Latest: Details emerging on Vatican gay-seminarian ban

[contemplative]

**
****Details emerging on Vatican gay-seminarian ban ****
Rome, Nov. 11 (CWNews.com) - According to the latest in a series of press reports, an eagerly awaited Vatican document will bar homosexuals from the priesthood and seminary training, but the ban will be absolute only for those whose homosexual tendencies are “deeply rooted.”

Although the document says that homosexuals should always be treated with respect, and warns against any form of illicit discrimination against gay men, it also reiterates the Church teaching that homosexual tendencies are a serious objective disorder. The document stresses that there is no “right” to ordination, and the Church must select the men best able to carry out the priestly ministry.
**

Read more

 

[Catholic29]

If the document is finished and is in final draft form, I say release the darn thing, I see no point in delaying it any longer.

And the sooner it is released the sooner these dissidents will realise that same-sex relations are NOT of our Catholic tradition nor are they God approved. Of course this is all spelled out in Scripture (Genesis 19: 1-29, Romans 1: 24-32, 1 Cor 6: 9-10 and 1 Tim 1: 10) and also the Catechism (2357), but they choose the claims of secular science and their “feelings” over the Truth or else they were never taught. They need our prayers…

Summit decries gay marriage
Pastors and ministers pushed for a proposed gay-marriage ban despite an anonymous bomb threat.
startribune.com/images/ne2/170584.d.jpg

Kathleen Olsen, who is a consociate of the Sisters of St. Joseph Carondelet of Minneapolis, leads more than 75 protesters in song. The group was protesting the Minnesota Pastors Summit at Grace Church in Eden Prairie, which is promoting a state constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage. Richard Sennott

Read article: startribune.com/stories/462/5720160.html

 

[Evangel]

Catholic29:

If the document is finished and is in final draft form, I say release the darn thing, I see no point in delaying it any longer.

It may very well be a translation issue. The source (Latin?) document is drafted, circulated, debated, tweaked (and leaked, apparently).

Once that document is finalized/approved, it would go to translation into major languages. Each translation would then have to be verified/approved as accurate. (One can easily imagine a slight mistranslation error causing havoc among the faithful for years).

Given the corrective nature of this document, I’m perfectly willing to endure delays if it means getting it right on all counts.

 

[Catholic29]

Evangel:

It may very well be a translation issue. The source (Latin?) document is drafted, circulated, debated, tweaked (and leaked, apparently).

Once that document is finalized/approved, it would go to translation into major languages. Each translation would then have to be verified/approved as accurate. (One can easily imagine a slight mistranslation error causing havoc among the faithful for years).

Given the corrective nature of this document, I’m perfectly willing to endure delays if it means getting it right on all counts.

Good point,

But I wonder how long that process could take, if that is in fact the issue?

I just hope the delay has nothing to do with Vatican officials or Benedict XVI having second thoughts about its content, bowing to pressure from bishops and religious superiors to water it down.

Just as this guy was once a religious superior, but thank God not anymore: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=84548

 

[Evangel]

Catholic29:

I just hope the delay has nothing to do with Vatican officials or Benedict XVI having second thoughts about its content, bowing to pressure from bishops and religious superiors to water it down.

I have faith in Pope Benedict.

 

[m134e5]

Catholic29:

And the sooner it is released the sooner these dissidents will realise that same-sex relations are NOT of our Catholic tradition nor are they God approved. Of course this is all spelled out in Scripture (Genesis 19: 1-29, Romans 1: 24-32, 1 Cor 6: 9-10 and 1 Tim 1: 10) and also the Catechism (2357), but they choose the claims of secular science and their “feelings” over the Truth or else they were never taught. They need our prayers…

People do not need a document to know they shouldn’t become a priest if they’re going to be an active homosexual!!! It’s pretty much a given. Those who would be active homosexuals and priests at the same time “couldn’t care less about what some cardinals halfway around the world think about what they do”. (I mean no disrespect for the clergy here- these are not my feelings- I am simply illustrating the feelings of those who think you can be actively gay and a practicing Catholic) No one seems to understand that there is a difference here. They lump those who want to be chaste in with those who don’t care about chastity (and do not care about the Church). What about those who are chaste (this clearly is not what is meant by this post- because those who are chaste have not “chosen the claims of secular science and their “feelings” over the Truth”.

I wonder how they will define deep-rooted tendencies. Many guys have thoughts about, or experiment with other guys just because hormone levels are off the charts and things that would normally be disgusting may not be for the time being- it isn’t uncommon for this to last as late as their late 20’s.

 

[Catholic29]

Evangel:

I have faith in Pope Benedict.

Me too.

 

[Riley259]

Here’s an article about this topic from the Boston Globe. The article seems to suggest that men with strong homosexual tendencies, practicing homosexuals and those that support the gay culture and causes will be automatically barred from the priesthood. Those who have had “transitional” homosexual tendencies in adolescence would at minimum had to have been chaste (and I assume have moved past those immature tendencies to an authentic heterosexual maturity) for three years prior to becoming a deacon. These criteria appear to be more stringent than the initial reports in the paper and on this forum. Not surprising, however, the *Globe *article solicits comments from two progressives, Steven Pope, a Boston College liberal theologian (who by the way is goods friends with the infamous Rev. Walter Cuenin, a strong supporter of gay rights) and Brad Luna, a spokesman from the Human Rights Campaign, which is a gay advocacy group - no comments were solicited by known faithful, orthodox Catholics in the Boston area which is par for the course in this town.

boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2005/11/12/vatican_policy_on_priests_said_to_prohibit_gays/

 

[Skotnicki]

If the article accurately reflects the decision of the pope and the council for education, then that is a slam-dunk victory for the faithful moderate Catholics in favour of ordaning men with SSA.

The restrictions were obvious:

-Don’t ordain men with strong homosexual tendencies (no ‘flamers’) just like we don’t ordain men with extreme sexual attractions to women. This one will be difficult to control as the definition of “deep rooted” is ambiguous.
-Don’t ordain the unchaste (this is the same as for heterosexuals) and ALL candidates must display an ability to live a chaste lifestyle, homosexual or heterosexual.
-Don’t ordain those who espouse the validity of the homosexual lifestyle (this is the same with heterosexual men though, who are not/should not be ordained if they give such vocal support to ethical views widely outside Catholic mainstream).

It would seem that the pope has sided with psychology and reason rather than right-wing homophobic hysteria.

 

[St.BJLabre]

Skotnicki:

If the article accurately reflects the decision of the pope and the council for education, then that is a slam-dunk victory for the faithful moderate Catholics in favour of ordaning men with SSA.

The restrictions were obvious:

-Don’t ordain men with strong homosexual tendencies (no ‘flamers’) just like we don’t ordain men with extreme sexual attractions to women. This one will be difficult to control as the definition of “deep rooted” is ambiguous.
-Don’t ordain the unchaste (this is the same as for heterosexuals) and ALL candidates must display an ability to live a chaste lifestyle, homosexual or heterosexual.
-Don’t ordain those who espouse the validity of the homosexual lifestyle (this is the same with heterosexual men though, who are not/should not be ordained if they give such vocal support to ethical views widely outside Catholic mainstream).

It would seem that the pope has sided with psychology and reason rather than right-wing homophobic hysteria.

I couldn’t have said it better myself. I, myself, am a young man who has dealt with same sex attractions throughout my life and is seriously considering the priesthood. I have always been (with the exception of a few slipups with a former girlfriend) chaste and I plan on remaining that way. I do not dissent from Church teachings at all. I have practiced celibacy and have had a great deal of success, even in all male environments (I attended an all male high school). While I agree that the Church needs to be much more careful when ordaining men with same sex attractions, a blanket ban on homosexuals would fly directly in the face of our own Catechism. We are simulations telling men with same sex attractions that they can be celibate, but they can’t be priests because, well, we aren’t confident that they can be celibate. It doesn’t make any sense. People talk about putting a fox in a chicken coop (which is offensive because it makes people who have suffered with same sex attractions sound like terrible people who can’t be trusted), but priests work with women much more than they work with men (women tend to be much more involved in parish ministry). Are we then to bar straight men from the priesthood? The real questions are: does this man agree with all the Church’s teachings? Does this man have the right reasons for entering the priesthood? Can this man live celibately, and has he demonstrated this to be true? If the answer to all of those questions is yes, and the Church still says that men with same sex attractions cannot be ordained, then that is simply discrimination. I pray that the Pope uses common sense and does not give into the reactionary branch of the Church, while still maintaining traditional Catholic teaching. Amen.

St. Benedict Joseph Labre, Beggar of Perpetual Adoration, pray for us!

 

[Skotnicki]

Excellent post BJLabre,

I would like to encourage you to follow and carefully discern your vocation in life and not be disappointed if at certain times your beliefs are contradicted by statements from the papacy. Hopefully logic will prevail, but remember that Aquinas was condemned, Ignatius Loyola was brought before the inquisition, and Louis Marie Olivier Duchesne and Johann Adam Mohler were eventually vindicated in their histories and ecclesiologies.

I have some contacts in various religious orders if you feel that you are called in that direction (rather than the diocesan clergy) and would gladly help answer any questions you might have.

 

[oat_soda]

but they can’t be priests because, well, we aren’t confident that they can be celibate. It doesn’t make any sense. People talk about putting a fox in a chicken coop (which is offensive because it makes people who have suffered with same sex attractions sound like terrible people who can’t be trusted), but priests work with women much more than they work with men (women tend to be much more involved in parish ministry).

i think you miss the point. homosexual inclination is inherently disordered whereas attraction to women is not. Granted, most men have disordered attractions towards women, but, homosexuality is more disordered. nobody has the right to be a priest; it is a privilege that no one deserves.

the church has the responsibility to choose the very best candidates to the priesthood. therefore, those who have a serious impediments to becoming a priest, which homosexuality is one of them, should not be admitted. It is far too important of a role to let less then qualified people in.

plus, by the very fact that most homosexuals act effeminate, they will further push away many young vocations and may not be effective leaders.

you must accept the fact, that all of us are fallen and are need of redemption in Christ. homosexuality can never be tolerated or accepted because no one ontologically is born that way.

not be disappointed if at certain times your beliefs are contradicted by statements from the papacy.

i would say that to be catholic is to be in union with the pope. listen to the pope, he knows more then we do.

 

[tatiana27]

[QUOTECatholic29]If the document is finished and is in final draft form, I say release the darn thing, I see no point in delaying it any longer.

Maybe they’re waiting for the American Bishops to be closed in all together in one place, at one time, before it’s sprung upon them – that way there’s more control over any possible negative reactions on the hierarchical front. . . the Bishops are meeting VERRRY soon. . .

 

[St.BJLabre]

i think you miss the point. homosexual inclination is inherently disordered whereas attraction to women is not. Granted, most men have disordered attractions towards women, but, homosexuality is more disordered. nobody has the right to be a priest; it is a privilege that no one deserves.

the church has the responsibility to choose the very best candidates to the priesthood. therefore, those who have a serious impediments to becoming a priest, which homosexuality is one of them, should not be admitted. It is far too important of a role to let less then qualified people in.

plus, by the very fact that most homosexuals act effeminate, they will further push away many young vocations and may not be effective leaders.

you must accept the fact, that all of us are fallen and are need of redemption in Christ. homosexuality can never be tolerated or accepted because no one ontologically is born that way.

I agree with you on most of what you said. There is no right to ordination and the Church should select the best candidates. I agree that homosexual acts can never be tolerated and are disordered. I agree that everyone has fallen and is in need of redemption. However to label every man who has ever had homosexual attractions as somehow less worthy of Christ’s priesthood is exactly what turns homosexuals away from the Church in the first place. Would you want to be a part of an organization that says you are less worthy and talks about you like you are somehow subhuman? Of course not, no one would. We need to preach the truth about homosexuality while keeping our language sensitive to those who suffer from it. Trust me, to be a celibate Catholic homosexual is a very heavy cross to carry. Anyway, I don’t think that it is necessarily an insurmountable obstacle to ordination, although it can be. Trust me, I am hardly effeminate. But I can see your point about why such men shouldn’t be ordained. The point is that we need to be more careful in allowing homosexuals in the priesthood, not intolerant. (By the way I do plan on listening to the Pope, if he says under no circumstances can homosexuals be ordained, I will listen. I will accept whatever crosses Christ hands me)

 

[oat_soda]

I agree that homosexual acts can never be tolerated and are disordered.

not just the act but the inclination iteself is disordered. the acts are evil.

However to label every man who has ever had homosexual attractions as somehow less worthy of Christ’s priesthood is exactly what turns homosexuals away from the Church in the first place.

the church will decide on what exactly constitutes “homosexuality”. i don’t think they will turn around candidates just because of a few fleeting disordered sexual thoughts.

if you read any of JPII’s theology of the body, you will see how far all of us are from where we need to be when it comes to our sexuality. it must be redemed in Christ. because our sexuality reflects a cosmic dimention of God’s plan for us, it strikes right at what it means to be human.

the more disordered our sexuality is, the more disordered our whole relationship with God and others will be. this is why it is a serious issue and is not about unjust discrimination against gays.

we need to stop making excuses for our disordered passions and die to ourselfs and share in Christ’s sufferings on the cross. too often homosexuality is treated as if it was a ethnicity or something that is inheriently good or at least neutral morally.

 

[m134e5]

Skotnicki:

It would seem that the pope has sided with psychology and reason rather than right-wing homophobic hysteria.

Let’s hope so.

 

[fix]

Skotnicki:

It would seem that the pope has sided with psychology and reason rather than right-wing homophobic hysteria.

You mean the psychology that understands SSA is a problem to be overcome, not embraced as “diversity”?

 

[snoopy]

St.BJLabre:

I agree with you on most of what you said. There is no right to ordination and the Church should select the best candidates. I agree that homosexual acts can never be tolerated and are disordered. I agree that everyone has fallen and is in need of redemption. However to label every man who has ever had homosexual attractions as somehow less worthy of Christ’s priesthood is exactly what turns homosexuals away from the Church in the first place. Would you want to be a part of an organization that says you are less worthy and talks about you like you are somehow subhuman? Of course not, no one would. We need to preach the truth about homosexuality while keeping our language sensitive to those who suffer from it. Trust me, to be a celibate Catholic homosexual is a very heavy cross to carry. Anyway, I don’t think that it is necessarily an insurmountable obstacle to ordination, although it can be. Trust me, I am hardly effeminate. But I can see your point about why such men shouldn’t be ordained. The point is that we need to be more careful in allowing homosexuals in the priesthood, not intolerant. (By the way I do plan on listening to the Pope, if he says under no circumstances can homosexuals be ordained, I will listen. I will accept whatever crosses Christ hands me)

Your sensitive post stopped me in my tracks. What a holy man you must be. It appears you have thrown away your own ego for the love of God. I would be proud to have you as my priest.

 

[St.BJLabre]

the more disordered our sexuality is, the more disordered our whole relationship with God and others will be.

I’m going to assume that you didn’t mean that in an offensive because to say that somehow my relationship with God is disordered because I have had homosexual inclinations is insane. But, like I said, I agree that sometimes it can affect the way you interact with people in an adverse way, but that is not always the case.

too often homosexuality is treated as if it was a ethnicity or something that is inherently good or at least neutral morally.

Like you said, homosexual acts are sinful and evil, not the inclination. The inclination is something I cannot control, therefore the inclination is morally neutral. I am not sinning because I have those attractions.

I think the biggest difference in the way people who want an outright ban on homosexuals in the priesthood and those who want something short of that is their philosophies on what makes someone suitable for the priesthood. I believe that loving God and being holy is a much more important requirement than being straight. We have undoubtedly had saints who were homosexuals, it is ridiculous to say that somehow those saints were less holy or less worthy or less anything because of something they had no control over. The same goes for priests. Remember, Jesus didn’t pick aristocrats to be his apostles, he wanted the ones no one else wanted…

 

[oat_soda]

I’m going to assume that you didn’t mean that in an offensive because to say that somehow my relationship with God is disordered because I have had homosexual inclinations is insane.

we are all sinners, each and every one of us. and until we are united with God in the beatific vision, our relationship with one another and God is disordered. so don’t take it personally- im as disordered as they get and will spend a long time in purgatory.

We have undoubtedly had saints who were homosexuals, it is ridiculous to say that somehow those saints were less holy or less worthy or less anything because of something they had no control over. The same goes for priests. Remember, Jesus didn’t pick aristocrats to be his apostles, he wanted the ones no one else wanted…

impossible. because they are saints by definition, they are in heaven. they didn’t need to go to purgatory as would anyone who suffers from homosexuality. the inclination to homosexuality is disordered or evil. they may have been at one time of thier life but through the grace of God they would have overcome it in order to be saintly.