Telling the story from our point of view

Blog Archive

November 29, 2005

Vatican recommends 'overcoming' homosexuality to gay priests

Fellow ghetto conservative blogger Dell Gines gives a welcome attaboy to the Pope for his role in the "no gay priests" policy letter.

I too applaud the Pope for securing and defining the position of the church on homosexuality. When it comes to people who are fraudulently representing the church and by extension Christ, they should be given clear directives on how to correct that. The Vatican has taken this a redemptive step forward by recommending that homosexual identified priests overcome their homosexuality before entering the priesthood.
According to the AP report, "The Instruction said men "who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called `gay culture'" cannot be admitted to seminaries. The only exception would be for those with a "transitory problem" that had been overcome for at least three years."

Homosexual clergy, hidden or otherwise, in any denomination which eschews homosexuality, are a threat to that church's spiritual well being. Those who "come out" in protest are doing the church a favor. I pray that they come out and resign.

  • Related: Courage, the RC groups which helps individuals deal with same sex attractions.
  • 19 comments:

    RV said...

    I thought you were gay?

    DL Foster said...

    Rv,
    I hope Im reading your question right. No, I used to be gay. 15 years ago.

    Brady said...

    DL, it is worth noting out that celibate men that are striclt opposed to the "gay culture" or gay sex but that still live with same sex attractions would still be banned from the priesthood based on their attractions alone.

    DL Foster said...

    Brady,
    Have these men renounced those attactions as ungodly? Actually, I dont see the use of having an attraction you dont intend on using at some point. Please explain why that is acceptable to live that way. Should I live having attractions to women other than my wife, even if I dont commit adultery? Should one have an attraction to children, even if they never sexually touch a child?
    The truth is that the attraction will eventually manifest an opportunity and unless it has been dealt with the end result will be a sexual encounter. The priests who claim to be celibate and homosexual sounds like a misnomer to me. Is homosexuality exclusive of sexual contact. If it is just a thought or an attraction, why would someone identify with it? Why allow someone to call you a thief if youve never stolen anything?

    Regan said...

    Pedophilia and adultery are violations and betrayals, Foster.
    Homosexuality, and same sex committed relationships are not.
    Homosexuality is a morally neutral aspect of human sexuality and has no bearing of the things of merit that a gay person can do equal to heterosexuals.
    There is no obligation to change one's sexual orientation from gay to not.
    I answered you.
    Now I have a question:
    What would you think of an anti Semitic ex Jew?

    DL Foster said...

    A couple of things,
    1. I didn't ask you a question.
    2. Your [world]view is a secular one, incompatible with biblical teaching, which is why you can easily place homosexuality in the morally "neutral" zone. And if homosexuality is a "morally neutral aspect of human sexuality", what would that make the people who practice it? An interesting concept indeed.
    3. You made a point of saying "committed" homosexual relationships aren't "bretrays and violations". It would lead one to believe that your categorical positioning of some homosexual relationships indicate those who are not commited (which by far is the great majority of homosexual relationships) are immoral and wrong. That would most likely support assertions by those on the so called religious right that most homosexuals practice immorality.
    4. There is no obligation to do anything except (as the saying goes) pay taxes, stay black and die. However there is great opportunity to reorient one's sexual identity, feelings and behavior.

    Now, to your question:
    What would you think of an anti Semitic ex Jew?
    Im not sure what I would "think" of such an individual. The point of the question seems prone to discombobulation. You would probably need to explain your premise for the question before any type of satisfactory response can be offered.

    Regan said...

    See how much wording you took to answer.
    I would love to engage this stream.
    But, I won't be allowed what's needed to do so.

    Regan said...

    You say secular as if it's a bad thing, and announce Biblical belief as if it's all good.
    An anti Semitic ex Jew is but one example of the abused becoming the abuser.

    Your blog is a caution on that. What I meant by the continued obligation forced on gay people to change, is the suspension of equal and fair, or non threatening treatment unless and until they no longer are or appear to be gay.
    This does not make becoming ex gay a matter of choice.
    Especially if it's a matter of religious doctrine, that is not one's own.

    DL Foster said...

    the continued obligation forced on gay people to change

    Let's attempt a very simple exercise here.

    name three gay people you know who were forced to change. Please cite the accompanying circumstances.

    Regan said...

    1. Pierre Seel: one of thousands survived Nazi death camp.

    2. Billy Tilton: a woman jazz clarinetist, lived as a hetero man.

    3. Kevin M. lives as a het, but is gay. Terrified of coming out to family.

    You know that mental and emotional intimidation, if not physical is a specter that gay children live with every day.
    Perhaps the state, unlike Iran, doesn't execute teens to ensure that intimidation.
    But ANY threat, is coercion. Therefore a method of force.

    Robert said...

    Rev. Foster -
    you wrote
    "The truth is that the attraction will eventually manifest an opportunity and unless it has been dealt with the end result will be a sexual encounter"

    Wouldn't this also apply to celibate priests who identify as heterosexual? I'm sure there are cases of priests who go their entire ecclesiastical careers without having a sexual encounter with any other human being. If this is true of heterosexuals, why couldn't, or wouldn't, it be true of celibate homosexual priests as well?

    Regan said...

    And this is precisely why females in this scenario, who have been abused, abandoned and the children sired by priests also...goes ignored by the Vatican
    Abuse is abuse...and scapegoating gay men, won't solve the problem.
    It only further intimidates and isolates gay people.

    DL Foster said...

    scapegoating gay men, won't solve the problem.

    What is the "problem"? Unless youre Catholic, you may be just guessing, therefore are equally ignorant of a solution.
    Furthermore, do you have irrefutable evidence that shows not one single homosexual man was involved in the Catholic sexual abuse scandals? If you don't, its a pretty outlandish mischaracterization to say gays are being "scapegoated".

    Secondly, you ply the victimist theories pretty thick. I'd like to see any homosexual who has been intimidated and isolated by the actions of the church. Proof please. The ones who have spoken out have been defiant and unrepentant, not intimidated and isolated. Those who remain [quiet] are nothing more that downlow priests. That's a pretty deceptive and disgusting position to be in.

    DL Foster said...

    Wouldn't this also apply to celibate priests who identify as heterosexual? I'm sure there are cases of priests who go their entire ecclesiastical careers without having a sexual encounter with any other human being. If this is true of heterosexuals, why couldn't, or wouldn't, it be true of celibate homosexual priests as well?

    First, there is no Biblical madate requiring any religious leader to be sexually celibate. Its a Catholic doctrine, not Biblical.
    That being said, it is their rule and consequently, their rules must be clarified. I support their recent clarification in regards to homosexual priests.

    Your theory, relative to Catholic teaching is correct, but not applicable. Illicit heterosexual behavior isnt acceptable. There is no Biblical acceptance or encouragement for homosexual thoughts or actions. A man who desires a woman for intimacy (in context to creative intent) is in contrast encouraged and expected.

    This is where Catholic doctrine errs or falls short because it presents a problematic scenario by requiring celibacy for religious leaders. One problem only creates another.

    DL Foster said...

    1. Pierre Seel: one of thousands survived Nazi death camp.
    Forced to change? Was that the Nazi's intention for the death camps? Hardly.

    2. Billy Tilton: a woman jazz clarinetist, lived as a hetero man.
    Transsexuals can hardly classified as being forced to change. This is an outrageously ignorant example.

    3. Kevin M. lives as a het, but is gay. Terrified of coming out to family.
    I still dont see where change is applicable in this example. Perhaps your definition of change is fluid enough to include the kitchen sink. Playing word semantics is not a good way to prove your point.

    Regan said...

    You are missing the point, so eager are you to dismiss or limit communication.

    The point is what motivates anyone to give up their identity at all.
    Changing or passing: distinctions between the two are not made when discussing homosexual identity with the general public.
    I tried to give you the benefit of a doubt you have not accorded me.
    This was an exercise.

    When so many ex gays sound alike, have similar professions and preoccupations, it would lead a straight person like me interested in discussing the issue of change-wondering what you'd be like if being gay was accepted as routinely as being left handed or a genius is?

    Regan said...

    Convincing others that being no longer gay-to the extent that being tempted to be abusive of those of their former identity, is a sure sign of the same insecurity that makes a person relinquish that identity to begin with.

    It's not so unusual for certain religious groups to take advantage of a person with those issues.
    Or take advantage of 'battle fatigue', if not insecurity.
    However, as stated before:
    because gay people are a grossly misunderstood and misrepresented minority to begin with, it's important for people who identify as such to remain who they are.
    Or else we'll never really learn about them or who they are.

    DL Foster said...

    ex gays sound alike, have similar professions and preoccupations

    1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

    According to the Bible, you have just gave us a very high compliment. A thanks is in order.

    Regan said...

    Once again, Foster-you have deflected the discussion and took to self congratulation.
    To take your own statement and put it to another context:
    Nazis, Klansmen, Taliban, Sharia law enforcers and radical Southern Baptists, do not put you in good company of like thinkers.
    All men of God, certain of God's will and instruction.
    Those that deem themselves the most civilized and in charge of 'protecting' aspects of civilization itself from imagined enemies.
    Biblical passages have been used to support destructive and mean spirited and impractical socio/political structures,...there is no less exception when it comes to gay people, than for any other group peacefully working, or having already done so, to integrate.

    That you can speak in Bible verses does not impress, especially for the reasons you do so.

    I have to go now about my usual business of repairing the damage you and your like minded brethren do.

    Merry Xmas.