Posted on 09/19/2005 4:11:33 PM PDT by scripter
Pope Benedict XVI has given his approval to a new Vatican policy document indicating that men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained as Catholic priests, reports Catholic World News.
The policy statement is a direct result of the pope's concern about the pedophilia scandal in the church – especially in the U.S.
The new document, prepared by the Congregation for Catholic Education in response to a request made by the late Pope John Paul II in 1994, will be published soon. It will take the form of an "Instruction," signed by the prefect and secretary of the congregation: Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski and Archbishop Michael Miller, according to the report.
The report was first referenced on Joseph Farah's nationally syndicated radio program last week by Raymond Arroyo, author of the new book "Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve and a Network of Miracles." Arroyo has covered the papacy more than any other journalist
The text, approved by Benedict at the end of August, says that homosexual men should not be admitted to seminaries even if they are celibate, because their condition suggests a serious personality disorder that detracts from their ability to serve as ministers, says the CWN report.
Priests who have already been ordained, if they suffer from homosexual impulses, are strongly urged to renew their dedication to chastity and a manner of life appropriate to the priesthood.
The "Instruction" does not represent a change in church teaching or policy, according to the Vatican.
Catholic leaders have consistently taught that homosexual men should not be ordained to the priesthood. Pope John XXIII approved a formal policy to that effect, which still remains in effect. However, during the 1970s and 1980s, that policy was widely ignored, particularly in North America.
The Congregation for Catholic Education prepared the "Instruction" after soliciting advice from all of the world's bishops, from psychologists and from moral theologians. A draft was then circulated among the Vatican dicasteries concerned with the issue, notably including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The pending release of the "Instruction," in the face of certain criticism from liberal forces in America and Western Europe, demonstrates the determination of the Vatican to improve the quality of priestly ministry and to protect the church from some of the scandals that have recently shaken the Catholic community – and no doubt deterred many men from entering priestly training.
Informed sources in Rome indicate that the "Instruction" probably will be made public after the Synod of Bishops, which meets in Rome Oct. 2 through 23.
That's my point. We're not talking about men who'll be practicing homosexuality, but men who'll be practicing celibacy. Celibacy, last time I checked was not a sin. If the priest is celibate, he's not committing the sin of homosexuality.
Yes, I agree. I must admit that as I thought about it I had some other puzzlements as well. For example, if 'homosexuality' is a sin, then homosexuals are 'sinners'. But who isn't a sinner? If just 'being' a homosexual is a sin then does that preclude them from being a Catholic as well as a priest? If a sinner cannot be a priest or a Catholic, then who can be either? It makes me also think about a question that has puzzled me for a long time. Namely, if marriage/intercourse between a man and a woman is for the sole purpose of procreating children and a couple is unable to conceive, and deemed unable to conceive, then are they committing a sin when they have sex? Are all post-menopausal women who have sex committing a sin when they do? Interesting dilema, this sin and exclusion for it thing.
It is really rotten fruit either way -both activities are immoral and evil.
Homosexuality (the disordered condition -all causes unknown -in some cases not chosen) is not legal or illegal -it is a disordered condition subjectively claimed and not objectively measured -as such, the disordered condition that predisposes one toward homosexual activities can not be legislated for or against. Regardless, the Church teaches that those that suffer the disordered condition merit just discrimination; e.g. banned from military service, banned from Boy Scout leadership, and in this case banned from ordination...
Homosexual activities (always a choice), on the other hand although disordered and always intrinsically evil are legal in some locals -in the US, the evil of sodomy was legalized by judicial fiat recently...
See my # 102
I believe that any sexual activity outside of marriage, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual, is just as abhorrent in the sight of God. The difference is that somebody who wants to engage in heterosexual activity has a sanctified avenue through which to engage their desire--marriage.
But if a person with homosexual proclivities is celibate is he or she anymore guilty of a sin than a person who lusts after a person who is not their spouse?
Frankly I have less problem with a celibate homosexual being a parish priest (and presumably living alone) than I would have with a homosexual priest living in a monastery where he is living so closely with other men. It's like having an alcoholic working as a bartender.
It does matter because the church considers it a sin AND a mental disorder.
It promotes the homosexual as a role model. Homosexuality is a behavior to be repudiated.
That thinking ignores the whole crisis which led to this ban: homosexual parish priests sexually abusing boys.
"Tu es sacerdos in aeternum, secundum ordinem Melchisedech" -- "Thou art a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. 109.4 = 110.4 KJV).
The most that can be done to a man who has been properly ordained a priest is to strip him of the right to exercise priestly functions. That was done to at least one of the Boston area pedophiles.
Excluding men who are active homosexuals is a no-brainer.
Excluding men who are suspected of being homosexual, due to mannerisms, or choice of hobbies, or whatever, is a subjective judgment.
In order not to be out of compliance, some of these seminary authorities will jump offside in turning men away who might otherwise make good priests.
Some number of homosexuals have always been a part of the priesthood; Martin Luther complained about them five hundred years ago.
One should anticipate that there will be even fewer men entering seminaries than there has been. This will continue the inevitable march toward lay dominance of parish administration, with priests serving as sacramental circuit riders.
I didn't say that I had NO problem with a homosexual parish priest, just LESS problem with one who may be homosexual but is also celibate (as they all should be).
On the other hand, I think pedophiles, whether they are directed toward boys or girls, should be banned from being priests.
Still I support what the Pope is doing. I think priests should be exemplary role models of the highest ideals of the church.
even if he became a priest under false pretenses? interesting.
I'm not quite sure why we are having this disagreement if you support what the Pope is doing. But I'm glad you do.
Right. The pre-Vatican II Church was vigilant against homosexuals, yet many became priests because they learned the rules and stayed within the rules.
This new declaration will remove the open homosexual practices in seminaries. That certainly needs to be done, if it hasn't been done already.
But gays have snuck into the military, and they'll sneak into the priesthood.
If they're celibate, there will no problems, as has been the case for a thousand years.
If you're not doing the behavior, then it is the same as a heterosexual priest not doing heterosexual behavior.
Do they ban priests with other mental disorders, say paranoia or depression?
All I'm saying is that if you're taking your vows seriously, it shouldn't matter because you would not be doing ANY sexual behaviour. How would anyone know?
Good for the Pope! It is about time that a present day Western religious leader took a stand.
AMEN!!
Trade those light in the loafers for Episcopalians to be named later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.