Posted on 02/27/2006 12:24:00 PM PST by NYer
ROME (CNS) -- Cardinal-designate William J. Levada said a priest who publicly announces he is homosexual makes it difficult for people to see the priest as representing Christ, the bridegroom of his bride, the church.
A public declaration of homosexuality places a priest "at odds with the spousal character of love as revealed by God and imaged in humanity," said the U.S. cardinal-designate, who is prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Cardinal-designate Levada made his remarks during a Feb. 26 homily as he presided over a Mass for the installation of the new rector of Rome's Pontifical North American College.
In the presence of some 170 seminarians, Msgr. James F. Checchio made a formal profession of faith and promised his fidelity to Catholic Church teaching as he took over as rector of the U.S. seminary in Rome.
In his homily, Cardinal-designate Levada reflected on the challenges priests face today and on the Sunday Scripture readings, which described God's love for his people as the love of a husband for a wife and described Jesus as the bridegroom of the church.
Referring first to "the tragic problem of sexual abuse of minors by clergy," the cardinal-designate said, "thanks be to God, it is now possible to say that the measures taken by the bishops on behalf of the church have put into place a comprehensive program of education, prevention and care for victims, as well as measures to ensure that abusive clergy are not returned to ministry."
"One of the more immediate challenges facing seminaries," he said, is the implementation of the Congregation for Catholic Education's November instruction that men with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" should not be admitted to the seminary or ordained to the priesthood.
The instruction, however, made clear that the church was not questioning the validity of the ordinations of gay men who already are priests.
The cardinal-designate said the instruction "is not directly related to the U.S. sexual abuse crisis, but it is not without relevance for it," insofar as a study commissioned by the U.S. bishops identified homosexual behavior as a component in many clerical sex abuse cases.
Beyond the issue of psychosexual maturity, Cardinal-designate Levada said, "the question also needs to be viewed from its theological perspective," particularly in light of the biblical images of God's spousal relationship with his people and Gospel passages in which Jesus refers to himself as the bridegroom.
The doctrinal chief said he wanted to look specifically at "the situation of the gay priest who announces his homosexuality publicly, a few examples of which we have recently heard reported" in reaction to the Vatican document.
"I think we must ask, 'Does such a priest recognize how this act places an obstacle to his ability to represent Christ the bridegroom to his bride, the people of God? Does he not see how his declaration places him at odds with the spousal character of love as revealed by God and imaged in humanity?'" he said.
"Sadly, this provides a good example of the wisdom of the new Vatican instruction," he said.
The cardinal-designate also told the seminarians: "It is important for our people to hear us priests preach and teach about the fundamental character of God's love imprinted upon humanity in the original act of creation: 'God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them.'
"It is here that we find the basis for church teaching about marriage and about the family," he said. "It is here, too, that we find the basis for church teaching about homosexuality and the reason why proposals for recognition of homosexual marriage are contrary to sacred Scriptures and the natural law."
Duh.
I believe the answer to both questions is "Yes." The damage that these men sow is not accidental in any way; it is deliberate.
"ROME (CNS) -- Cardinal-designate William J. Levada said a priest who publicly announces he is homosexual makes it difficult for people to see the priest as representing Christ, the bridegroom of his bride, the church."
Well, MAYBE that's because HE AIN'T REPRESENTING CHRIST!!!!!!!
Christ is NOT represented by a homosexual priest PERIOD.
You can throw any theology which requires that out the freaking window.
Too bad he didn't say that while he was Archbishop of the San Francisco Diocese (1995-2005)...
"The instruction, however, made clear that the church was not questioning the validity of the ordinations of gay men who already are priests."
Amazing.
You folks can't question the "validity" of the "ordaination" of a man that sodomizes other men or little children????
Come on! Right is right and wrong is wrong!!!
Christ is NOT represented by a homosexual priest PERIOD.
You can throw any theology which requires that out the freaking window.
Considering that the statement is coming out of the Vatican (and how nuanced they make all of their statements), his words are remarkably clear and unambiguous. Made in a way as to apply reason to the declaration where the logic cannot be contested.
Had he simply said, "Gay Priests are an abomination," true, he'd make us happy, but he'd set the Vatican up for a firestorm (considering the gay lobby, perhaps the right word would be "a firebombing"). This way, one can't honestly argue with the logic. (The cool part is that one can apply the same logic to the abomination of so-called female priests, as well)
Sort of refreshing...at least imho. But ymmv.
As long as the bishop does what the Church calls for, the sacramentality of the ordination is valid. "The Lord hath sworn, and he will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech" (Psalm 109: 4). The validity doesn't depend on the temperament of the one being ordained.
It is an old stance of the church that sinfulness does not invalidate the authority of a priest. However, scnaelous does serve to discredit priests in the eyes of his flock. If your shepard acts like a wolf, he scatters the flock.
If his behavior he known, then he should not be allowed to remain as a priest.
There is one minor, little problem. No, they shouldn't have been ordained in the first place. However, once they were ordained, they can't be "unordained." Not because they would deserve to be ordained (ordination is a grace), but because ordination "confers an indelible spiritual character" on the ordained.
If the validity of their ordination is called into question by the Vatican, then the validity of any ordination could be called into question by others.
Again, a profound and inspired statement, imho.
"If his behavior he known, then he should not be allowed to remain as a priest."
Isn't laicization extremely rare.
No, he should and, according to Canon law, must be punished. This punishment goes up to and includes laicization. And if he violates that, excommunication. But one can't "undo" an ordination. One can make a person "effectively" a layperson, but not "literally" a layperson.
You're thinking like man, and not as God does. All of those who are ordained are sinners. All are most unworthy to receive that sacrament. If it is discovered that a seminarian is a sodomite, they wouldn't be ordained. But if it isn't discovered until afterwards, and they received the sacrament, it doesn't change the fact that they have received it. In that case, they would be defrocked, but they are still "priests" in the sacramental sense.
I think you're misunderstanding the technical language. (Maybe you ought to stop thinking with your emotions. Just a suggestion ...)
Saying "the church is not questioning the validity of the ordinations" means that they are really priests, not just laymen wearing funny collars. It doesn't mean they are good priests, or that they ought to be in active ministry, or that they should have been ordained ... only that they really were ordained.
By contrast, if (for example) a man pretended to be Catholic and appeared to have been ordained to the priesthood, but it later came out that he had never been baptized and was a Muslim, he would not be validly ordained. He would not be a priest at all. (Not even a Catholic layman, in this case.)
It has nothing to do with the virtue of the person involved, or the lack thereof.
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.
