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

Dear Kurt,

No problem, Friend, no problem.

You make very intellectually sensible and responsible arguments.

And I've always admired you for that.

Your Catholicism is a deeply rooted one that comes from a mature conviction.

Alex

about "orientation"...let's cut through the...well, you know

The modern world doesn't like to talk about sin - if it did, there might have to be repentance!

When someone refers to a "homosexual orientation", the statement really should be "temptation to sin through homosexual activity".

A temptation to sin is something to be resisted and overcome by the grace of God. End of story.

An "orientation", OTOH, is something in this modern world that not only can be glossed over, it can, and often should, be cultivated and acted upon! Anything is OK if its an "orientation".

There are temptations to drunkenness, avarice, etc., Homosexuality is another one of a long list of temptations to sin.

David you are certainly free to your opinion.

But I would be rather interested in the in finding out more info on the above. I'm not sure a room full of drunk women trying to take advantage of me is the worst experience I could think of.

We don't want to go to far off topic here but I want you to know I do acknowledge a womans capability to sexualy assualt a man, that is in narrow circumstances. There have been cases I believe where men who on a "one-nightstand" have allowed a woman or two to tie them up, and then the women would place masks on their heads and turn on a camera and assualt the tied up man with objects. But this is a rarity and speaks to other criminal things also. And it also suggests that you shouldn't let strange women tie you up.

Other then that I'm unaware of womens propensity to rape men. It would be almost non-existent. On the other hand homosexual men are just as potential to rape other men as heterosexual men are potential to rape women.

On the minor point of the the 1929 issuance from the Holy See, it became clearly null with the adoption of our own Ruthenian particular law on that subject.

On the issue of orientation, I think the Church's statement "Always Our Children" speaks to that.

Kurt

Wasn't that the document that the Vatican criticized?

anastasios

Kurt and Anastasios,

Here is a clip from:

Vatican Update
[JUL. 13, 1999]
Catholic World News Service
* VATICAN DISCIPLINES TWO AMERICANS
================================================
VATICAN (CWNews.com) -- The Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will forbid two American religious from exercising their pastoral ministry among homosexuals, because their views on the morality of homosexual acts have been judged "unacceptable."

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has signed a note from the Congregation, with the express approval of Pope John Paul II, pointing out that Father Robert Nugent, SDS, and Sister Jeannine Gramick, SSND, are at odds with the teachings of the Catholic Church insofar as they do not recognize the intrinsic immorality of homosexual acts. The note from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was made public on Tuesday, July 13.

For more than 20 years, Father Nugent and Sister Gramick have directed New Ways Ministry, a Washington-based organization dedicated to promoting "justice and reconciliation" for homosexuals and lesbians. They are the authors of the book, Building Bridges: Gay and Lesbian Reality and the Catholic Church (1992), and editors of Voices of Hope: A Collection of Positive Catholic Writings on Gay and Lesbian Issues. They have also been influential in the preparation of documents such as "Always Our Children," a statement on homosexuality issued by the administrative committee of the US bishops' conference."

================================================

From http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Igpress/CWR/CWR1197/Dossiera.html we read this from Philip F. Lawler:

"AOC did include a bibliography of Church documents regarding homosexuality, and that list included the 1986 statement by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 'Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.' But nowhere in the text does AOC cite that Vatican document. In its response to the bishops' pastoral message, Courage pointed out that the Vatican statement had left no doubt that homosexuality "is 'objectively disordered,' because it urges a person, not toward the inherent good of marriage and procreation, but toward sinful conduct." That crucial message can be found nowhere in the American bishops' latest statement. As Women for Faith and Family noted in a forceful public statement, AOC "seems to have deliberately set out to muddy the waters the Vatican had made clear in 1986."

=================

From the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 'On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.' Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church, October 1, 1986 as found at: http://www.newadvent.org/docs/df86ho.htm


"As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God's liberating grace."

"... this Congregation wishes to ask the Bishops to be especially cautious of any programmes which may seek to pressure the Church to change her teaching, even while claiming not to do so. A careful examination of their public statements and the activities they promote reveals a studied ambiguity by which they attempt to mislead the pastors and the faithful. For example, they may present the teaching of the Magisterium, but only as if it were an optional source for the formation of one's conscience. Its specific authority is not recognized. Some of these groups will use the word "Catholic" to describe either the organization or its intended members, yet they do not defend and promote the teaching of the Magisterium; indeed, they even openly attack it. While their members may claim a desire to conform their lives to the teaching of Jesus, in fact they abandon the teaching of his Church. This contradictory action should not have the support of the Bishops in any way.

15. We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses. No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral. A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin."

====================

For an earlier document on this topic, please see 'Persona Humana' [Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics] December 29, 1975:

http://www.newadvent.org/docs/df75se.htm

"... homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God.[18] This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of."

====================

As for a Byzantine statement, we have this http://www.melkite.org/bishopQA.htm#Homosexuality: from Bishop John Elya, Melkite bishop of the Eparchy of Newton:

"To admit that one is homosexual -- "God created me that way" -- is a statement of fact which should not offend adult people who discuss issues and not persons. To admit that one is active homosexual or active heterosexual out of marriage, and to brag about it does cause scandal in a Catholic assembly, and is contrary to two thousands years of Christian tradition based upon the Judeo-Christian ethics. The teaching of the Church is deeply rooted in the Sacred Word of God. It is a fact that in our American society there are many homosexual people, regardless of the controversy whether this condition is innate or acquired, whether it has to be cured or lived with.

No discrimination (and no preferential treatment either) should be practiced against or ln favor of those with homosexual orientation. However, the fact remains, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, that sex out of marriage is gravely sinful, whether it is among homosexuals or heterosexuals. To point a finger at the homosexuals while condoning heterosexual promiscuity is prejudicial and hypocritical. We are all sinners in need of the mercy of God; but we are not allowed to brag about it or to condone it as if it were the right thing to do."
------------

He mentions the AOC letter:

"The Pastoral Letter on the subject issued recently (1997) by the Administrative Committee of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops titled "Always Our Children" asks the parents of homosexual children to show them love and affection and not to let their religious conviction spoil their family relationship. However it did not change the stand of the Catholic Church as mentioned above."

=========================


Kurt stated that: "On the issue of orientation, I think the Church's statement "Always Our Children" speaks to that."

My question for Kurt is: Why did you ignore the other documents from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the entire 2,000 years of Church Tradition (which Bishop John speaks of) if you were interested in what the Church teaches?


Joe

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

Maximos notes above: "There have been cases I believe where men who on a "one-nightstand" have allowed a woman or two to tie them up, and then the women would place masks on their heads and turn on a camera and assualt the tied up man with objects. But this is a rarity and speaks to other criminal things also. And it also suggests that you shouldn't let strange women tie you up."

How's about 'un-strange' women? <g>

Actually, I think that that is just "theater"; it is a way to 'adorn' the experience with psychological 'decorations'; it is not really an assault.

Reminds me of the new Yoplait commercial where the wife is dressed as a French maid and is 'seducing' the husband into trying some yoghurt. And the daughter walks in and says: "My parents are SOOOOO weird." Just a little erotic tinge to life.

Blessings!

Dr John,

LOL! Yes un-strange women also.

As for the theater experience, it becomes assualt when your not willfully participating.

Seen the commercial, humorous enough. My problem is I can like things like that... while at the same time unable to reconcile anything "erotic" with the Virgin Mary. Bringing in another question I might start a thread on but not to really offer any comments on.

Actually, no, though some anti-gay activists groups claimed it did. In a lengthy statement, the Vatican asked for about seven words to be revised to provide more clarity. Obviously, as a gay man, I don't agree with the Vatican's position. But I respect them. It is the small but vocal element of truly hateful people who seek harm to me and others.

Axios

"It is the small but vocal element of truly hateful people who seek harm to me and others."


Axios,

The Church, in all of its statements, asks for us not to hate any homosexual, but to recognize that it is against 2,000 years of tradition and teaching. If we were to "hate" anyone who was a sinner or had a natural propensity to sin we would hate mankind altogether. But God's creation is "good" and we are all made in the Image of God. As for our Likeness, we all need improvement.

The Church is only being clear and asking for clarity and truthfulness is presenting its teachings. The invitation to holiness is aimed at the homosexual (oriented or practicing, however you may define) and those heterosexuals who are either married or single. No one is immune from complying with the Commandments and Beatitudes and especially Love. God never asks us to harm anyone. Those who do are not of God.

Those who hate homosexuals and act on their hatred by harming them also fail to head the words of all the Church documents. By singling them out in such negative ways places us in the same shoes as those men who wanted to stone the woman caught in adultery.

I remember a group of seminarians who may fit the description of hate you made; I also remember a small vocal group of homosexual seminarians who were just as pitiful.


Getting back to the original topic: When one experiences these things it becomes a burden to those whose only desire was to serve God by being a priest. Both groups of hateful people ruin the experience of priestly preparation, especially for naive seminarians who recently got out of high school. There were times when homosexuals caught on to these naive seminarians and came on to them without mercy, like hyenas surrounding a newly born wildebeest; vocation directors telling young students that touching another man's genitals was considered a valid expression of love; the countless homosexuality and celibacy conferences; and the time when young seminarians would learn what really happened in 1929 with the enforcement of mandatory celibacy on our Church, a story rarely heard of or ever discussed - a story one would have to go to a Latin seminary to learn the history of one's own church.

I will stop here. Resentment is beginning to set in and I run the risk of saying too much.


Joe

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

Yes. And while not a Catholic, I appreciate that. I just wish that it was more effective with that minority of her children who are hateful towards gay people or indifferent to acts of violence or discrimination against us.

Axios

Historicaly many of the most macho men were lovers of men. Alexander the Great - one tough hombre, a multitude of the Roman legion, the Greeks had some primitive commando outfit that was as homosexual as you can be, and unknown to most people - the Samurai were frequent enjoyers of homosexual sex.

Yet these men were not only true lion-hearts but excelled in virtues often times that far exceded that of your regular heterosexual males. Infact the Samurai rarely learnt math at any real level because money was not his concern, and to ask the Samurai to swear his word on anything would have been insulting, for to the Samurai his word was good enough and it was his honor.

Some how I can't take the word of some heterosexual bully that he is more "man" then any homosexual man till I see him stand, and not run, and fight sword and axe under a dark blue sky with frost on the ground and his breath visible in the air against a foe bigger then him and stinking worst then him, like so many Roman soldiers did some time ago.

Everyone can't beat everyone up, so what I would do is carry some pepper spray with me, use it in the aggressors eyes, and then punch him in the throat. And if he ends up on the ground ask him how he's doing now. And remind him that God forgives but gay men don't. ------- Just my advice though, you can take it or leave it.

I think these types of groups can be very dangerous, and I could not in good conscience ever encourage someone to participate in something like this.

One man I know who participated in a Protestant "conversion" group ended up in the Psych unit after attempting suicide.

From my understanding and limited experience, I consider this school of thought to be lacking.

Greetings to all!
Stefan

Hi,

My answer to the thread question is I don't know.
If it's true, is God calling these folks to the Priesthood? Mr. Thur pointed out several Scripture verses that condemn acting on those types of desires. Why would the Bible have those types of statements, then in the 21st. century the true Church is being led spiritually by gay men? The two just don't go together. If there are men who promote that lifestyle in the Church as Mr. Thur pointed out in an earlier response, why do they think it's OK. That fact that someone who is a or aspires to be spiritual leader and ignores the word of God in such an obvious way is scary.Not to mention because if they are Priests they are held in stricter judgement by God. You have to wonder if they believe in eternal damnation? Babas need to be in charge of religious vocations.

Nicky's Baba

To All Participants:

Since this thread has drifted from the original topic I'm going to close it. I, respectfully, submit that this sort of topic not be raised again.

Edward, deacon, sinner and Moderator