting to simply manage the symptoms of an underlying psychological disorder and resign one’s self to a life lived in internal dissonance? Perhaps. But in my common sense take, this person can “resign” to “accept” (subliminate) his SSA attraction in a vocational role and identity other than the priesthood role of Father for the flock.

 

[felra]

(Continued)

Having a supportive community who understands a person’s weaknesses but still accepts the person, and can properly praise or rebuke a person, is much more likely to cause a person to act in a Godly way then if the person’s struggles remain hidden. By refusing priests who have SSA, they will still enter but keep that part of themselves hidden. By accepting them, they will have community support and will not struggle with this nearly as much

.

Whoooa there. One, a seminarian who does not discuss and disclose his SSA is a big flag unto itself. Secondly, the seminarian should absolutely be looking for a supportive community, a circle of mature Christians, to discuss his personal and intimate struggles with. One should not enroll into the seminary to hopefully “find” the community support needed to deal with this intimate issue. The answer is not as you frame to “accept” the SSA struggling individual to the seminary where “they will have community support and will not struggle with this nearly as much”. Let’s address first things first, which should be incumbent upon any SSA afflicted man considering a lifelong vocation calling by God.

No one is arguing that those who have issues and are actively called to ACT on SSA should be allowed in the priesthood. Much the same as a heterosexual would be counseled that if he felt like pursuing a woman, he shouldn’t be there, as it is a sign that he is not yet ready to accept a marriage to the church, and no sex. The end result would be different for someone with SSA, as you wouldn’t then counsel him to go after the guy, but the same logic is applied.

If he isn’t ready to commit himself to the church, he isn’t ready. This is just the same for those with SSA.

Again, let’s not bury alive the underlying psychological disorder of which SSA is but a symptom of. Having a commitment to the Church is not enough for a man to be accepted as a seminarian candidate–this is too simplistic of a “good reason” to accept a candidate with SSA into the seminary.

If a man feels

a distinct call to the priesthood, fully understands the commitment he is making, desires to make said commitment to the church, and makes it through the lengthy discernment period, why would we then turn him away because he could have chosen a different path?

Because the decision to pursue and to be ordained into the priesthood is not an individual decision. It is a “family matter” with the ordained priest as commissioned as Father of the flock and fitness thereof determined by the Church.

Priests who have grappled with and come to peace about their sexuality are wonderful leaders for those who find themselves facing similar struggles.

No doubt, but depending what “grappling with” and “come to peace about their sexuality” all means could either leads others to or away from the saving truth of the Gospel.

By my count, you are down to 3 or 4 (depending where the seminarian falls on my delineation) “good reasons” for a seminarian with SSA to be a good candidate for priesthood.

 

[beckers]

Forest-Pine:

The possible ban is complicated by a lack of agreement on how seminaries would ascertain whether an applicant was homosexual, or even how to define homosexuality for a man who professes to be celibate.

''Is it someone who is sexually active, or someone who had a fleeting same-sex attraction 20 years ago?" said John L. Allen Jr., the Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter. Allen said that some US bishops are urging the pope not to sign it, because it would lead to negative publicity and little change in policy.

This is also my problem with declaring a blanked ban. If a man has come to the decision that he is attracted to men and he decides NOT to particapte in those acts then are we not judge him for a sin that he has not committed?

I have a really problem with people judge homosexuals as out right sinners. Not everyone is society defines themselves by their sexuality. I do not go around introducing myself as Jane Doe–heterosexual…what are you??? Sex doesn’t run around everyone’s mind all the time. I get this feeling that people believe homosexuals are just thinking about the next time they can have sex. They believe that they are people who can not control their sexually urges. This is a sad thought. Heterosexuals and homosexuals are both able to control thier sexual urges and have been doing this for years.

If a man has descerned that he feels a calling to the priest hood then i think he should be allowed to apply to the seminary. The seminary should interview everyone in detail. As long as he is completely honest during the application process then it should be up to the seminary and the bishop to make that decision.

From personal experience…I have seen a friend go through the process of accepting his call to ceibacy because he was a homosexual. I have seen such a fight with his interself in dealing with this. He has felt so much pain and was lost about not knowing where his place was in the church and society.Over time he has find himself. I have such respect and love for him. His struggle was beautiful to see. He never lost faith in GOD and his strength gave me strength. I love him and would 100% trust him to be around my childern (someday…GOD willing). Seeing this struggle first hand I know that he doesn’t make decision lightly. He will be a good priest. He knows life struggles and how to defeat sin and the demons with in oneself in following GOD will.A man like that is someone who you can trust someone who you can believe and someone who you know loves the church because he has given up what society has said is okay and instead follows what the church says is correct. That shows he is a good man a person you can trust to teach church doctrine.He is a person who believes in christ and follows his teaching. He is a person I could trust. Why should the church deny his vocation simple because of past sins? I hope people do not deny me my place in the church because of past sins.

IF a person is celibate then it should not matter what their sexually orienation is. Now if they like childern then they should be deny or if they have not giving up and decided to be celibate on their own then they should be denied. I think this is key becuase someone who gives it up on their own is someone who has come to accept that their sexuality is not correct or good for the church. They are more likely to follow their choice then if someone tells them that they can’t do something simple to join the priesthood.

We need to remember that homosexual people are people too and that just because you precieving them to be sinners does not mean that they are. Remember don’t point out the splinter in your neighbors eye until you take the log out of your own eye. There are many reasons why men are not accepted to the seminary but i don’t believe it is health for us as a church to just throw someone out of the pool for preisthood simple based upon their sexuality,Sexuality is a part of who we are as people but not the only defining thing.

I wish i could expand on my thoughts and i apolgize on any grammar and spelling errors as i have not had the time to run spell check or re-read what i have wrote. I have two major problems 1.) Cats–keep trying to walk on the laptop 2.) hurricane Rita is coming in and we are getting power surges so i need to get off. Keep us in your prayers!!!