Skip to comments.Vocations Are Up at English-Speaking Seminaries
Posted on 12/02/2006 3:12:54 PM PST by NYer
ROME Romes largest English-speaking national seminaries are detecting an increase in numbers of vocations after a less fruitful period in the early part of the decade.
The Pontifical North American College, the Venerable English College and the Pontifical Irish College are all reporting higher numbers of candidates for the priesthood compared to a few years ago.
Weve seen a steady increase to the diocesan priesthood in the United States, and we are now seeing the benefit of that in the college, said Father Dennis Gill, media spokesman at the North American College. He noted that vocations to religious orders are still suffering quite a bit, but that the college had experienced a measurable increase.
This academic year, the college accepted 46 candidates to the priesthood. The number compares with 38 candidates during 2003, 44 in 2004 and 43 last year.
However, the seminary has not yet matched the total of 51 new seminarians admitted in 2002. Some believe the drop in 2003 was a direct consequence of the sexual abuse scandal that broke out the preceding year.
The college, founded by Pope Pius IX in 1859, has a total of about 170 seminarians.
A similar story can be found at the Pontifical Irish College. Nineteen seminarians are currently studying at the institution, up from 16 last year. The colleges rector, Msgr. Liam Bergin, is very hopeful that more men will answer the call to the priesthood in the coming two or three years because of a boost from a growth in vocations in Ireland.
Like the North American College, the Irish College has been forced to deal with the fallout from clerical abuse scandals in Ireland.
We like to think were emerging from a difficult and dark time, Msgr. Bergin said. Theres light on the horizon.
For each of the past three academic years, the Venerable English College has admitted five new students, whereas in previous years it was receiving only one or two new candidates a year. In 2000, the college had just 15 seminarians; now it has 25.
The numbers are picking up and the word on the ground in the UK is that there are more in the pipeline for next year, said Father Andrew Headon, vice-rector of the college.
Father Headon, a former vocations director, stressed that the actual numbers of candidates in the English-speaking colleges in Rome cannot be compared, as each national situation is different and is dependent on the ratio of seminaries to students. But he added, My gut feeling is that weve bottomed out and numbers are now on the increase. We reached a real low five years ago the numbers went right down.
A number of reasons are given for the upturn, but the most significant are believed to be stronger bishops and the papal transition last year.
Father Gill said that many of the North American Colleges new students are coming from areas where there is clear thinking and strong bishops who are deliberate and careful in their teaching of the faith. He cited examples like Bishop Robert Carlson of Saginaw, Mich., whose diocese has seen a rapid rise in vocations since he was appointed bishop there in February 2005.
Father Gill also pointed out that many of the new seminarians come from small dioceses rather than large, metropolitan ones.
The change of popes has also played a significant role.
Im sure the death of Pope John Paul II has been a contributing factor, said Msgr. Bergin. It was extraordinarily positive advertising that the Church received in the media and was reflected soon afterwards by the numbers of people coming to Rome it was essentially six weeks of free advertising that put Rome on the agenda.
Father Headon agreed.
As a result of the conclave, the media focused on the Catholic Church and all the good it does, which did counter the negativity of the scandals and definitely has had an effect on the number of people coming forward, he said.
He remembered a similar phenomenon happening after Pope John Paul IIs visit to Britain in 1982.
Looking back, there was a large increase in vocations from 1984 to 1986 and people were saying then that we couldnt have paid for such publicity, Father Headon said.
Perhaps surprisingly, the Pontifical German College has yet to reap the benefit of what Germans call the papst-effekt (pope effect) of Pope Benedict XVIs election. Last year, the colleges intake was 17 students, while this year it was 15. According to its rector, Jesuit Father P. Meures Franz, the numbers are stable, and average at 15 a year.
Father Headon, however, sounded a hopeful note about German vocations. He believes that many of those who watched press coverage of the papal transition or attended World Youth Day in Cologne were impressionable teenagers who will reach the age at which they can enter a seminary in a few years.
Predicted Father Headon, The German college will see a rise in numbers in the next two to three years.
More good news, bump! Can you handle this!
No! This is the JPII generation responding to his call to the priesthood, despite the liberal bishops who would prefer those who are 'light in the loafers'. God bless them on their journey!
I was telling everyone this when I first came on FR!
Why do you say that?
Why do you ask?
Because I am curious. Seminaries have turned around, and I was wondering where you were getting your information.
Cardinal Arinze - "Youth will embrace religious life with right role models"
Today's seminarians reflect growing trend
Number of Seminarians Increases - Please Decipher This!!!!
In Seminaries, New Ways for a New Generation
Seminary Springtime: Father Darrin Connall s Big Success
EVIDENCE GROWS OF DIRECT DISOBEDIENCE TO VATICAN IN MAJOR AMERICAN SEMINARIES
Pope to Church: Risky Seminarians Must Go
Priests Down, Seminarians Up
U.S. Priests and seminarians survey: more vocations in orthodox dioceses
Vatican Announces Surge in Seminaries during JPII Pontificate
Seminary Reform Needed in Wake of Sex Abuse Study ["the crisis in the Church is ... homosexuality"]
Homosexuals in seminaries? The latest.....
Priests 'In Orgy' at Seminary
Bishop urges gay ban in clergy; presses for overhaul in screening priests
A New Breed of Priest
AUSTRIAN SEMINARY SHUT DOWN FOR PROBE
Seminarians Show Support For Celibacy
556 Reasons for Hope [Seminarians Support Celibacy]
No Shortage of Vocations From Conservative Parishes
Oakland seminary housing sex offender priests
Phoenix bishop to helm Priestly Formation Committee [of USCCB]
Vatican Firms up Plans for U.S. Seminary Visitation in 2005
SIBLING VOCATIONS - Early calls led two sisters to same religious order
On the admission of homosexuals to seminaries
Catholic priests demand the right to marry
New Start For Austrian Seminary
Disciples of Pope John Paul (Faculty of Gregorian University Gripe About Piety of New Seminarians)
New Priests in U.S.: Older, and More >From Abroad (Survey Tracks Trends Since 1998)
U.S. seminarians welcome Pope Benedict XVI
Vatican review of seminaries to raise issue of gay priests
Some Decry Retirement Despite Priest Shortage
The Priesthood Ordination Class of 2005 People would be surprised to know that I
(Catholic) Seminarians Double In 25 Years
Pope's death inspires would-be priests
Changes Add Up for Priesthood
Irish Bishops Apologize to Seminary Whistle-Blower
SIGNAL CALLING - UB quarterback foregoes family and career to train for priesthood in Rome
Pop Culture Heros Help Recruit Priests
Small Bible-belt (Catholic) diocese sees increase in seminarians
Dashing young priests turn heads at Youth Day
Vatican to Start U.S. Seminary Evaluations
Apostolic Seminary Visitation To Begin This Fall
U.S. Bishops to Begin Inspecting Seminaries
Prelate Says Gays Shouldn't Be Ordained
American overseeing Vatican evaluation of US seminaries says gays should not be ordained
Vatican to Check U.S. Seminaries on Gay Presence
POPE APPROVES BARRING GAY SEMINARIANS
Pope bans homosexuals from ordination as priests
Questions Arise Over Seminary Inspections
New Vatican Rule Said to Bar Gays as New Priests
New Vatican Rule Said to Bar Gays as New Priests (ABOUT TIME)
VATICAN: HOMOSEXUALS ARE NOT TO BE ORDAINED AS CATHOLIC PRIESTS
Homosexuals in the seminary; A Global Church in a Globalized World
Gay Men Ponder Impact of (Anti-Gay Clergy)Proposal by Vatican(Barf Alert)
Aquinas Seminary is First for Scrutiny
Vatican Begins Inspections At St. Louis Seminary (Rector: No homosexuality-pedophilia link)
The Sins of the Seminaries
Notre Dame Experts React to Potential Seminary Rules
Seminary Reviews Not Just About Homosexuality, Says Prelate
Jesuit Official Rips Expected Ban on Gays
Jesuit Official Rips Expected Ban on Gays
Jesuit official protesting expected Vatican ban on gay priests
A Catholic Moment of Truth
Gay Catholics Angry Over Seminary Searches
New Rules Affirm Pope Benedict's Stance Against Gays
New Report on Vatican Gay Priests Document Said to be Gay Lobby Rumor Mill
Gay men can be priests if celibate
Gay men can be Catholic priests if celibate-paper
No ban on gays expected in Vatican document; will advise 'prudential judgement'
African Cardinal Views the Vocation Shortage - With Full Seminaries, Ghana Shares Its Wealth
Keep the Ban
Today's seminarians: The Vatican survey
Lincoln diocese boasts highest number of priests to Catholics
Vatican Document on homosexuals in seminaries will be published tomorrow
Married Priests Arent the Answer (a seminarian states his view)
Vatican document restricts gays in priesthood: paper
Barring gays from priesthood not discrimination, say Italian bishops
Roman Women are Converts to Convents
Heads Up!! Zero Hour is 9am on December 29
Why I Thank God I Couldnt Be A Priest
A look inside the Denver seminaries
Ordination Challenges: Out of the Seminary, Into the Fire
Vatican teams checking seminary effectiveness (in all, 229 US seminaries to be reviewed)
Seminaries Are Overflowing in Socialist Vietnam
Seminaries Full in Southern India (despite new anti-conversion law)
Ordination Class of 2006 - New Catholic Priests include twins, converts and some surprises
Twin ordinands, youngest of 13, credit parents for priestly vocations
Eleven new priests for Denver, largest ordination class in 40 years
Religious vocations can come from anyplace
Coordinator of U.S. seminary visitations expects report this fall
Continued growth for Australian seminaries
Journey of faith runs through R.I. (young Polish immigrant ordained to priesthood)
A leaf of Faith (Catholic convert enters religious life)
More twins (enter priesthood)
These twins are doubly blessed - Identical brothers from Erie to become priests today
New, stricter Priestly Formation Program issued for U.S. Catholic seminaries
O Father, Where Art Thou? (US catholics coping with shrinking priesthood)
Pope Tells of Key to Awaken Vocations (address to religious and seminarians at Vespers)
U.S. Catholic Seminary Probe Sent to Vatican
Homosems, A Year On
You mean when a notoriously liberal AmChurch dissenter like Kenneth Untener is replaced by a solid, orthodox Catholic like Bishop Carlson, there's suddenly a (relative) abundance of vocations to the priesthood? *slaps forehead in amazement*
Me too. This article is an important one, and one of the few that addresses the issue head on. And to go further , the sexuality of each seminarian needs to be discovered and celebacy directly taught or abolished. It is not a problem which can be ignored.I do not think that seminaries have "turned around."
CATHOLIC WORLD NEWS
Jun. 03, 2002
AIDS has quietly caused the deaths of hundreds of Roman Catholic priests in the United States although other causes may be listed on some of their death certificates, the Kansas City Star reported today. The newspaper said its examination of death certificates and interviews with experts indicates several hundred priests have died of AIDS-related illnesses since the mid-1980s. The death rate of priests from AIDS is at least four times that of the general population, the newspaper said. Kansas City Bishop Raymond Boland says the AIDS deaths show that priests are human.
Astonishing, when you think about it. The paragraph above comes from an Associated Press report on a series of newspaper articles by Judy L. Thomas that appeared in January of 2000. It is too much to say Catholics were "rocked" by the attendant media hype--the scandal threshold has been raised pretty high in recent years--but among the laity the articles occasioned, if not a gasp, at least a general sigh of exasperation. From all sides, almost, one heard the complaint "Why doesn't somebody do something?" Why not indeed.
A large part of the answer is implicit in the remarkable response to the situation tendered by Bishop Boland. To aver that a priest shows he is human by dying of AIDS is to say that it is somehow natural to our human state to engage in acts of passive consensual sodomy, from which the resultant infection takes its predictable course. Few Catholics who are not in Holy Orders would share this view of human nature. In reality, the fact that priests die of AIDS proves that they commit sin, by which they show not that they are human but that they act in a sub-human manner--sub-human not in any special sense, but in the ordinary sense in which each of us falls short of his true human dignity by sinning, whatever our sin may be.
But Bishop Boland, like many of his brethren, is unwilling to concede the major premise. "I would never ask a priest how he got [AIDS]," he told Thomas, "just like nobody asked me two years ago how I got cancer of the colon. But I would provide for him. I would not write him off and say, 'Because you've got AIDS and because there are doubts about how one can acquire it, therefore you're not a good priest." Well, let's take the case of a 3-year-old girl brought into the emergency room with a broken jaw and cigarette burns on her rib cage. Suppose the hospital personnel said, "Look, there's more than one way to pick up these injuries, and the girl's medical treatment will be the same whatever their cause, so there's no point in asking how she got them." Most of us would see such a response as a culpably willful refusal to face up to a grim reality. By the same token, when we are urged to pretend that there is room for doubt as to how most priests contract AIDS, we can be sure that our gaze is being intentionally diverted from the ugly and indisputable facts: a disproportionately high percentage of priests is gay; a disproportionately high percentage of gay priests routinely engages in sodomy; this sodomy is frequently ignored, often tolerated, and sometimes abetted by bishops and superiors.
A WIDESPREAD PROBLEM?
Just how widespread is homosexuality among priests and bishops? For obvious reasons, no reliable statistics are available. The percentage is vigorously disputed, of course, but one indication of the scope of the problem is that those who argue for the lowest estimate insist that the number of gays in the clergy is no higher than that of the gay population in society at large--as if this were not on its own showing evidence of a profound crisis. Gay priests themselves--who, though admittedly partisan, admittedly also have unique access to the facts--commonly assure us that they are legion within the priesthood in general and well-represented even among bishops. The Kansas City Star series mentioned above notes that, of 26 novices who entered the Missouri Province of the Jesuit order in 1967 and 1968, only seven were eventually ordained priests. Of these seven, three have (to date) died of AIDS, and a fourth is an openly gay priest now working as an artist in New York. The priest-artist deplored the fact, not that his fellow Jesuits engaged in homosexual relations, but that they did not take "safe-sex" precautions even after the facts about HIV transmission became known. In this case, four of seven priests in a discrete sample are known to have been actively homosexual. What can we extrapolate from this data about the remaining three men, or about the American priesthood in general? Ten years ago the liberal National Catholic Reporter cited this example as typical:
Father Smith (not his real name) is a Jesuit priest working in a Philadelphia parish in one of the older parts of the city. He is a closeted gay priest and does not want his name used. ... "In my worst moments," he said, "I fear I will have been a collaborator in supporting an institution that oppresses gay people...." He said he became a Jesuit after falling in love with an older, 40-year old Jesuit priest. Smith was 20 then and studying at St. Joseph's College in Philadelphia. "As a Catholic priest, I know there would be no church without gay people. ... I assume priests are gay until proven otherwise."
In the same vein, such priests routinely gloat about the fact that gay bars in big cities have special "clergy nights," that gay resorts have set-asides for priests, and that in certain places the diocesan apparatus is controlled entirely by gays. What is significant is that these are not claims made by their opponents, not accusations fired off by right-wing Catholics in a fit of paranoia; rather they are gays' words about gays themselves. Their boasts include having blackmailed the Connecticut Catholic Conference into reversing its opposition to a gay-rights law by threatening to "out" gay bishops--a reversal that is difficult to understand without resort to the blackmail explanation. These considerations serve to underscore the point that the problem of gay priests entails not simply the scandal of sexual misdemeanor but also the fact that gay Catholics, by virtue of the fact that they reject her authority, serve to undermine the teaching Church. Hence their influence must be gauged not only by their numbers, but by the focus and force of their hostility. To this end, it is instructive to ponder the following message to his fellow gay clergy by South Africa's Bishop Reginald Cawcutt, penned in response to a rumor that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (bio - news)'s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was about to issue a letter prohibiting the acceptance of gay seminarians.
Kill [Ratzinger]? Pray for him? Why not just f--- him??? Any volunteers -- ugh!!! ... I do not see how he can possibly do this -- but... If he does, lemme repeat my statement earlier -- that I will cause lotsa s--- for him and the Vatican. And that is a promise. MY intention would be simply to ask the question what he intends doing with those priests, bishops (possibly "like me") and cardinals ... who are gay. That should cause s--- enough. Be assured dear reverend gentlemen, I shall let you know the day any such outrageous letter reaches the desks of the ordinaries of the world.
Bishop Cawcutt's actual communication, be it noted, contained no prudish dashes. While the virulence of his language may be exceptional, the targets of his antagonism are not, and it is noteworthy that none of Bishop Cawcutt's several defenders distanced himself from the content of the prelate's harangue.
IDEOLOGY ALLOWS THE PROBLEM TO PERSIST
Bishop Cawcutt's astonishing survivability puts one in mind of President Clinton's, and to some extent the persistence of the gay priest problem and President Clinton's immunity to scandal have a common cause: Clinton in his own sphere and gay clergy in theirs have been indispensable agents in the advancement of the liberal agenda. Like their secular counterparts, Catholic liberals, even where they do not positively applaud the sexual recreations of gay priests, are willing to overlook the resultant embarrassment in order that a more important end may be served--in order, that is, that gays may remain as active members in the Church to assist them in their project of replacing ecclesial authority with personal experience as the norm determinative of authentic faith.
The leadership of the liberal movement in the Catholic Church is still today dominated by former priests, brothers, and seminarians who abandoned their vocations in the 1960s and 1970s. Most of these left to marry, and for them contraception remains the touchstone issue. Of their companions in dissent who stayed behind in the priesthood, a disproportionately high number are gay, and even liberal writers have commented on the "lavenderization of the left" that characterizes the clerical wing of their movement. A review of a recent book on the priesthood by the National Catholic Reporters Tom Roberts typifies the position--uneasily held, nervously expressed--of the non-gay progressive:
"Considering Orientation" is the chapter of The Changing Face of the Priesthood that deals with the increasingly disproportionate number of homosexuals in the Roman Catholic priesthood and the one that leads the author, Fr. Donald B. Cozzens, to ask if the priesthood is on its way to becoming a "gay profession." It is a devilishly difficult question to ask, first because almost no one in the hierarchical ranks wants anything to do with it, and because one can only approach it through a minefield planted wide with homophobes, right-wing zealots who see homosexual clergy as a particularly noxious manifestation of a liberal agenda, and the church's teaching that the homosexual orientation is "objectively disordered."
Whether the priesthood is becoming a gay profession is not, of course, a difficult question to ask, or to answer. It will be a tough problem to solve, in part because Catholics like Roberts cherish a contempt for conservatives ("homophobes," "right-wing zealots") that overmasters their intuition that something has gone wrong with the liberal project when its closest allies in the clergy are linked in the public imagination with male ballet dancers and fashion designers.
The "minefield" that terrifies Roberts involves not the explosive potential of error but the explosive potential of truth. What is unthinkable, what seems to be psychologically impossible to concede, is that there is an aspect of post-conciliar controversy in which the conservatives might have been right after all. In the same vein, whereas the National Catholic Reporter via Jason Berry's articles was among the first publications to broach the subject of clerical sexual abuse, the same paper remains bewilderingly doctrinaire in its refusal to question the dogma that the preponderance of male victims is entirely unrelated to priestly homosexuality. Though progressives lampoon the orthodox as cowards who shut their eyes and cover their ears while shouting the party line, in this arena there is little doubt as to who is asking the disconcerting questions and who wants to change the subject. The Kansas City Star series cites an example that is as telling as it is typical; the subject is pre-seminary HIV testing.
One religious order that doesn't require the test is the Society of the Precious Blood. The Rev. Mark Miller, provincial director of the Kansas City province, said the testing raises issues that he does not wish to address. "When you ask a question, you need to know why you are asking it," Miller said. "The answers that would come up put it in a category where we don't want to go."
Still, liberals characteristically refuse to acknowledge their own role in creating the gay priest problem, and often attempt to transfer the blame to others. Thus Roberts complains that "almost no one in the hierarchical ranks" wants to tackle the crisis--a complaint that is at least partly disingenuous. Much of the hierarchy's reluctance to address the issue stems precisely from the beating it knows it would take at the hands of liberals should it treat gayness as a negative factor. Since liberals dominate the opinion-forming institutions in the Church--the media, the bureaucracy, education at all levels--and since they are able to call on powerful allies in the secular world to help discredit their adversaries, only the boldest of bishops would risk a truly candid discussion of the problem in public.
HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT TREATED AS A PROBLEM
For all that, the number of priests dead of AIDS has forced everyone, even gay clergy themselves, to admit that something is not right. Here too, however, the nature of the crisis as well as its solution has been brought to the public attention by the secular media and presented solely in its secular aspects. What is disappointing, if not surprising, is the extent to which bishops and religious superiors have adopted the secular mindset and washed their hands of their moral responsibilities, in effect allowing the poachers to appoint themselves gamekeepers. A parade example is the case of Father Michael Peterson, founder of the Saint Luke Institute, which specializes in therapy for priests with sexual disorders. Peterson himself died of AIDS in 1987--a circumstance which not only failed to destroy the credibility of his motives or to delegitimize his therapeutic techniques, but which earned him almost unanimous port-mortem accolades even from bishops. Examples can be multiplied from the Kansas City Star articles:
In 1986, [Father Dennis] Rausch moved to South Florida and eventually became Catholic chaplain at Florida International University in North Miami. It was there that he began counseling and ministering to people with HIV and AIDS. In February 1989, Rausch decided he should get an HIV test himself. He waited nearly three weeks for the devastating results. "The first year was really difficult," said Rausch, 47. "I went through anger at myself for being so stupid. You wonder, 'Am I going to get sick and die? How long am I going to be around? What if the bishop finds out? Is he going to ship me off?'"
Father Rausch's worries were unfounded. In January of 2000 he was doing neither penance not jail time but running an AIDS ministry program for the Archdiocese of Miami. No one familiar with the conduct of Catholic gay/lesbian ministry in the United States will contest the claim that many, perhaps most, of the ministers are sexually active gays. It is a slight exaggeration, if it is an exaggeration at all, to contend that the only disqualifying factor for gay/lesbian or AIDS ministry is moral disapproval of the gay lifestyle. The situation is not much different in the field of vocation direction and of priestly formation.
The Rev. Thomas Crangle, a Franciscan priest in the Capuchin order in Passaic, NJ, knows what a positive AIDS test can do to a seminarian. When he was vocation director for his province, Crangle said, a man applied for his order, which didn't require testing, and another order that had mandatory testing. "He came out positive," Crangle said. "He came to me and he said, 'That just blows all my dreams.' I said, 'It doesn't blow your dreams. You had a vocation before this, and this does not make you who you are."
In assessing the likelihood of remedying the crisis, the importance of the poacher-turned-gamekeeper phenomenon cannot be stressed enough. Not only does it ensure that the current wisdom regarding seminary recruitment will be maintained for the foreseeable future, but that the problem deemed to be in need of fixing will be the problem of traditional Catholic morality and asceticism. The official and expert responses to priests who die of AIDS are remarkable for what they omit and for what they include. Mention is seldom, if ever, made of the moral failing on the part of the priest. Sodomy is a mortal sin, and this sin is compounded on the part of the priest because it involves a further violation of his promises of chastity, in addition to the hypocrisy implicit in his acting against his role of moral teacher and helper of souls. Silence on this subject on the part of bishops and religious superiors is baffling to lay Catholics, who naturally wonder whether there is double standard in operation that censures laypeople but excuses clergy, that censures heterosexual but excuses homosexual vice.
Even rarer than discussion of the moral delinquency of the priest with AIDS is candid acknowledgment of the part played by sexual perversion in contracting the disease, the psychological disorder of the man locked into a compulsive homosexual libido which is marked by an adolescent selfishness and hunger for gratification and an adolescent irresponsibility and lack of control. Men entrusted with institutional authority who are enfeebled by deviant compulsive sexuality cannot help but damage the institution, not only by sexual mischief, but in ways unrelated to sex in which their immaturity, hostility, and irresponsibility lead them to sacrifice the common good to their own agenda. Yet the gamekeepers and their partisans keep alive the pretense that a priest can make the "mistakes" that lead to his death by AIDS while still serving the Church with moral and doctrinal and pastoral integrity, as if the inclination to sodomy were an isolable affliction like measles or a weakness for chocolate.
A case in point concerns Father Thom Savage, S.J., who last year became the first president of an American university, religious or secular, to die of AIDS. Most of the faithful who learned of it winced at the shame that it should be a Catholic, and still more a priest, that earned this distinction. One might have expected official responses similar to those offered when a priest is found dead in a brothel: a low-key statement of regret for the scandal caused, a brief reaffirmation of the priestly duty of chastity, a reminder to pray that God deal mercifully with the departed. Father Edward Kinerk, SJ, is a former superior of the Missouri Province of the Society of Jesus and Savage's successor as president of Rockhurst College. This is how he chose to speak to the issue:
As a Jesuit, I cannot feel anything but pride and gratitude for a meteor that burned itself out in the service of others. On May 10, 1999, God took the gift back. Thom is with God. As Jesuits, we rejoice. He has done what God sent him to do.
Many Catholics simply shook their heads in disbelief after reading this encomium. Embezzlers are not commended for their generous service to the banking industry, yet gay priests who break their vows are routinely praised for their ministry. Why then does the laity so seldom protest? By a curious irony, it is often the more than ordinarily God-fearing people who find themselves reduced to silence on this issue. This is because the spontaneous disgust that sodomy arouses in normal persons simultaneously evokes, in the Christian, compassion for those wretched enough to be afflicted with such disordered appetites. We shudder to learn of the existence of men with a morbid attraction to vomit or to corpses, yet our natural horror is almost always a horror mixed with pity. In the same way, even though most Catholics in their heart of hearts reject the stigmatization of their healthy reactions as "homophobia", an uneasy sense of "there but for the grace of God go I" tempers their revulsion and sometimes inhibits them from giving voice to the moral concern they rightly intuit. Gays have not been slow to exploit this reticence to their own political advantage, and indeed have done so with outstanding success.
MUST CELIBACY BE TAUGHT?
If it is not already obvious from what has preceded, it should be stated flatly that the word "homophobia" will not be found in the mouth of an honest man. It represents an intellectual fraud perpetrated for devious political motives that will not withstand open examination. A parallel bit of semantic sleight-of-hand is the notion that "sexuality" or "celibate sexuality" needs to be taught to adult men. One of Judy Thomas's Kansas City Star headlines neatly encapsulates the party line of the gamekeepers: "Seminary taught spirituality, liturgy, and Latin--sexuality was taboo." Thomas reports that most priests polled by the Star "said the church failed to offer an early and effective sexual education that might have prevented [HIV] infection in the first place." Though uncritical in its presentation, her series accurately picks-up this drumbeat and relays it in quote after quote.
"Sexuality still needs to be talked about and dealt with," said the Rev. Dennis Rausch.
"The Jesuits have made a much more concerted effort to educate our men on sexuality and celibacy and what that means," Father Edward Kinerk said.
"When young men go into seminary, they don't even know what celibacy is," said Father Harry Morrison, a California priest who has AIDS. "A lot of this technical language, these Latin phrases, all you know is there's something to be afraid of. You don't even know exactly what it means."
"How to be celibate and to be gay at the same time, and how to be celibate and heterosexual at the same time, that's what we were never really taught how to do." (Bishop Thomas Gumbleton)
Without exception, the reaction of every sane heterosexual priest of my acquaintance to this proposal is, "Say what?" It is difficult to imagine a psychologically healthy 15-year-old boy, much less a seminarian, who would not have a wholly adequate and complete idea of "what celibacy is." If a groom expressed hesitations to his bride as to "sexuality and fidelity and what that means," she would have excellent reason to doubt his sanity or good will or both--clearly a happy marriage is not in the cards. By the same token, every decent man knows when he walks through the seminary door that it's wrong to tumble the receptionist and shower with the altar boys and stash porn in his dresser, and those who pretend to be teachers in this arena are themselves deeply confused or profoundly duplicitous. I do not dispute that there exist 25-year-olds who do not know what celibacy means, but such men are radically unfit to become deacons, priests, and bishops, and all the lectures in the world will not make them otherwise.
There is a sense of course in which a normal, well-intentioned seminarian can and should learn from the ascetical tradition of the Church and from non-politicized psychology how to avoid dangers to chastity and how to strengthen his self-mastery so as to stay chaste. Exhortations to modesty in speech and dress and to custody of the eyes are examples of the former; instruction on the dangers of projection and transference in counseling situations are examples of the latter. But everyone familiar with the current reality knows that the "workshops on sexuality" offered to priests and seminarians do not concern themselves with techniques helpful to self-mastery. Rather they take the form of group sharing sessions in which the participants are invited to make peace with their own "sexuality" and urged, much more forcefully, to tolerate those with non-standard appetites. A case in point: the US Jesuits recently approved guidelines for admitting novices that include this characteristic of the ideal candidate: "He has the ability to identify and accept his own sexual orientation and to live comfortably with people of different sexual orientations." Note that in the discussion of sexual orientation the qualifiers "normal" and "deviant" play no part in the equation. In this context they never do.
The gay priest problem will continue to worsen as long as this code-talk remains the dominant idiom. As long as seminarians are "educated in sexuality" by the Michael Petersons and are warned by their superiors that they must "live comfortably with people of different sexual orientations," we can be sure that the number of gays will steadily increase in the clergy and the language of moral integrity will be pushed out of the discussion. Quite simply, those entrusted to fix what is broken are broken themselves and are camouflaging their real motives in the fuzzy vocabulary of therapy and pastoral sensitivity. As with every institutional crisis, this one ultimately boils down to the question of accountability. Who recruits the newcomers? Who forms their habits and attitudes? More importantly, who appoints the recruiters and educators? Who will name the problems for what they are and take responsibility for putting them right? The issue of accountability forces us to confront a yet more intimidating crisis, one which is easily misunderstood and which I take up with reluctance, but which must be faced squarely as an unpleasant truth.
Bishop Van said last Sunday that the Fort Worth Diocese has 25 seeking voaction, which is the most that this diocese has had.
The last I heard Mount Angel Abbey here in Oregon had over 95 seminarians. I have no idea how many are diocesan priests, however.
What an ignorant statement.
Of which club do you speak?
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.