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.
  • 10 comments:

    Anonymous 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?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.