D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Yeah, but neither one is a poll
- Status
C
Contarini
Guest
How is this relevant? Surely no one (no orthodox Catholic, that is) is disputing that people living lives of blatant unchastity (whether heterosexual or homosexual) should not be priests? Allegedly this document is going to ban persons of a homosexual *orientation, *and that is what is being debated on this thread. Note that silvano said he couldnât stand a âgayâ priest even if he was celibate. Thatâs a blatant example of taking over a secular concept (âsexual orientationâ) and basing your views on it under the guise of upholding Catholic orthodoxy.
The whole conception of being âgayâ is a corrupt cultural construct that leads people to think that their sexual inclinations are what define their identity. Banning âgaysâ from seminaries simply gives into that un-Christian way of thinking rather than challenging it at its core by keeping the focus on chastity and holiness.
Mind you, I have hopes that the document wonât be phrased in those terms. Weâll just have to see. The media are hardly very reliable on these matters.
Edwin
P
pauljmaxmi
Guest
Do think that this carries over for men who take solemn vows in religious orders and donât proceed to ordination. I mean, could we have celebate homosexual Brothers. Does this ban touch that or does it only pertain to barring those men who seek ordination? Also, does it apply to religious orders? I assume that it does because when a Catholic news service reports it says that gay men should be barred from ordination, but when a secular news source reports it, they say seminaries. There is a difference. I suppose that we will really just have to wait until the Vatican releases the document. However, any thoughts would be appreciated.
S
seagal
Guest
Iâm with you, Ben. Just because someone hasnât had a homosexual experience yet doesnât mean they never would â or vice versa. Itâs possible that Rome is concerned about âspecial friendshipsâ that might evolve in the seminary simply because of human nature. We do have examples of homosexual behaviour erupting in places where women are excluded, ie. prisons, boysâ schools. But if a person is trying to live a truly Christian life, they would remain chaste no matter what their sexual persuasion.
It seems to me that there should only be 2 criteria for allowing a man into priesthood:
- Does he have a true vocation to Holy Orders?
- Is he living a Christian life?
T
tuopaolo
Guest
I believe homosexuals should be barred from ordination just as* in Church law first cousins are barred from marriage. However, just as in Church law first cousins are able to marry with a special dispensation, I believe that, assuming there are no concerns about validity, that a homosexual should be able to be ordained if it is an exceptional case.
*Actually I do not believe first cousins should be barred from marriage, but I used that example to illustrate the point I was making. I canât think of another one that would be better.
*Actually I do not believe first cousins should be barred from marriage, but I used that example to illustrate the point I was making. I canât think of another one that would be better.
R
Riley259
Guest
Yes, it should matter. Homosexuality is disordered and thus that personâs psycho-sexual makeup is already compromised. Despite a person with same-sex attractions best intentions, the evidence suggest that they are the ones who will most likely fail their vows of celibacy and putting them in close quarters with other men during their formation is too risky. We canât risk having them in a situation of near occasion of sin. In addition, the âemotional warfareâ that they would be under would be too great, i.e., trying to come to terms with their obvious same-sex attraction and the Churchâs clear teaching on the disordered nature of their affliction. The data clearly shows that itâs too risky: 81% of the abuse cases were homosexual related!
M
mamabear7
Guest
Yes, homosexuals should definitely be prohibited from becoming Catholic priests. I donât see how straight men can be attracted to the priesthood when there are so many homosexuals in the seminaries. Also, there have been so many priests abusing people lately because there are so many gay priests - did you notice that most of the victims have been male? I donât hate gays; itâs a fact that gays molest people more often than straight people do. Thereâs even a lifesitenews.com article about a woman who is speaking out about the gay âmarriageâ controversy because she was raised by two gay men and abused.
my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne
R
RyanL
Guest
I think as a discipline they should be barred from the priesthood until we can get our act together WRT celibate priests. Once that issue is behind us, we should consider changing the discipline (while advocating that no one should practice any sinful act).
Just my thoughts.
God Bless,
RyanL
Just my thoughts.
God Bless,
RyanL
B
ben_dy
Guest
Itâs my hope that young men who are homosexual will simply be honest about their feelings and Iâm sure that each decision will be on a âcase-by-caseâ basis. I would also imagine that the terminology will be somewhat âopen mindedâ - by which I mean that if a young man has led and intends to lead a life of chastity that even should he seem somewhat effeminate yet professes no particular sexual attraction to males, and if his priorities seem to be in order, he wonât be denied entry into seminary.
There was a History Channel (or Discovery - one of those channels that air programming that I can find fascinating even if I donât think Iâll be the least bit interested!) that was about the âhomosexual revolutionâ and talked about how WWII brought together so many young men from all over the country who found that, put together with so many other young men, they were in fact attracted to those of the same sex. And they found others who were likewise attracted. The program put a great deal of importance on WWII as an important part of homosexual history in the U.S. as homosexual men from all walks of life entered into a lifestyle in which they were thrown together in stressful circumstances and found that they could identify one another despite the overwhelming number of heterosexual men in which they were surrounded.
While most seminaries (I donât think!) are not quite as intense as most prisons the atmosphere is certainly more âstressfulâ than that of most boyâs schools and (having been in a minor seminary in the '40âs and '50âs) I would imagine that SOME COULD BE. Rumor has it, of course, that seminaries are genuine breeding grounds for those with homosexual attractions. And while there is always a âdangerâ that heterosexual priests breaking their vows with consenting women, heterosexual men are NOT likely to suddenly discover a sexual interest in adolescent boys, who have comprised the majority of the victims of the sexual abuse by priests.
Someone posted a link to an article here that seemed to imply that Cardinal Bernardin was an acknowledged homosexual (perhaps Iâll question that in another threadâŚ) but, to my knowledge, there was only one allegation and when Bernardin went public with it, the man making the accusation recanted. I, frankly, donât believe that we have an overwhelmingly homosexual clergy shepherded by a homosexual hierarchy - but I think we must maintain vigilance in order to assure that the gross and widespread abuses that have so occupied the Church in the U.S. for so long must be drastically reduced. I;m certain that there are far, far more of us who have terrific childhood and adolescent stories of priests whom we loved like second âfathersâ than there are those who have stories of abuse⌠our stories donât make headlines no matter how life changing the experiences.
I am looking forward to discussion of the document when it is released! No doubt there will be much to discuss - and possibly debate!
M
m134e5
Guest
If they are known to be homosexuals, then they should be prohibited- both from a seminary education and from ordination.
If they show that they are working to live out a life of holiness, have been doing so for several years, and they donât discuss their struggle with anyone- except their spiritual director and maybe a close friend or two (and these discussions are only for support- they are never inappropriate), then they should not be prohibited from going to the seminary.
The Church has made a decision on the ordination of homosexual men to the priesthood, and I would never advise anyone to try and go against it. I am afraid of how this will be received by those who struggle with homosexuality, because it seems like the Church requires them to be chaste, then turns around and assumes they canât be- making it seem like the Church thinks they canât be as holy as anyone else. The sacrament would still be valid- this is a matter of discipline, not doctrine (and a future pope could change this rule, too).
How is the Church going to regulate this? Teenagers often have homosexual thoughts- and these thoughts sometimes occur even into the 20âs. Also, most homosexual men have been âin the closetâ for part of their lives- and many hide their sexuality from family and the people they work with forever- they know how to cover it up quite well- they can hide it from the people in the seminary too. The only ones theyâll weed out are the ones who care enough about the Church to respect itâs teachings.
If they show that they are working to live out a life of holiness, have been doing so for several years, and they donât discuss their struggle with anyone- except their spiritual director and maybe a close friend or two (and these discussions are only for support- they are never inappropriate), then they should not be prohibited from going to the seminary.
The Church has made a decision on the ordination of homosexual men to the priesthood, and I would never advise anyone to try and go against it. I am afraid of how this will be received by those who struggle with homosexuality, because it seems like the Church requires them to be chaste, then turns around and assumes they canât be- making it seem like the Church thinks they canât be as holy as anyone else. The sacrament would still be valid- this is a matter of discipline, not doctrine (and a future pope could change this rule, too).
How is the Church going to regulate this? Teenagers often have homosexual thoughts- and these thoughts sometimes occur even into the 20âs. Also, most homosexual men have been âin the closetâ for part of their lives- and many hide their sexuality from family and the people they work with forever- they know how to cover it up quite well- they can hide it from the people in the seminary too. The only ones theyâll weed out are the ones who care enough about the Church to respect itâs teachings.
M
m134e5
Guest
What evidence? No scientifically reliable or valid study has been done or can be done to prove this. âCommon senseâ can be deceiving. Example- people used to think the stomach itself was responsible for hunger pains- science has shown that it isnât- yet âcommon senseâ would tell us that it is.
Which is better? Avoiding a near occasion of sin, or taking a chance- maybe they could fall, but maybe they could find what helps them grow closer to God and work through their problems.
They have to come to terms with it sometime! It could be argued that the structured prayer life of the seminary, the opportunities to receive the sacraments frequently, and being surrounded by people who care about their faith and are trying to live it the best they can could help a man who struggles with homosexuality become stronger and more able to resist temptation.
81% means nothing. This study is not reliable or valid. How many cases went unreported? How many priests have had consentual affairs with women? How many priests have hired prostitutes? The studies on this only reflect those cases that have been reported.
S
Starsweeper
Guest
The Church has made a decision on the ordination of homosexual men to the priesthood, and I would never advise anyone to try and go against it. I am afraid of how this will be received by those who struggle with homosexuality, because it seems like the Church requires them to be chaste, then turns around and assumes they canât be- making it seem like the Church thinks they canât be as holy as anyone else. The sacrament would still be valid- this is a matter of discipline, not doctrine (and a future pope could change this rule, too).
I see your point here, but I also think itâs a mistake to think that homosexuality is exactly the same as heterosexuality in behavior. Itâs a very well kmown fact that homosexuals are very, very promiscuous, much more so than the average heterosexual. In fact their identity often revolves around their need for sex with other men. I definetly think that they can be chaste, and in fact anyone can. However, I think they need more help, more love and more support than a heterosexual would because they unfortunately have a disordered condition that as mentioned before often leads to promiscuity without support. Are they getting this help and support in the seminary and the priesthood? I highly doubt it. If anything Iâm sure itâs extremely tempting for them. Think about it, if you were trying to be a celibate heterosexual, would you move into the playboy mansion? Also with the culture right now telling homosexuals that their behavior is OK, I think a lot men who would have ordinarily been celibate in another time, bought into the lies and acted on their inclinations. Right now, there are far too many gays in the priesthood. Maybe someday at a different rule can be made for I have no doubt that are men with SSA that would make holy priests, but for the moment I stand with our Pope.
I see your point here, but I also think itâs a mistake to think that homosexuality is exactly the same as heterosexuality in behavior. Itâs a very well kmown fact that homosexuals are very, very promiscuous, much more so than the average heterosexual. In fact their identity often revolves around their need for sex with other men. I definetly think that they can be chaste, and in fact anyone can. However, I think they need more help, more love and more support than a heterosexual would because they unfortunately have a disordered condition that as mentioned before often leads to promiscuity without support. Are they getting this help and support in the seminary and the priesthood? I highly doubt it. If anything Iâm sure itâs extremely tempting for them. Think about it, if you were trying to be a celibate heterosexual, would you move into the playboy mansion? Also with the culture right now telling homosexuals that their behavior is OK, I think a lot men who would have ordinarily been celibate in another time, bought into the lies and acted on their inclinations. Right now, there are far too many gays in the priesthood. Maybe someday at a different rule can be made for I have no doubt that are men with SSA that would make holy priests, but for the moment I stand with our Pope.
S
Sherlock
Guest
Iâm in favor of the banâas a matter of discipline, not doctrine, of course. Given that the vast majority of sexual exploitation of minors by priests has been perpetrated by homosexual priests, this seems like a wise prudential decision to make. No one has a ârightâ to the priesthood. Perhaps in a future culture less obsessed with sex, this could be changed.
R
Riley259
Guest
The John Jay study is the best independent study we got - sure itâs not 100% accurate but what study is? To anyone who wants to be prudent, though, itâs good enough.
T
tuopaolo
Guest
You are right thatâs why there should be no homosexual priests.
No it isnât. Jesus was heterosexual. All men and women are made by God as heterosexual. Becoming a priest does make you less of a sexual being. It just means that you will not express your sexuality in certain ways (marriage, family, or courtship). If a man marries a woman and then becomes a widower and has no intention whatsoever of remarrying â that does not suddenly change him from being heterosexual to asexual. God did not make any man or woman asexual. âMale and female he created themâ Priests remain men just as much as before their ordination. Holy Orders does not strip priests of their sex.
L
Legatus
Guest
It also seems to me that an âopenlyâ homosexual priest who is âpractisingâ a celibate life would be a wonderful example for young men (and women) who are fighting that particular demon.
By all means! Homosexuals have no Christian role models. They are also forced to hide their sexuality (though this is less so nowadays). They canât hope to marry if they are Christian and there are few good people to whom they can talk about what they are going though. Now we would have the Church tell these men that while they must be chaste they cannot be priests because they are, by virtue of their affliction, far less capable of controlling themselves than heterosexuals.
Ask yourself. How would a heterosexual respond to such treatment when growing up? Would he develop a mature sexuality? I doubt it and it is this sexual immaturity that causes so much of the problem with non-celibate priests.
And by the way, has anyone considered the fact that if the Church teaches that homosexual men are by nature less able to control their sexual desires than heterosexual men then the Church is teaching that homosexual men subjectively are guilty of a lesser sin? In fact, if they are less able, though no fault of their own, to control their urges then they are not likely committing a mortal sin at all when they yield to that urge.
Bring on the gay Christian role models. In fact, it would be great to see an openly gay person who practiced heroic chastity canonized a saint.
By all means! Homosexuals have no Christian role models. They are also forced to hide their sexuality (though this is less so nowadays). They canât hope to marry if they are Christian and there are few good people to whom they can talk about what they are going though. Now we would have the Church tell these men that while they must be chaste they cannot be priests because they are, by virtue of their affliction, far less capable of controlling themselves than heterosexuals.
Ask yourself. How would a heterosexual respond to such treatment when growing up? Would he develop a mature sexuality? I doubt it and it is this sexual immaturity that causes so much of the problem with non-celibate priests.
And by the way, has anyone considered the fact that if the Church teaches that homosexual men are by nature less able to control their sexual desires than heterosexual men then the Church is teaching that homosexual men subjectively are guilty of a lesser sin? In fact, if they are less able, though no fault of their own, to control their urges then they are not likely committing a mortal sin at all when they yield to that urge.
Bring on the gay Christian role models. In fact, it would be great to see an openly gay person who practiced heroic chastity canonized a saint.
R
Riley259
Guest
B
ben_dy
Guest
While I am, thinking pastorally, somewhat in agreement with this statement, I think that the scandals here prove, if anything, that we must be more protective of our young men (and women) first and find ways other than presently an openly gay priest leading a celibate life as a role model: surely those examples would be much more effective coming from lay apostolates, perhaps, as I think it goes without saying that the majority of homosexuals in the Church are among the laity and not among the clergy.
Again, this falls into an area of catechesis and ministry that I think would make for a wonderful lay apostolate with diocesan approval (something that may already be in existence, for all I know, in a diocese with a large number of homosexual Catholics?
To be honest, when I was growing up (Iâll be 68 in December) when we talked about sex - even when it was just talking amongst the boys - no one had anything to say about homosexuality (and Iâm a seminary drop-out while my brother is still a priest). My father made sure that the boys knew the facts of life at an early age but there was not, at that time, such an emphasis on sex as part of every facet of life. I was in my 30âs, I guess, and happily married, during the âsexual revolutionâ and I really donât feel as if I missed much. While Iâm not naive enough to believe that we can hope for a return of the days when we defined ourselves more by the lives we led than our sexual inclinations and experiences, I do hope that we can evolve socially to the point where sex becomes understood as the natural love as expressed between husband and wife and not a gross definition of what makes a person what he or she âisâ.
Iâm not certain that the Church really âteaches that homosexual men are by nature less able to control their sexual desires than heterosexual menâ - those teachings, to my knowledge, have been the product of various studies into homosexual behavior which conclude that homosexual men are much more likely both in promiscuity and in molesting adolescent boys (true pedophiles are more likely to be heterosexual). The decision to enter into a homosexual act is a conscious decision and it is also a sin. To say that a homosexual disorder has an accompanying God endowed nature that lessens reason and absolves conscience is not, I think, being suggested by anyone.
Again - Iâm all for the formation of a âgay Christianâ lay apostolate and ministry under the direction of a diocese to produce âgay Christian role modelsâ who live according to the teaching of the Church. I think such role models would be far more effective than seeing an openly homosexual priest in a chasuble every Sunday.
L
Legatus
Guest
Legatus:
This is rationalization for committing sin without the guilt - pure sophistry! We all have free will and make choices whether to sin despite the temptation. Is an alcoholic or a porn addict ultimately guiltless of sin - of course not. Yes, they struggle more to control their desires and temptations and to some extent are less culpable but if they give in then itâs done willfully and is thus sin.
This is by no means a rationalizaton for commiting sin without guilt. I would certainly not make such a claim since I do not accept the premise that gays are less able to control their urges than are heterosexuals in the first place. But others on this thread seem to imply that gays are inherently less able to control their urges and I am merely pointing out one of the ramifications of their argument. An inherent inablility to control oneâs urges may indeed lessen oneâs freedom to choose.
As for Alcoholics and addicts, you have chosen bad examples to make your case. Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12 Step programs dealing with addictions maintain that these problems are a disease rather than a character defect. A person who has not yet entered on the course of recovery may indeed be less culpable for getting drunk etc. This is not a cop out. AA is a profoundly spiritual and, in fact, Catholic (Ithough not specifically so) program which places great emaphasis on trust in God and in rooting out moral defects. The 12 Step programs also have the highest success rate - far better than non-spiritual psycological programs.
M
misterX
Guest
wether they are practicing or not. Anyone who is homosexual, wether they be open about it or not, should be banned from the preisthood. A lot of people here seem to be missing the point it doesnât matter if they are celibate. What you will have is someone in authority in the church who will not be willing to preach against homosexuality as a sin. And people must also remember that people not only sin with their actions but with their thoughts. So really the issue of wether or not that the homosexual priest is celibate or not, because he would still be living in sin.
- Status