Why can't men with SSA be ordained priests?

[cjoliver]

I accept the Church’s judgement that, "while profoundly respecting the persons in question, [she] cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who . . . present deep-seated homosexual tendencies . . . "

In your estimation, what is the best argument for why this is the case?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It says “deep-seated”. That basically means “prone to temptation and may have lived scandalously before becoming priests.”

In addition to being prone to temptation, the Church has had a past problem with gay men entering the clergy in order to have a socially acceptable and respectable profession that would not raise eyebrows in the way being a single man out in the world not dating women would have done. For some men who were able to control themselves and were spiritually inclined, this probably worked out fine, but others were kind of joining for the wrong reasons and ended up falling off the chastity wagon or causing other problems.

 

[rosejmj]

There is an article on First things written by a man living with SSA. He lives out the Catholic teaching on chastity and he strongly believes that men with SSA should not enter the priesthood. He says chastity is often more difficult for them and often there is some psychological reasons behind it too. Not there fault so I understand how it can seem unfair. It is definitely a cross for anyone with SSA, whether or not they follow Church teaching or not

 

[PJH_74]

He says chastity is often more difficult for them and often there is some psychological reasons behind it too.

I have a very good gay friend that was a virgin at least until his late 30/early 40s. The topic has not come up recently, but there’s a good chance this is still the case. He puts emotional connection well before anything physical and has had a number of such relationships. So one has to be a bit careful with such generalizations and in reality, my friend has lived a life on this topic in line with church teaching. If anything gay men are, well, they are men.

Let’s not pretend that a parish priest does not have access to women and can easily break church teaching on sex, even outside their vows. Remember the Catholic church acknowledges that gay people have the right to exist as gay people. It only equates homosexual sex as any other teaching, say as sex outside marriage.

I think the reason you see push back on gay priests has a great part to do with these men becoming priests to avoid something. This holds true for anyone trying to become a priest, nun, or whatever. Doing this has to a spiritual discernment and commitment, there can be no other reason to do so. It cannot be used to run away from something in the world.

 

[rosejmj]

I see your point. I think it may be harder once a man has engaged in sexual behaviors. That could apply any man though. If he has to engaged in sexual behaviors then I’m not even sure his tendencies are deep seated.

 

[commenter]

It only equates homosexual sex as any other teaching, say as sex outside marriage.

Well, a little different. Heterosexual sex acts outside marriage violate the Moral law.
Homosexual acts outside marriage violate the Moral law, and the Natural Law. Heterosexual acts may also violate the Natural Law sometimes, but not inherently, as in all homosexual acts.

 

[po18guy]

The sex scandal has been reported as “pedophilia” too many times to count. How many times have we heard “pedophile priests” for example? So many times that the phrase has been ingrained into our linguistic memories.

But, is that true? The John Jay report noted that 81% of incidents involved priests engaging in relations with post-pubescent males - that is not pedophilia unless you expand the definition. That is homosexual behavior. Remember that these are the same aged boys/young men which the public schools are hurriedly instructing in condom use and other sexual practices. So is public school curriculum pedophilic?

And, note the “deep seated” in the statement - I think your answer is found there.

Argument and disagreement to follow.

 

[Kima]

Homosexual acts outside marriage violate the Moral law

I suspect you already know this, but to clarify: Homosexual acts do always violate the Moral law. And marriage is only valid if between man and woman.

 

[commenter]

In my post, I had put in the wrong phrase by mistake. Of course, their is no homosexual marriage, but I was responding to comparison of adultery, which can be by homosexual or heterosexual acts.

 

[goout]

I accept the Church’s judgement that, "while profoundly respecting the persons in question, [she] cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who . . . present deep-seated homosexual tendencies . . . "

In your estimation, what is the best argument for why this is the case?

Because the priest ought to model chastity, and any person who has a deep seated struggle with chastity will struggle to model Christ.

 

[Kima]

It´s okay

God bless you!

 

[TK421]

There is no prohibition to people attracted to the same sex becoming priests or religious. This was probably fairly common for the past 2000 years, although people attracted exclusively to the same sex also married and had children.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

He puts emotional connection well before anything physical and has had a number of such relationships

There are actually a lot of people, gay AND straight, who do this. Unfortunately the world will always see any emotional bond through a sexual lens because of our sex-obsessed culture.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

This was probably fairly common for the past 2000 years,

I’m sure it’s still common, assuming that the people involved are able to control themselves and not behave in any untoward way, and that if tempted they take steps to remove themselves from the situation and do not sin.

 

[PJH_74]

Heterosexual acts may also violate the Natural Law sometimes

I’m not sure why such a distinction has to be brought up. By Church teaching a sex act is either “Natural” or “Unnatural”; there are no extra prizes because of the genders involved.

 

[PJH_74]

There are actually a lot of people, gay AND straight, who do this. Unfortunately the world will always see any emotional bond through a sexual lens because of our sex-obsessed culture.

That list, can include parents by default.

 

[dochawk]

Remember that these are the same aged boys/young men which the public schools are hurriedly instructing in condom use and other sexual practices.

Not in all of the cases–particularly those in which the abused are seminarians, adults, in which case it is homosexuality and not pedophilia .

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The sex scandal has been reported as “pedophilia” too many times to count. How many times have we heard “pedophile priests” for example? So many times that the phrase has been ingrained into our linguistic memories.

A 12- to 14-year-old may technically be “post-pubescent” but to the average person on the street, especially the average parent, that’s pedophilia. They’re not interested in making some distinction between a priest who likes 7-year-olds and one who likes 12-year-olds. It’s disgusting both ways.

 

[LawyersGunsAndMoney]

Right. Yes, technically an adult who goes after a 13 year old is not a pedophile, but insisting on the point just looks weirdly defensive and pedantic.

 

[commenter]

I think the distinction between “deep seated,” and others who MAY be ordained, needs to be explained more.