www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings What does the Church teach?

One of the mature aspects of intelligent discussion is the ability to tackle tough issues, however controversial, within the context of charity.

I post below an article about a book, “The Changing Face of the Priesthood,” written by a former head of St. Mary's Seminary (Latin Catholic) in Cleveland, Ohio. The book deals head-on with the issue of homosexuality in the priesthood today.

= = = = = = = = = =

"Gay Culture" Threat to US Priesthood: Heterosexuals are made to feel uncomfortable, claims top churchman

Noel Young

Taken from SCOTLAND ON SUNDAY
June 11, 2000

A leading American churchman is claiming that the Roman Catholic priesthood has become "primarily a gay culture" that deters heterosexual men from taking up vocations.

The Changing Face of the Priesthood, by Father Donald Cozzens, says an exodus of experienced priests from the church, many of them to marry, has drastically altered the gay-straight ratio. "At issue at the beginning of the 21st century is the growing perception that the priesthood is, or is becoming, a gay profession," Cozzens writes. "Heterosexual seminarians are made uncomfortable by the number of gays around them."

"The straight seminarian feels out of place and may interpret his inner destabilization as a sign that he does not have a vocation for the priesthood." Cozzens, a priest for 35 years, is head of St. Mary's Seminary in Cleveland, Ohio. He does not go into whether gay priests indulging in sexual relations are violating vows of celibacy, but he says: "The sexual contacts and romantic unions among gay seminarians create intense and complicated webs of intrigue and jealousy."

Dean Hoge, a specialist on the priesthood at the Catholic University of America, describes the Cozzens book, now on sale in Ireland and Scotland, as "the most important we have seen on Catholic Priests for years."

Bishop Robert Morneau praised the author. "I think he raises some very important issues," he said. "We need to look at what's going on."

Cozzens was well aware he was stirring up a storm when he wrote his book. After one interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, which provoked calls for his resignation as rector of the local seminary, he has stopped giving interviews. He told the reporter: "I had to write this book. Parts of it have been percolating in my soul since my days teaching at college.

"I don't think we, in the Church, have asked ourselves what is God's spirit saying to us through these most recent crises the sexual misconduct with minors and the large numbers of priests who have stepped away from their calling. Cozzens covers many other ills of the priesthood in his book, but it is chapter seven, Considering Orientation, that has drawn all the attention. "I confess to a certain anxiety as I begin this reflection on homosexuality and the priesthood," he writes.

"Whatever it said about such a sensitive and complex issue is open to misunderstanding and seeming insensitivity. Some will deny the reality that many observers see as changing the face of the priesthood that the percentage of homosexual priests and seminarians is significantly higher than society at large.

"Others will see any attention given to the phenomenon as a symptom of the homophobia that is characteristic of individuals with less than open minds. Still others will wonder what difference sexual orientation makes in the celibate lives of priests."

Cozzens says the need gay priests have for friendship with other gay men, and their shaping of a social life largely comprised of other homosexually oriented men, has created a gay subculture in most of the larger US dioceses.

The Catholic Church in America has paid out many millions of dollars in child sex abuse cases. Cozzens points out that most priests who are abusers target teenage boys, unlike most other child abusers who tend to target girls. Figures for the number of homosexual priests in the American Church are very difficult to pin down. Cozzens says estimates range up to 60%.

Cozzens is not against ordaining gay men, and he concedes some effective bishops and even some popes may have been gay. But, he argues, an overwhelmingly gay clergy affects how lay people view the priesthood and also the intake of recruits. He says the priesthood's crisis and the Church's crisis of soul is in part a crisis of orientation. "Sooner or later the issue will be faced more forthrightly than it has been in the closing days of the 20th century. The longer the delay, the greater the harm to the priesthood and to the Church."

[reprinted with permission from Life Enterprises Unlimited]

= = = = = = = = = = =

I find this interesting (disturbing?) because it comes from a veteran priest who was directly involved with vocations.

What are your comments?


Holy Mother Church has published several official statements regarding this issue, namely:

'Persona Humana' [Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics] December 29, 1975: http://www.newadvent.org/docs/df75se.htm

'On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.' Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church, October 1, 1986: http://www.newadvent.org/docs/df86ho.htm

From Melkite Bishop, John Elya of the Eparchy of Newton:
http://www.melkite.org/bishopQA.htm#Homosexuality:

Is there a homosexual spirituality in Christian Church Tradition? If so, where can we find it? If not, can there be one as equally honorable as Christian Marriage?

Since everything we do is a "public" liturgy, what can we say about those relationships done in secret without celebration?

What do the canons and Church Fathers teach?

My main concern is: How can we relate what is going on, per the former rector's book, to the Scriptures?

Due to the sensitivity of this topic, please keep discussions at a charitable and Christian level.

In your posts, please note the references you base your response on. I hope that this thread can be a beginning of an honest reflection from a biblical perspective. I welcome all Bible quotes/passages.

Cantor Joe Thur
Moderator

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Dear Cantor and Mentor Joe Thur,

Forgive me a sinner!

This is a very important issue and one that you've framed in a very intellectually responsible way.

I think there certainly is a wide public perception of the celibate culture of the priesthood being either overtly Gay or else CONDUCIVE to the maintenance of a Gay lifestyle.

My grandmother was of the "old school" where being "gay" only meant being exceedingly joyous.

But she always suspected celibate priests, especially if they were handsome, of being unfaithful to their vows as heterosexuals.

It was partly because of this overt public perception of Gay priestly culture that I experienced, in all places, in a Catholic school designed to promote priestly vocations, and the nastiness associated with it all, that I gave up on the Priesthood for me.

The guidance counsellors at school, although Catholic, when they heard I was interested in the Priesthood, interviewed me for about a year and, among other things, tried to determine if I had any "Gay tendencies" that would make me "want" to become a celibate Priest.

Of course, I never did - I wanted to be a married Priest, but since they thought that "Byzantine Catholic" had to do with being conniving, that didn't sink in at all.

The counsellors were, for the most part, former seminarians who told me that the seminary they attended had Gay candidates - something that troubled them.

The point is that I was sick of all the harassment, the innuendo and then the cruelty of my classmates that scared me off.

I didn't think I should have gone through this in a Catholic high school.

I was never in a major seminary and don't know what goes on there.

I just know that the public perception of Gay culture in the Priesthood is strong and engenders real inner conflict for people who would otherwise consider serving Christ and His Church in the Priesthood.

Alex

I guess several proposals or issues to consider.

First, let us divide the question. First part, sexually active unmarried priests. I don't have any answers here other than it seems the gender of the sexual partner is not a major matter other than if it is a woman, I includes the addtional moral issue of possibly creating new life without a stable two-parent family to care for the new life.

Second, sexually inactive constitutional homosexuals.

A) I guess first we need to work at bringing about a world where striaght men can accept situations where they are not the dominate group. People who can only function when their group is the majority should not be candidates for the priesthood.

B) Admit the Latin liberals and the Greek Trads are right, ordain married men.

C) Accept the fact that the ability to respond to this is quite limited without developing a McCarthyistic Witch Hunt. Exactly how does one rid the priesthood of constitutional homosexauls? Limp wrists? Football disinterest? Too much time at classical concerts? Excessive interest in obsucure and elaborate liturgies such as the Byzantine rite? (OK, the last one might work )

K.

In the spirit of St. Augustine, I ask forgiven for the comment about Byzantine liturgics.

K.

So Kurt, you think only "constitutional" (don't know where this term has come from as the Constitution doesn't mention Homosexuals, AFAIK) homosexuals are the only ones with an interest in our Byzantine Liturgies?


I think if you were following in the spirit of St Augustine you would not have made such a comment to begin with or you would have editited your reply.

I am sorry to say Kurt, but this comment really disgusted me, and to think at times in the past I actually tried to defend you and your apparent "troll-ness".

David

Well if I may....

One, I don't think people on the whole are "called" to the Priesthood. Just my opinion. But I think the culture of a society can engender in it's young qualities of service to others - to something greater then themselves - or qualities that tend more towards selfishness.

Two, why does the gay "culture" have to promote womanish qualities about it's self on the whole? The rare portrait of the gay man is one latin machismo. Most often gay men, by there own doing in the media and culture, put forth gay = girly. I have no problem with men that act womanish, really I don't, but I'm not going to be lead by them. Gay men would find more tolerance if they would transform their rainbow flags into... black & gray raider colors... I don't know? But the Priesthood would not be rolling through these gay crises images if more of the gays in the Priesthood seemed more "a man's man".

A Priest I've known since childhood once told me that the Priesthood use to promote boxing within in it's ranks as away of relieving stress. But he says that is no longer promoted. I know... boxing is barbaric... ya, ya, ya. The same people have never been sandwiched in football. Look meditation, reading , drawing, poetry, should all be promoted. But why can't the physical harding of the body through sports also be acceptable?

The over all culture of much of the Church is viewed as womanish and ready to be lead by a strong woman who could take the timid men of the Church by her pinky and lead them like a task master.

I hope I do not offend all of the good Priest out there, gay or straight, "manly" or womanish. I only mean to express what I see as the predominate image given by the Church today.

I must say though, that I am very impressed with the young seminarians today.

I personaly would not feel bad about being around gay men that act like "men". I don't get any sex from women either so we have something in common. A common bond as it were.

Justin,
What do you mean by this?

You do not believe that God specifically calls individuals to the religious life or the priesthood?

David

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Dear David and Justin,

The Church does indeed teach about the reality of vocations to the Priesthood.

It is up to the Church to discern such a vocation before the ordination of a candidate.

Without such discerning of a vocation, given by God, of course, the Church will not ordain.

We really should not question the validity of vocations unless we wish to question the validity of the workings of the Spirit in the Church of Christ.

Forgive me a sinner,

Alex

I do - Padre Pio - yes. Most Priests no. Most monks no. Most Nuns no.

It's just my opinion David one which I'm sure no one will listen to so don't get so concerned.

I think one can commit to a number of things - religious life one of them. I recall the Virgin Mary telling some children she would like them to join religious life, but only if they wanted to. Was it the Fatama children??? Well at any rate I don't believe God "calls" or whispers in the ears or "moves" people to religious life. You can find people of all faiths claiming, in all sincerity, that God calls them to be Rabbi's, Imams, Baptist Pastors, Buddhist this Hindue that.

If God called all of these homosexuals or child molestors to the Priesthood then why are we even having this discussion. His Work Is Done.

“First, let us divide the question.”


Kurt,

I was the one who began this thread with questions pertaining to Church teaching, Scripture and recently published documents. Discussing this topic needs some “anchor” to keep it from going adrift – as it has in past threads. So I don't want to arbitrarily divide it any further than relating the issue to the 'paramaters' I set forth - Church teaching, Scripture, and recent documents from Holy Mother Church. Your post makes no connection with these.

I would like to make some comments and questions on your post because I have some difficulty trying to understand you points and how they relate to the parameters I established:

A) Is it really an issue of “straight men” (however defined) accepting a minority status? What does that have to do with the tenets of Church teaching and Scripture? Christian morality has always found itself a minority voice in a culture that “knoweth not God.” Christian morality is basically a counterculture system of ethics. Its Pro-Life stance is a case in point. Straight men are also obliged to live chaste lives (cf. Romans 1:18-32) and not as adulterers.

B) What does “Liberalism” and “Traditionalism” have to do with Ortho-praxis in Christian living? These terms have always disturbed me in theological discussions. One either follows Christ and adheres to the teachings of the Church or one doesn't. If we are to discuss the issue of whether ordaining married men, we should first approach it from Scripture and Tradition. Don't you think?

C) I find it hard to believe that the Church can only address moral issues by initiating a program of McCarthyism. Maybe this isn't what you really implied? In the documents I posted, the Church is very careful in stating that charity remains. The woman caught in adultery can be anyone for anyone transgression against God and fellow brothers and sisters. The one ready to stone the transgressor can be anyone too. Notice how the older guys walked away first (older = more years to accumulate sin?). In regards to a Witch Hunt, this can also refer to networks of homosexual clergy intimidating priests who challenge the status quo in various dioceses and religious communities. The "hunt" can go both ways. The author of the book I quoted above, Fr. Donald Cozzens, writes about seminarians being made “uncomfortable” and “out of place.” This experience is real for many who have done the seminary thing at one place or another. Aside from what may seem to be Witch Hunts or Inquisitions, we have to decide if living a life based on Christ should be our focus first. If I signed a contract to perform a certain service and not do it, can I make a claim for payment?

I don't understand your comment (and later apology one minute later) about Byzantine liturgics?

In reading your post, I cannot help but sense that everything is seen as political. Majority, minority, dominance, liberal, Traditional, McCarthyism, and constitutional are terms you used - none of which are from the Scriptures or Church Teachings nor on what Christian morality is based. In light of what you wrote, “Accept the fact that the ability to respond to this is quite limited,” how can we respond and/or converse in the context of “Tradition” (a Tradition that actually includes the Magesterium and the Scriptures)?


Cantor Joe Thur
Moderator

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

I am going to try to be objective and balanced and charitable.

I would strongly agree with Kurt. If the Catholic Church wishes to remove from the priesthood those priests who are celibate but with a homosexual nature, no means to that goal exists other than some methods that would be quite disturbing. I think it would be impossible for it not to turn into a situation of people "turning in" others who they did not care for or making judgements on a few attributes that are stereotyped as "gay" (since in this situation, you do not have the sexual act to define gays).

And yes, I get the joke that an interest in "high" liturgics might be one of the features that get used to weed out these celibate priests with a homosexual orientation.

A Vatican spokesperson last week suggested that removing celibate gays might be an objective of the Church. He was vague but has not taken the opportunity to clarify himself. If he is being understood correctly, I have a very low opinion of him.

We can have our differences as to gay sexual behavior. But on this issue of celibate gay priests I see no way a decent Christian can justify a campaign to have them removed from the priesthood. Every organization has cliques and takes legitimate steps to deal with them. This does not jusify some of the actions that have been mentioned in the press.

I think everyone here is a fair minded person. But I think you all need to understand how soceity treats gay people. Catholics, Orthodox and all people of good will need to re-evaluate how they treat gay people. The Catholic Church says birth control is a sin, but did you every hear of someone beating up another person because they used birth control? Or because they divorced? You can beleive homosexuality is wrong but also believe that our society has a real problem in the amount of violence and hate that is directed against gay people.

An yes, darhlings, we do have good liturgical sense!

Axios

So far, there has been no commentary on what the Church teaches on the issue of homosexuality. I opened this thread to give one more attempt to discuss this issue in a civil and intelligent manner.

I have given three areas where one can begin commentary, namely Tradition, Scripture and recent Church documents. My understanding is that no one is really interested in what the Church really teaches simply by the fact that no one ever refers to it in such discussions.

If there is to be no serious commentary on Church teachings, the Scriptures and recent Church documents (I gave the links above) on the issue of homosexuality (and the priesthood) then I will consider closing this thread, something I had no intentions on doing.


Joe Thur
Moderator

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Dear Cantor Joe,

While I agree that Kurt and Axios have addressed the issue from a more political point of view, I didn't get the sense from the original article that initiated this thread that we are to discuss how the Church views homosexuality, but homosexuality as a culture in the priesthood.

If I am wrong, please forgive me.

Clearly, St Paul encapsulates the view of the Church on homosexuality in 1 Corinthians, 6:9 (NKJV):

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, . . . will inherit the kingdom of God."

Also, in Romans 1:27:

"Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."

The Church has consistently taught the same, that homosexual acts are inherently disordered and sinful.

At no time is the issue of a "homosexual orientation" discussed.

In fact, historical religious commentators on homosexuality have understood it to be a moral disorder of heterosexuals.

Caesars who had wives and families often practiced homosexuality as a way to do develop an aristocratic "in-group" i.e. doing something the Great Unwashed did not. They also ate in abnormal ways etc.

The idea that someone could have a "homosexual orientation" is something that has only relatively recently been realized.

There have been saints who have affirmed their homosexual orientation, and yet were priests, monks and even popes as they were celibate (St Aelred of Rievaulx, Pope Julius II, and King Edward II's homosexual orientation did not prevent him from being widely venerated a saint).

Lev Gillet, Monk of the Eastern Church, went so far as to say that the moral jury is still out on homosexual acts between those of a homosexual orientation.

The fact is there are aspects to sexual morality that are largely undeveloped in Christianity, largely because of the "celibate culture" that has permeated it historically.

The Old Testament, however, is anything but a representative of celibate culture.

Alex

"... I didn't get the sense from the original article that initiated this thread that we are to discuss how the Church views homosexuality, but homosexuality as a culture in the priesthood."


Alex,

Excellent observation! You are correct. Your attempt to comment on this issue based on the Scriptures and Church teaching first was what I hoping for. This is a Scripture forum and our understanding of things should begin there and not on personal feelings and politics.

As I initially wrote, "My main concern is: How can we relate what is going on, per the former rector's book, to the Scriptures?"

How can we comment on 'homosexuality as a culture in the priesthood' without considering the larger culture or context of Church and its teachings? Thank you for your wonderful response. You demonstrated that a Church that emphasizes Tradition (which includes Scripture) can actually make use of the sources of that Tradition.


Joe

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]