CrossCuT Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) I put this question in a new thread as to not derail the current one regarding a homosexual priest coming out. Below is my original post on that topic: It seems to me that most catholics would find a homosexual priest an abomination (at least thats the impression) so regardless of the method in which he announced himself no one would be happy with it. A question I had a while ago that people refused to speculate on is if having homosexuality somehow made you unable to perform priestly duties since celibacy is the norm in the west. (The same extends to homosexual nuns, or any others in equivalent or related roles) Could it be a spiritual or social deterrent? Spiritually,I would say no. But if you consider the social aspect, I also have to consider that a lot of Catholic congregations still have a large amount of homophobia. So the priest might put a wedge between himself and his congregation if they indeed felt uncomfortable with it. Should they get over that? Yes. But I admit that it might cause a problem with certain members who might take this as a compromise in his faith. Edit: I dont think anyone has suggested that he would be a poor priest because of his homosexuality, but it just reminded me of the question I had a while back. To expand on my original thought, would homosexuality prevent the priest from performing priestly duties? Would the consecration be invalid, would confessions be invalid etc etc. Since the church views homosexuality as inherently evil, would there be any inherent risks, problems, or bars against his ability to perform his duty as it pertains to spiritual nourishment? This isnt really meant to be a huge debate/rage fest, I just want some participating thoughts. Maybe there is some official teaching somewhere that states "Gay people's spiritual lives are throttled due to their sin and therefore are not adequate vessels for holy orders and/or related such things" I guess Im sort of asking something that can also be related to an older conversation about female Cardinals. While there is no actual rule that they CANT be cardinals, is it still ok? I know people fell on both sides of the question but thats sort of how Im viewing this current question. Also please note I am note creating this as a flame thread or to start shenanigans. Edited January 19, 2015 by CrossCuT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoseOfGuadalupe Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I see nothing wrong with a gay priest as long as he is being chaste and stands with the Church's teachings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Historian Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I put this question in a new thread as to not derail the current one regarding a homosexual priest coming out. Below is my original post on that topic: To expand on my original thought, would homosexuality prevent the priest from performing priestly duties? Would the consecration be invalid, would confessions be invalid etc etc. Since the church views homosexuality as inherently evil, would there be any inherent risks, problems, or bars against his ability to perform his duty as it pertains to spiritual nourishment? This isnt really meant to be a huge debate/rage fest, I just want some participating thoughts. Maybe there is some official teaching somewhere that states "Gay people's spiritual lives are throttled due to their sin and therefore are not adequate vessels for holy orders and/or related such things" I guess Im sort of asking something that can also be related to an older conversation about female Cardinals. While there is no actual rule that they CANT be cardinals, is it still ok? I know people fell on both sides of the question but thats sort of how Im viewing this current question. Also please note I am note creating this as a flame thread or to start shenanigans. There may be psychological issues to consider when asking this question, due to the disordered nature of homosexual attraction, there are great likelihoods that there are other issues in the individual's past that drives these inclinations. But, that controversial point beside, the biggest reason for not ordaining homosexual men is becasuse the priesthood will be a massive occassion of sin for them. When they go to seminary? Surrounded by men in close quarters. Enters religious life? Oh his neighbour's an attracrtive young guy. When he's in the priesthood? Constantly in touch with his fellow priests, even intimately so due to the nature of the priesthood, is expected to be involve in parish life, and, with men, that involves spending a lot of time with them, in sporting activities and bars, and there will also be cases, such as the recent sex abuse scandals, where young adolescent men will be at risk. This isn't like women's ordination. A guy man can be validly ordained, albeit illicitly. There's no deep theologically scientific reason for why he shouldn't be ordained. It's a matter of prudence and human judgement call. We are free to dissent in our opinion, but not, of course, in our practise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted January 19, 2015 Author Share Posted January 19, 2015 I dont know how being around other men is a massive occasion of sin. Are you implying that everyday encounters with friends of the opposite sex is a massive near occasion of sin for heterosexuals? A different orientation does not mean you are attracted to 100% potential mates let alone sexually attracted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Sacraments celebrated by a gay priest are valid. Mass celebrated by a gay priest is valid. In both cases, I'm assuming that the priest intends what the Church intends the sacrament or Mass to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Historian Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I dont know how being around other men is a massive occasion of sin. Are you implying that everyday encounters with friends of the opposite sex is a massive near occasion of sin for heterosexuals? A different orientation does not mean you are attracted to 100% potential mates let alone sexually attracted. But you're over-simplifying matters. It's not just that a priest is around other men, it's that he's always in intimate contact with other men. Either in the seminary, whether there is a geographical intimacy, or later, in the priesthood, where there is an emotional intimacy due to the bond of brotherhood that priests estabish with themseves. You have sacrificied having a family, so you turn towards one another for support and friendship. Those reationships can be a grave occassion of sin. If I wouldn't let my teenage daughter go to an all-boy's slumber party, I wouldn't let my son go to one either. It's just prudence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franciscanheart Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 It's been told to me several times that homosexuality is not an automatic disqualifier for religious vocation. If God is calling, God is calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Historian Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said... "The issue at stake here is the intrinsic truth of sexuality's significance in the constitution of man's being. If someone has deep-seated homosexual inclinations–and it is still an open question whether these inclinations are really innate or whether they arise in early childhood–if, in any case, they have power over him, this is a great trial for him, just as other trials can afflict other people as well. But this does not mean that homosexuality thereby becomes morally right. Rather, it remains contrary to the essence of what God originally willed … For, in the end, their attitude toward man and woman is somehow distorted, off centre, and, in any case, is not within the direction of creation of which we have spoken." "Sexuality has an intrinsic meaning and direction, which is not homosexual. We could say, if we wanted to put it like this, that evolution has brought forth sexuality for the purpose of reproducing the species. The same thing is true from a theological point of view as well. The meaning and direction of sexuality is to bring about the union of man and woman And, in this way, to give humanity posterity, children, a future. This is the determination internal to the essence of sexuality. Everything else is against sexuality's intrinsic meaning and direction. This is a point we need to hold firm, even if it is not pleasing to our age ... Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don't want to get married anyway." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Historian Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders [...] 2. Homosexuality and the Ordained Ministry From the time of the Second Vatican Council until today, various Documents of the Magisterium, and especially the Catechism of the Catholic Church, have confirmed the teaching of the Church on homosexuality. The Catechism distinguishes between homosexual acts and homosexual tendencies. 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. 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]. 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]. Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem - for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted January 19, 2015 Author Share Posted January 19, 2015 But you're over-simplifying matters. It's not just that a priest is around other men, it's that he's always in intimate contact with other men. Either in the seminary, whether there is a geographical intimacy, or later, in the priesthood, where there is an emotional intimacy due to the bond of brotherhood that priests estabish with themseves. You have sacrificied having a family, so you turn towards one another for support and friendship. Those reationships can be a grave occassion of sin. If I wouldn't let my teenage daughter go to an all-boy's slumber party, I wouldn't let my son go to one either. It's just prudence. Im in intimate contact with men and women everyday and I do not find myself sexually aroused at every turn of the corner. I dont think its an oversimplification. However I think that a lot of Catholics have a willfulness to find fault in something that does not warrant it. :idontknow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Couple things responding to CC's original post: Homosexuality is NOT inherently evil. Distinction between acts and tendencies and all that. As AnHistorian stated, there's currently a ban on the ordination of gay men. However, I'm not sure if it's that clear in practice. Is the three years removed reference apply to men who have the inclination but haven't acted on it in three years, or just to those who consider it a phase? For example, a man who doesn't find himself at all attracted to women, but has been practicing chastity? I don't think that is clear; I think that is open to further debate/discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Personally, I think that in a perfect world, it wouldn't matter. A guy makes a vow of chastity, who cares if he's attracted to men or women? I find the "gay men can't relate properly to men/women" argument totally lacking in credibility. I've heard the practical argument that in seminary, men are encourage to form friendships with each other for support, and I can see how that could make things more difficult for gay men. But on the other hand, these people know they're taking up a celibate calling, and that's not something I would do, because I'm 99% sure I'm called to marriage (on the other hand, it's not like homosexuals have much choice about celibacy in the eyes of the Church). The only way we could really know for sure is to actually talk to gay people and take what they say seriously. It doesn't make sense that only heterosexuals would be involved or consulted in making a decision about whether or not gay men can be priests. But how many bisexual men have been ordained? And at it's heart, I think there's still a significant level of homophobia permeating the ideological landscape. And do we have similar rules about heterosexual men and their last relationship or "encounter"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 The way it was explained on Catholic Answers Live is thus: Gay men are not barred from being ordained. If you look at the wording of the document, it says "deep-seated same sex attraction", which is to say, something that affects you and your personality in a very strong way. A guy who is very flamboyant and has a lot of effeminate mannerisms would not be considered for the priesthood because his sexuality has deeply and strongly affected who he is both as a person and how he expresses himself. Which is not a judgment saying it is necessarily wrong for men to act that way, but that this type of personality is not fit for the priesthood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oremus Pro Invicem Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) And do we have similar rules about heterosexual men and their last relationship or "encounter"? While I haven't seen anything official, I beleive a heterosexual's behavior prior to applying to a seminary is also taken under consideration and could cause an issue if the person is still battling with issues of impurity, or has shown a lack of time from being free of such a problem. For example if I had problems with impurity for 12 years and experienced one year of impurity free living and I applied for the seminary then I would most likely be denied. Edited January 20, 2015 by Oremus Pro Invicem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 . The only way we could really know for sure is to actually talk to gay people and take what they say seriously. Are you out of you mind?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now