Here goes another priest who revealed he's gay

[cathgal]

houmatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060108/NEWS/601080323/1026

He counsel people to be honest about their orientation to their family. Does he stop there. Does he ever counsel them to seek help like Courage or live a chaste life or does he encourage them to live it out. Lots of missing info here. Can’t say he’s a good priest where homosexual is concerned. Maybe he’s one more priest who believed homosexuality is not a disorder. O O.

 

[Della]

Okay, I found some things disturbing here. First we’re told:

At 18, Morrison went to a co-ed college in Kansas but switched to a Catholic seminary in Indiana after his first year.

It was then that Morrison said he first became aware of his homosexual orientation. The seminary leads priest candidates through counseling and other programs aimed at self-discovery to ensure each student knows who he is so he can make a firm commitment.

“You can’t develop a relationship with God unless you know yourself,” Morrison said.

Morrison said his self-examination revealed he was gay.

Are most gays really this unaware of their sexual orientation for this long? Don’t most know as children that they are attracted to the same sex? What kind of “counseling” did he get, anyway? I’d be more suspect of the counseling than my sexual orientation if it had taken me so long to know about it.

Secondly, Fr. Morrison describes the ruling that gay priests aren’t to teach at seminaries as: “Those insulting comments are made. There’s no one to challenge that,” he said. “That homosexual priests committed to their vows can’t teach, that makes no sense to me.” Is he implying that there can be no good reason and that this is some form of undeserved persecution? Shouldn’t he look into why this ruling was made before making such a statement?

And thirdly, his encouraging young people to be “honest” about their sexual orientation. How many priests feel they have to do this kind of counseling? What makes him think he is qualified to do such counseling? If I were a parent in that parish I’d want some answers to these questions.

 

[fix]

In his letter, Morrison said he didn’t reveal his orientation for attention or approval but to be more true to himself, God and those he serves.

“I have come to realize that while I was encouraging others to be honest, I was not putting these words into practice in my own life,” Morrison wrote.

He restated that belief in an interview Friday.

“Not following my own advice,” he said, “caused me great concern.”

Morrison is not only a priest but also a public figure. He has spent much of his more than 18 years as a priest leading churches in Terrebonne Parish. He was pastor of Annunziata Church in Houma for 11 years, St. Bernadette Church in Houma for three years, St. Joseph Church in Chauvin for three years, and director of vocations and seminarians for the Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux.

 

[Forest-Pine]

Della:

Secondly, Fr. Morrison describes the ruling that gay priests aren’t to teach at seminaries as: “Those insulting comments are made. There’s no one to challenge that,” he said. “That homosexual priests committed to their vows can’t teach, that makes no sense to me.” Is he implying that there can be no good reason and that this is some form of undeserved persecution? Shouldn’t he look into why this ruling was made before making such a statement?

It doesn’t make any sense to me, either. The problem is those priests who AREN’T commited to their vows. Priests do not stop being heterosexual or homosexual upon ordination. They must have a right-thinking with their sexuality in proper perspective and must be able to conform their actions to their will and their will to the church’s teachings. Those who can do this are an asset to the priesthood–whether their sexuality is homosexual or heterosexual either one.

And thirdly, his encouraging young people to be “honest” about their sexual orientation. How many priests feel they have to do this kind of counseling? What makes him think he is qualified to do such counseling? If I were a parent in that parish I’d want some answers to these questions.

I think a large part of a priest’s job consists of counselling others in the way they should act, including in matters of sexuality. The question isn’t if he is counselling them to be honest–which of course they should be–but if he is using his position of authority to push an agenda of making teens think they might be gay or if they are that they could act upon those feelings. However, from the scant “evidence” we have about his own decision (which seems to be to act in accordance with the church’s teaching on celibacy), I would presume that he is using his authority and his experiences to be a positive moral influence, teaching honesty and celibacy. If those people who are gay are open about it AND act in accordance with church teaching concerning celibacy, it will go a LONG way to bring about societal respect for the homosexual individual as well as for the church’s teachings on celibacy.

He seems to be open and transparent in what he is doing, and there is no indication that he is going against church teaching. If this is accurate, then this is a wonderful example to other gay men and gay priests on how to be homosexual, celibate, under church teaching, and respected. Perhaps others will take note!

 

[fix]

Della:

Secondly, Fr. Morrison describes the ruling that gay priests aren’t to teach at seminaries as: “Those insulting comments are made. There’s no one to challenge that,” he said. “That homosexual priests committed to their vows can’t teach, that makes no sense to me.” Is he implying that there can be no good reason and that this is some form of undeserved persecution? Shouldn’t he look into why this ruling was made before making such a statement?

Yes, they should and they should obey the directive.

A part of the Vatican’s instruction on banning homosexuals from Catholic seminaries that did not gain widespread media attention was a covering letter accompanying it that specified that “gay” men must not be allowed to be seminary rectors or professors. Signed by Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, prefect of the education congregation, and Archbishop J. Michael Miller, the congregation’s secretary, the letter specified that the instructions “must be adhered to faithfully,” a stipulation expected to rankle among North American and European bishops who have long been accustomed to a creative interpretation of obedience to Rome…

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/dec/05120203.html

 

[buffalo]

It is beyond me why a chaste homosexual priest (or person) has to reveal his struggle to anyone.

 

[fix]

buffalo:

It is beyond me why a chaste homosexual priest (or person) has to reveal his struggle to anyone.

My question as well. Perhaps it is part of the Oprah generation where every single personal issue must be aired to gain “closure” or “healing”. In less fancy times it was called scandal.

 

[Forest-Pine]

buffalo:

It is beyond me why a chaste homosexual priest (or person) has to reveal his struggle to anyone.

I would say in ordinary circumstances that I agree totally. However, I think the extreme amount of focus “bad” gay priests are getting right now would make a “good” SSA priest want to be vocal as a means of showing that there is a way of handling the situation that is right and good. This would be directed both towards other homosexual men who might be struggling for a way to go (and only seeing examples like this) and for the average parishioner who is only seeing bad fruit displayed in the media and might come to the conclusion that “homosexual” and “priest” or “homosexual” and “celibate” are oxymorons.

 

[cathgal]

He’s celibate cuz he’s a priest. At least he’s sticking to his vow. But who knows what he thinks if one is not a priest. We still don’t know what he thinks about homosexuality, disorder or not. That’s why Vatican is so prudent about homosexual priests teaching at seminaries. The parents of those kids he counseled should check up on what kind of counseling he gives if they haven’t already.

 

[fix]

Forest-Pine:

I would say in ordinary circumstances that I agree totally. However, I think the extreme amount of focus “bad” gay priests are getting right now would make a “good” SSA priest want to be vocal as a means of showing that there is a way of handling the situation that is right and good. This would be directed both towards other homosexual men who might be struggling for a way to go (and only seeing examples like this) and for the average parishioner who is only seeing bad fruit displayed in the media and might come to the conclusion that “homosexual” and “priest” or “homosexual” and “celibate” are oxymorons.

If the article is accurate the priest himself uses the term “gay” and openly criticizes the new Vatican directive, or at least questions it. Is that the type of message a good “gay” priest delivers to his people?

 

[Della]

cathgal:

He’s celibate cuz he’s a priest. At least he’s sticking to his vow. But who knows what he thinks if one is not a priest. We still don’t know what he thinks about homosexuality, disorder or not. That’s why Vatican is so prudent about homosexual priests teaching at seminaries. The parents of those kids he counseled should check up on what kind of counseling he gives if they haven’t already.

I agree.

 

[Angels_Watchin]

ANOTHER homosexual priest comes out to his congregation this week,(Louisiana) is supported by his bishop (Samuel Jacobs); is the **PASTOR **at his church; is working at a local college with students; AND WAS A VOCATIONS DIRECTOR in the diocese.
Portion of the article below.

"he does not plan to resign, he said.

Nor is he being asked to, said Louis Aguirre, spokesman for the Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux.

"He’s not being asked to do anything but to continue his ministry," Aguirre said.

In a written statement Saturday, Bishop Sam G. Jacobs said the Roman Catholic Church makes a clear distinction between homosexual actions and orientation.

The Vatican’s statement says homosexual acts are intrinsically immoral, but people don’t choose their sexual orientation and should not be discriminated against because of it, the bishop wrote. And, he wrote, people should be judged by their acts.

Morrison, a priest for more than 18 years, has been pastor of St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Church at NichollsStateUniversity for more than three. Students often drop by to chat, drawn by his warmth and wit.

*He has led three other churches in Houma and Chauvin, and has been director of vocations and seminarians for the Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux. He also helped found a school for at-risk Terrebonne youths and creating a benefit race to support that school. *

the 2 page article is at

---

Angel*

 

[Angels_Watchin]

*In response to Bishop Jacobs’ obvious misinformation in the newspaper article, *

***PLEASE call **Spokesman for the Diocese, Louis Aguirre at 985-850-3132 and **Bishop Samuel Jacobs at 985-850-3124 and persist in requests for the bishop’s public correction of, “Vatican’s statement says that…people don’t choose their sexual orientation”.That is simply not true. There is NO statement from the Vatican that states that. ***
**
*#2358 in the APPROVED (dated 1997) Catechism states
***2358 ***The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

“they do not choose” was never approved and was completely obliterated in 1997, over 8 YEARS AGO.

---

*And contact *
*Vicar for Priests
*Msgr. Francis J. Legendre, (985) 632-3858 and *

***Coordinator for Clergy and Religious, ***Rev. Jay L. Baker, *
*(985) 850-3122 *
**
and request that Fr. Morrison be removed from ALL positions ministering to children and young adults, including the seminary.

**
God help us,
Angel

 

[cathgal]

fix:

If the article is accurate the priest himself uses the term “gay” and openly criticizes the new Vatican directive, or at least questions it. Is that the type of message a good “gay” priest delivers to his people?

You’re right. A good priest does not go against Christ or His Church. If he disagree, he should keep it to himself and seek to understand. That’s what humility is all about.

 

[Forest-Pine]

fix:

If the article is accurate the priest himself uses the term “gay” and openly criticizes the new Vatican directive, or at least questions it. Is that the type of message a good “gay” priest delivers to his people?

I don’t see it. He said that those who have SSA should be honest with their loved ones. Not that they should attend Gay Pride parades. He said he decided in October (well before this document came out) to do the same by telling his parish family. He wants them to know him and still respect him. To see that there is a way of being “homosexual” and still being in full communion with the church. Again, I see nothing wrong.

He fully supports the recent Vatican document as he does not identify himself as “gay,” considering his homosexuality a moot point as his vow of celibacy comes first. His only problem is if he, someone who has done everything correctly and by the book, will be unjustly punished by being removed from his teaching position. I contend that this is the type of priest we need in such positions. Ones who put the CHURCH first.

I see here a tendency to jump all over him and assume he is trying to change or attack the church simply because he is publicaly identified as homosexual. In him, I see a desire to fully live out his calling to the priesthood and fully submit himself to church teaching. I simply don’t understand what the problem is.

It is a little different to write a letter to your parishioners which, among other things, mentions one’s SSA in a way that will bolster his standing among others afflicted with this problem than it is to give a flaming coming out speech during a homily. He told those he counselled to face those they love and to embrace church teaching. I’m sure he heard plenty of times that it was “easy” for him to say behind that white collar as no one would ever question him and he’d never “understand” their struggle. I’m sure he’s been pained by the errant actions of priests who proclaim their desires for “gay lovers” from the pulpit doubly more than we are–as they are blemishing the reputation of the priesthood AND of those with SSA who adhere to the church’s teachings.

I don’t see the problem here.

 

[Forest-Pine]

cathgal:

You’re right. A good priest does not go against Christ or His Church. If he disagree, he should keep it to himself and seek to understand. That’s what humility is all about.

Since when can one not have a respectful and honest opinion? It is not dogmatic that those who have SSA cannot teach in a seminary. He is completely within his rights to disagree on this issue. The true marker is if he respectfully follows the rule while he works to change it. We’ll see what happens…

 

[Angels_Watchin]

Check out the other post on this subject (posted today, also). I did a search for this info before I got started with the new thread, but it took me so long to get the links and quotes, you guys had been talking for 30 minutes before I hit ‘submit thread’!

The other one has names and numbers to call.

God Bless,
Angel

 

[felra]

Article excerpt: http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=4334358

**

Popular priest tells parish he’s gay, but celibate

**

THIBODAUX, La. (AP) - Deciding he had to practice the honesty he preached, a popular priest has told his family, his bishop and the people in his parish that he is gay.

Why pray Lord does this priest feel compelled to go public with declaring his [psychosexual] identity as a “gay”? The term “gay” is all but politically and lifestyle advocacy charged, that the priest is declaring more than his struggle and affliction with same sex attraction. The good bishop needs to realize that this incurs the sin of scandal to the flock entrusted to this priests care.

 

[fix]

Forest-Pine:

I don’t see it. He said that those who have SSA should be honest with their loved ones. Not that they should attend Gay Pride parades. He said he decided in October (well before this document came out) to do the same by telling his parish family. He wants them to know him and still respect him. To see that there is a way of being “homosexual” and still being in full communion with the church. Again, I see nothing wrong.

He fully supports the recent Vatican document as he does not identify himself as “gay,” considering his homosexuality a moot point as his vow of celibacy comes first. His only problem is if he, someone who has done everything correctly and by the book, will be unjustly punished by being removed from his teaching position. I contend that this is the type of priest we need in such positions. Ones who put the CHURCH first.

I see here a tendency to jump all over him and assume he is trying to change or attack the church simply because he is publicaly identified as homosexual. In him, I see a desire to fully live out his calling to the priesthood and fully submit himself to church teaching. I simply don’t understand what the problem is.

It is a little different to write a letter to your parishioners which, among other things, mentions one’s SSA in a way that will bolster his standing among others afflicted with this problem than it is to give a flaming coming out speech during a homily. He told those he counselled to face those they love and to embrace church teaching. I’m sure he heard plenty of times that it was “easy” for him to say behind that white collar as no one would ever question him and he’d never “understand” their struggle. I’m sure he’s been pained by the errant actions of priests who proclaim their desires for “gay lovers” from the pulpit doubly more than we are–as they are blemishing the reputation of the priesthood AND of those with SSA who adhere to the church’s teachings.

I don’t see the problem here.

All I know of the case I read as follows:

…Morrison said his self-examination revealed he was gay…

Morrison said he is not bothered by those regulations as much as instructions he said the Vatican issued with the document that bar gay priests, even those who remain faithful to their vows of celibacy, from teaching at seminaries…

Morrison said he would heartily agree if the Vatican had chosen to exclude from seminary teaching anyone who had broken a vow of celibacy, both homosexual and heterosexual. But to single out homosexual priests for the rule was “very insulting” and cause for concern, he said…

“It seemed they were concerned about the number of gay candidates pursuing the priesthood,” said Morrison. “It was offensive.”

Does this sound like a priest humbly submitting to the authority of Rome?

The quote shows he uses the term “gay”. I have not read his letter, perhaps he does not use the popular term.

 

[Forest-Pine]

I disagree. This priest does not identify with the gay culture and has consistently lived out his celibate calling to the priesthood. He fully accepts the recent Vatican document and welcomes it. His only concern is the cover letter which states that any priest with SSA cannot be in any type of teaching position. As a celibate priest who has willfully and respectfully placed himself under the authority of the church, he does not understand why he should be punished by having his teaching positions taken away. Whenever he counselled those with SSA, it appears he counselled them to be honest and to submit to the church’s authority. He has consistently lived that out in his own life as well.

Why in the world would you call for such a person who is dedicated to the church’s teachings to be removed from all ministerial positions?! This is the type of man we need in the priesthood! One who submits to church authority and bears his cross with humility and respect!

His questioning the cover letter ruling is not heretical. The real issue is if he will submit himself to the ruling while working to have it changed. There is no current evidence that this is not the case.

This is already being discussed here.