www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Are Most Priest Homosexuals?

Dear Alex,

I'm so sorry to hear of your sad story as a young man. But I am glad the Lord sent you to us as our "Web Rabbi". Keep coming back, keep sharing, and keep teaching those Priests.

--------------------------

As far as this thread is concerned, I have met two Priests who have had "sex problems", both of whom have since passed away. One was a local pastor who pleaded guilty to abusing a boy in the parish and was removed.

The other was more prominent. I met Archbishop Eugene Marino when he was an auxiliary to Cardinal Hickey in Washington, DC. He had to resign as Archbishop of Atlanta because he had a relationship with a woman. He lived the rest of his life counseling clergy with drinking problems and passed away a couple of years ago.

I think most Priests are trying hard to keep their vows. There are those who fall, but they are mostly better people than I am. Unfortunately, when they fall, they attract more attention. Even the worst sinners are very good at being bad examples.

There is, of course, a big difference between what you think about or are attacted to, and what you do about it.


John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the phrasing of the various questions about 'homosexuality', 'heterosexuality', 'bisexuality', and 'pedophilia'. The implication is that these are adequate descriptions for people. I'm sorry to say it: but I think it's not.

The psych types tell us that people move along a spectrum of sexuality from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual with a number of potential stops in the middle. Determinedly heterosexual men who get sent to jail get transformed into determined homosexuals while incarcerated, and then revert when released. It's just their sexuality.

For the clergy, there is the constant psychological orientation to love everyone; and I suspect that sometimes this orientation puts priests in the middle of the Kinsey spectrum.

But the issue of sexuality is not the critical one when dealing with the revelations about Boston, St. Louis, Philadelphia, etc. All human beings are sexual. BUT, the critical issue is one of adhering to one's vows. I knew seminary colleagues who transgressed -- and it disgusted me. Not because of the sexuality or sexual activity, but because the man didn't have the guts to live up to his word. (This is a real bugaboo of mine -- a man, to be a man, must keep his word.) If one professes celibacy and chastity, then, damn it!!, that's what you need to do. And if one can't do that, then resign.

Sexuality is not an illness. It's a God-given gift. Vows are also a gift, given by man and accepted by God. Neither one should be abused or disregarded.

As for pedophilia, it's an illness and the person should be sent to a mental institution for lifelong treatment. Inside.

So, yes. There are priests who are all along the sexuality spectrum. All well and good. But if one has a vow of chastity, then it is to be kept, unconditionally. Those weaklings who violate it sin twice: once by violating their public vows; secondly by causing scandal in the Church and denigrating the office of priest.

I don't mean to be harsh. But for me, growing up rather poor and blue collar, we didn't have much; but a man's word was his bond and his treasure. And I have little sympathy for those who don't keep their word. It doesn't cost them anything. And if one can't do that, then of what value is one's life?

Let us remember all the good priests who are now becoming suspect just by being priests. Let us pray for them; let us be supportive of them; and let us show them the familial love that should be the characteristic of the Christian family.

Blessings!

Dr. John,

I liked your post. There is much in it to reflect on, including your point about how people move through various degrees of sexuality you are right. Even at the age of 30 I am just coming to grips with my sexuality, although to most it would appear I always was totaly secure, confident, and understanding in it. For instance most heterosexual men fantasise at times about raping women (not in the bloody sense, but in the erotic take charge sense). How does this jive with ones Chistianity and devotion to the Holy Mother? I don't know.

You are a bit more hardcore then I, I would not refer to persons that engage in pedophilia as weaklings, though I suppose I come of as hardcore sometimes.

Anyways I appreciate what you said about your blue collar and poverty background. I do think these things can build "character" in a person. For myself I never grew up hungry or went without, and I was raised in a middle class neighborhood with a number of poor people living throughout that neighborhood. It wasn't the best of worlds but it wasn't the worst. And good things were instilled as well as bad. But ones word was one of those things that was given "esteem" if you will

Having said all that let me say that as an adult I have not always kept my word and thus Dr John you help me remember to look at the beam in my own eye while I'm try to take the torn or beam out of other peoples eyes. *Mea Culpa, Mea Maximus Culpa*.

Dear Friends:

I can't believe that a topic of this nature, started less than 24 hours ago, has already received so many responces.

You will excuse me then if I do not post a reply myself, I could post a few very pertinant occurances, but this topic touches on the sanctity of the Priesthood and I would rather not.


Sincerely
defreitas


PS.
My Grandfather told my Grandmother: "If I should fall ill don't call him."

Maximus,

Men are also potential murderers, adulterers, Sodomites, thieves, etc,...

But the key word is "potential" and this is why all men - and women - are asked to pray to our Father not to be led into temptation. You can't hold something against someone simply because they have the "potential" to do something evil or sinful for such charges ignore the good that comes from people who keep temptation away and lead good lives. If it ends up that people get prosecuted for having potential to do something then we are in grave danger. It leads to the idea that one is "guilty" first whether evidence is present or not. Then we must ask who has the ability and authority to lay charges against one's brother or sister without evidence and without any 'acts' being done?

We are alarmed about homosexuality and pedophilia in the priesthood (and it IS there and it HAS caused much destruction in our churches), but fail to realize that the public schools play the Turkey Dance too with their wayward teachers. It's not just bishops who are covering up such things. I saw many good men leave the Latin seminary due to this issue. Most of our seminarian conferences were about celibacy and homosexuality. It was a freaky experience after one such homosexuality spirituality conference that several of my classmates proudly "came out of the closet." Many friendships were destroyed that weekend. There is much focus on the crotch while trying to accept the heavy "gift" of celibacy. The obsession with sex and the 'act' was too much. Most of my brother seminarians (all being Latins) are now married with children. They still want to serve the Church but marriage is an "impediment" - just as it is in our Byzantine Catholic Church. My question: what exactly does marriage "impede" that homosexuality does not?

As for a more extensive list of "potential" and "actual" sins, I would like to refer you to Romans 1:18-32. This is aimed at men and women.

Let's pray that the Holy Spirit remains present in the hearts of all men and women as they are confronted with temptation and "alternative" lifestyles that do not reflect the sacred mysteries or Christian virtue. Let us forgive those brothers and sisters who have caused much grief and destruction to our communities of faith by their personal sins. The coming feast of the Resurrection and Pentecost shows that it is God who has crushed sin and triumphed. We just have to comply. In the Byzantine doctrine of Theosis it is called "Synergy."

Let's synergize with God!

Joe

[ 03-14-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

I would take strong objection to the statement that marriage is an impediment to serving the Church, in principle or fact, in East or West. Were I a bishop, I would refuse to ordain a candidate who asserted this, on that statement alone.

K.

My question: what exactly does marriage "impede" that homosexuality does not?

Good question...

Well, in my opinion, sexual orientation has nothing to do with Theosis. Whether a priest is homosexually oriented or not is beside the point. The celibate struggle is just has hard if not harder. I feel a priest can be just as holy regardless of his sexual preference.

Dmitri

Kurt,

I don't compute what you are trying to say. I was simply referring to the fact that marriage is still something that prevents a married man to be ordained a priest in either the Latin Church and Byzantine Catholic Church in this country. As far as I know, the ban on married priests still hasn't been lifted since 1929 - unless you know something I don't. It is not so much the candidate who asserts this reality, but the fact that our bishops still enforce it.

I think MOST priests are priests because they feel called by God in a special way to serve their fellow sinners.

We're ALL sinners, after all and we all live with our various weaknesses and temptations. Priests aren't immune from this any more than the rest of us and the priesthood isn't a life to choose to hide from one's own weakness. We should continue to pray for those who serve the people of God in the church.

I feel the church should cooperate fully with the civil and criminal justice system if a priest commits a crime.

The priests, nuns, and monks I knew as a kid where all great people and had a profoundly positive effect upon my friends and me.

Dmitri,

We are all "oriented" to sin and alternative lifestyles that can lead us away from sanctity.

Taking your logic to another application: Can a man be "just as holy" in his marriage by being a practicing homosexual? Can a man be "just as holy" in his marriage if he is a practicing adulterer? Can a man be "just as holy" in his relationship to his children if he is a practicing pedophile while teaching at school? How can one be "just as holy" if one is blaspheming God in the meantime? What saves many in these types of discussions is the key term "orientation". What in creation is orientation? How do you police it? How does one quantify or recognize it? Whatever happened to the term "temptation"? Unless sin doesn't exist anymore, I guess orientation can serve as a better term in a world of relative morality.

Let me post Romans 1:18-32 (a weekday reading in our Typicon, so it will never be proclaimed at Sunday-only congregations) for a quick refresher course:

* * *

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,

30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;

31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

* * *

It is odd how we are so hell-bent to return to our ancient and venerable traditions in liturgy and church governance that we forget our ancient and venerable traditions in Christian ethics.

Men and women have always had the propensity to abandon natural relations with each other for unnatural ones. Men also have, in turn, abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another.

We have become "foolish" and "futile", and those who attempt to teach the truth are penalized for simply relaying what is natural. I understand fully well the political correctness of the issue regarding homosexuality. Unfortunately, we have spent too much time defending it at the expense of promoting marriage. Marriage still represents a little Church.

It is unfortunate that we don't head Isaiah. God's wrath against Sennacherib the Assyrian king and against the infidelity of Judah is because by their acts and lifestyle they did not worship the Creator. Therefore, their rubric-correct Temple liturgies and their blowing of incense was rejected. God is a jealous God. You can't say "I am just as holy" when you reject God's commandments and principles of morality and sexuality.

Let us pray that we are not led into temptation. This means all of us. Homosexuals don't have a monopoly on vice and sin. We should also be ready to forgive and welcome back the Prodigal son or daughter in the love of God.

Joe

[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Slava Isusu Christu!

Oh boy! Here we go!

Underlying all of these issues is sin. The Eastern Church does not categorize people according to their sexuality. We are created in the image and likeness of God. Our job is to become deified and to have that image of God restored fully in us both soul and body. There is no such thing as a homosexual person, only a child of God who is being tempted to break the commandments of God. Again for the Eastern Christian to label oneself by ones sin or "sexuality" is grievous. Many are afflicted by feelings of same gender attraction and of many other things not befitting God's People, BUT they are not to identify with that sin. I am speaking from the Eastern perspective because I am an Eastern Christian. We cannot define ourselves by the DSM of the APA. We are not children of this world, but Children of God. The world has defined us into categories when God has called us His Children and made us in His Image and Likeness.

All people are created by God normal, we BECOME disordered because of sin; we are RESTORED by the CHURCH to our ORIGINAL ESTATE in GRACE by virtue of the Sacred Mysteries by the Sacred Priesthood. These are issues of sin and must be corrected by the wisdom of the Church. I believe priests who confess to be identified as "homosexuals" should be disciplined. If they are practicing they should be removed. But if they are struggling with it and wish to overcome it as any other sin they should be given all the support of the Church, both lay hierarchial, and on a private pastoral level. All pedophiles et al. should be removed and prosecuted. These are issues of common sense; they have been trumped up by the media because they glory in what they see to be the hypocrisy of the Church and they want good RATINGS as well.

These reports will have drastic negative affects on vocations for the Latin Church and that is the REAL drawback to all of this. They are having such as drastic vocation crisis as it is as us poor Rusyn Catholics are. The Church is going to have to do MAJOR DAMAGE CONTROL on this for YEARS and I think another Ecumenical Council is in Order to straighten out all this.

Again calling oneself a homosexual or a heterosexual et al is verboten from the patristic and Eastern perspective. All people are created normal by God, again, we become disordered because of sin and we are restored by God through His GRACE in the Mysteries. So does this topic have validity? No, it is fruitless; and ends up as a circular form of gossip. Did the topic starter have good intentions? Sure. But,our job is to glorify the Priesthood and to pray for and support the good and holy priests in our Church who are faithful to be PR agents for them . When it comes to legal issues et al. Unless we are personally involved we must mind our own business. If a priest has fallen, we must pray for him and his victims and let the law, both Church and civil, sort out the rest. The bottom line is this: 1. Gossip is sin. 2. We cannot participate in it. 3. If someone is sinning we must pray for their salvation. 4. This topic ends in hurting the image of the Church, and Her priests, therefore it is innapropriate.

True Church Reform and Restoration will come about as it always has, through Saints and holy men and women of God both clergy and lay. It has never come about through a witch-hunting campaign (Not that this has anything to do necessarily with the topic starter). We are better men and women to pray for our priests then adding to the negative publicity. It is better to quelch our desire to discuss scandal and contraversy and to pray secretely for those victimized by sin and the attacks of the Devil.

In the Theotokos,


Robert

Robert,

Yes. Good points.

The message of Romans 1 is basically: We are all screw-ups.

In Theosis it is not only the Image of God in us but the "likeness" that needs perfected and aligned via Synergy with God's Energies.

I do disagree with Item 4. If we fail to address child abuse and incest because such topic do damage to the image of Fatherhood and Parenting, then we allow the innocent children to continue being ignored. It is not Fatherhood, Parenting or Priesthood that is damaged - even though the Evil One loves to convince us that is the case - but innocent lives corrupted or victimized by sinful people.


Joe

[ 03-14-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]

Dear Maximus,

You have to forgive me, Brother!

I see now that my reaction to +Ray's initial thread topic was largely due to the fact that, by it, he scratched off the scab that had been covering a festering inner wound in me.

I shouldn't have reacted that way to you, and apologise.

I wanted to thank you and +Ray and Joe Thur, Mother Sharon, David, Mor Ephrem, John and Dr. John and everyone who posted here (to date, hopefully more are on the way!).

I've never had the experience of pouring out my soul on the internet in this way before.

Believe me, it all shook me in a way I haven't been shaken before.

By the end of the day, a wonderful peace was mine, thanks to you.

I know I have more healing to do.

But thanks to you, I've started out on the right path.

A lot of thoughts are racing in my head today and I need a bit of a while to go away and be alone for a bit.

God bless you all!

Alex

I use the term orientation because it does not necessarily involve actions. I feel homosexual orientation is more complicated than most of the vices you mentioned, Joe. I respect your opinion but do not agree with your logic.

DMitri.