Posted on 03/03/2011 8:38:10 AM PST by marshmallow
In an interview with a local newspaper, Bishop Matthew Clark of Rochester appeared to take issue with a 2005 Vatican document that reaffirmed that men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” should not be ordained.
“I know some magnificent gay priests,” said Bishop Clark, who has led the upstate New York diocese since 1979. “If they are openly gay in terms of living a lifestyle that is incompatible with their basic commitments, we have to intervene. But I have always tried to be open to such candidates.”
In 2005, the Congregation for Catholic Education stated that the Church “cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’”
Bishop Clark added:
There was, as you know, a lot of attention given to that by the Holy See over the years, and one of their statements left the impression that under no circumstances could a person of gay orientation be ordained a priest. And that's not so.
If a person's sense of himself as a gay individual inevitably leads him to campaign against the Church's formal teachings or live a lifestyle that is upsetting to the community or scandalous, such a person would not be an apt candidate for the priesthood. But if a person understands that and lives a lifestyle that is compatible with what we ask of all of our priests, then I'm happy to receive them.
Bishop Clark’s comments echo those he made in late 2005, when he criticized the Congregation for Catholic Education’s document.
“The fundamental concern of formation for a life of celibate chastity is for sexual maturity, not sexual orientation,” he said at the time. “Good seminary formation needs to provide an environment in which both heterosexual and homosexual candidates can grow to commit themselves wholeheartedly, even joyfully, to chaste and faithful celibacy.”
A recent Catholic World Report article found that in 2008, the Diocese of Rochester ranked 175th out of the 176 Latin Rite US dioceses in its ratio of seminarians to Catholics.
Bishop Matthew Clark and a changing church (Rochester City Newspaper)
On Priesthood and Those With Homosexual Tendencies (Congregation for Catholic Education, 2005)
The Barren Fig Tree (Catholic World Report)
In what position would he like to receive these seminarians?
If one wanted to harm an organization (of whatever sort) from within, one could hardly do a better job of it than to inflict on it as leaders the likes of Clark, Hubbard, Mahony, Bernardin ...
Bishop Clark? He's a fully communicant Catholic bishop, one who will soon retire with a minimum stipend of $1,900 a month, and other benefits from the Catholic Church. There's no "consider" to it. That's what he is.
Does this mean you have been wrong about the bishops being lock-step robots following their Vatican programming?
“say, did you hear they frocked the new gay priest?”
“no?”
“yeah, got Seminarian all over the place”.
oh please, you know you were thinking it.
This is what they actually say:
Vatican to America: ‘Social Justice’ is About Relationships, Not SocialismWhether he intended to or not, Cardinal Turkson has now echoed what many conservative Catholics in America have been calling for repeatedly — subsidiarity in economic policy. More importantly, the Cardinal observes the heart of the matter in noting that a ‘handout’ and a ‘gift’ are not at all the same, with the latter being more in keeping with the Gospel message.Peter Cardinal Turkson, President of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, has a message for Catholics in America, particularly those involved in social justice ministry, that could put a damper on the political machinations of the Shadow Party.
The message? “Social justice” is about “relationships,” not “socialism.” This clarification may very well be the catalyst to set the Catholic Church in America back on course with authentic Catholic teaching on hot-button issues involving massive government entitlement programs and other forms of overreach. If nothing else, it will almost certainly jump-start the “social justice” debate among Catholics.It would be useful if we just observed our sense of justice as our ability to fulfill the demands of the relationships in which we stand.
This is in contrast to socialism, he explained, which is an ideology in which private property and private interests are totally placed in the service of government policies. What the Pope proposes in ‘Caritas in Veritate,’ said Cardinal Turkson, is ‘achieving the common good without sacrificing personal, private interests, aspirations and desires.’
Cardinal Turkson said the Council was also surprised that the Pope’s concept of the ‘gift,’ was perceived in some circles as encouraging government welfare handouts. In ‘Caritas in Veritate,’ Pope Benedict described the concept of “gift” as a way to understand God’s love for men and women in his gift of life and his gift of Jesus.
One of the key principles of Catholic social thought is known as the principle of subsidiarity. This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom. It conflicts with the passion for centralization and bureaucracy characteristic of the Welfare State.You may remember that Pope John Paul II worked closely with President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to bring down communism in the Soviet Union and Marxist governments in Latin America. With the worldwide Left now in such kinship with Islam, and with no modern-day Reagan or Thatcher in sight, Pope Benedict XVI certainly has his work cut out for him. If they recognize that America has become polarized, perhaps America’s Catholic bishops will bite the bullet and commit themselves to following in the footsteps of the just-beatified Pope John Paul II…to morally undermine the Left as he morally undermined the Soviet Union
Be aware that there are a few folks here on FR whose sole aim is to demean Christianity. These posts and the numerous links he saves is purely for the benefit of secularists and liberals to hit out at Christianity as a whole
I have no idea in the world who you are talking about :)
“Anyone else surprised that he didn’t refer to them as fabulous gay priests? “
lol
Indeed. It can not be healthy for a gay person who is committed to celibacy to be put in the path of temptation. Which I think would be the case in an all male environment. Intentions and desire to follow Church teaching on sexual morality is a good thing and should be supported. You don’t put an alcholic to work in the liquor store. Same here.
LOL check out 2,182 in the Sola Fide thread. That one’s still going strong.
Anyone that puts one penny into the collections of diocese run by bishops like these, deserves bishops like this.
Bad shepherds like these are a chastisement for the sins of the sheep. Saint John Eudes, basing his words on Sacred Scripture, says that when God wants to punish his people, he sends them bad priests. See The Priest, His Dignity and Obligations, by Saint John Eudes, Chapter 2, "Qualities of a Holy Priest". (New York: P.J. Kenedy and Sons, 1947).
MOST PRIESTS GO TO HELL:
a) I do not speak rashly, but how I feel and think. I do not think that many priests are saved, but that those who perish are more numerous. ( St. John Chrysostom)
Pray for the conversion of this bishop, but avoid him like the plague, or he might take you with him.
Additionally, any man that has effeminate mannerisms is obligated to make an effort to cover them up, to change them, for effeminate men are a bad example to children, a scandal.
"I do not speak rashly, but how I feel and think. I do not think that many priests are saved, but that those who perish are more numerous." ( St. John Chrysostom)
Keep in mind that Catholics (clergy and laity) during St. John Chrysostom's time (349–407) really lived the faith, and went to mass. If you compare apples with apples, this writing would read today:
"I do not speak rashly, but how I feel and think. I think that scarcely ANY priest are saved today".
What about Alex Murphy’s Presbyterian pastors and other Presbyterians. What, according to you, happens to them?
Gay Priests and Gay Marriage
What the one issue has to do with the other.
http://old.nationalreview.com/03june02/kurtz060302.asp
"According to you", is a one man opinion, useless to Catholics, even if it comes from a pope.
Everything that I post is from the Catholic Church, always providing sources of Church teaching from antiquity,and prior to Vatican II.
If you and your gang had not spent all your time cluttering up Alex Murphy's threads with chaff posting, nothings conversations just to ruin any discussion (as you also have done to my threads and postings), if you had not done that, maybe Alex Murphy would have answered your question himself about what I've written about all those outside of the Church. He knows exactly what the Church teaches, and he knows that "invincible ignorance" and all the other politically correct sentimentality are novelty to the Church.
"Mind reading", and attribution of motive to another FReeper, are forms of "making it personal" and are explicitly forbidden on the Religion Forum.
Verdugo, there is one and ONLY one way in which your post is not a blatant example of mind-reading and attribution of motive to another FReeper.
Tell the truth, V. "You can't lie, even to save the World"
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.