Replies

First: Peace, frithguild. I did not say you were an acolyte. I said Garry Wills, whom you brought into the discussion, is someone I do not accept as a reliable commentator.

Second, it is true that seminary rectors cannot always perceive homosexual tendencies. But they ought not to admit as ordinands any man who has deep-seated emotional or psychological problems, including strong tendencies toward homosexuality or pedophilia, depressive disorders, drug or alcohol abuse, or any other such serious problem if that can be discerned beforehand.

Some seminary rectors acted in good faith, not knowing that particular seminarians had these problems. In other cases, there is a record of vocations directors willfully ignoring or defying instructions for the selection and training of worthy candidates.

You can read about it is "Goodbye, Good Men" and it is the sort of thing that poisons the Church and imperils souls.

If a man is not called to celibacy, he ought to marry, because he is not called to monastic or clerical orders in the West.

He could marry and become a deacon. That makes sense, doesn't it? Nobody has to make a vow he can't fulfull; nobody ought to.

Celibacy, like monogamy--- marital fidelity ---entails sacrifices. Celibacy is not easy and instinctual; but frankly, neither is monogamy. Thus everyone is called to live a challenging life of virtue, whether they are called to are celibacy or monogamy.

Of course, our corrupt culture declares that both are impossible, or are an unreasonable imposition on human nature. But a corrupt culture must not set the standards for the Church.