Repeal of the Instruction against Gays

  • Thread starter Thread starter bluealtec
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sonic said:
I understand what you are saying. I will say this… anybody that knows F.r Groeschel knows he doesn’t play politics with his work. He tells things like he see’s them, and that includes being critical of both clergy and psychology.

Plus, he’s a New Yorker, which makes him a-okay in book. 🙂

I’m currently looking for the show he made his statements, but you can do a search here for any of his shows.

ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/intro.asp
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link, once I’ve finished this essay I’ll browse the whole of EWTN, never been on their site! 🙂
 
ByzCath said:
No one with nonchaste (or noncelibate) inclinations regardless of sexual orientation are to be admitted to seminary or religious life, period.
Click to expand...
Code: 
True, though if I understand it correctly, I do believe this instruction is stating that chaste homosexuals are not to be admitted to the priesthood:
…Regarding acts, it teaches that Sacred Scripture presents them as grave sins. The Tradition has constantly considered them as intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law. Consequently, under no circumstance can they be approved.
Click to expand...
Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfil God’s will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter[8].
Click to expand...
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[9], 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”[10]…
Click to expand...
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html
 
One other characteristic that Fr. Pacwa mentioned - besides fidelity to chastity - is that a man wish to become a father to men, women and children in a parish.
 
utah_rose said:
No, not all are pedophiles, but the temptation is there. Most of the molestation was done to boys, not girls, and many of the men were sexually abused when they were boys.

So, if you have that tendency you should not be around children at all. It would be as difficult as an alcoholic staying away from an alcoholic beverage that was available to him.

We all must avoid the occasion of sin. Perhaps these men are better suited for being lectors in the Church or serving the Church in another capacity.

Sadly, this is their cross to bear, but it would be unfair both to children and other men for homosexuals to be ordained into the priesthood.
Click to expand...
If one looks at the statistics, the majority of the “pedophile” incidents have been between priests and post-pubescent boys.
 
Madaglan said:
If one looks at the statistics, the majority of the “pedophile” incidents have been between priests and post-pubescent boys.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and thus those incidents are acts of homosexuality, not pedofilia.
 
ByzCath said:
So no source?
Click to expand...
Source for what? To the concept of cloistering either men and women strictly excluding the other sex?

Here is the 1917 Canon Law:

Can 133 §1. Caveant clerici ne mulieres, de quibus suspicio esse possit, apud se retineant aut quoquo modo frequentent.
 
Barbkw said:
Chastity is a growth process. The longer one practices, the stronger a person becomes. Fidelity to God is the key.
Click to expand...
Do you think that the practice is to frequent the objects of the sexual temptation?

I always was taught that if I want to be caste I should avoid the temptation, if I seek it, I will be lost.
 
laszlo said:
Do you think that the practice is to frequent the objects of the sexual temptation?

I always was taught that if I want to be caste I should avoid the temptation, if I seek it, I will be lost.
Click to expand...
Many people are able to confront and control their temptations. Each person’s control over their free will varies concerning the drive for sexual acts.

That is why the instruction states the language concerning “deep seated tendencies”.

Take for instance, people who live in co-ed dorms or berthing, aboard ships with male/female crews, etc. Yes, there is an increased access to temptation, if free will takes over. However, most people in these situations, develop increased resistance to sexual temptation.

Again, fidelity to God, is key.
 
LemonAndLime said:
Excuse me - is this Priest also a scientist, or a psychologist?

If he is, then I will take his opinion seriously. If he is only a Priest, I would be interested to know what authority he has to give “facts” on human sexuality apparently based on a kind of science. What research has he done to show this?
Click to expand...
Yes, he is a psychologist, and very well versed on this particular issue as well. The research is clear, though, whether you are a priest, psychologist, or a layperson. The vast majority of sexual abuse cases of children are committed by married men who claim they are heterosexual.
LemonAndLime said:
Code: 
 Most official Psychologist associations recognise paedophilia as an orientation in itself. I think they perhaps have more authority than a Priest of the Church on these matters.
Click to expand...
This is BS for two reasons. Most official psychology associoations DO NOT do this. Second, NO ONE has more authority on how human sexuality is to function than God, the creator of our sexuality. Therefore to the extent that the priest is accurately representing God’s point of view, it would not matter how many secular organizations declared any type of sexual behavior “normal” that will not make it so.
LemonAndLime said:
The Bible has never claimed to be a scientific textbook, therefore the Church and its clergy should never profess scientific facts based on belief.
Click to expand...
The Church was making no effort to “profess scientific facts”. The Church has the duty to protect the priesthood. Jesus said

Matt 10:37-39
37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38 and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.

Therefore, if a person is not also willing to leave behind their own sexual orientation, they are not worthy of Him. The choose has the right, and the responsibility, to choose from among those called to be eunuchs for the kingdom of God to serve as priests.

If an applicant or candidate to seminary stubbornly clings to their sexual orientation over their call to the priesthood, it is a sign of deeper spiritual problems. It is no different than clinging to any other worldly value over the Kingdom. They are not a suitable candidate.

The seminaries have been infested with a culture of homosexual activity for an entire generation, and the poison has leaked out into the flock. A drastic step had to be taken, and it was. If God has called someone to the priesthood, then He will be ready, willing, and able to grace such a person to become the eunuch he is called to be. If the person is not willing to forsake all other attractions in favor of Christ, then no amount of grace will save him.
 
Brendan said:
Exactly, and thus those incidents are acts of homosexuality, not pedofilia.
Click to expand...
At face value, it’s easy to say this statement makes sense, so that many people accept it as reasonable and move on. I would like to disagree.

How many mature gay men really desire teenage boys?
How many mature straight women desire teenage boys?

I don’t doubt that some of the abusers were gay. It’s probably even a statistically higher percentage than just the general population of sexual predators, simply because for so long priesthood was an acceptable alternative for a closeted gay man to live a life of service to the church, with no question to his sexuality. I suspect that if most victims were teenage boys, this would also make sense since it would be more likely for an adult male (the priest) to have access to boys than to girls, particularly altar servers.

Let’s not confuse pedophilia, or even pederasty, with homosexual orientation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top