[US Bishops] Gay-inclined are cut some slack

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 11/29/5 | Wyatt Buchanan

[SmithL]

Head of U.S. bishops interprets Vatican's edict on priesthood.

Roman Catholic priests and seminary students with "homosexual inclinations" can be good priests and should not fear discussing the issue with their superiors, Bishop William S. Skylstad, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said in a statement scheduled for release this morning.

As head of church leadership in the United States, Skylstad sets the tone for how Vatican edicts are carried out in this country.

Skylstad made the statements in a news release timed to today's planned release in the Vatican of a document called an "instruction" that clarifies the church's stand on whether gay men can enter the priesthood.

The Vatican instruction -- according to a leaked copy posted on the Catholic World News Web site -- prohibits the ordination of men to the priesthood who "are actively homosexual, have deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called gay culture."

The leader of the nation's largest gay Catholic group, DignityUSA, applauded Skylstad's interpretation, calling it the best possible.

[Convert from ECUSA]

Ain't it the truth!

[John O]

It is quite plain that what is meant by "gay" is a homosexual orientation, not the participation in any homosexual activity

I disagree that such a thing as "homosexual orientation" exists. If they are celibate and have never given into the perverse temptation they struggle with, then they are not 'gay'. They are merely tempted. Does being tempted to steal make one a thief? Does being tempted to kill make one a murderer? Only giving into the temptation establishes the behavior. BTW, self identifying as 'gay' demonstrates that they have given into the temptation. They identify with their sin rather than with thier Savior

[John O]

Are you saying that being teased as a youngster will cause a person to do something that the very programming in his genes tells him not to do?

sure. It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy and it happens all the time. Tell a kid he's stupid enough and eventually he will believe you. This is also why the 'homosexuals' work so hard to recruit in schools. Get to the kids young and convince them they are 'gay'. Brain washing works.

If that is the case, how strong is this genetic programming, and if it is not that strong, how can it be said that genes dictate our behavior?

Genes give the initial direction to our behavior, they set the default initial condition. Our choices determine the rest. A child who is raised without trauma will turn out heterosexual. That is the default. Introduce trauma (molestation etc) and there is a chance that the behavior will change.

Just male homosexuality? Not female?

More studies have been done on male than on female. I know that the relationship with one's father plays a part and that molestation plays a part but don't have enough info to make a blanket statement. Also female sexual behavior seems to be more fluid as seen by LUGs etc. Bottom line is that as a man I never looked too hard into the cause of female perversion.

Are there males who have experienced one of more of these three things and are not gay?

Sure there are. There are some who've experienced all three and never suffered from the disease. There are others who suffered from the disease and overcame it. What happens to us only influences us it does not doom us to perversity. All behavior is a choice. How we choose is greatly influenced by our genetics (sets the default) and then by what happens to us and how we react to those happenings

If so, what is the difference between males who experience these things and are gay and those who experience them and are not? Is it genetics?

It's definitely not genetics. I'd guess other support systems, religious faith, good normal friends, strength of character prior to the trauma, willingness to face reality rather than hide from it. Lots of things.

This is seen also in the presence of tens of thousands of ex-homosexuals. These men recovered from their disease and overcame what was done to them. Some choose to get healthy while others choose to remain 'gay'.

[dangus]

Temptation to do evil is not part of our divine nature, but is rather "concupiscence," an effect of evil in our lives. One who resists great temptation has borne great suffering, and is morally heroic, perhaps moreso than someone who has faced less temptation. But the persistance of a strong, unusual, and unnatural concupiscence is a troubling indicator that one may not be capable of effective ministry.

God gives us the graces of sanctifying natural urges and processes by making them means towards our salvation. What once had a holy end (sexual desire) has been perverted by the fall of man to an evil (lust), but can through surrender to God (contrition) can be rectified to a reflection of God's love (marriage). Thus, the very thing which makes us tend towards evil can become an instrument of our salvation. The priesthood, however, necessarily requires an abandonment of that tool for sanctification, and so, therefore, should be reserved for those whose sexuality has been less perverted.

It is true that all priests, like all people, struggle with concupisence, but homosexual desire is a form of concupiscence which is both extra dangerous for priests (since they are denied normal outlets for developing a healthy sexuality), dangerous for their flock (who depend on the priests to have a healthy sexuality, and can be gravely harmed by priestly abuse), and made particulalry more dangerous by the strains and sacrifices of the priesthood.

This is in contrast to some other concupiscence; a tendency towards greed may be helped the asceticism of certain religious orders.

[John O]

Temptation to do evil is not part of our divine nature, but is rather "concupiscence," an effect of evil in our lives.

Other than this we are in complete agreement. Man has no divine nature. We are not God nor will we ever be. Our nature is to do evil. (see Gen 8:21) It is only through the blood of Jesus Christ that we can make any claim to be good

[dangus]

Okay, scratch "divine," substitute, "unfallen."

[John O]

cool. I guess we put an end to this one. Have a very Merry Christmas

[BikerNYC]

I guess the bottom line is whether behavior is caused or not. It seems that you want it both ways.

Straight behavior is genetically caused because that is the "default" position of our genetic code. People are straight, not because they choose to be, but because that is what their genes tell them to be.

On the other hand, gay people can somehow break free of this "biology is destiny" thing and break the very genetic code that is built inside all of us.

It sounds as though gay people exercise free will but straight people just succumb to their genetic code.

If behavior is not caused, then being straight is just as chosen as being gay. If it is caused, then it is caused for all of us.

[BikerNYC]

Our nature is to do evil.

That adds a different twist. I thought you had said that our nature was to do good -- to be straight -- and it was only when evil -- molestation or teasing -- interfered with our nature to be straight that we did the evil thing - be gay.

If our nature is to do evil, then how are gay people acting outside of their nature?

[John O]

I guess the bottom line is whether behavior is caused or not. It seems that you want it both ways.

People are straight, not because they choose to be, but because that is what their genes tell them to be.

WHat you refer to as 'straight' is the default position. Everyone who is mentally healthy is heterosexual. Genetics drive this. However these people still choose to practice the behaviors they practice. They could choose to be celibate. It's just that a healthy mind can't even fathom practicing homosexual behavior. It's so unnatural as to be unthinkable to an unexposed healthy person. (A child in a healthy environment will never grow up 'homosexual' if he is never abused or exposed to homosexuality)

On the other hand, gay people can somehow break free of this "biology is destiny" thing and break the very genetic code that is built inside all of us.

I never said "biology is destiny". Although it does influence us to behave in certain ways. 'gay' people are mentally damaged/diseased and thus practice behaviors unthinkable to mentally healthy people. Likewise necrophiliacs, bestiaphiles, pedafiles etc. All sexual perversion is the result of mental illness. Of course these people choose to perform these behaviors due to their underlying mental disease.

(Modernman should not have been banned.)

He was banned? What for? Not that I'd miss him. IIRC he was a homosexual enabler.

me->Our nature is to do evil.

I thought you had said that our nature was to do good -- to be straight -- and it was only when evil -- molestation or teasing -- interfered with our nature to be straight that we did the evil thing - be gay.

Avoiding unnatural behaviors, such as the practice of homosexuality is not so much a case of doing good as it is a case of following our nature. It is natural for man to hate, to desire things for himself without consideration of others (stealing etc), to lust after someone else's stuff (wife, goods). All these impulses are evil (or result in evil if entertained rather than resisted) but they are natural. Watch a child to see the true nature of man. Babies are totally self centered, me, me, me is all they understand. Somewhat like democrats.

But even in our evil nature we will not do that which is unnatural unless we become diseased or damaged.

If our nature is to do evil, then how are gay people acting outside of their nature?

It is their nature to seek sexual union with members of the opposite sex. Nature drives us to reproduce. Only mental illness would override that, forcing someone into a hopelessly sterile sexual desire.

We've had these discussions before BNYC. I know that you are either a practicing homosexual or a homosexual enabler and are pretty much unteachable so let's not waste anymore of each other's time. Have a very Merry Christmas

[BikerNYC]

I never said "biology is destiny". Although it does influence us to behave in certain ways.

What does that mean? There's the crux of it. Influence us?

Either biology causes behavior or it doesn't. Either consciousness is free and cut off from the universal chain of cause and effect, or this thing we call "free will" is just a sweet idea. This is the bottom line and the source of what I perceive to be the problem with the argument. You want it both ways. You want to say that consciousness is both caused and free and I don't see how that can work.

'gay' people are mentally damaged/diseased and thus practice behaviors unthinkable to mentally healthy people. Likewise necrophiliacs, bestiaphiles, pedafiles etc. All sexual perversion is the result of mental illness.

Now it seems that you are saying that homosexuality is "the result" of mental illness. That suggests to me that it is not chosen, it is caused. Something has gone wrong with a person's genes or brain and, as a result, he commits homosexual acts.

Of course these people choose to perform these behaviors due to their underlying mental disease.

"Of course"? A mentally diseased person chooses to act the way he does? People in mental hospitals are actually choosing to slam there head against a wall, over and over and over again? This is a bizarre use of the word choice.

But even in our evil nature we will not do that which is unnatural unless we become diseased or damaged.

This makes no sense. Perfectly sane evil people do not do unnatural things?