Pope approves barring gay seminarians

[Libero]

Who are you to say what is and what is not fair? Leave that to the Church.

I love the priests, as well as those who desire to serve Christ in that manner - and precisely out of this love for them that I desire not to place a loaded pistol in their hands.

The simple basics of morality and common sense allows a person to see what is fair and what is not. I have never seen a document from the church establishing what is fair. Who are you to say that homosexual priests are a dangerous situation, usually incapable of denying their sexual temptations. It would appear that you have loat the previous respect that you had.

Claiming the situtaion to be a loaded pistol is hyperbole and simply not true.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Libero:

The simple basics of morality and common sense allows a person to see what is fair and what is not.-Exactly- I have never seen a document from the church establishing what is fair. -Fairness is a subjectivity-Who are you to say that homosexual priests are a dangerous situation-revert to common sense here-, usually incapable of denying their sexual temptations. It would appear that you have loat the previous respect that you had.-How so?

Claiming the situtaion to be a loaded pistol is hyperbole and simply not true.-Statistics and common sense would say otherwise.

Common sense is not on your side. Statistics are 80% against homosexuals in the priesthood - that’s 4 out of 5! I am not basing my stance off of feeling at all…you are. Take a step back for a second and try as much as possible to remove your biasness.

All respect still remaining,
~Lee

 

[beckers]

Jabronie:

I still don’t like it. A man suffering from SSA shouldn’t be punished. I’d understand if the seminarian is prancing around as an “outed” homosexual and insisting on speaking out in favor of gay marriage and things like that, but why should a young man who’s quietly praying to overcome SSA be denied his calling to the priesthood?

Thank You Thank you for saying this.

Correct me if I am wrong (nicely please).The church has told us that homosexual feels are natural and okay BUT that acting upon those feels is wrong because it is having sexually relationship outside of marriage and with another of the same sex. A homosexual who has accept and come to turns with their homosexuality and accept their calling to stay celibate is no different then any other non-married lay person. They are all required to stay celibate.

I think it is unfair to stay that just because you have this orientation that you are automatically bared from following your vocation. Just because I am a heterosexual person doesn’t mean I have to get married. It depends on what your calling for vocation happens to be. I don’t think that GOD has decided that some of us are only good for certain things simple based upon our sexuality. By linking sexuality with what GOD’s vocation calling is for us then we have done the same thing society has done for generation.We are making sexuality the definition of who we are as people. This is wrong. We are complex human beings. We shouldn’t discriminate someone based upon something that they didn’t chose to have happen to them. People don’t chose their sex, their race, their cultural and yet we don’t discriminate against them on what their roles should be in the church.

I don’t know about you but the few friends that I have who are seminaries didn’t just decided to go on a whim. It was something that they struggled and discerned for years. Why stop them from following GOD’s calling??? Who are we to judge and say that GOD didn’t give them their struggle with their sexuality to test them, to see their strength, or to see if they could follow his laws that it was wrong instead of the laws of society that says it okay to act upon your feelings. These might be some of the best priest to have. They know the struggles of good vs evil, right from wrong and society vs God’s law. Instead of bashing them why not rejoice that we have them? Why not help them follow their vocation instead of rejecting them???

Also you can’t just say this person is committing a sin because of his orientation. If he is not having sex or dating and living with someone then he doing what is required by GOD’s law for him.We should be praying from him and rejoicing in the fact that he has come to terms and accept him for who he is as a person and help him find his place in the church.

Warning soap box-----

I am also really sick of people only blaming homosexuals for the problems of molestation. Not all homosexuals are pedophiles. There are LOTS of heterosexual pedophiles. I believe you are throwing the baby out with the bath water by baring all homosexuals from the priesthood. I think we need a hard mental test and one that happens routinely even after ordination. Some mental problems may come up later on that then bar the person from being a priest or by actually seeing and hear from people in a church situation you may be able to develop more of any understand of who they really are. In the seminary you may not see the interaction that a man might have with children. You may never know that he likes children and for all the years he was in the seminary he was able to control himself because he wasn’t surrounded by children but once he got out into the real church setting that the warning signs came up. That is where people need to be watched. After taking my church training to work with children I realize that the only thing that will stop anything is getting rid of the opportunities of a child being molested. That means telling your children it is never okay for someone to touch you and to make sure no one is alone with a child. The only time a priest should ever be only with a child is confession and by that age they should know what is right and wrong. It is up to US to stop the problems. We must be activte with prayer and with physically being a body to help stop these actions.

Soap box done—

God Bless,

Beckers

 

[Libero]

Common sense is not the same as statistics. Common sense is deeply routed in the type of personality. Common sense would say not to assume that one person is the same as the next, due to one small attribute that they have, however your statistics seem to show otherwise. As well as this, I am sure that common sense will show your statistics not to be fact. I have no bias approach, look at the situation in the UK. There has been one reported scandal in our church that has been picked up during recent years. The priest in question was not homosexual, but rather a paedophile. I am sure that the church in the Uk must have more than 0 homosexual priests, yet statistics say that we have none, as there has been no scandal.

Common sense would say we should not over react and claim situations to be something they are not.

Similarly in respect Libero.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Libero:

Common sense is not the same as statistics…Common sense would say not to assume that one person is the same as the next, due to one small attribute that they have,…Similarly in respect Libero.

I never claimed that common sense and statistics were the same thing, I merely said that they both are against your position in this particular case.

And being a homosexual in not a “small issue” at all.

Well, we have talked to each other over this matter; we have gotten two or three together; now let’s “take it to the Church” to see what we should do.

 

[E.E.N.S]

There will definately be those who disagree with the Church on this matter, as we will soon see in the media, and no doubt it will cause a great many to be turned away from the Church, but there has always been people leaving the Church because of things they don’t agree with. This is a serious issue (especially here in the states) and needs serious action.

I commend the Pope for his firm stance on truth and morality.

 

[felra]

Correct me if I am wrong (nicely please).The church has told us that homosexual feels are natural and okay

BUT that acting upon those feels is wrong because it is having sexually relationship outside of marriage and with another of the same sex. A homosexual who has accept and come to turns with their homosexuality and accept their calling to stay celibate is no different then any other non-married lay person. They are all required to stay celibate.
What!! :bigyikes: This is what the Church actually says:

**2357 **Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (CCC)

I don’t think that GOD has decided that some of us are only good for certain things simple based upon our sexuality. By linking sexuality with what GOD’s vocation calling is for us then we have done the same thing society has done for generation.We are making sexuality the definition of who we are as people. This is wrong. We are complex human beings. We shouldn’t discriminate someone based upon something that they didn’t chose to have happen to them. People don’t chose their sex, their race, their cultural and yet we don’t discriminate against them on what their roles should be in the church.

I don’t know about you but the few friends that I have who are seminaries didn’t just decided to go on a whim. It was something that they struggled and discerned for years. Why stop them from following GOD’s calling??? Who are we to judge and say that GOD didn’t give them their struggle with their sexuality to test them, to see their strength, or to see if they could follow his laws that it was wrong instead of the laws of society that says it okay to act upon your feelings. These might be some of the best priest to have. They know the struggles of good vs evil, right from wrong and society vs God’s law. Instead of bashing them why not rejoice that we have them? Why not help them follow their vocation instead of rejecting them???

Also you can’t just say this person is committing a sin because of his orientation. If he is not having sex or dating and living with someone then he doing what is required by GOD’s law for him.We should be praying from him and rejoicing in the fact that he has come to terms and accept him for who he is as a person and help him find his place in the church.

Warning soap box-----

I am also really sick of people only blaming homosexuals for the problems of molestation. Not all homosexuals are pedophiles. There are LOTS of heterosexual pedophiles. I believe you are throwing the baby out with the bath water by baring all homosexuals from the priesthood. I think we need a hard mental test and one that happens routinely even after ordination. Some mental problems may come up later on that then bar the person from being a priest or by actually seeing and hear from people in a church situation you may be able to develop more of any understand of who they really are. In the seminary you may not see the interaction that a man might have with children. You may never know that he likes children and for all the years he was in the seminary he was able to control himself because he wasn’t surrounded by children but once he got out into the real church setting that the warning signs came up. That is where people need to be watched. After taking my church training to work with children I realize that the only thing that will stop anything is getting rid of the opportunities of a child being molested. That means telling your children it is never okay for someone to touch you and to make sure no one is alone with a child. The only time a priest should ever be only with a child is confession and by that age they should know what is right and wrong. It is up to US to stop the problems. We must be activte with prayer and with physically being a body to help stop these actions.

Soap box done—

God Bless,

Beckers

 

[YinYangMom]

contemplative:

article says…
Priests who have already been ordained, if they suffer from homosexual impulses, are strongly urged to renew their dedication to chastity, and a manner of life appropriate to the priesthood.

Yeah, I read that already…
but I’m asking about former SSAers who seek to become priests.
Say they went through therapy or something and haven’t had the affects of SSA for 5-8 years or so…will their past condition keep them out of the priesthood?

I ask because the Church is coming out in support of COURAGE and they’re asking us parishioners to reach out to the homosexual community to try to help them understand the nature of their condition and to seek help to correct the disorder.

We’re called to encourage them to practice Chastity particularly while undergoing treatment…and then when successful they will either remain single, get married, or what? Is the priesthood not an option for them?

Here we are offering them a future, hope, and I would imagine a man who successful conquers his disorder because of the church would feel a call to repay the church by offering the rest of his life to Her…but then to have the door shut on him would seem unjust.

 

[beckers]

Originally Posted by beckers
**
*Correct me if I am wrong (nicely please).The church has told us that homosexual feels are natural and okay BUT that acting upon those feels is wrong because it is having sexually relationship outside of marriage and with another of the same sex. A homosexual who has accept and come to turns with their homosexuality and accept their calling to stay celibate is no different then any other non-married lay person. They are all required to stay celibate. *

What!! :bigyikes: This is what the Church actually says:

**2357 **Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (CCC)

Maybe I am just not getting myseldf across but I never intended to say that homosexual acts are okay. They are grave matters. The quote you gave says that "Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” BUT where does it say that people who don’t act upon their tendence should be considered sinners and discrimated against? Are we saying that if you have homosexual feeings that you automatically go to Hell because it is an unforgiveable sin??? I mean if it’s a sin then you should be able to confess and accept GOD’s grace and live up to your calling. In the case of a homosexual that is going to mean being celibate.

 

[felra]

beckers:

Correct me if I am wrong (nicely please).The church has told us that homosexual feels are natural and okay

BUT that acting upon those feels is wrong because it is having sexually relationship outside of marriage and with another of the same sex. A homosexual who has accept and come to turns with their homosexuality and accept their calling to stay celibate is no different then any other non-married lay person. They are all required to stay celibate.
What!! :bigyikes:

**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. (CCC)

I think it is unfair to stay that just because you have this orientation that you are automatically bared from following your vocation.

The Church is the one who determines if one has the priestly vocation–this is not a personal pursuit or determination.

Just because I am a heterosexual person doesn’t mean I have to get married. It depends on what your calling for vocation happens to be. I don’t think that GOD has decided that some of us are only good for certain things simple based upon our sexuality. By linking sexuality with what GOD’s vocation calling is for us then we have done the same thing society has done for generation.We are making sexuality the definition of who we are as people. This is wrong. We are complex human beings./

QUOTE]
God created us male and female. We are created as complex sexual human beings. The priesthood is a sacramental sign of the complementary espousal embrace of the bride (Church) with the bridegroom (Christ). The priest is the Father to the God’s children (the flock).

**2332 Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul. It especially concerns affectivity, the capacity to love and to procreate, and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others.

We shouldn’t discriminate someone based upon something that they didn’t chose to have happen to them. People don’t chose their sex, their race, their cultural and yet we don’t discriminate against them on what their roles should be in the church.

Discrimination is an erroneous term when discussing fitness and qualification for the priesthood vocation (as determined by the Church).

We should be praying from him and rejoicing in the fact that he has come to terms and accept him for who he is as a person and help him find his place in the church.

What exactly does “come to terms and accept him for who he is as a person” mean?

 

[proud2bcatholic]

Scott Waddell:

It bears repeating again: a person must not only have an interior call to the priesthood but also an external one that is discerned by the Church. A mere feelin of call to priesthood is inadequet on its own.

Exactly. I would like to repeat it a third time, as it seems not to be sinking in. The Church is the arbiter of vocations, not the individual.

This is nothing new in regards to the Church’s stance, it just has not been enforced.

I pray for all people that struggle with SSA, that they will depend on the grace of God to live a life of chastity and devotion to the Lord. I am sure that it is a huge cross to bear. I also hope that they receive any help that they need to overcome the disorder.

 

[fix]

felra:

beckers:

Discrimination is an erroneous term when discussing fitness and qualification for the priesthood vocation (as determined by the Church).

This is a big part of the discussion of homosexuality and ordination. It is my experience that any proscription, no matter how legitimate, scientifically evidenced, theologically explained will satisfy many people who viscerally think impediments are unjust discrimination or in some way is just “mean” to some numbers of folks. I just cannot follow the reasoning.

 

[beckers]

Okay, I think we are all on two different tracks. I am totally for those who act and participate in homosexual acts should be barred from being in the priesthood. Why… because by not following church teaching on this one grave matter they are showing that A.) they don’t trust God’s words because they don’t live them…How can a teenager follow the advice of priest to abstained from sex if the priest himself is doing it…Which leads them to be bad examples and means they are not good vessels to teach GOD’s words. B.) If they can’t follow one teaching then what other teachings are they going to tell people they don’t have to follow…Birth Control…co-habitation…what church are the truly representing???

On the other hand:

1.)The people I am talking about are people who have had homosexual feelings, and either A.) never acted on them…B) acted on them and repent and never acted on them again…These are the people I have a problem with omitting from the priesthood if they are truly called to the vocation. They have done what the church has asked them to do. To suppress their sexual feelings and realize that having sex and a marriage are not a calling from them. They are people who are actively living a life of celibacy. Maybe they need a new name.

2.) If someone is following that calling and NOT participating in homosexual activates then why bar them from the priesthood. Why are their sins worst then a heterosexual priest have pre-martial sex before he becoming a priest? They were both outside marriage…and in the end both destroy the sanctity of marriage and sex… why hold one man’s sins more then another man’s…doesn’t god not forgive both equally? And just because a man has had sex with another man does not mean that he has a tendance to have sex with childern be it male or female. Thinking that it is okay to have sex with a child at all be it a hetrosexual or homosexual man is sick and disgusting. Those individuals need to be barred from doing anything in the church where they might be able to even thinking about touching a child.

1. If a homosexual man can not be forgive for past transgressions then where is their place in the church??? Are they always to wear the mark of a sinner and not be able to follow their vocation calling?

4.) When I am comparing the sexual activities of a homosexual to a heterosexuals I am comparing them to the fact that we are all called to celibate until marriage. If marriage is not for us then we are called to be celibate for life.

 

[InnocentIII]

Scout:

I fully agree! This whole arguement isn’t about ordaining homosexuals, but trying to decide who God has chosen to be a priest. Personally, I’m not going to make that call. If a man feels that he is called by God to be a priest, then who’s to tell him he isn’t?

.

This is a fallacy. Many have claimed thay have a call from God to the priesthood, but the Church has always assessed each such person before admitting them to Holy Orders. I know many people who are my colleagues as teachers who claim they felt called also but who make very bad teachers. This whole issue is driven by the post-60’s “I can do whatever I want and preventing me is discrimination” attitude. A calling must be tested by the Church not just accepted because someone says they have it.

 

[Bella3502]

Just how will a man’s orientation be determined?

Will there be a panel of men “claiming” to be straight testing those who they think are gay? Let’s not forget the gay bishops and Archbishops. Should they be making these determinations?

Let’s remember this dialog a year from now when nothing has changed.



I still don’t approve of the double standard. You can’t be a gay priest, but you can be a gay nun.

 

[YinYangMom]

Bella3502:

Just how will a man’s orientation be determined?

Will there be a panel of men “claiming” to be straight testing those who they think are gay? Let’s not forget the gay bishops and Archbishops. Should they be making these determinations?

Let’s remember this dialog a year from now when nothing has changed.



I still don’t approve of the double standard. You can’t be a gay priest, but you can be a gay nun.

Not a double standard.
At no time is a nun acting in Persona Christe.
BIG difference.

 

[Hildebrand]

mercygate:

No. Gay does not equal child molester.

But the current scandals in the Church were largely not about molesting children. More than 80% of them involved adolescent boys. That is a homosexual issue.

And I do affirm the excellent service of those priests with SSA who manage to live in chastity.

 

[fix]

1.)The people I am talking about are people who have had homosexual feelings, and either A.) never acted on them…B) acted on them and repent and never acted on them again…These are the people I have a problem with omitting from the priesthood if they are truly called to the vocation. They have done what the church has asked them to do. To suppress their sexual feelings and realize that having sex and a marriage are not a calling from them. They are people who are actively living a life of celibacy. Maybe they need a new name.

They have some degree of same sex attraction and perhaps other psychological conditions that are not compatible with ordination. I see no grave reason to find a loophole to ordain these types of individuals. They may achieve holiness like all of us strive for, but why is ordination seen as a right?

Why are their sins worst then a heterosexual priest have pre-martial sex before he becoming a priest? They were both outside marriage…and in the end both destroy the sanctity of marriage and sex…

Many arguments have been stated already, one of them is that these issues are not just sins, but unnatural as well. With all that has happended in recent years is it prudent to continue to ordain men with these problems?

And just because a man has had sex with another man does not mean that he has a tendance to have sex with childern be it male or female.

The scandal is mostly about homosexual men and teen males. The disoder to homosexual acts often includes teen males.

If a homosexual man can not be forgive for past transgressions then where is their place in the church??? Are they always to wear the mark of a sinner and not be able to follow their vocation calling?

Huh? As a married man I cannot be ordained to the priesthood. Where is my place in the Church? How is that different?

When I am comparing the sexual activities of a homosexual to a heterosexuals I am comparing them to the fact that we are all called to celibate until marriage. If marriage is not for us then we are called to be celibate for life.

A heterosexual man gives up one good for a greater good when ordained. The homosexual inclined man would give up an evil for a good.

 

[E.E.N.S]

InnocentIII:

.

This is a fallacy. Many have claimed thay have a call from God to the priesthood, but the Church has always assessed each such person before admitting them to Holy Orders. I know many people who are my colleagues as teachers who claim they felt called also but who make very bad teachers. This whole issue is driven by the post-60’s “I can do whatever I want and preventing me is discrimination” attitude. A calling must be tested by the Church not just accepted because someone says they have it.

Preach it brother!

 

[Scout]

InnocentIII:

.

This is a fallacy. Many have claimed thay have a call from God to the priesthood, but the Church has always assessed each such person before admitting them to Holy Orders. I know many people who are my colleagues as teachers who claim they felt called also but who make very bad teachers. This whole issue is driven by the post-60’s “I can do whatever I want and preventing me is discrimination” attitude. A calling must be tested by the Church not just accepted because someone says they have it.

Just because the Church has a set of “questions and answers” to determine who’s fit for ordinaition and who isn’t, doesn’t mean that the “questions and answers” being put forth are the right questions and answers.

I also find your analogy of bad teachers to be a bad one. Just because they’re not good at their job doesn’t mean they weren’t called to be teachers, it could just mean that they haven’t had the appropriate training and discipline to be good ones. Right now I’m called to be a SAHM, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have bad days with my children. Does that mean I wasn’t called? No, it just means I need to pray and get better at it.

This all comes down to discerning vocations, and there’s no “right” question or criteria to discern that if the person knows he has been called by God to a certain vocation.
Scout :tiphat: