www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Pope approves barring gay seminarians

They do, but it must be admitted there is a difference between suffering a temptation which is less proximate (e.g. seeing a beautiful woman on the street, or having a meeting with one in your office during work hours) and being placed in the midst of it. For example, would it be prudent for a priest with "OSA" as you term it, to be asked to live with a bunch of peer women, including showering with them potentially in communal showers, etc? Would not the latter be a far greater form of temptation than the former? Or for that matter, would it not be more imprudent for a priest to have a private venue to meet with a young woman, outside of the context of a meeting, potentially in a more intimate setting? How about asking such a woman to also share your rectory with you and sleep in the next room once ordained a priest? The answer is clearly yes. In terms of proximate occasions of sin, it isn't even close.

It seems to me the same common sense that dictates against co-habitation (even when it is done with the best intentions) for men and women before marriage applies here.

In general, you can quote several lines from the article, and provide a link to the rest.

However, in my thinking, a small Catholic forum discussing Catholic issues is in no way in violation of copyright laws in posting an article such as this from a Catholic source.

One must respect the spirit of the copyright laws, but sometimes the letter of such laws becomes a case of "Lex mulla, Lex nulla," "A bad law, is no law."

One cannot copyright Catholic concepts, because Catholic concepts come from God, not our intellect.

This particular story, after the death of JPII and election of B16, is the single most important development in Catholicism since the homosexual abuse scandals broke in America in 2002.

Lets not fall on our swords over overly scrupulous, legalistic interpretations of copyright laws, that violate the spirit of Catholic, law when the issue is so very important.

They do, but it must be admitted there is a difference between suffering a temptation which is less proximate (e.g. seeing a beautiful woman on the street, or having a meeting with one in your office during work hours) and being placed in the midst of it. For example, would it be prudent for a priest with "OSA" as you term it, to be asked to live with a bunch of peer women, including showering with them potentially in communal showers, etc? Would not the latter be a far greater form of temptation than the former? Or for that matter, would it not be more imprudent for a priest to have a private venue to meet with a young woman, outside of the context of a meeting, potentially in a more intimate setting? How about asking such a woman to also share your rectory with you and sleep in the next room once ordained a priest? The answer is clearly yes. In terms of proximate occasions of sin, it isn't even close.

[/QB][/QUOTE]

Yes--but now the vast majority of priests live alone in a rectory, mainly due to lack of priests. Fewer and fewer parishes have multiple priests any longer. I guess that I'm confused as to how one temptation can be worse than the other.

I believe the Pope's approval is based on the results of the John Jay Study commissioned by the USCCB after the clerical sexual abuses came to the fore in 2002. For the details of the results and other related matters, please see:

http://www.usccb.org/ocyp/webstudy.shtml

The Study showed almost 65% of the reported sexual abuses committed by clergy were against MALES and slightly over 35% against FEMALES. The age of the minor victims ranged from 1 through 17 years old (below 18, the age of majority).

Majority of the victims were between the ages of 11 and 14, which spans both pedophilia (sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children, male or female, aged 13 years old and below) and ephebophilia (sexual abuse of pubescent males or females between 13 and 18 years of age).

Because of the preponderance of male victims, the sexual acts were conclusively committed by homosexual clergy. Heterosexual acts were a very minor finding which could be dealt with in another appropriate manner.

Hence, the ban on the admission of gays into U.S. seminaries.

Amado

P.S. With respect to the screening process, some National Episcopal Conferences have implemented their own guidelines with success.

Dear Doc,

I have no problem with the subject matter with the article you posted. My problem with your posting of the article is that the article is listed on the CWN website for paid subscribers only* (I know, I pay for my subscription, as no doubt you do). This is not an "overly scrupulous, legalistic interpretations of copyright laws, that violate the spirit of Catholic law when the issue is so very important." In fact this issue also speaks to the spirit of the moral code- "Thou shalt not steal." Now if you want to contact CWN and ask permission to republish the article on this forum, that would be proper, but the policy of this Forum and the Terms and Conditions as listed on the CWN website (to which I provided a link) is quite clear are quite clear.

There was a recent ruling affecting my industry with regards to copyright violation. A publishing company held a copyright on a weekly publication that was available to paid subscribers only. A subscriber made a decision to share the publication to affliate offices around the country. The publisher sued the subscriber for copyright violation. The publisher argued that the subscription was sent to only one office of the subscriber not multiple offices, and any sharing of the copyrighted publication violated its copyright. The court agreed with the publisher and awarded the publisher damages in the amount of the unpaid subscriptions, as well as punitive damages. the award was millions of dollars.

Unless you are wlling to indemnify the Byzantine Forum against a potential lawsuit please do not quote "Lex mulla, Lex nulla" to me.

Michelle,

you can provide a link with a few quotes or summation of the article. As you see in my response above, the article in question is available to paid subscribers only.
(I apologize for taking up space on this subject, but this is an important lesson we must understand.)


*(it appears that as of this morning, 9-20-2005, the article is available to all and not just paid subscribers.)

A big "Thank You" to the Administrator for excerpting the article I posted. That was certainly what should have been done in the first place, and for my part in it I apologize.

I would certainly hope that Catholic World Report would NEVER sue ByzCath.org for posting one of their fine articles ! :p

Now, back to the thread:

As I said,

This is the FIRST time the Church has indicated HOW they are going to deal with the recent homosexual abuse crisis. While the USCCB continues its spin and refusal to identify the roots of the problem, the Vatican is going right to the source of the problem, which is an open admission by the Vatican that the western Church is and has refused to address the crisis in its reality, and thus the Vatican is making an end run around the obstructionist USCCB.

Dear Dr. Kopp:

No, this NOT the first time! Some National Episcopal Conferences have been implementing theirs for the past 2 years, with specific guidelines from Rome.

No, again.

The USCCB commissioned the John Jay Study in December 2002 specifically to "identify the roots of the problem," among others. Please take time to read the results of the study and the other related documents at the the linked USCCB site.

Agreed, Rome has known of the source of the problem a long, long time ago.

However, the instruction will be addressed to the ENTIRE Church, not only to the "western Church." This attempt to indict ONLY the "western Church" seems to exonerate the Eastern Catholic Churches from sexual abuse of minors.

Did you know that the John Jay Study included the Eastern eparchies in the U.S. and that there were at least 14 members of the Eastern clergy who were reported/"guilty" of sexual abuse of minors?

I don't think it is fair to characterize the USCCB as "obstructionist" in this regard. It had to wait for the results of the John Jay Study and to sift through the findings. I am sure the USCCB forwarded a copy thereof seasonably to Rome.

The USCCB, of which Eastern eparchs are MEMBERS, did no cover-up, if I am understanding the implication of your post.

At any rate, the instruction would be welcomed by the world's bishops and their respective national episcopal conferences.

Amado

Actually, I've read them, extensively. Please quote a public statement by ANY bishop of the USCCB, speaking FOR the USCCB, acknowledging that the sex abuse crisis was a homosexual crisis, not one of pedophilia.

I have yet to see any such admission.

On the contrary, the "Talking About Touching," VIRTUS, "Good Touch Bad Touch," etc., programs implimented by the USCCB universally and openly deny that homosexuality had a role in the sex abuse crisis.

That is obfuscation and willful deceipt.

Hopefully, no eastern bishops are actively involved in that deception.

[/QB][/QUOTE]

My reference to the "western church" was unclear. I was not implying a distinction between the Roman Rite and the Eastern Rites. I was implying the Church in the west, i.e., the developed english-speaking countries in which the homosexual abuse mostly occurred.

My research indicates that there are problems with unchastity among the priests in second and third world nations, but only in the western developed countries is the problem primarily homosexual in nature.

I sat through 3 hours of VIRTUS training, and it was all stuff I saw on DATELINE 2 years ago. I wonder why the Church thinks this program is of value in correcting the original problem. Since I worked for the government for 24 years it seems like the same approach when a problem was discovered. Management would never address the guilty party and take corrective action. Instead a meeting would be called and everyone would sit through hours of talk about the problem.

Dear Logos Teen you said:

"To me, there just doesn't seem to be a clear answer. All in all, I don't think it's the homosexuality that's causing the problem; it's our culture."


I say:

I'm in complete agreement with you. As an example, when I read the 'authorized' biography of Lawrence of Arabia, his friend who admitted he was a homosexual and admitted he loved Lawrence said that Lawrence would have been appalled at the idea of sexual relations. He said that we have to realize that it was a different time and era, and homosexuality was unthinkable...in the West at least.

Now I say in the West because Lord Byron loved the sexual climate in the Ottoman Empire. In his first visit to Greece the notorious Turkish head of Northern Greece Ali Pasha kept flattering him and inviting him to visit him at night.

Lord Byron was exceptionally good looking. He was also a notorious womanizer that seemed to have liked boys as well...or so it was said. But that was also the pagan Ancient Greek mentality that became quite popular in Rome. So much so that one wealthy Roman paid the equivalent of $200,000 or more for a good looking slave boy

I have a magazine that was published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art also stating that in the 'Belle Epoque' homosexuality was unheard of while lesbianism was acceptable and laughed about. I tend to question this though, because in the Brothers Karamozov there is a woman that is so grateful towards another woman for releasing the man she loves that she keeps hugging and kissing her on the mouth.

In other words it seems that what might be taken today as lesbianism as shown in the paintings of the impressionists, might just have been a normal show of affection in a different age, place and time.

Another example of this would be an old silent movie of Charlie Chaplin's. In it he keeps kissing this young orphan boy he loves and wants to protect on the mouth. Evidentally at the time it would not have been taken as anything but innocent.

But then there is 'pagan' Germany before and during the depression. Marlene Deitrich, the famous German movie star, wore pants at a time when it was unacceptable, and felt the moral climate in this country during the 1930's was rediculous...for they in Berlin were free to love boys and girls with equal abandon. And that we can see in the movie 'Cabaret'.

It definitely is the culture. But that was the problem all along. If a young boy whose sexuality is not yet defined is made to believe that it is okay to be a homosexual, would he have been one had it not been acceptable?

Zenovia

Dear John you said:

"And priests who have OSA (Opposite Sex Attraction) don't suffer from a bombardment of temptations?"

I say:

Priests are very vulnerable. Anyone else can just turn away from someone that they might have an attraction for, or someone who is deliberately trying to seduce them. Priests cannot because of their vocation as priest. They are the one's that must do the comforting, advising, etc. By the time they realize what's happening, it can be too late.

Zenovia

I am sorry all, but I hit the send button too soon on the previous.

Here is my post:

Logos Teen,

There is a simple and clear answer, follow the standards that guide formation. Not everyone called is homosexual, but by studies and statistic they are more apt to succomb to temptation not only because of society, but the nature of the environment they must live in. By experience here in the skete I live in, I have one other priestmonk here, who had been widowed and preferred to take monastic vows for community life. We have had several postulants, that could not abide by the celibacy requirement and had to be asked to leave. They found that being removed from the world only inflamed their passions.

I also have had the sad responsibility of being called by a hierach. He had a monk that had been thrown out of almost every monstic house in the US. His great transgression was, that in his teens he was an active homosexual, and the way most think, never took any precaution for HIV. He had a conversion in his life and lived celibacy strictly from the time of his conversion. Unfortunately it was too late. After five years he diagnosed with full blown AIDS. His community put him out, and the next, and the next. etc. Each house did not want to be assosciated with a monk with AIDS. I was called were I was teaching, and literally begged by my hierarch if I would take him on. I paused and prayed, and I got the response immediately, YES. Father Nektarios arrived with few clothes, and a suitcase full of meds. I had to even arrange through the generosity of my physician (a good catholic doctor) to have him treated pro-bono.

Father Nektarios though because of late detection and because of lack of Christian charity had already progressed to the last stages. If anything it was truly a spiritual time for both of us. We truly prayed, and I ministered to him physically, emotionally, and spiritually. I gave him a little comfort for his last months. He was eternally grateful, and expressed it, and thank God for the agape we had between us. He stated he is paying for his temptations and sins now. He also stated since the first time since his conversion he saw the face of Christ as told to us in the gospel. It was late one night, that we both knew the end was there. It was a long vigil, myself, Father Nektarios, and my doctor who came to the skete. About an hour before dawn, his end approached, and prior to it begged me to see that no one like him would be tempted in the name of religion to the temptations he faced. He was buried the day after his repose, and he is prayed for continuosly. He was only 30 years old.

We as a culture think we can handle gay clergy. We can't, because we place them in an environment that can cause any easy fall. Many do not want to deal with the pain and sacrifice that comes, when their temptation becomes a responsibility to other. I pray for those that struggle daily with homosexuality and its temptations. I pray that they may be spared the pain suffering and loss of youth and life as Father Nektarios.

In the meantime, let us not set some people up for the tempttation, but reach out to them in love and help them grow in stability by reaching out to others that are like them and strengthen in the words and love of Lord.

Forgive me all
Father Anthony+

Fr. Anthony,

What is there to forgive? You were Christ for Fr. Nektarios. What a wonderful opportunity to really serve!

Fr. Deacon Edward