THE ELEPHANT IN THE CHURCH a Catholic priest speaks out against homosexual priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaPatri4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
NOR’s New Oxford Notes

New Oxford Notes Index

17 September 2004

Why won’t the Catholic bishops solve the 'gay priest problem?'

The solution to that problem is simple and self-evident, according to Karl Keating, a lucid and sensible thinker if ever there was one: “I know of homosexual priests who live chastely…. Such priests deserve our respect. On the other hand, there are homosexual priests who are ‘gays’ — they have chosen to live the homosexual lifestyle. It is from the ranks of these priests that most (not all, admittedly) of the abuse cases have arisen. The priestly scandal has not been so much about priests abusing children as about homosexual priests acting out their homosexuality with teenagers and young adults.” Keating then gives his solution:

"1. If a priest is ‘gay’ — living a homosexual lifestyle — he should be removed from ministry immediately….
  1. If a priest is homosexual but not ‘gay’ — that is, if he is living chastely — let him continue in ministry until normal retirement.
  2. Exclude from seminary formation and ordination any homosexual, whether ‘gay’ or chaste…. The latter should not sign up for ‘guy-only’ work that will have him living with other men (thus putting him into near occasions of sin)…. He should be encouraged to serve the Church in other ways…. If the priesthood in this country were healthy, little or no harm would come from ordaining chaste homosexuals whose homosexuality is kept private. But we do not live in ordinary times."
Keating concludes: “The three-step process I propose would solve the abuse scandal almost overnight…” (This Rock, May/June).

The question is: Why do our bishops at the conference level seem unwilling to do what Keating proposes, what any conscientious Catholic would propose? It may have a lot to do with the Lavender Mafia and its allies in episcopal ranks.

You may remember the name of Joseph Kellenyi. He figured in Michael S. Rose’s book Goodbye, Good Men, and in two of Rose’s articles in the NOR (Dec. 2002 and June 2003). Kellenyi, who was once a seminarian at Mundelein in the Chicago area, makes the following statement about a conversation he had with the Rev. John F. Canary, the Rector of Mundelein Seminary, in August 1999:

“I told Rev. Canary that I had some problems with the Chicago Diocese. I told him that I perceived that while Cardinal Bernardin had probably lived a celibate life, and may not have abused Steven Cook, that he also was flamingly gay. I said that I perceived that under Bernardin’s regime, Chicago had become like Santa Rosa under Bishop Ziemann. I said that in Santa Rosa, those priests and seminarians not in the bishop’s gay clique were treated unjustly, and that the same was true of Chicago under Bernardin.** I said that I perceived that Bernardin fostered and promoted a network of gay priests and bishops, and that they protected each other, covered up each other’s ‘mistakes,’ and promoted one another to positions of responsibility in Chicago and the church at large**. I alluded to the fact that Bernardin had appointed Rev. Canary, and that he in turn had appointed the formation faculty. Rev. Canary’s response was ‘Your perception is accurate. The question is what are you going to do about it.’”

What a brazen challenge from Canary! But Canary obviously didn’t know with whom he was dealing, for Kellenyi did indeed do something about it.

** click on link below to read article in its entirety**

cruxnews.com/NORNotes/nor-17sept04.html
 
I’m in the process of reading this thread, but since the poll asked me to explain my response, I’m going to post before reading the whole thread.

No. Homosexuals are suffering from a disorder that hampers their ability to be effective priests. As my bishop has said, written and stated before the USCCB… “a priest must be a man who would make a good husband and father in a Christian family.” My six years of experience as a seminarian, and 13 years of experience as a husband and father of my own family inclines me to agree 100% with my bishop.
 
What do we do now about those who have contracted AIDS and still wish to receive Communion and be faithful to the Church for the rest of their lives?:confused:
 
40.png
goofyjim:
What do we do now about those who have contracted AIDS and still wish to receive Communion and be faithful to the Church for the rest of their lives?:confused:
Jim, I don’t think AIDS has anything to do with it. One of the first people I knew who had AIDS was a religious who contracted it from a blood transfusion. I didn’t hear that the Sister was denied communion because she had a disease.

Lisa N
 
**New Vatican Document on Homosexuality and the Priesthood Coming Before Fall 2005

**
VATICAN CITY, December 13, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - John Thavis, the Vatican correspondent for the Catholic News Service, an agency of the US Bishops Conference, reports that the Vatican will soon publish a document concerning homosexuality and the priesthood. The report notes that Vatican officials are preparing an inspection (or visitation) of US seminaries to commence in the Fall of 2005 and the document is expected prior to the visitation.

Bishop John C. Nienstedt of New Ulm, Minn., chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Priestly Formation, said in an interview in Rome, “I think they intend to have it out by the time the visitation begins.”

The Vatican has confirmed several times that men with homosexual sexual orientations should not be ordained. The December 2002 bulletin of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments contained a letter signed by Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, who has since retired as the head of the Congregation, which said ordaining such men would be imprudent and "very risky."

A prominent Vatican document dealing with the issue was released as early as 1961. The 1961 document from the Sacred Congregation for Religious prohibits the admission of homosexuals to the diocesan priesthood and religious orders. The document states: “Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination,” because priestly ministry would place such persons in “grave danger”.

The document is being prepared by the Congregation for Catholic Education in consultation with several other Vatican agencies, including the doctrinal congregation. In a report earlier this year, the education congregation described it as an “instruction on the criteria and norms for the discernment in questions regarding homosexuality in view of the admission of candidates to the seminary and to sacred orders.”

Commenting on the coming document which has been more than five years in the making, Bishop Nienstedt said, "“I think it’s going to be a balanced document, because the whole question of homosexuality not only has psychological dimensions but also has varying degrees of a person acting out or not acting out.” He added, “So the whole question has to be nuanced considerably: ‘What is homosexuality?’ ‘What are the homosexual attractions?’ and that sort of thing. I think this document will be helpful because it is going to address those questions.”

Jhw

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/dec/04121307.html

I wonder what will happen when this Vatican document is released. If they are still sticking to their guns about not admitting homosexuals into the seminaries where does it leave all the professed homosexual priests who have already been ordained when in fact they never should have been ordained in the first place?

 
40.png
tcay584:
Again, I remind you that the material you provided refers to the act and not the inclination. How is it that if heterosexuals resist the temptation to sin, they are applauded but if it’s a homosexual that’s resisting the temptation, it counts for nothing…you’re an abomination…you’re going to hell…stay out of my Church. Hope you enjoy your glass house…watch for stones.
WOW! Those are strong words to use against a brother. YOUR Church? I believe Jesus called it His church. “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build My Church.” “My Church.”

Of course it is the act that is the sin, not the inclination. However, the seminary setting with close association in living accomodations presents for those afflicted with same-sex attraction, in some cases, perhaps most, a possible near occasion of sin. It is incumbent upon heterosexuals and homosexuals alike to avoid the near occasion of sin. It would not seem prudent to place homosexuals in the seminary or the rectory after ordination.

God saves.
Repent and follow the Gospel
 
Sometimes is isn’t advantageous to look too much in detail, like not seeing the forest because of the trees. Homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed in the priesthood, any more than a gigolo, or an adulterer. One wouldn’t put a thief in charge of money. While all of us are sinners we don’t all commit all the sins. Paul writes that each of us have a gift. Some have the gift of tongues, others interpret it,some have compassion some justice. Not everyone should be a priest. Not even in the days of Jesus were all priests but it was reserved for the tribe of Levi.
 
40.png
kencando:
Sometimes is isn’t advantageous to look too much in detail, like not seeing the forest because of the trees. Homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed in the priesthood, any more than a gigolo, or an adulterer. One wouldn’t put a thief in charge of money. While all of us are sinners we don’t all commit all the sins. Paul writes that each of us have a gift. Some have the gift of tongues, others interpret it,some have compassion some justice. Not everyone should be a priest. Not even in the days of Jesus were all priests but it was reserved for the tribe of Levi.
Say that’s a very good point. I get incredibly weary of people complaining about the Church not allowing anyone who applies to take up the job as priest. Of course this does relate mostly to the prohibition against female priests. But there is the odd attitude that anyone who wants to be a priest should have that opportunity although if you applied the same standard to any other vocation, people would think it was quite reasonable. Pointing out Paul’s comments about our having various gifts and honoring those gifts instead of coveting someone else’s avocation seems like a more effective argument.

Lisa N
 
It is probably too late to do anything.
The magisterium admitted large cohorts of homosexuals to seminary and then invested them with Holy Orders. These clergymen were not stupid. I think they understood exactly what they were doing. What on earth would happen now if all the homosexual priests were defrocked, or even just barred from giving the sacraments? In many rural areas several parishes may have to share one Priest and even large churches have too few clergy.
 
As I’ve stated on similar threads, this would be the equivalent to allowing a heterosexual man into a convent. From a practical standpoint, it would be placing someone in the proximal occasion of sin.

There are certain pre-requisites to becoming a priest. You cannot become a priest if you have certain psychological problems or physical limitations. It might not seem fair, but there are good reasons for these restrictions.

I’m not saying that a “professed homosexual” cannot maintain a celebate lifestyle as a priest, but unless the person completely renounces this urge as a temptation to sin and openly acknowledged that homosexual acts are evil, would the Church want this person instructing the faithful? No! It would be like allowing a heterosexual man who believed that adultry or fornication weren’t sins to become a priest.
 
40.png
JimO:
As I’ve stated on similar threads, this would be the equivalent to allowing a heterosexual man into a convent. From a practical standpoint, it would be placing someone in the proximal occasion of sin.

There are certain pre-requisites to becoming a priest. You cannot become a priest if you have certain psychological problems or physical limitations. It might not seem fair, but there are good reasons for these restrictions.

I’m not saying that a “professed homosexual” cannot maintain a celebate lifestyle as a priest, but unless the person completely renounces this urge as a temptation to sin and openly acknowledged that homosexual acts are evil, would the Church want this person instructing the faithful? No! It would be like allowing a heterosexual man who believed that adultry or fornication weren’t sins to become a priest.
We all have to renounce sin before entering the Church. We also do it again when we renew our Baptismal Vows. So, I don’t see the difference. Part of being a priest is renouncing sin and temptation. So, if a man is going to become a priest, what makes the difference what sins he’s renouncing? He’s still making a vow to be obedient to God and stay away from sin. If a man isn’t willing to renounce sin, no matter what the sin is, then he isn’t worthy of the priesthood. However, if he faithfully renounces sin and trives to be obedient to the Church, then I say let him become a priest.

Scout :tiphat:
 
40.png
Scout:
We all have to renounce sin before entering the Church. We also do it again when we renew our Baptismal Vows. So, I don’t see the difference. Part of being a priest is renouncing sin and temptation. So, if a man is going to become a priest, what makes the difference what sins he’s renouncing? He’s still making a vow to be obedient to God and stay away from sin. If a man isn’t willing to renounce sin, no matter what the sin is, then he isn’t worthy of the priesthood. However, if he faithfully renounces sin and trives to be obedient to the Church, then I say let him become a priest.

Scout :tiphat:
Not all issues are equal. If a man has a alcohol problem before becoming a priest, or a gambling problem, is it wise to ordain him? Homosexual conduct is often a compulsive disorder. With all the problems we have today, do we really need to ordain SSA men?

The Vatican may soon come out with a directive that says they should not ordain them. I can’t wait to see what it says.
 
40.png
fix:
Not all issues are equal. If a man has a alcohol problem before becoming a priest, or a gambling problem, is it wise to ordain him? Homosexual conduct is often a compulsive disorder. With all the problems we have today, do we really need to ordain SSA men?

The Vatican may soon come out with a directive that says they should not ordain them. I can’t wait to see what it says.
I understand that not all issues are equal. However, I’ve yet to see a person who didn’t struggle with the same sin over and over again-which would make that sin habitual. So, in the case of habitual sin, why ssa worse than someone else who has a tendancy to commit another sin?

If we’re going to exclude people based on what they “might” do, then we might as well close down the seminaries and dissolve the priesthood all together.

Scout :tiphat:
 
I don’t have any paricular objection to priest with same sexattractions. However I would probably require a Person in this category to be older than the other canidates.
It seemed to me that many of the accused priests were young homosexuals. I would like to see statistics on whether or not they had reoccurances later in life.
 
40.png
Scout:
We all have to renounce sin before entering the Church…
I agree that a man who refuses to repent of sinful behavior, particularly sinful habits, should not be allowed into the priesthood, regardless of the nature of the sin. The problem is that if a man says that he is a homosexual and believes that it is a genetic or normal predisposition and not a disordered tendancy toward sin, has he truly rejected it as sinful behavior? Homosexuality is problematic because technically it isn’t sin unless it is acted upon and yet the tendancy toward homosexuality is disordered. Therefore, someone could have never sinned in this area and yet not be convinced of its disordered nature.

Also, aside from all this, as I stated above, there are practical problems with having homosexuals in a seminary surrounded by men. It’s no different than the problems with homosexuals in the military. Research has shown this to be a problem. This would be an even bigger problem in a seminary where the men are trying to live a life of holiness. The potential for disruption or scandal is high. In fact, it wouldn’t be fair or appropriate to place a homosexual young man in the midst of other men. As stated in my earlier post, it would be no different than placing a heterosexual man in a convent. In a place where people are supposed to be free from internal carnal temptation, you cannot place someone who would have an attraction for others in the community.

Just my thoughts.

Jim 🙂
 
40.png
fix:
The Vatican may soon come out with a directive that says they should not ordain them. I can’t wait to see what it says.
Dear Fix,

Wasn’t that document from 1961 a directive or are you referring to the document that is expected to come out in the Fall? The Vatican already has said that homosexuals should not be ordained but many seminaries have ignored that directive.

I’ll try to find the quote.

God bless
 
To the best of my understanding, although homosexuality is deemed ‘objectively disordered’ this is NOT the same thing as equating homosexuality with a mental disorder, which is something which would be determined by by secular law and not the Church. Rather, homosexual inclinations are considered to be a particular SPIRITUAL disorder which the soul must overcome. ( I do happen to think that homosexuality is ALSO a mental disorder, and a disorder which can be cured or at least treated sucessfully–I specify that homosexuality should be defined as a mental illness under LAW and not by mental health professionals because I think that too many mental health professionals are motivated by ‘political correctness’ and not by truth. We are in dire need of Christian secular leaders in most Western nations who will stand up to such nonsense, define homosexuality as a mental illness under the law, and strip people of their counseling credentials if they decline to treat it as such). I do perceive a great number of the posters to this thread assume thatr one who is homosexual must necessarily be sexually active and incapable of celibacy, which I suspect is no more true of homosexuals than of heterosexuals.

I am uncomfortable with self-identified homosexuals in ministry personally mainly because I suspect many of them seek positions of power and authority in order to serve in a fifth-column capacity, to undermine the moral values of the institution they seek to serve and to ‘lobby’ for acceptance of their ‘lifetstyle’. If they enter seminary so throuroughly self-aware of their ‘identity’, particuarly in this current age, I think this tends to be an inevitable risk. Such seminarians should be invited to leave off their preparations for pulpit ministry forthwith. Notwithstanding this–some men enter into the ministry and then discover themselves to have homosexual inclinations later. Their ‘identity’ does not preclude their serving in ministry but if they find themselves unable to obey the obligation either to remain celibate or to re-direct their inclinations towards heterosexuality, they should resign from ministry. And I do not disallow that some men, perceiving themselves as possessed of homosexual tendencies, will nonetheless serve their church well and laudably WITHOUT misappropriating the trust vested in them for the advocacy of immoral ends.
 
40.png
JimO:
I agree that a man who refuses to repent of sinful behavior, particularly sinful habits, should not be allowed into the priesthood, regardless of the nature of the sin. The problem is that if a man says that he is a homosexual and believes that it is a genetic or normal predisposition and not a disordered tendancy toward sin, has he truly rejected it as sinful behavior?
I don’t think a person who doesn’t reject his sin has truly repented, either. Of course those men shouldn’t be permitted to enter the priesthood. Someone who doesn’t believe a sinful behavior isn’t a sin shouldn’t be allowed to be a priest, no matter what the sin is.
40.png
JimO:
Homosexuality is problematic because technically it isn’t sin unless it is acted upon and yet the tendancy toward homosexuality is disordered
Why is it any more disordered than any other tendancy toward sin? Is it worse than someone who has a tendancy to lie? If he doesn’t lie, he’s not sinning, even though there are times he may feel compelled to lie. Does that mean he’s disordered? Of course not.
40.png
JimO:
In fact, it wouldn’t be fair or appropriate to place a homosexual young man in the midst of other men.
Okay, so then we should just put all the homosexual men on an island and leave them there-because they’re always going to be around other men.

If a man is truly striving to live out God’s will for his life, let him in.

Scout :tiphat:
 
I found it Fix.

**

from LifeSiteNews.com

New Vatican Document on Homosexuality and the Priesthood Coming Before Fall 2005


VATICAN CITY, December 13, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - John Thavis, the Vatican correspondent for the Catholic News Service, an agency of the US Bishops Conference, reports that the Vatican will soon publish a document concerning homosexuality and the priesthood. The report notes that Vatican officials are preparing an inspection (or visitation) of US seminaries to commence in the Fall of 2005 and the document is expected prior to the visitation.

Bishop John C. Nienstedt of New Ulm, Minn., chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Priestly Formation, said in an interview in Rome, “I think they intend to have it out by the time the visitation begins.”

The Vatican has confirmed several times that men with homosexual sexual orientations should not be ordained. The December 2002 bulletin of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments contained a letter signed by Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, who has since retired as the head of the Congregation, which said ordaining such men would be imprudent and “very risky.”

A prominent Vatican document dealing with the issue was released as early as 1961. The 1961 document from the Sacred Congregation for Religious prohibits the admission of homosexuals to the diocesan priesthood and religious orders. The document states: “Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination,” because priestly ministry would place such persons in “grave danger”.

The document is being prepared by the Congregation for Catholic Education in consultation with several other Vatican agencies, including the doctrinal congregation. In a report earlier this year, the education congregation described it as an “instruction on the criteria and norms for the discernment in questions regarding homosexuality in view of the admission of candidates to the seminary and to sacred orders.”

Commenting on the coming document which has been more than five years in the making, Bishop Nienstedt said, "“I think it’s going to be a balanced document, because the whole question of homosexuality not only has psychological dimensions but also has varying degrees of a person acting out or not acting out.” He added, “So the whole question has to be nuanced considerably: ‘What is homosexuality?’ ‘What are the homosexual attractions?’ and that sort of thing. I think this document will be helpful because it is going to address those questions.”

Jhw

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/dec/04121307.html
**
 
The document you referred to was written in 1961-before Vatican II. At that time, you couldn’t receive communion in the hand, either, but now we can. Times change, and as they do, people become more knowledgable about certain aspects of life.

Hopefully, the document that is to come out about the situation, will shed some light on it. I just hope they make the right decision.

Scout :tiphat:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top