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

Dear Cantor Joe,

Thank you for your kindness!

I'm experiencing a "Scriptural renaissaince" under your inspiration, as you know.

I pray that more posters and lurkers visit your domain here and give a more prominent place to the Scriptures in their spiritual life.

Congratulations on a great and much needed service to us all!

Alex

Dear Cantor Joe,

I have one how bout: Therefore but by the grace of God go thee?

That's really the only scripture I personally memorize. And I think it sums up the entire human existence.

I'd like to know who here is in the Priesthood? Axios, myself? So how can we rightly "talk on the homosexual culture of the Priesthood" as if we've experienced this "subculture" first hand. All we can go by is our observations from the outside looking in.

Are you sure your not trying to set this discussion up to fall in to your corner of beliefs? I ask because your insistent on Scripture- which we all no damns homosexuals to hell (at least the males, lesbians seem not to draw God's wrath... perhaps because He's a man and we know men like lesbian action). Your insistent on Church teaching - we know Church teaching as it parrals masturbation one we're going to hell the other we're going to loose our eye site. Of course obviously scripture and Church teaching allows Catholic hierarchy to allow for and arrange situations for the sexual violation of children without the pain of damnation to hell or the lose of eye site.

If I can bring in an analogy here: I've confessed my masturbation to a Priest (good Priest) and he's told me it was abnormal. Fine. So now I've talked to two physciatrist at the VA who've both told me my masturbation was normal and in range of all males my age. So who's right? Frankly I don't think the Church is an authoritive source on all things sexual.

The problem with the homosexuals in the Church as I see it has very little to do with their sexual orientation, so bringing up scripture and Church teaching won't really benifit in my opinion. The problem lies in the culture these said homosexuals have developed and the heterosexuals support... if this subculture exists. Bring in more meat eaters, manly homosexuals, and you'll find more heterosexual males join the ranks. And Church leadership must begin to relazie that it sets the tone of the culture - infact it is responsible. It may have been lacking in it's duty.

Dear Maximus,

I think Cantor Joe set this discussion up responsibly and we haven't been responding to his legitimate issues in the same way.

Cantor Joe did not only include Scripture, but also Tradition and the teachings of the Church, as he plainly said.

I didn't, forgive me, appreciate your attempt at humour by your homosexual/lesbian comment vis a vis the Scriptures.

What Joe has asked is legitimate and he is asking for our views.

He doesn't need, or deserve, our second-rate pop psychology in trying to figure out his motives.

He is a man who is serving the Church of Christ, preparing for the Diaconal Ministry, and all the while raising a family.

Sounds like a man with truly Christian motivation to me!

So you've said you blame the Church leadership.

And you've said we have no business commenting on a gay culture if we've not experienced it ourselves.

Anything else?

Alex

At the risk of steering this thread off topic:

1. Lesbians aren't mentioned in the Bible, as far as I know, because they are women, and the Bible legislates in the male gender. "You shall not covet your neighbour's wife" doesn't mean that a woman can covet her neighbour's husband. It precludes this sort of thing for both male and female.

2. Jesus is God; Jesus is Man. But to make a blanket statement that God is a man seems to fly in the face of the fact that before the Incarnation, God was purely Spirit; and it was before the Incarnation that these rules were laid down. Whether or not men like lesbian action doesn't matter; that doesn't regulate God's law. And from a personal POV, I find the remark that because God is a man, he likes lesbians, and that's why they aren't specifically condemned to be ignorant at best. Sorry, my friend, that's just how I see it.

3. The Church doesn't teach that if you masturbate, you'll lose your eyesight.

4. To say: "Of course obviously scripture and Church teaching allows Catholic hierarchy to allow for and arrange situations for the sexual violation of children without the pain of damnation to hell or the lose of eye site." is another ignorant remark.

5. The Church says masturbation is disordered, not abnormal. There is a difference, however subtle.

Dear Catholicos,

Actually, some Biblical translations have "masturbators" where others translate "homosexuals" and "effeminate."

St Thomas Aquinas regarded masturbation as worse than adultery.

The Eastern Church's canons would often bar a man from the priesthood for masturbation, for having "polluted himself" etc.

The story of masturbators losing their eyesight was concocted by Victorian physicians to stop the practice.

The Church is basically against any sexual activity that is not shared with another according to God's purpose.

Many sex therapists today who deal with sexual dysfunction will counsel married men to stop masturbation et al. and get rid of those things that have "oversexed" us.

The Church can be trusted on this and I've not seen anything by any reputable social scientist in this field who contradicted the most traditional Church and Scriptural teaching in this respect.

But enough about this - I'm getting hungry. Is it lunch-time?

Alex

Maximus,

"... how can we rightly "talk on the homosexual culture of the Priesthood" as if we've experienced this "subculture" first hand. All we can go by is our observations from the outside looking in."

This doesn't mean we cannot discuss it. When we were told that we will know them by their fruits, the suggestion wasn't one of participation in their activities, but observation. Like adultery, one doesn't have to be on the giving or receiving end of the act, but society does feel the results of such conduct unbefitting of marriage. Society does have a say on what goes on behind closed doors because it is society that ends up receiving its results.

This reminds me of the arguments that goes like such: A celibate priest cannot fathom what marriage and raising a family is all about, therefore they are at a loss in trying to comment or advise. I say "Hogwash!" My wife works for OB/GYNs and half of the patients go to male physicians. Does the male doctor have to experience pregnancy and childbirth to understand his business? There are women who will NOT go to a female OB/GYN too! Does one have to do drugs in order to get in touch with the drug culture? Does our non-drug use make us inept in commenting on the problem of drug abuse? I don't think so. This celibate/family-marriage argument fails to recognize that marriage is more than child-bearing and child-rearing. Theosis goes beyond the physics of marriage and conjugal relations. What is marriage if it is not in the context of the relationship between Christ and the Church as we read in Paul's Letter to the Ephesians? Will our bodies lead us in the right direction? We need guidance in helping us reach that end, whether that priest be celibate or married. Many of us can attest to the deep spirituality and many sacrifices celibate priests have made on behalf of us just as much male OB/GYNs have done an excellent job.

My reference to the Scriptures, Church teacing and recent statements on the subject is public material. It can be reflected upon and discussed. These 'sources' serve as anchors to keep us from going adrift if we intend to maintain a Christian commentary on it. Look what happens when these sources are not used in this topic. That's when charity and love ends and harassments begin.


Joe

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

Dear Cantor Joe,

We love y'a, Big Guy!!

Alex

Dear Mr. Thur,

Many times I have heard people refute Scripture teaching on this subject saying that NT verses were written by men.I goall the way back to Leviticus. It was given directly by God.(So is NT but people argue the fact about time spans inwhich it was written, Jesus didn't say it,Jesus himself was Gay etc.) What concerns me is what you stated about a group's behavior in a prior thread.Do you think this has anything to do with the reluctance to ordain married men? Married men are likely not to be as easily intimidated as young un-married seminarians or worry about people viewing the Priesthood as a Gay profession.I think I've heated up the conversation enough for now.

Nicky's Baba

Let me try to take another stab at the topic and hope I am on target.

I would offer that neither Scripture nor Tradition have much to say about "gay culture".

If the assertion is true, it might best be studied along the line of other exampels when the priesthood was viewed as dominated by a particular culture (academic culture, middle class culture, clergy as a particular social group, clergy as squires, etc.) We certainly have had these situations in the past. What was the proper response then?

Axios

Dear Alex & Mor Ephrem,

Mor it's like Alex said I was trying humor and then being sarcastic - which probably didn't work to well, of course I know the Church doesn't teach you will go blind from masturbating.

I appreciate what you say Alex your probably right I was being a bit of a jerk. But come on... the whole issue of Scripture, Church teaching/Tradition is loaded to be against gay guys already. Who can support homosexual men in Scriptures? Tell me... and find a section that specificaly mentions doing good to homosexual men. The Church, it's Tradition, we already know it is against homosexual engaged in homosexual sex.

I first appreciated the way Joe started off the thread. But it became obvious to me that his insistence on Scripture was to load the discussion against homosexuals. Joe if this is not what you where trying to do I'm sorry, but that's how it seems to me.

One other thing it is my inclination to take up for those out numbered, just how it is, I'm no hero don't get me wrong. But I don't like bullies. And this discussion seems geared toward blaming homsexuals (quite is kept... a member of this forum) for the sex scandals in the Church. Instead of putting the blame where it should be put... with the leadership. Yes Alex that's right the leadership... not Scripture and gay men... but the leadership.

What does Scripture say about adultry? So if a heterosexual Priest sleeps with someones wife - which has happened more then once - should all heterosexual men be band from the Priesthood? Or should the Priest be de-frocked or what. Some how I got the feeling heterosexual mens inclination towards attractive women won't be considered grounds for keeping hetero's out of the Priesthood.

Also Alex, Mor, and Joe. You will rarely find me, if ever, using Scripture to build theological arguments. I'm not totaly ignorant of Scripture but I know enough about Scripture to know one needs real training in Scripture to really be able to use Scripture for building theological principles. When I do use Scripture you will more then likely find me useing it to help someone out regarding their own life. Or I'll be useing it for my own personal help. So I tend to defer to the Bishops and theologians when it comes to Scripture as it relates to the theology of the Church.

And Mor I do think that Scripture not refering to lesbians and speaking of women as mens property has everything to do with men and nothing to do with God. Don't get me wrong I do believe God inspired the Bible, but more along the ways I'm sure he inspires writers and poets.

Mor, while I was being sarcastic about the Church leadership being allowed to put children in harms way without fear of pain and so forth, one would be not to far off to consider it the truth... infact I'm sure a number of prosecutors already do. Would you Mor shuffle a Priest known to have molested children around more children? You could do this confident you wouldn't face the pain of hell for this? What is more disturbing leadership that does this or a homosexual Priest quitely administering the Last Rites to someone?

Mor in my old age I come to relize one thing - everyone more often then not has some dirty deeds in the closet. I'm very skeptical when people want to put on their same caps and shirts and go look for people like homosexuals. There is enough guilt to go around in this world but we often like to pick out certian groups of people to blame for the worlds problems.

Anyone remember the Inquistion? Didn't they "clean up" the Church by putting to the stake those *conversos*?

Joe I don't mean to be unfair to you by implying your doing the same thing as "Jew hunting" but you see how this sort of thing can come across?

And yes your right we can discuss things Joe, without having been through certian things ourselves. But I suppose I can only speak for myself when I say I feel very unqualified to speak on the inside culture of the Priesthood. I've never been in it and I don't know that I could be fair.

***

All what I really do regret, more then my sarcasim, is the impression I keep giving on the womanish Priest thing. I thing in many ways I was unfair with those Priest who aren't what we would say the most masculine acting. Suerly many of them have many great and admireable traits. So yes, it is wrong for me to suggest that more machoism is needed, infact I suppose it is not what is needed at all. Perhaps I need to be less trying to be macho maybe that is what is needed

Joe, really I did like the way you started the thread off. But if your intent is to side against homosexuals right from the start, I'm not going to go with it. And you And Alex and Mor can just be angry at me. I still find the leadership at fault. Having said that I'm sure many regret what they failed to do or did, the Cardinal inculded, I make no judgment on them other then the failure in their leadership. The leadership was still at fault.

Tell me... and find a section that specificaly mentions doing good to homosexual men.

I think it falls under "Do good unto others..." If He didn't make any distinction, neither will I.

What does Scripture say about adultry? So if a heterosexual Priest sleeps with someones wife - which has happened more then once - should all heterosexual men be band from the Priesthood?

In all fairness, a valid point...

And Mor I do think that Scripture not refering to lesbians and speaking of women as mens property has everything to do with men and nothing to do with God. Don't get me wrong I do believe God inspired the Bible, but more along the ways I'm sure he inspires writers and poets.

Then you're forced to admit that, since the Bible was inspired by God, and He didn't let anything into it that He didn't want to reveal, that "lesbians are OK", as a friend of mine would say. And since that doesn't square with the teaching of the Church which gave us the Bible as we have it, one or the other is wrong. You pick which.

Would you Mor shuffle a Priest known to have molested children around more children? You could do this confident you wouldn't face the pain of hell for this? What is more disturbing leadership that does this or a homosexual Priest quitely administering the Last Rites to someone?

I'll start with your last statement. I personally don't have a problem with homosexual priests...just those who actively live out that lifestyle by cultivating homosexual relationships, "scoping out the guys", etc. They don't live up to the standards which they should try to live up to, all the more because they represent the God who made the standards...they don't even try.

I would certainly not shuffle a priest around who's guilty of abusing children. I myself would kick them out and turn them in. I agree with you that this problem is one of the leadership, and I for one am disgusted more and more as each day goes by, and new reports of cover ups, intrigues, and abusive clerics are published. Today, for the first time, I felt physically sick after reading them. Some of what I have read previously I felt really bad about, but today I guess was the straw that broke my back; I felt physically sickened by all of it, and all I wanted to do for a while was weep.

As someone considering a priestly vocation, I have a decent idea of how difficult such a thing is to live out...at church on Sunday, our priest just kept talking about what a rough life it is...he's got a funny way of attracting vocations, don't you think? But with all the stuff that's going on now, and all the allegations in every direction of things being brought into light, it gives priests and those who might be considering such a vocation an even harder time.

Today, I was at dinner with a couple of friends, and they saw I was visibly shaken by it all, so we talked about it; and they're not exactly charitable with such things. I asked them if they thought I was gay, since they seemed to feel that the vast majority, if not all, of the priests in this country are homosexuals, active or not. They said that they knew I wasn't gay, but they "don't want" me "messing around with that priest stuff, because the rest of them are, and you don't know what those guys might do...how are you going to deal with a priest guy if he grabs your (blank)?"

From others who know of my discerning a vocation, I've heard such questions as "Why do you want to be a priest? Do you like touching kids?" I like playing peek-a-boo with babies, chasing little kids around the church and playing games with them and telling them jokes and stuff...kids are wonderful, I love kids...that's why I originally wanted to be a pediatrician or a pediatric surgeon...I like dealing with kids. I certainly don't want to abuse them in such a heinous way. Yet, once a family member told me to stop playing with these kids like that because it was unbecoming (for someone who everyone thinks has a priestly vocation) to have such close dealings with kids, even if only to chase them around, play tag, or something like that.

It's really sad that things have come to this. More and more I'm beginning to understand what my priest meant when he said that if you decide to serve God in ordained ministry, "you will never have mental peace in this life".

And you And Alex and Mor can just be angry at me.

I'm not angry at you. I didn't realise you were being sarcastic. And I've been kinda sensitive about these things in recent days. I'm sorry I gave you the impression that I was angry at you. Forgive me.

I still find the leadership at fault. Having said that I'm sure many regret what they failed to do or did, the Cardinal inculded, I make no judgment on them other then the failure in their leadership. The leadership was still at fault.

We agree completely on this point.

“I first appreciated the way Joe started off the thread. But it became obvious to me that his insistence on Scripture was to load the discussion against homosexuals. Joe if this is not what you where trying to do I'm sorry, but that's how it seems to me.”

Maximus, my insistence on the Scriptures was twofold: (1) this is a Focus on Scripture forum, therefore insisting that we deal with any issue from the point of view of the Scriptures is what I do and ask, and (2) to simply give some ear to the basis of Church Tradition, namely the Scriptures. If you have the impression that the Scriptures are loaded against homosexuality then maybe this is worth investigating. What does this tell us?


“… the sex scandals in the Church. Instead of putting the blame where it should be put... with the leadership ... not Scripture and gay men... but the leadership.”

Many would agree with you. I witnessed and learned a lot with seminarians from all over the world and the experiences they shared. It can begin when a Vocation Director states that touching another man's genitals is a valid expression of love. This outraged many seminarians who were not prepared for such direct forwardness of people they were expected to trust. Becoming a seminarian today involves background checks, psychological exams, in-depth interviews, letters of recommendation, etc. The CIA seemed to be easier place to get a job! Yet no such exams are mandated for Vocation Directors. With the events in Boston (and other dioceses) this has been a problem too. The bishop is primarily responsible for the men he ordains. The Pastoral Letters in the NT speak about the “overseer” managing his house well. Playing the Turkey Dance and covering up the actions of wayward priests make him an accomplice. Bishops have to stand before the fearsome judgment seat of Christ for the scandals they fueled. Just as much destruction can be caused by bishops as pedophiles. In the end, people vote with their feet.


“So if a heterosexual Priest sleeps with someones wife - which has happened more then once - should all heterosexual men be band from the Priesthood?”

I believe Alex was the one who brought up banning priests.


“I tend to defer to the Bishops and theologians when it comes to Scripture as it relates to the theology of the Church.”

And this is why it is necessary to pay head to the pastoral letters the Church publishes. Our discussions should include them. At least you recognize that. Many don't.


“I'm very skeptical when people want to put on their same caps and shirts and go look for people like homosexuals. There is enough guilt to go around in this world but we often like to pick out certian groups of people to blame for the worlds problems.”

You forget that the issue of homosexuality is only one of many moral issues facing the Church. The fact that the Church DID publish pastoral letters and statements on this particular issue tells me that it was necessary. Should the Church be accused of picking on certain groups of people or acting in their capacity to advise the faithful about how the issue relates to Church teaching and pastoral care?


“Anyone remember the Inquistion? Didn't they "clean up" the Church by putting to the stake those *conversos*? Joe I don't mean to be unfair to you by implying your doing the same thing as "Jew hunting" but you see how this sort of thing can come across?”

The only seminarians that were "singled out" and asked to leave the schools that I knew were those caught with girls in their rooms thus demonstrating that the gift of celibacy was not really being considered. The topic is about homosexuality and the priesthood. I am somewhat surprised how this issue can become an opportunity for some to bring up the Inquisition, McCarthyism, Jew Hunting, Witch Hunting, etc. It seems that those who are the most defensive of homosexuality are those who come up with the worst terms for the people they are defending. Can you tell me why this is so? No one hear is suggesting a witch hunt or an Inquisition.


“Joe, really I did like the way you started the thread off. But if your intent is to side against homosexuals right from the start, I'm not going to go with it.”

My intent was not to pass judgment on anyone, Maximus. My intent, as stated above, was to put the discussion within the context of the teachings of the Church, but most importantly the Scriptures. This has been my request from the beginning. Alex has made an attempt in one previous post to reflect on Scripture. Your own conclusion about the Scriptures was the fact that it would "load the discussion against homosexuals."


Cantor Joe Thur

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

Mor,

The "doing good to homosexuals" I wrote that out wrong I guess, that was not what I meant to say.

If you feel that doing service in the Priesthood is what you should. And you are willing to commit to it. Then you should. Actually, it has been Priests that I have known who have been the best examples of Christ. Priests of today are generaly the less judgemental and the most patiant. Most people - like your friends - never give consideration to the weight Priests must carry from the years of hearing peoples confessions. Heavy weight to bare. Yet they do it. And they carry the honor of not gossiping.

If you become a Priest Mor, you will suffer. This is the way it will be. So you have to ask yourself if it is worth suffering for.

***

Joe,

I have to say this you do have the ability to state your points well and clearly. And I will give you that you made a number of good points.

I guess why it is opportune to bring up "Jew hunting" and so forth is because well... it's opportune

I'm sorry to hear that you had the experience you had in the seminary. Unfortunate.

Regarding homosexuals Joe, we must also admit to heterosexual mens propensity to commit adultry. Shouldn't we? Most men by my experience, cheat on their wives. But lets look at single men - according to Scripture, infact according to Christ, if one looks upon a married woman with lust he has already committed adultry. *I* years back at a strip club lusted for a striper who I found out was married, from talking with her. The lady was rubbing my *personal area* with her leg. This was in Vegas thus it was all nude. The young woman was really a nice woman in general regards, I know stripers are nice while try to get your money, but I truely believe she was a nice person. Any ways it wasn't until a few months ago that I relized that I committed adultry through that experience. Infact since the age of 21 (I'm 30 now) I've probably gone to strip clubs about 15 or 20 times. So out of all of those times and out of the many women - how many times did I commit adultry? I don't know because I don't know how many if any of the women were married. But I think it might be fair to take my experience and extend it out to a huge proportion of young single men in our society. So I just hope with keeping our own short-comings in mind we can better respect those that are homosexual and have that burden in life.

And Joe, I don't accept homosexuality as the proper order of sexuality, nor do I think persons are just simply born that way (though I accept that there may be some genetical links that participate, at least for many). But I think human sexuality has many complexities to it, and I think we don't do it justice in the way we approach the homosexual topic often. But that's all I will say.

Maximus,

You make good points and thank you for sharing your own experience. This only confirms the notion that homosexuals don't have a "monopoly" on sin. I think I stated that several times. We all are sinners and Paul points that out in Romans 1. The topic was not an attempt to "cast stones" at a particular group of people, but to simply answer the rarely asked question: What does the Church actually teach? Many have answered that there is no teaching, yet there is a lot of documentation in the references I gave on other posts. What is of my concern is the very loud silence on Church teaching, Scripture and recent pastoral letters on this subject. Not only our shortcomings should we keep in mind, but also - and I don't want to sound morbid - our death. Makes for interesting reflections about life!

Yes, we don't fully understand homosexuality. Even if it was biological, it doesn't give the green-light to act on it. Heterosexuals, even married ones (and especially men), have to overcome the 'natural inclination' to act on their sexual desires. Christian morality invites us to go beyond our physical limitedness. I admit that I get bent out of shape when someone states that we are only human. ONLY Human? Does this mean that we are merely biological entities that are doomed to acting out our natural inclinations? Is free will not a factor in this? How about prayer and fasting?

Maybe that is why marriage is considered a means of salvation and a re-confirmation of our baptismal vows? Why does Paul recommend marriage to those who will otherwise sin? Nothing even mentioned about children! Marriage and conjugal relations with one's spouse is a "natural home" for human sexuality and a place to avoid sin, whether it be homosexual or adultery or fornication or masturbation or pedophilia or incest. How much social problems would be avoided if sex was contained within marriage and irresponsible fathers were to remain with the women they impregnate to support and raise their children?

There is a difference between homosexuals who promote their lifestyle with an "in your face" attitude and those who are trying to overcome it. This is similar to the difference between those married heterosexuals who promote pornography, the Playboy life, and lack of commitment in marriage and those who are trying to remain faithful to their spouses during times of stress and lack of security. We should pray for all of them. We need living icons.


Cantor Joe Thur

[ 03-20-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

God's Word states "that the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church." He is cleaning His house, and the darkness will have to loosen the grip it has on man. He also says "anything done in darkness will be brought to the light." These sins will not remain hidden. As the Body of Christ we have been chosen for this time to stand firm for His Church and for society as a whole as the Church goes through its cleansing process. He is asking us to be strong in His Word and faith, to do so we must be steadfast in prayer and the Sacramental life of the Church.

We have been granted so many wonderful priest, don't let illigetimates turn your heart from those who are truly faithful. Take time to kiss their hand, touching your forehead to it, let them know you are standing firm with them. They have given their lives to give us Eucharist, Jesus standing with us in the flesh, always eaten, but never consumed. Should we not stand as well with him? They are hurting because of the sins of a few percentage wise, let us pray that these good men are protected by the armor of God.

A day to us is but a twinkling of an eye to God. Let us pray that the house cleaning will be swift.

Let us also pray for the healing of those souls hurt by rebelious priests. That they be given an overabundance of mercy for healing and whatever help their families need. That the Church accepts responcibility for its actions, so that the true love of the Church for its people will shine forth for all to see. That the right decisions are made in all situations.

Stush