"deep seated homosexual tendencies?"

  • Thread starter Thread starter notredame_999
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

notredame_999

Guest
Referring to Pope Benedict XIV recent letter banning homosexuals from the priesthood with “deep seated homosxual tendencie.” This seems way to vague for me. I feel the Church isn’t doing enough to root out homosexuals in the priesthood. I have a problem with Pope Benedict XIV recent letter described in some of these posts that allow for homosexuals to become priests if they have “given up those feelings” for three years. That seems ridiculous. How does a person stop being a homosexual after three years? Either you are naturally attracted to men or naturally attracted to women, I don’t understand the wiggle room. I also feel that Church should give seminarians polygraph examinations and ask them, “are you, or have you ever been, a homosexual or carry homosexual attractions?”

Would I be admitted to a seminary for the priesthood if I was this honest about my desire to purge the clergy of homosexuals?
 
I completely agree with you. How can the Church view homosexual tendencies as gravely disordered and yet deem a homosexual healthy enough for the priesthood? It makes no sense. There are physical, emotional, and psychological standards that must be met to ensure a man is fit to be a priest. “Giving up those feelings” doesn’t take care of the basic disorder that remains present. I was unaware that the Pope wrote a letter making the statement you alluded to; I’ll have to read it.

Unfortunately, I think the answer to your last question would be a resounding no.
 
Are you saying that a celibate homosexual – in other words, one who keeps the same vows as a heterosexual – should not be a priest?
 
agnes_therese said:
Are you saying that a celibate homosexual – in other words, one who keeps the same vows as a heterosexual – should not be a priest?
Click to expand...
Absolutely I am. Historically the Church has always held this view. How can you say one is giving up a wife, children, and the marital act, if one has no interest in a wife, children, and the marital act?
 
What happened to “hate the sin, but love the sinner”?
And do you think for one moment that the Pope is just “guessing” on the 3 year rule?
And remember that the church rests upon His Holiness the Pope with the Magestirium, and the church is “you”, so rest in the knowledge that the vicar of Christ, as chosen by GOD is doing the right thing according to the will of GOD.
 
notredame_999 said:
Absolutely I am. Historically the Church has always held this view. How can you say one is giving up a wife, children, and the marital act, if one has no interest in a wife, children, and the marital act?
Click to expand...
In that case, you also will be wanting a process in place to weed out anyone who is asexual. And what about someone who is attracted to women, but has no interest in having children? He would meet only 2/3 of your criteria.
 
notredame_999 said:
Absolutely I am. Historically the Church has always held this view. How can you say one is giving up a wife, children, and the marital act, if one has no interest in a wife, children, and the marital act?
Click to expand...
What about the guy that is discerning between a vocation as a single and celibate and the guy that is discerning religious life? Its not always a decision between getting married and not getting married and being a priest.

Honestly, I’m not sure I’m want a priest that has any “deep seated tendencies” , be it hetersexual or homosexual. I think you missed the point the Pope is trying to make.
 
Part of the reason why Catholic men have turned away from the church is because they can’t relate and are actually disgusted by some of the femininity coming out of the pulpit. Thats not to say that’s the only reason, but it is certainly part of it. That’s also not to say that homosexuals make up a majority of the priesthood, because they don’t. However, I do think they make up a significant minority with a percentage higher than the general population.

I personally think that homoexual oriented priests, even if they are celibate, are a weed in the church that need to be pulled out. I am considering the priesthood, have researched celibacy and its history, tried to convert to eastern catholicism for the purpose of married priests, but have realized there is no way around celibacy in the latin rite. I have also realized that if I entered the seminary, no matter which one, there will definetly be some homosexual oriented people around me and that quite frankly sickens me.

I am not sickened by the fact that they are homosexual oriented, but rather because they are going to be priests and I do not feel that they should be.

I just don’t understand how someone can have homosexual attractions, then stop for 3 years, then be ordained.
 
PatriceA said:
What about the guy that is discerning between a vocation as a single and celibate and the guy that is discerning religious life? Its not always a decision between getting married and not getting married and being a priest.

Honestly, I’m not sure I’m want a priest that has any “deep seated tendencies” , be it hetersexual or homosexual. I think you missed the point the Pope is trying to make.
Click to expand...
What do you mean you don’t want a priest that has “deep seated tendecies?” Don’t you want a man who you know for sure 100% is attracted to women? I know I do.
 
Julian0404 said:
What happened to “hate the sin, but love the sinner”?
And do you think for one moment that the Pope is just “guessing” on the 3 year rule?
And remember that the church rests upon His Holiness the Pope with the Magestirium, and the church is “you”, so rest in the knowledge that the vicar of Christ, as chosen by GOD is doing the right thing according to the will of GOD.
Click to expand...
I read nothing in notredame_999’s post to suggest he does not “love the sinner”. However, the issue here isn’t even really about “hating the sin” - if we’re assuming the would-be priest in question is a chaste homosexual. (Sin only enters the picture when homosexual behavior is involved).

The issue is the health/ability of a seminarian. Would-be priests need to be robustly healthy people - in body, mind, and spirit. This is why men are given medical and psychological examinations as part of the application process. A serious disease, a psychological disorder, a communications disorder, are all examples of issues that would bar a man from entering seminary. An inclination toward homosexual behavior is another such issue.

I would doubt the Pope is “guessing” as to the 3 year rule, but that doesn’t mean that the source of this criteria isn’t in error. Unless a Pope is speaking on faith and morals, he is capable of making errant statements. Case in point: Pope John Paul II’s praise of Marciel Maciel.

A (good) priest’s life is not his own. He must devote all his time and energy in service of Our Lord. How can he commit to do this if he struggles with a physical/psychological/emotional/behavioral problem which consumes much of his energy?

For those of you who find no problem with a homosexual entering the seminary, how do you explain all the rampant homosexual activity that has taken over so many of our seminaries?

Notredame_999: You may be interested to know that the Marians of the Immaculate Conception are clear that they do not accept homosexuals. Fr. Donald Calloway has made this clear; you can google it.
 
Notre Dame person, OP:

With every one of your posts, I shudder to think that YOU are considering the priesthood as your vocation, as you have indicated many times. Your prejudices and general attitudes give me the chills.

A homosexual person certainly, absolutely, positively does NOT have to act on their sexuality – although certainly many do. In fact, as you undoubtedly know, it is the Catholic ideal to consider their sexual orientation as a “cross” and to rely on God’s help to overcome their natural tendencies. You would deny ordination to a man who is committed to living a celibate, holy life because of natural tendencies he had no part of choosing – how Christ-like of you. Remember the recent Gospel where Jesus said He did not come to call the righteous but to call sinners?

I hope that whatever spiritual director you currently have, or will have in the future, will be astute enough to see clearly the makeup of your character and attitudes.
 
Heh, putting a man with homosexual tendencies into a seminary full of nice young men would be like putting a heterosexual man into a convent of young nuns and telling him “Now, think holy thoughts”(!)

I’ve heard that in the past such a man would simply be ‘sent home’. If the Church had kept to this practice, we might not have had the pederast problem to such a degree, today.
 
Notredame: “When wicked men defile you and it’s all because of Me, then blessed are you. Rejoice and be glad.”

That is Christ’s message to you.

Notice how uncharitable and intolerant the other side always is.

Keep the faith.
 
A man who: loves the Lord, is fixed on becoming holy, on being divinised for eternity, on serving the Sacraments of God, hates evil, is absolute in his hatred of the Solitary Sin, and who firmly upholds every Commandment (including the 6th and 9th) should be eligible for the priesthood, in my opinion. What merit is there in singling out homosexual men from heterosexual men, if any given individual from each ‘group’ can stay celibate in his thoughts and actions? The sexual abuse scandal is a result of stupidity, impiety, and an immoral culture, stemming from the widespread secularisation of everything in the early-to-mid 19th century. Blaming homosexuality generally for the breaking of the vow of celibacy is like blaming original sin for the individual man’s choice to commit murder.

Homosexuals of iron will and masculine nature can exist, and I believe some do exist. It is about as likely as meeting a bodybuilding woman, but the possibility is still there. A homosexual who can overcome the inveterate effeminacy that comes with the disorder is a man to be admired, and who is worthy of striving through the priesthood. If his mind and hands never stray from the path of God and he becomes a saint, how can anyone be sickened? The sin of lust can be overcome like any other sin; likewise, if homosexuality is a “sin like any other”, it too can be overcome. If it is not a natural order come from God’s creation thereof, it is just a warping that can be undone. Whatever the answer to its purpose, function, origin, and goal is, it can still be undone. Thanks be to God for the grace to do so.
 
notredame_999 said:
What do you mean you don’t want a priest that has “deep seated tendecies?” Don’t you want a man who you know for sure 100% is attracted to women? I know I do.
Click to expand...
I think you need to look up the definition of the term “deep seated tendencies”. It means the person, hetersexual or homosexual, can not fight their attraction to the people they are attracted to in a habitual manner. They are not able to live chaste lives. A hetersexual man should not be entering the seminary if he is habitually attracted to females anymore than a homosexual man should be.

I certainly want a priest that can live a chaste life, don’t you?
 
“Deep-seated homosexual tendencies” to me would mean that all sexual expression would be homosexual, never heterosexual. (Obviously some people can be attracted to both sexes – the “deep-seated homosexual tendency” would eliminate all heterosexual attraction and thus any heterosexual expression.) It certainly doesn’t mean that a person described above is incapable of living celibately.

Celibacy is a commitment made through the action of grace (and often within a vocation), whether it’s made by a heterosexual or homosexual person, and has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

True, it may be a bit more difficult for a gay man who is surrounded by men in the seminary and later within the all-male clerical culture, but it’s the vowed commitment that will provide sufficient grace to withstand spontaneous attractions and acting on those impulses.

Once a priest is ordained and working in a parish environment, or teaching in a coeducational college – or wherever he happens to serve, except a cloistered monastery, he will be in contact with women of all ages. The commitment he’s made as a heterosexual priest will provide sufficient grace in those situations, too.

According to my best friend, who happens to BE a heterosexual priest nearing retirement age, part of the problem with the Church’s handling of the first abuse cases to be revealed was the charity it had extended toward the offending priest. Of course, that charity should have also been shown to the victim and his/her family and the accused brought to civil justice – no argument from me on that – but my friend’s point was the Church rightly did not throw the accused to the wolves out of concern for its own, particularly when many accusations hadn’t been proven. (That point is certainly arguable, but I’m just the messenger. I personally abhor the Church’s actions, but I understand what my friend is saying.)

Priests aren’t meant to be “rooted out” if they live their vow of celibacy and serve the Church and God with honor, according to their vocation. Candidates for the priesthood, if they have met the Church’s current very strict guidelines, are not to be “pulled up” either.

The Church asks every unmarried person, gay or straight, man or woman, to live celibately… some can, many can’t, but one’s sexual orientation is not the driving factor in celibacy – it’s the commitment made through grace, and I assume a bigger scoop of grace when accompanying a vocation.
 
Deeply rooted homosexual tendencies refers to persons who are entrenched in that lifestyle, not to the possibility of having SSA. The reason that this was spelled out now is because it had never been done.

We always had a rule that said that we (religious and diocesan) could not admit heterosexual men who are sexually active. No one ever said anything about homosexuals, because these were things that people just did not talk about once upon a time. There was, if you will, a pruddish attitude about sex. You did not mention certain things.

Now the rules are clear for any man who wishes to enter a diocesan seminary or a religious novitiate, regardless of his sexual feelings. He must be celibate and not just recently celibate. The three-year rule was always in place for heterosexuals, except for those who had been married and were widowed.

The rules were not just for priests either. They applied to sisters, nuns and brothers too.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Layman said:
If the Church had kept to this practice, we might not have had the pederast problem to such a degree, today.
Click to expand...
A look at most scientific studies reveals that the majority of men who abuse children sexually were not gay to begin with. The vast majority of children in the US are abused by men who live heterosexual lifestyles. It is unfair and fallacious to accuse homosexuals of automatically being pedophiles.

Sexual sin is a sin like any other. If you had a 500 pound man wanting to enter seminary, should you let him? It’s obvious, barring a medical condition, that he is mastered by gluttony. But would you let him in if he lost 300 pounds, even if he still had an attraction to overeating but was victorious? Before you mention gravity of sin between the two, gluttony is a mortal sin, just as homosexual acts are.

Treating homosexual sin as worse than heterosexual sin (fornication) or any of the other mortal sins is prejudicial. They are both equally mortal and disgusting.

The argument that putting a man with SSA in an environment of all men is wrong doesn’t hold any water. A priest will often find himself in tempting situations, regardless of his sexual orientation. The pastor at my last church constantly dealt with advances from women (ultimately giving in and disqualifying himself).

I think it’s great that the Church gives grace to those who once struggled with sin but found freedom in Christ. I think the 3-year waiting (and growing) period is an awesome way to determine if someone has been truly freed from their sin and tested sure.
 
I’m not an expert on SSA, so please remember that this is just my opinion, not fact from heaven etched on tablets. From my experience living in community for many years and have been a superior, I don’t see how living in a house full of men can be a temptation, trust me. There are many discouraging factors, especially if you belong to a religious order. I’ll just list a few. These are more common to religious orders, than they are to religious congregations and to diocesan rectories, but many would apply. I’ll just give you some example of life in one of our houses.
  1. You’re never alone.
  2. There is a horarium, so everyone is accounted for at all times.
  3. You don’t always live with people you like. You have to teach yourself to like them, because you have no choice.
  4. You’re very busy from the time you get up at 4:30 to the time that you go to bed at 11:00.
  5. You’re in formation for 10-years where discipline is drilled into you and the formation team is very observant of anything that may disrupt the common life.
  6. You develolp an intense life of prayer and sacrament, which allows for grace to operate.
  7. No one is exempt from Original sin. SSA are not the only disorder that human beings bring with them. We have many disordered affections from racial prejudices to problems with authority and all of these are scrutinized and weeded out during the formation years. You would have to be a master actor to hide them.
  8. Heterosexual temptations are not absent, because you live with men. We do work with many women. Therefore, one would also have to say that no one with strong heterosexual feelings should be admitted.
These are just a few things. When the formation team does its job, the end result is that you weed out those individuals who are not called to live this life and you equip those who are with discipline and a strong life of prayer. There is always going to be someone who flies under the radar. Superiors, bishops and formation teams are not omniscient. But the ones that we have in place today are very holy and astute men.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top