Ordaining Priests with SSA

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scout
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Scout

Guest
There has been quite a bit of discussion on this thread, and in other places, about ordaining men with ssa. I asked my own priest about it in an email, and I found his thoughts on the subject extremely wise, insightful and thought-provoking. I would like to share them with you.

“I guess the way I look at it is that the church should ordain
whoever God calls. The real question is then would God call someone whose sexual orientation is homosexual? That is really not for me to say. I think it is obvious that such men have been ordained. If a homosexual orientation is an automatic disqualification for priesthood, then are those who have been ordained validly ordained? If they are, then the orientation
alone is not grounds for disqualification. If they are not, then what about all the baptisms, eucharists, marriages, confessions, etc. they have done? Surely these are invalid sacraments. Do you see the problem? The church must discern who is called and who is not. Perhaps you are right in saying the real question is celibacy…will the person live a celibate and chaste life? That may have more to do with something other than sexual
orientation. There is so much more we need to know before coming to a decision. But the bottom line is, the church should ordain those God calls. The problem is deciding who God calls.”

Any thoughts?

Scout :tiphat:
 
The real problem, which some people dance around, is that SSA is a serious psychological disorder. Viewed in that context, the question should be simply: Does a serious psychological disorder of any kind disqualify a man from the priesthood?

Of course, a man with SSA who does have a vocation may find reparative therapy to be helpful. NARTH has been successful with helping many men overcome SSA. So, if a man with SSA goes through reparative therapy for years and overcomes his problem, is he then qualified to pursue his vocation? Or is the fact that he once had SSA a permanent impediment to the priesthood? I’m afraid wiser minds than mine will have to answer those questions. I’ve heard the Holy See will soon be issuing guidelines for admitting men with SSA to our seminaries. I think it’s prudent to wait and see what Rome has to say about the matter.

And this has nothing to do with declaring the ordinations of homosexual men to be invalid. Obviously they aren’t invalid. If a priest is ordained, he’s a priest, regardless of what sins he may be struggling with.
 
40.png
Scout:
There has been quite a bit of discussion on this thread, and in other places, about ordaining men with ssa. I asked my own priest about it in an email, and I found his thoughts on the subject extremely wise, insightful and thought-provoking. I would like to share them with you.

“I guess the way I look at it is that the church should ordain
whoever God calls. The real question is then would God call someone whose sexual orientation is homosexual? That is really not for me to say. I think it is obvious that such men have been ordained. If a homosexual orientation is an automatic disqualification for priesthood, then are those who have been ordained validly ordained? If they are, then the orientation
alone is not grounds for disqualification. If they are not, then what about all the baptisms, eucharists, marriages, confessions, etc. they have done? Surely these are invalid sacraments. Do you see the problem? The church must discern who is called and who is not. Perhaps you are right in saying the real question is celibacy…will the person live a celibate and chaste life? That may have more to do with something other than sexual
orientation. There is so much more we need to know before coming to a decision. But the bottom line is, the church should ordain those God calls. The problem is deciding who God calls.”

Any thoughts?

Scout :tiphat:
Click to expand...
I think that if the heirarchy feels it is wise to not ordain them, then that is how it should be done. It does not bring into question whether the sacraments are valid because they are not saying that a homosexual is unable to recieve ordination. What they are saying is that it is wise to not ordain them due to recent problems. All sacraments are still valid that are performed by homosexual preists.
 
40.png
Scout:
There has been quite a bit of discussion on this thread,
Click to expand...
I must have missed it as this post is in Post #1…
😃

Since news over the past three weeks has indicated that a new document may be in the works, perhaps it might be best to wait on it, see what it says, why it says it and then discuss it.
 
If a homosexual orientation is an automatic disqualification for priesthood, then are those who have been ordained validly ordained?
Click to expand...
The proposed rule to disqualify gays from the priesthood is a canon, a law of the church. The church, if she wishes, can certainly validly ordain gays, but is presumably just going to choose not to. Just like the church could, if she wished to, validly ordain priests.

None of this has anything to do with the validity of the ordaination of those gays already ordained, much less the validity of their sacraments.
 
SSA is a serious psychological disorder
Click to expand...
I agree. But I make a distinction between serious psychological disorders.

There are many types, the angry, the sad, the manic, the crazy, the violent, etc…

And SSA is a sad disorder.

It is not a compulsion, nor necessarily violent. It is not a disorder that effects their distinction of reality or forces them to do things.

In other words, it is an emotional wound, but they are not insane
 
40.png
batteddy:
it is an emotional wound, but they are not insane
Click to expand...
Well said. I think one of the biggest problems the Church faces is that on this relatively short thread, faithful Catholics referred to “SSA” or Same Sex Attraction, “homosexual orientation,” and “gays” in a relatively synonymous way. I suggest that these are all very different things. “Homosexual orientation” is a very solidified form of SSA; I find it hard to believe that everyone with any experience of SSA has this “orientation.” “Gay” is essentially a political word that has as much or more to do with participation in the gay subculture than it does with any sexual attraction or activity. People are attracted to all kinds of things, sexually and non-sexually, and it can be very difficult to narrow down these attractions enough for coherent discussion.
 
40.png
batteddy:
I agree. But I make a distinction between serious psychological disorders.

There are many types, the angry, the sad, the manic, the crazy, the violent, etc…

And SSA is a sad disorder.

It is not a compulsion, nor necessarily violent. It is not a disorder that effects their distinction of reality or forces them to do things.

In other words, it is an emotional wound, but they are not insane
Click to expand...
No. Please don’t misunderstand. I never meant to imply that men with SSA are insane. But they do require psychological help to deal with their attractions.

For some, it is indeed a compulsion, especially those who have previously engaged in homosexual behavior. But everyone is given the grace by God to overcome temptations. And I categorically reject any opinion that says that SSA, even if not acted on, is a sign that God has abandoned you and you are destined to hell. This is a wicked, un-Christian opinion that seems to totally dismiss the infinite mercy of God.

We must always pray for our brothers and sisters suffering from SSA. This is a heavy cross for them to bear.
 
40.png
HagiaSophia:
I must have missed it as this post is in Post #1…
😃

Since news over the past three weeks has indicated that a new document may be in the works, perhaps it might be best to wait on it, see what it says, why it says and then discuss it.
Click to expand...
Why not discuss it now before the document comes out. Once the church has said something definitive there is less to talk about. Kind of like the ordination of women (and there was not to be discussion about it) but I’m not suggesting that there shouldn’t be dialog post document.
 
This has been, so far, the most charitable and adult discussion on the topic of homosexuality I’ve read yet on this board. Usually it deteriorates into something very unchristian and filled with fear and hate (and may still). Thanks to those who have posted so far for being so…mature about this! 🙂
 
Bruised Reed:
Why not discuss it now before the document comes out. Once the church has said something definitive there is less to talk about. Kind of like the ordination of women (and there was not to be discussion about it) but I’m not suggesting that there shouldn’t be dialog post document.
Click to expand...
I believe I was trying to say that there have been multitudinous threads on this subject in some variation or other; and since there has been nothing definitively new said by the church, and a document is supposed to be pending, I simply suggested we wait to see what, if anything new is going to be said rather than the same ole, same ole.

Just my :twocents:
 
Dr. Bombay:
The real problem, which some people dance around, is that SSA is a serious psychological disorder. Viewed in that context, the question should be simply: Does a serious psychological disorder of any kind disqualify a man from the priesthood?

Of course, a man with SSA who does have a vocation may find reparative therapy to be helpful. NARTH has been successful with helping many men overcome SSA. So, if a man with SSA goes through reparative therapy for years and overcomes his problem, is he then qualified to pursue his vocation? Or is the fact that he once had SSA a permanent impediment to the priesthood? I’m afraid wiser minds than mine will have to answer those questions. I’ve heard the Holy See will soon be issuing guidelines for admitting men with SSA to our seminaries. I think it’s prudent to wait and see what Rome has to say about the matter.

And this has nothing to do with declaring the ordinations of homosexual men to be invalid. Obviously they aren’t invalid. If a priest is ordained, he’s a priest, regardless of what sins he may be struggling with.
Click to expand...
Why would he have to go through reparative therapy? Isn’t that a bit redundant. He is not supposed to be having any kind of sex.
 
40.png
HagiaSophia:
I believe I was trying to say that there have been multitudinous threads on this subject in some variation or other; and since there has been nothing definitively new said by the church, and a document is supposed to be pending, I simply suggested we wait to see what, if anything new is going to be said rather than the same ole, same ole.

Just my :twocents:
Click to expand...
I was just sharing my priest’s opinions on the subject, which I thought to be very wise. I wanted to know if others saw the dilema isn’t really in ordaining priests with SSA, but determining who God has called to be a priest. If you feel this thread is “same ole, same ole”, I would encourage you to find a way to change that, or refrain from participating in the thread all-together.

Scout :tiphat:
 
40.png
snoopy:
Why would he have to go through reparative therapy? Isn’t that a bit redundant. He is not supposed to be having any kind of sex.
Click to expand...
So he can overcome his psychological disorder. As we’ve seen in recent years, just because a priest with SSA is not “supposed to be having any kind of sex” does not mean he never will.

Reparative therapy, if successful, would remove one temptation from the priest’s life.
 
Dr. Bombay:
So he can overcome his psychological disorder. As we’ve seen in recent years, just because a priest with SSA is not “supposed to be having any kind of sex” does not mean he never will.

Reparative therapy, if successful, would remove one temptation from the priest’s life.
Click to expand...
So he would be attracted to women instead of men? Again, isn’t that a bit redundant.
 
Several bishops have talked about this fairly recently; the current National Catholic Register quotes Archbishop Edwin O’Brien of the Military Archdiocese as saying that those who have been sexually active or are aware of strong attractions should not seek to enter seminary. Some months ago Cardinal George stated that those who had been promiscuous or had been members of a gay subculture likewise should not seek to enter formation.

I am getting the impression that some want the bishops to say something along the lines that virgins who are completely chaste and free of fantasies should not consider seminary formation. To my knowledge the bishops have been very careful NOT to say this, perhaps because this does not actually constitute a “strong homosexual tendency” or orientation. I think we need to be very careful in using the values of the world to encourage people to self-identify as “homosexual,” whether they are interested in formation or not.

In any case, I have never seen any example of a prelate encouraging anyone to engage in reparative therapy, which seems to have extremely limited success for all that we wish it to be 100%. In fact, Courage is very careful to say that reparative therapy is not at all required morally and that the decision to seek it is up to the individual. It has absolutely nothing to do with the moral life.
 
40.png
snoopy:
So he would be attracted to women instead of men? Again, isn’t that a bit redundant.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you are talking about. Your question is opaque.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top