In coming out as gay, Catholic priest sparks debate about church stance

[OriginalJS]

The book should make enough to support him. Any publicity should boost sales.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

This writer’s reaction is certainly not tepid, but I can’t say I disagree.

No Longer Anonymous: Why I Decided to Come Out as a Gay Priest

patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2013/05/no-longer-anonymous-why-i-decided-to-come-out-as-a-gay-priest.html

 

[Elizabeth502]

Thanks for the link, Grace.

Among the many aspects of the Comments section which interested me were the many misunderstandings of the phrase “deep-seated homosexual tendencies.”

But underpinning all of the objections, whether commenters below the article, or the priest who is the subject of this thread, or those modernist Catholics who have been thoroughly secularized in their understanding of morality, is the refusal to acknowledge the Magisterium as the seat of absolute and binding moral authority. Why any man would enter the Roman Catholic priesthood not fully embracing this essential fact of Catholicism is beyond me. (Or why a woman who wished to challenge the Church on this or similar matters would enter Religious life.)

And as I said on the ‘Kentucky Woman’ thread, it boils down to a lack of assent to the Church being Christ’s voice. You can only believe you are in a position to challenge the Magisterium if you believe that the Spirit does not authoritatively speak through Christ’s Church in matters of faith and morals. (Or, if you believe that God does definitively speak through the Church, but that He is sometimes wrong, which is flat-out heresy and blasphemy, both.)

 

[natashapa]

Someone commented earlier that 2/3 or 3/4 of married men commit adultery. I don’t think it’s that high, but there’s probably some study done somewhere that came up with those numbers. Or like a lot of studies or polls, it is based on a small sample and is meant to justify some type of objectionable behavior.

I was the one that stated that quote. Whether or not it is accurate, given the number of divorces in the US, I would guess the number is certainly not a small percentage. I have been married 25 years, and my husband and I took our vows quite seriously. My point is that I suspect some people weaken. Holy Orders require a lifetime of chastity, something I think many people fear they would not be able to do. I am not attempting to justify anything or anyone; I’m praying that anyone who has chosen be given strength to help them follow their vows, whether it is marriage or Holy Orders.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I was the one that stated that quote. Whether or not it is accurate, given the number of divorces in the US, I would guess the number is certainly not a small percentage. I have been married 25 years, and my husband and I took our vows quite seriously. My point is that I suspect some people weaken. Holy Orders require a lifetime of chastity, something I think many people fear they would not be able to do. I am not attempting to justify anything or anyone; I’m praying that anyone who has chosen be given strength to help them follow their vows, whether it is marriage or Holy Orders.

Indeed. Well stated. And we should all forgive ourselves and others when we do weaken! (Usually that’s “when,” not “if,” and I don’t just mean in sexual matters, of course, but when we weaken in our obligations in marriage, parenthood, profession, friendship, citizenship. )

The difference is, when we weaken, it is not the Church that should weaken with us, let alone be obligated to weaken with us and berated until it (never) does. When one discovers, however suddenly and surprisingly, that he/she is not suited to priesthood or Religious Life, or is choosing consciously to forego the help of grace because the other looks too attractive, it is offensive to devise theological rationalizations as to why…

(a) adultery should be OK because marriage vows are ‘too difficult to keep’
(b) fornication should be OK because ‘it’s too long to wait until marriage’
(c) it should be OK to abandon one’s parental responsibilities because the adolescent years can be trying, or because one of your children is (mentally ill, disabled, fill-in-the blank), and in those cases parenting requires special courage and patience
(d) heterosexual activity should be OK in the priesthood or religious life because “sexuality is fundamental to humanity” (or, I’ll be an unhappy priest/religious if I don’t have sex, and that won’t be good to those I serve)
(e) homosexual activity should be OK in the priesthood or religious life because (see reasons in (d) )

Such normal, fallen people ^ should stop persecuting the hierarchy of the Church for not conforming itself to the “requirements” of carnal desires and comforts.

 

[SaintFrancis333]

@Tim Watt…

Maybe he thought that by becoming a priest he could handle the chastity issue and then later on he discovered that it was more powerful than he realized.
I would doubt that he went thru all that education and training just to deny the teachings of his chosen profession.
He can continue to be a priest but now he should join the Episcopal church because I don’t think that he will ever be happy as a Roman Catholic.

Episcopals don’t have priests. They do not have valid ordinations. If he were to go into any non Catholic community and attempt to be a minster, he would be sinning mortally. Especially if it was a community that has “communion” since it is only symbolic. Him knowing of the Real Presence and then denying it, or participating in it, would be condemning to him should he not find repentance later in life.

 

[LtTony]

Aren’t all priest to be chaste? Why would it matter as long as any priest is living a chaste vocation. Why is it different for any other priest that may struggle with an attraction to a woman or women.

Agree.

It matters since the priest scandal. They discovered that most of the abusers abused those who were over 12 - so homosexual - as opposed to those under 12 - Pedophilia. I don’t know who picked up on the age of 12 but that is a concern anyway. Chastity/celebacy covers it all, but with abusers it becomes even more important.

Pedophilia, ephebophilia and hebephilia are all very differnt abnormal sexual preferences that are not - in clinical terms - always related to homosexuality. Does the media paint the that picture? Absolutely. Is is accurace? Absolutely not. It is one way to justifiy the devient behavior. Are some of those charged with this homosexuals - we all know that anser to that. Can it be blamed on that? NO. It is based on sexual preference - not sexual orientation.

A disproportionate number of homsexuals practice the preferences you mentioned. The MSM ignores it; the church brought up this inclination, it would be further attacked as a scapegoating homophobic organization.
At least that’s how I see it. I could be wrong.

 

[PaulinVA]

One is not gay unless they are actively living the homosexual lifestyle. Having attraction to members of the same gender, does not make one homosexual. Engaging in relationships does. This Priest is a prime example of the crosses many people carry. I sympathize with his cross but am ashamed by his selfish and unholy actions of defaming the Church. God have mercy on his soul.

I’m not sure I agree with that premise. If gay ==homosexual, then having Same Sex Attraction is the same as being homosexual or gay. You are either homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, or asexual. A young man who is in seminary and is, or could be, attracted to women is a heterosexual. A young man you is in seminary and attracted to men is homosexual. One is not asexual until one engages in sexual activity.

The problem is that there is a “gay culture” that gay people seem to gravitate to. It’s as if you have to actively enter “the fight” to validly be gay. Doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[DrTaffy]

I was the one that stated that quote. Whether or not it is accurate, given the number of divorces in the US, I would guess the number is certainly not a small percentage.

I’m not sure about the figure you quoted, but a figure of roughly 10% used to be quoted as average for false paternity, that is someone who turns out not to be fathered by the person they thought was their father. The number of women who cheated would presumably be higher than the number who actually got pregnant while doing so.

See this article for a bunch of figures and references. This article suggests the 10% figure is way too high, suggesting 3.7% instead.

 

[Margy1948]

Episcopals don’t have priests. They do not have valid ordinations. If he were to go into any non Catholic community and attempt to be a minster, he would be sinning mortally. Especially if it was a community that has “communion” since it is only symbolic. Him knowing of the Real Presence and then denying it, or participating in it, would be condemning to him should he not find repentance later in life.

He’s already committing a mortal sin according to Catholicism, at least he would have a supportive community and one he agrees with…as it is, all he’s trying to do is to ‘get his name in the newspapers’ as my mom used to say.
This man is doing nothing new, the Gay priest issue has been hashed and rehashed, quite frankly, he should either shut up or leave…and we should stop giving him free publicity. That includes me.

 

[ricofall]

The bishops were instructed in 2005 not to ordain homosexual men because it is too risky. I have seen and read things that lead me to believe that some bishops ignore this instruction, but I will link it below if you’re interested. I think it makes sense. I believe many bishops do not understand the instruction and think it is too harsh. Like most people, because of the pro-homosexual propaganda we are constantly bombarded with in our culture, they probably do not realize that homosexuality is a relational and often a gender-identity problem, not simply a sexual problem.

"In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, 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 practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”.

“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.”
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

Thank you for the update. I have not hear that until now.

 

[olvick]

Nowhere in the Bible, the Catechism, in official Vatican documents, or pronouncements by the Papacy have I ever read, seen, or heard anything anti-gay. These sources of Catholic teaching speak to the sinfulness of sex outside of marriage ( and some within that union) in all its forms, and it’s pretty simple, be chaste and love one another.

When I hear a Catholic criticize the Church for its stance against a particular sin that is popular, but inherently evil (fornication, contraception and abortion for example), I get hacked! They aren’t being Catholic. If you claim Catholicism embrace it in its wholeness!

All priests are to remain celibate. I think a homosexual man can control his impulses as well as heterosexual man. If one gives into the temptation of sex as an event.He can reconcile it in the confessional, take command of himself, and avoid all sources of temptation. If he gives into it as a lifestyle, then he needs to step back from the priesthood for a period of discernment, either by consent or rebuke.

Any person, lay or priest, who espouses and publicly supports anti-Catholic teachings of faith and morals should be held accountable, and I do not applaud that guy Meiers, for coming out and supporting a gay agenda in any form.

He does need prayers, and I sincerely hope he reconciles with the faith and his vocation. He deserves that. I am sure in other ways he has served his parishoners well from some of the comments I’ve read

 

[FAB]

It matters since the priest scandal. They discovered that most of the abusers abused those who were over 12 - so homosexual - as opposed to those under 12 - Pedophilia. I don’t know who picked up on the age of 12 but that is a concern anyway. Chastity/celebacy covers it all, but with abusers it becomes even more important.

Two issues with this.
One the pecentage of priest in the entire scandle was only about 1%, very small numbers.
Second, the vast majority of child sex peditors are hetersexual and no homosexual, so there is an issue to think that the numbers would be different amoung priest.

 

[livingwordunity]

While I disagree with the priest and think he is … well, misguided I guess, I have to admire his honesty.

There is nothing admirable about causing scandal. The ones who struggle with the disorder of SSA and admit that homosexual behavior is a sin are the ones that will be forgiven. There is no reason for someone to broadcast their sins to try to get public approval. Jesus has a very strong warning about scandal. “but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the man by whom the temptation comes!” - Matthew 18:6-7

 

[Glad2behome]

It is my understanding that it is ok for a priest to have SSA and struggle with it. It’s when he becomes part of the gay lifestyle that it becomes an issue.

I believe that he took a leave and try to reconcile what he wanted to be true and what the church teaches. He could not. I will say at least he is honest about it. Perhaps he will become closer to god down the road. We can only pray.

I do applaud him coming out and admitting the truth. I do not approve of this attack on the Church though. The Church has stood its ground on homesexuality lifestyles since the beginning. He can go to another denomination that meets his requirements for his truths. I only pray that he finds his way home. After all, we all have crosses to bear.

 

[Glad2behome]

There is nothing admirable about causing scandal. The ones who struggle with the disorder of SSA and admit that homosexual behavior is a sin are the ones that will be forgiven. There is no reason for someone to broadcast their sins to try to get public approval. Jesus has a very strong warning about scandal. “but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the man by whom the temptation comes!” - Matthew 18:6-7

As I understand, having SSA alone is not a sin, it’s acting on them.

 

[Glad2behome]

Just as when a heterosexual priest becomes part of the heterosexual lifestyle, it becomes an issue. You say No to ALL sex when you decide to enter the priesthood. Sjpeaking about the priest now…this is what is so contradictory about “not agreeing with what the Church teaches.” Millions of lay heterosexual Catholics never find their true mate, or are divorced, never granted an annulment. They are also bound by the same requirement to refrain from sexual activity. Yet I never hear a groundswell of complaint or “disagreement” from Catholics about how “unfair” it is that fornication and adultery are forbidden. It is only a crisis that homosexuals are told they can’t have sex. And somehow, not the individual, but the Church must “change” regarding that.

If you want sex outside of a valid heterosexual marriage, do not become a priest (celibacy is still mandatory at the moment, for priests), whatever your orientation. Because once you enter the priesthood – even if celibacy is later relaxed – it will never be relaxed for the already ordained. The option of the priesthood may eventually be instated for men who are already married.

Why is this a surprise to this priest?

And thankfully, the newer seminary programs/procedures now include an in-depth examination as to the candidate’s sexuality prior to acceptance into the priesthood.* If you are attached to sex of any kind, do not become a priest: this was never news, nor is it now.*

I think this priest shows the same double-message that many lay Catholics also have regarding hetero- and homo- sexuality. Somehow, the Church should ease restrictions on homosexuals, but not on unmarried heterosexuals. When you ask them why, you get emotional reasons and a bunch of illogic.

Well, If this Priest was acting on his SSA, then he most rethink his vocation, but we have to say according to statistics(and I HATE using statistics) 99% of persons have some sort of sexual attraction, only 1% are “Asexual”, meaning they don’t have any sort of sexual attraction.

Anyway, if one struggles with lust, then they most try to overcome them, especially if they have holy orders!

 

[KnightVigilant]

Nowhere in the Bible, the Catechism, in official Vatican documents, or pronouncements by the Papacy have I ever read, seen, or heard anything anti-gay. These sources of Catholic teaching speak to the sinfulness of sex outside of marriage ( and some within that union) in all its forms, and it’s pretty simple, be chaste and love one another.

You need to do more research.

Pope St. Pius V concerning sodomites:

"That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were destroyed by fire through divine condemnation, causes us most bitter sorrow and shocks our mind, impelling us to repress such a crime with the greatest possible zeal.

Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: “Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature, given that the wrath of God falls over the sons of perfidy, be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery” (chap. 4, X, V, 31).

So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.

Therefore, wishing to pursue with greater rigor than we have exerted since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss."

traditioninaction.org/religious/n009rp_HomosexualPriests.htm