Can Men who Experience Same-Sex Attractions Become Brothers or Priests?

  • Thread starter Thread starter salvemater
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

salvemater

Guest
I recently came across an article discussing the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.

The following quotes are directly from the article:
“This claim [that persons who experience same sex attractions should be ordained or permitted to enter religious orders] implicitly asserts the heretical view that that the homosexual orientation is not harmful to human persons, is not in itself a moral evil, and that the example of such an orientation is not harmful to the faithful. Even a celibate or chaste person with a homosexual orientation can harm the Church by the bad example of treating such an orientation as if it were not intrinsically evil. … [Additionally], the faithful themselves have a right to have priests, religious, and lay leaders who are lambs without blemish, who represent Christ to them by being like Christ. But the homosexual orientation itself is inimical to the will and plan of God, and to the example of Christ. … Therefore, the Church can and should deny all homosexuals (even those claiming to be chaste) all positions of authority, leadership, and teaching within the Church, including the roles of deacon, priest, and Bishop.”
Click to expand...
  1. In response to the question of whether or not it is moral for a person with same-sex attractions to pursue a religious or priestly vocation:
“No, it is not. For Scripture says: ‘…if a man does not know how to rule over his own house, how will he take care of the Church of God?’ (1 Tim 3:5). Any man or woman who does not know how to rule over the house of his or her own human nature, with its thoughts and desires, is not fit to rule over the Church, nor to be among the ordained or consecrated souls given a special place within the Church. … Persons who, in the past, have experienced a limited degree of same sex attraction, and who dealt with it prayerfully and chastely, and who now are entirely free from such an attraction, may seek ordination or consecration into the religious life. But those who succumbed to the objective mortal sin of homosexual acts are not fit for ordination or the religious life, even if they later repent and reform. For they are not lambs without blemish, suitable for consecration to the Lord God.”
Click to expand...
I also found a statement from a Vatican document stating the following:
“This Dicastery … believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who … present deep-seated homosexual tendencies. … Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem - for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.”
Click to expand...
That said, I have several questions:
  1. Is the article representing an official Catholic position, or is it a personal viewpoint?
  2. The article argues that men experiencing same-sex attractions cannot become priests or brothers because they are not spotless. While spotless men would of course be the ideal, since priests and brothers are meant to be examples of sanctity and teachers of virtue and prayer, is that realistic? After all, all people, since they are affected by original sin, have predispositions that order them towards sin rather than virtue, unless they have been given a special grace by God. Unless all seminarians undergo a dark night of the soul prior to taking vows or being ordained, wouldn’t most priests and brothers not be spotless?
  3. Both the article and the Vatican document suggest that to permit men experiencing same-sex attractions to be ordained or to become brothers is implicitly sending the message that the orientation is not objectively disordered or intrinsically evil. Why is this the case? Is the person discerning necessarily in denial about the evil of his inclinations, or ss the Church giving scandal by placing a person who is not “spotless” in a position of leadership?
  4. The Vatican document states that a person may be permitted to the Sacrament of Holy Orders if they have been free of same-sex attractions for at least three years. The article, however, suggests that if a person has ever, at any point in their life, acted upon their same-sex attractions, they cannot be permitted to enter seminary, even if they overcome their attractions and reform. Is that at odds with current Church policy?
 
Salvemater

You list four questions, but I think you are really only asking two.
  1. In current Catholic teaching, is homosexuality held to be inherently sinful, wrong, and “intrinsically disordered”?
  2. What is current Church policy on admitting candidates to the priesthood who are homosexually inclined or who have engaged in homosexual acts at some time in the past?
The answer to 1 Yes and the answer to 2 is that, in practice, it will vary from one diocese to another (for secular clergy) and from one order or congregation to another.
 
:nope:
BartholomewB said:
  1. In current Catholic teaching, is homosexuality held to be inherently sinful, wrong, and “intrinsically disordered”?
The answer to 1 Yes
Click to expand...
Neither *wrong *nor *“intrinsically disordered” *is equivalent to inherently sinful. Neither does the Church hold that homosexuality is inherently sinful.

tee
 
Salvemater, please be careful of your sources. This article appears on a website of, and appears to be written by, a man who has a history of presenting his personal opinions as “Catholic theology.” He is not to be taken as authoritative. When anything he says contradicts the Vatican, follow the Vatican. (which is a good rule to follow about anyone, actually)
 
salvemater said:
I recently came across an article discussing the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.

The following quotes are directly from the article:
  1. In response to the question of whether or not it is moral for a person with same-sex attractions to pursue a religious or priestly vocation:
I also found a statement from a Vatican document stating the following:
That said, I have several questions:
  1. Is the article representing an official Catholic position, or is it a personal viewpoint?
  2. The article argues that men experiencing same-sex attractions cannot become priests or brothers because they are not spotless. While spotless men would of course be the ideal, since priests and brothers are meant to be examples of sanctity and teachers of virtue and prayer, is that realistic? After all, all people, since they are affected by original sin, have predispositions that order them towards sin rather than virtue, unless they have been given a special grace by God. Unless all seminarians undergo a dark night of the soul prior to taking vows or being ordained, wouldn’t most priests and brothers not be spotless?
  3. Both the article and the Vatican document suggest that to permit men experiencing same-sex attractions to be ordained or to become brothers is implicitly sending the message that the orientation is not objectively disordered or intrinsically evil. Why is this the case? Is the person discerning necessarily in denial about the evil of his inclinations, or ss the Church giving scandal by placing a person who is not “spotless” in a position of leadership?
  4. The Vatican document states that a person may be permitted to the Sacrament of Holy Orders if they have been free of same-sex attractions for at least three years. The article, however, suggests that if a person has ever, at any point in their life, acted upon their same-sex attractions, they cannot be permitted to enter seminary, even if they overcome their attractions and reform. Is that at odds with current Church policy?
Click to expand...
Dear Child of God,
God loves all of us. He never loves our sin. What is sin? Ask God. An Apologist, one that is a priest is best and the Vatican site. When I was in nursing school in 1968, homosexuality was a perversion. A council was held after that w 10 member board. 7 members were homosexual. guess the vote. I don’t have all the answers. There is Sodom and Gomorrah. There is looking at society. Transgenders still have a high suicide rate before and after surgical intervention. Why does it exist? My survey w 50 of my pts and my brother (they were molested) That isn’t the answer for all. The church is a joke on this after the scandal. Obviously, homosexuals and child molesters slipped by. THe idea was celibacy. Celibacy doesn’t work for the great heterosexuals. So, marriage helps the heteros. Sodom and Gomorrah still might be a problem for the homosexuals. Now, pedophiles go straight to jail. It is complicated. It’s like playing w a puzzle, I feel. Match up the body parts w the proper holes and no problems. Do so after marriage and stay faithful and no diseases. Singles are to stay celibate=no diseases. That’s what God says.
Too unrealistic. I’m fat and I want ice cream. Avoid the occasion of sin. I gave up ice cream. One can join the Episcopalian church. They accept gays. The Holy Spirit will guide you to a true spiritual love affair w Jesus. Then, when you love Him so much, no man on earth will pull your heart strings. Keep a picture of Him in your pocket, if tempted pull it out and look it out and secure your celibacy.

in Christ’s love
tweedlealice 🤷
 
tee_eff_em said:
:nope:

Neither *wrong *nor *“intrinsically disordered” *is equivalent to inherently sinful. Neither does the Church hold that homosexuality is inherently sinful.

tee
Click to expand...
I think you are wrong, Tee. The Catholic Church follows the Bible. Both Old & New Test. say it is sinful.
 
Thank you all for your responses so far.
You list four questions, but I think you are really only asking two.
Click to expand...
  1. In current Catholic teaching, is homosexuality held to be inherently sinful, wrong, and “intrinsically disordered”?
Click to expand...
  1. What is current Church policy on admitting candidates to the priesthood who are homosexually inclined or who have engaged in homosexual acts at some time in the past?
Click to expand...
The answer to 1 Yes and the answer to 2 is that, in practice, it will vary from one diocese to another (for secular clergy) and from one order or congregation to another.
Click to expand...
The second question you listed is accurate, but I already know the answer to the first question. I suppose if I were to condense my point to two question, my first question would be “In spite of the fact that same-sex attractions are objectively disordered, can a person experiencing same-sex attractions be ordained? Or, more generally, can a person experiencing any kind of disordered attraction be ordained?”
“Celibacy doesn’t work for the great heterosexuals. So, marriage helps the heteros.”
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you mean by this. What is a “great heterosexual?” And I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss celibacy. Celibacy was not the cause of the sex abuse scandal.
“One can join the Episcopalian church. They accept gays.”
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting this is a good or a bad thing to do? First off, the Catholic Church DOES accept people who experience same-sex attractions; they simply point out the objective truth that acting upon those attractions is sinful because the attraction itself is directed towards vice rather than virtue. Second, only the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth, and only the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ. I would not condone or recommend “church hopping.”
“I think you are wrong, Tee. The Catholic Church follows the Bible. Both Old & New Test. say it is sinful.”
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “sinful?” If a person doesn’t specifically choose to develop same-sex attractions, they cannot be culpable for having them. The experience of having same-sex attractions itself is not sinful, but acting upon it or placing yourself in a position where you are more likely to act upon it is.
 
salvemater said:
Thank you all for your responses so far.

The second question you listed is accurate, but I already know the answer to the first question. I suppose if I were to condense my point to two question, my first question would be “In spite of the fact that same-sex attractions are objectively disordered, can a person experiencing same-sex attractions be ordained? Or, more generally, can a person experiencing any kind of disordered attraction be ordained?”

I’m not sure what you mean by this. What is a “great heterosexual?” And I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss celibacy. Celibacy was not the cause of the sex abuse scandal.

Are you suggesting this is a good or a bad thing to do? First off, the Catholic Church DOES accept people who experience same-sex attractions; they simply point out the objective truth that acting upon those attractions is sinful because the attraction itself is directed towards vice rather than virtue. Second, only the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth, and only the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ. I would not condone or recommend “church hopping.”

What do you mean by “sinful?” If a person doesn’t specifically choose to develop same-sex attractions, they cannot be culpable for having them. The experience of having same-sex attractions itself is not sinful, but acting upon it or placing yourself in a position where you are more likely to act upon it is.
Click to expand...
Yes, acting on it is sinful. So a man with the attraction, becomes a priest, just like a normal man attracted to girls, tries not to sin…he can become a priest!
 
Allow me to turn back to my original questions:

Granted that same-sex attractions are intrinsically disordered, should a man who is experiencing same-sex attractions, assuming that these attractions have not yet been overcome, be permitted to be ordained or join a religious order, provided that he agrees with all of the teachings of the Church, recognizes the nature of his attractions, and is living chastely?

Should the Church distinguish between people who have acted upon these attractions and those who have never acted upon them, even if both groups are currently committed to chastity?
 
salvemater said:
“In spite of the fact that same-sex attractions are objectively disordered, can a person experiencing same-sex attractions be ordained?”
.
Click to expand...
That was what I called your question No. 2. I answered it as follows:

“In practice, it will vary from one diocese to another (for secular clergy) and from one order or congregation to another.”
 
BartholomewB said:
That was what I called your question No. 2. I answered it as follows:

“In practice, it will vary from one diocese to another (for secular clergy) and from one order or congregation to another.”
Click to expand...
So it’s more a matter of prudence than an objective moral principle?
 
salvemater said:
So it’s more a matter of prudence than an objective moral principle?
Click to expand...
I was answering your question (No. 4 in your OP) about Church policy.
I don’t know the answer to the new question you are asking now. Perhaps some other poster can answer it for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top