Gays banned from priesthood

[Amado_de_Dios]

hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VATICAN_GAYS?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Nov 22, 4:17 PM EST

Vatican: Sexually Active Gays Unwelcome

VATICAN CITY (AP) – The Vatican says homosexuals who are sexually active or support “gay culture” are unwelcome in the priesthood unless they have overcome their homosexual tendencies for at least three years, according to a church document posted on the Internet by an Italian Catholic news agency.

The long-awaited document is scheduled to be released by the Vatican on Nov. 29. A church official who has read the document confirmed the authenticity of the Internet posting by the Adista news agency. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the document has not yet been officially released by the Vatican.

{…}

 

[gavin52]

Great! Gays openly practicing a gay life-style and/or actively promoting it are not compatible with the priesthood.

 

[CatholicCid]

Is it Nov. 29th already?

What’s this document supposed to say anyway…
Priests are celebit (in most cases) so if they are active, homosexually or hetrosexually, there is a problem.

As for supporting the gay culture… As a Priest, should not one call others AWAY from sin, not towards it?

I love how the media loves to turn everything around and support the US Past time of Catholic Bashing

Probably the only question i’d have would be to define the bold

The document said that “the church, while deeply respecting the people in question, cannot admit to the seminary and the sacred orders those who practice homosexuality, **present ** **deeply rooted homosexual tendencies ** or support so-called gay culture.”

 

[catsrus]

This is good news and I’m glad the Vatican has stepped in and made a declaration on this issue.
How will this particular document bare on the 1961 Vatican document making it clear that homosexuals should be barred from the priesthood?
Another concern is, what about the 25% to 50% homosexuals that are presently in the seminaries? (stats provided by Rev. Donald Cozzens, former seminary rector and author of The Changing Face of the Priesthood.
The document is scheduled to be released 11/29/05 so, hopefully, we’ll see these questions addressed at that time.

 

[koda]

I thought sexually active men of any sexual preference were unfit to the priests.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

koda:

I thought sexually active men of any sexual preference were unfit to the priests.

Well,yes, but the document says more.

A man fit to be a priest can certainly promote the chaste sexual relationship, in marriage, between a husband and a wife. Indeed, since Matrimony is a Sacrament, he may committed to Matrimony, even though he has not received the Sacrament himself. (He shows his own commitment through his celibacy, not being himself married.) But the document precludes those men who are committed to the gay life style – it does not say that they practise it; commitment could possibly be promotion and encouragement – from Holy Orders.

Anglicans in Canada voted to declare homosexual “relationships” as somehow sacred. Such an assertion by a Catholic man would preclude his ordination, by the terms of the document (as we have it now).

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Elzee]

hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VATICAN_GAYS?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Nov 22, 4:17 PM EST

Vatican: Sexually Active Gays Unwelcome

VATICAN CITY (AP) – The Vatican says homosexuals who are sexually active or support “gay culture” are unwelcome in the priesthood unless they have overcome their homosexual tendencies for at least three years, according to a church document posted on the Internet by an Italian Catholic news agency.
{…}

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but is what I highlighted in red a subtle (maybe not subtle) way of making ‘both sides’ of this issue happy. I’m not saying it was purposefully written this way, but this is how I think it can be taken:

**Overcoming homosexual tendencies is different than being a homosexual and just not acting on it for 3 years. This seems to align with the CCC that states homosexuality is a disorder, and in essence is saying if you have overcome this disorder, then you can be a priest. Technically, if you have overcome these tendencies you are no longer a homosexual. On the other hand, it’s not ruling out a man because he at some point was gay - thereby appeasing ‘both sides’ of the issue to some extent.
Am I analyzing this too much…

 

[netmilsmom]

hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VATICAN_GAYS?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Nov 22, 4:17 PM EST

Vatican: Sexually Active Gays Unwelcome

VATICAN CITY (AP) – The Vatican says homosexuals who are sexually active or support “gay culture” are unwelcome in the priesthood unless they have overcome their homosexual tendencies for at least three years, according to a church document posted on the Internet by an Italian Catholic news agency.

The long-awaited document is scheduled to be released by the Vatican on Nov. 29. A church official who has read the document confirmed the authenticity of the Internet posting by the Adista news agency. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the document has not yet been officially released by the Vatican.

{…}

Here it is…
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40891

 

[Amado_de_Dios]

Elzee:

**Overcoming homosexual tendencies is different than being a homosexual and just not acting on it for 3 years.

A temptation is not a sin. So if a priest has overcome his homosexual tendencies, but is still tempted from time to time (just as heterosexual priests may be tempted), so long as he does not give in, he can remain in the priesthood.

Saint Augustine led a very sinful life before his conversion. However, once he overcame his sinful tendencies (although not the impure images, which were engraved in his mind), he became on of Christendom’s greatest angels.

 

[fix]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Here it is…
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40891

The translation so far says this:

If, instead, one were to examine homosexual tendencies that might only the expression of a transitory problem, as in, for example, one whose adolescence is not yet complete, he must however pass clearly at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

Does this mean one must have no more tendencies? If that is the intent, then it would seem those with SSA may not be ordained, unless they are clear of it, meaning no tendencies?

 

[goofyjim]

Where would this put my possibilities for the religious life? Everyone who knows me knows I have never promoted the gay culture, in fact I have spoken vehemently against it. But I have been in therapy for what is termed same-sex attraction. Until this past summer when I came to the conclusion even the attraction was just a passing phase. Am I too late to enter some sort of religious life? I do not personally feel the call to the priesthood but I have often felt called to be a religious brother of some sort.

 

[St.BJLabre]

This actually doesn’t mean a whole lot when you really look at it. Bishops and heads of different religious orders are going to interpret this however they want to. The problem is that the Vatican isn’t giving very clear definitions of what they mean by phases like “deeply rooted homosexual tendencies”. Also, it isn’t clear what it means to “overcome” homosexual tendencies. Does it mean that they have to never be tempted or does it mean that they have to never give into temptation? It all means different things to different people and if the Vatican doesn’t give clearer definitions and instructions, they can’t expect bishops and heads of religious orders to enforce their policies the way they want them enforced. This document is about as clear as mud and probably will do more harm than good. Dioceses and religious orders could very well turn to a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy which could be disastrous. Also, the document doesn’t mention anything about non-ordained religious. Are lesbians allowed to be nuns? Are men with “deeply rooted homosexual tendencies” (whatever that means) allowed to be brothers? I salute the Pope for trying, but ultimately, like I said, this document doesn’t mean a whole lot.

 

[Isidore_AK]

leaked Vatican Document:

If, however, one is dealing with homosexual tendencies that may be simply the expression of a transitory problem, such as for example an adolescence not yet complete, such tendencies must be overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

It sounds to me like they are talking about confused teenagers.

I recall plenty of teens that turned out just fine after they got away from all the pro-gay, liberal ‘gay is ok’ elements in school (Gay/Straight Alliance and all of that ****).

So, if at one time you were a confused Teen that thought ‘maybe I’m gay’…but now you’re a straight adult who can keep it in your pants…then maybe you can be a Priest.

 

[Confiteor]

According to the language used, it would be hard not to conclude that “deeply rooted homosexual tendencies” rule out a man with enduring SSA (i.e. anyone not merely in a confused or immature state that results in SSA). But as some have alluded to, how in the world does someone in a position of authority distinguish the merely confused from the bona fide homosexual if the individual in question knows admitting to SSA is the kiss of death for his vocation? I’m not sure if rectors will have the option of “Don’t ask” but “Don’t tell” might be a natural defensive response. Then it will lead to people reporting their observations on the private lives of seminarians once they are in formation…I’m a little skeptical that the Church will be able to enforce something that goes to such personal matters when it can’t seem to keep the liturgy in line in many places (and that’s out there for the public to see and hear all the time).

 

[contemplative]

St.BJLabre:

if the Vatican doesn’t give clearer definitions and instructions, they can’t expect bishops and heads of religious orders to enforce their policies the way they want them enforced. This document is about as clear as mud .

“the church, while deeply respecting the people in question, cannot admit to the seminary and the sacred orders those who practice homosexuality, **present ****deeply rooted homosexual tendencies **or support so-called gay culture.”

Actually …It is as clear as daylight that the Vatican supports the possibility of homosexual priests and bishops.
Seems like the situation is status quo.
What we can only hope for now is that the private seminary reviews will reap positive results by squelching the overwhelming gay lifestyle and agenda…and that we won’t be certain of for awhile…maybe a whole generation or two. The gay agenda is very subversive.
I wish the Church would yank everything out and lay it on the table for all to see. Now I think that would shock the living daylights out of us.
We had a taste of this with the recent sex scandal. No one had to yank much…it just sort of suddenly oozed out in all it’s foul stench.

 

[contemplative]

contemplative:

No one had to yank much…it just sort of suddenly oozed out in all it’s foul stench.

Priest accused of sex crimes
Phoenix monsignor arrested on 10 counts

Michael Clancy
The Arizona Republic
Nov. 22, 2005 12:00 AM

Monsignor Dale Fushek, once one of the most popular and powerful priests in the Phoenix Diocese, was accused Monday of sexual misconduct with teenage boys and young men.

and it keeps on oozing out…read more

that is the foul oozing stench of abusive homosexual priests continues to ooze out

 

[fix]

contemplative:

Actually …It is as clear as daylight that the Vatican supports the possibility of homosexual priests and bishops.

How do you draw that conclusion? I see the exact opposite from the document. One must be free of any tendencies toward homosexuality to be ordained.

I do agree that, as always, how the folks in charge decide to interpret it is the problem. But, that is true for all directives and teachings. One must be submissive to the mind of the Church, not the culture.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

contemplative:

Actually …It is as clear as daylight that the Vatican supports the possibility of homosexual priests and bishops.
Seems like the situation is status quo.
What we can only hope for now is that the private seminary reviews will reap positive results by squelching the overwhelming gay lifestyle and agenda…and that we won’t be certain of for awhile…maybe a whole generation or two. The gay agenda is very subversive.
I wish the Church would yank everything out and lay it on the table for all to see. Now I think that would shock the living daylights out of us.
We had a taste of this with the recent sex scandal. No one had to yank much…it just sort of suddenly oozed out in all it’s foul stench.

I can’t come to the same conclusion from reading this document. To me, it seems to be saying that it is considering three different classes:
a) “those who practice homosexuality” (the active homosexual")

b) “present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies” (though they may be celibate, they still have the tendency or the objective disorder).

c) Finally, those who “support so-called gay culture” (I suppose this could go so far as to be even heterosexuals who’ve notoriously lent their support to gay causes, etc.).

The document seems to rather clearly state that these are ineligible for admission to seminary, thus inadmissible for ordination.

Let’s pray for the Church, the priesthood, and those who are suffering from SSA.

 

[netmilsmom]

fix:

The translation so far says this:

Does this mean one must have no more tendencies? If that is the intent, then it would seem those with SSA may not be ordained, unless they are clear of it, meaning no tendencies?

I think all of it depends on what the USCCB does with it.
(Check out the FReeper thread, they are geeked about the whole thing)

 

[Brad]

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40889

The document looks very good and just what the Church needs. The reactions back up this assessment:

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40713

“Father Reese: ‘A lot of the ones who abused boys were in fact heterosexual’;”

Really, now?

“psychologist who evaluated prospective seminarians says if followed it could have enormous effect”

Thank God if this means no more heterodoxy and solid father-figure role models.

Critcally important elements of the document:

"The Vatican document instructs bishops and religious superiors to use “painstaking discernment” in appraising the candidates for priestly training. Candidates who are identifiably homosexual are not qualified for ordination, the Vatican says. “In the case of a serious doubt in this respect, they must not admit him to ordination,” the document states.

The Congregation goes on to say: “The negative consequences that may derive from the Ordination of persons with profoundly deep-rooted homosexual tendencies are by no means to by ignored.” "