www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall question about homosexuality

To anyone who knows:

Please explain to me if this is true.

Someone, a Catholic, told me the other day in our discussion about homosexuality and pedophilia, that non clergy Catholic who are homosexual cannot receive communion. But Catholic clergy who are homosexual can practice their ministry AND receive communion.

Is this true? Is it different in the different Catholic Churches?

Ed Hashinsky

I've never heard this before. All Catholics are required to be in a state of grace when receiving Holy Communion. If someone has participated in a homosexual act, and then not made a confession, it is impossible for them to be in a state of grace.

And contrariwise, even someone who struggles greatly with such an attraction, yet intends to remain chaste, and has confessed any serious sins, is encouraged by the Church to receive Holy Communion.

Jeff

I think it possible to find various priests/confessors who may say anything to anyone about anything. Now whether it follows Church teaching, however, may be a different matter. But as far as your question about clergy vs. non-clergy, I have never heard that before. That being said, some of the things my friends have told me that priests said to them in confession defy belief.

If a Catholic priest is gay but totally chaste and celibate he is not in a state of sin (as far as homosexuality is concerned). In Catholicism as long as a gay person is chaste, celibate, and follows the teaching of the Church he/she is fine.

Same for both the Western and Eastern Church: http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur68.htm

Ed,

in the context of your discussion, what is meant by, "who are homosexual"?

Any sexual activity outside of sacramental marriage by Catholics (clergy or laity) is sinful.

I followed the sex scandal stories over the years and it seems that many Catholic bishops DO permit homosexually active clergy to continue their ministry. Some clergy have their partners live with them with full knowledge of their bishops. If gay clergy can receive communion (and say mass) then why are practicing gay laity are not permitted communion? I don't want to name names or single out any particular person (I believe that this is against forum policy) but much of this was also in the news. My question isn't about this as much as it is about why homosexually active (gay or lesbian) church members (laity) cannot receive communion, but clergy who are can? What exactly are the rules?

Ed

Zan,

Your comments bring up an interesting point. I know that the members of Courage eschew such labels as "gay" and "homosexual" because they choose not to define themselves according to sins to which they may feel tempted but choose to avoid. This makes perfect sense to me. I have also seen articles in print (wish I could remember where and when!) in which Catholic priests insisted on calling themselves "gay" while at the same time affirming their commitment to living chastely. Does anyone know why someone would want to do that?


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Your point? There have been several bad bishops who did that, heck there have even been gay bishops themselves. This against the teaching of the Church. This is not limited to Catholicism, I recall a particular scandal a year or two ago in Greece about a secret group of gays in the Greek Orthodox Church which the bishop allowed to exist.

And before anyone pulls the INSULTING "all Catholic priests are perverts" bull s**t - there are more perverts in public educatioin percent wise than in the Roman Catholic Church. Don't hear about that very often in the news, now do we?

A person has to be in a state of Grace to recieve communion. Sexual activity out of wedlock (which includes gay sex) is a mortal sin and it requires confession prior to taking communion.

This article goes into detail over what happens if a priest is in mortal sin http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur68.htm

Not only that but there are plenty of Homosexually active ministers out there, remember Ted Haggard?

This is hardly a Catholic only problem.

Zan,

I don't want to pick on the Catholic Church, but a friend who is Catholic just came out of the closet. He no longer goes to church even though he was the church choir director and music minister for years. He is not a drag queen nor does he flaunt his choice in sexuality. His life is a private affair. He is still deeply in love with his Catholic religion and still keeps his faith in Jesus, the respect of the Eucharist, and many ethical teachings in other regards. But for him he has chosen a lifestyle after much hardships that I cannot publicize. I sensed he was having a 'turn' in his orientation a few years ago, but never directly asked him about it. We parted our ways for other reasons, and lately I have caught up with him. He finally admitted to being gay. I was let down because I knew he chose that lifestyle after hardships I was privy to over the years. When I first met him he was a womanizer. But something clicked between then and now.

He cannot receive communion because he choses a lifestyle and will not give it up. He later bought a house with his partner and has become quite a successful person in his work. But he has confided in me several times his distraught about not being able to receive communion. But he knows Catholic priests who are also actively gay, their bishops know of their situation, and they not only continue to receive communion, the most sacred thing in the Catholic religion, but are also able to say mass, something my friend cannot even participate in even as a music minister.

Ed

Deacon Richard, This is a puzzle. is it possible to be a chaste gay?
Ed

If the bishop in question is allowing an sexually active homosexual priest to say mass than the bishop is in grave error, and once he dies Christ will judge him for his actions.

If your friend stays celibate and chaste then he may recieve communion too. Now I (exuse me for being rather personal) really enjoy females but, not being married, I stay celibate and chaste so I may be in a state of grace to take Eucharist, it is very hard but I do it out of love for Jesus. When I fail then I go to confession and pray that I don't give into temptation again.

Yes: do not have gay sex, do not masturbate, and have clean thoughts.

The simple truth is whomever eats or drinks unworthily eats and drinks his own condemnation whether he may be a layman, deacon, priest, bishop or pope... QED

Then why call them *gay*?
Ed

If someone finds the same sex sexually attractive that means that they are gay.

But like what Father Deacon said, the ones in courage try not to call themselves gay.

Dear Ed,

I am going to have to back up Deacon Richard and Zan here. It is possible for a person to lead a chaste and celibate life. First, one has to be called to such a life. In exercising this calling, especially for one in the vocation of the priesthood, it requires a number of things to make sure that one does not become prey to temptation, either heterosexual or homosexual. One of which is a disciplined life of prayer and activity in one�s ministry. Another being that they have a support system and a way of being held accountable for their time and activities. Other ways can be suggested.

To state that a person whatever their sexual persuasion must act of their urges and desires then makes us no better than the animals. Discipline and self-control has been practiced in the virtue of chastity for ages. It is modern society that makes us believe that something is abnormal when we do not act out sexually.

If we truly believe what is given to us in scripture, then we would not act in ways of promiscuity. For some it is more of a battle than others. But, chastity can be achieved if it is strongly desired and fostered. I for one have been living in such a life for well over 20 years now. I know of many others that also are living such a life. Chastity is an achievable goal if only we let God work with those that are called to this state. For those that are not blessed in the bonds of marriage, that would include them also, no matter what persuasion they are.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

Thank you, Father Anthony.

Your reply is good instruction. I am pleased that both homosexuals and heterosexuals are BOTH called.

My Catholic fiend is in a dilemma. He wants to receive communion but understands that his lifestyle prevents him from it. However, Catholic priests who live the same lifestyle still receive and say mass. I should note that he is not militant or demands some sort of justice on this double standard. He keeps to himself. Interesting enough, he has helped bury Catholic believers when their own families (who have fallen from the church) failed to give them a proper church burial. He paid for their funeral himself. Sad though that the person's family, who ARE practicing Catholics, did show up to make claims on the deceased person's belongings. I felt so sorry for him over this that I took him shopping after the funeral, bought a case of beer, and drank with him that night and giving him a chance to b**ch about it all.

Ed

I would think that a great number of masses through the centuries were performed by priests in mortal sin. If a priest in an isolated village were to fall from grace how could he reasonably deprive his parishioners of the holy sacraments the following Sunday while he journeyed to a neighboring priest to receive absolution.
I understand that ideally no priest ever sins on Saturday night, but I dont believe its realistic.
The gay priests err greatly if they perform mass in a state of sin, but refusing to say mass early Sunday morning would cause a stir and scandal as well. Isnt that why the church determined the sanctity of the minister does not affect the validity of the sacrament?
As far as a chaste person ceasing to be gay I would think that would be like saying an alcoholic ceases to be one the day he quits drinking.
Homosexuals are called to chastity the same as heterosexuals, but will still be despised and detested whether they commit any sins or not.

... or even after years of sobriety. I think there are a number of parallels between alcoholism and homosexuality, but there are also some important differences. For one thing, the term "alcoholic" was popularized by the founders of AA as a word to designate people who have a real problem with alcohol, but are trying to stay sober (i.e. admitting to being an alcoholic is an essential step to recovery), whereas the term "gay" is embraced by active homosexuals as a word to identify themselves and their behavior, promoting the latter as acceptable and honorable.

That would depend a great deal on their outward behavior. There are a number of gays who successfully keep their private life private because they know how to act like everyone else and fit in. It would seem that those who were previously unable to do so would be motivated to learn after committing themselves to chastity.


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Ed--It is patently silly that he CANNOT participate as a "music minister" at a Catholic parish. The Church, throughout it's history has used and employed (and continues to do so today) many people who were known to be gay as composers, arrangers, leaders of choirs, cantors, and performers of sacred music as well as creators of art and architecture. Musical worship and many church buildings would be much poorer if it was not for these people who have enhanced worship and used their talents for the glory of God. Attend any NPM conference if you doubt me. John

Ed,

I should think it would depend on how one chooses to define both words. For example someone could define "chaste" for themselves in terms of homosexual monogamy, etc.

I once heard Fr. Thomas Hopko say that homosexuality is simply one form of stunted psycho-sexual development (or something to that effect), which I think is one of the most insightful things I've heard on the subject. If this is true, then it is never too late to resume the process of maturation in this area.

Chastity is, after all, more than merely a condition of "not doing something"--it is a virtue, in which one either grows or declines. I would go so far as to say that the perfection of chastity is the perfection of psycho-sexual development. That's why I am suspicious of someone choosing to hang onto the "gay" label--it suggests that this may be a "stuck" point for them, inhibiting additional growth and increasing the risk of falling back.


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Ed,

In reading through this series a couple of thoughts came to mind. First, there is some lack of precision in how your formulated your thesis. A person can be homosexual, i.e., have strong sexual attraction toward other members of the same sex, without acting on this attraction. If that is the case, there is nothing to prohibit one from receiving communion.

Should one act out on these desires the mystery of confession will allow one to receive communion. The Donatist Controversy addressed the issue of the personal holiness of the priest and the efficacy of his ministry. While it is certainly deplorable to have an active homosexual priest (or deacon or bishop) that does not mitigate the mysteries since they are the action of Jesus himself working through the priest.

It is true that one who is not in a state of grace should not receive communion, it is rare that one would be denied. Such a person, whether lay or cleric, does so, however, at grave risk to their soul.

Fr. Deacon Ed

If a priest is an *active* homosexual, but makes use of the mystery of confession, then when does this cycle become an abuse?

Someday, the constant return to a homosexual lifestyle/activity will have to be challenged.

Imagine this. A heterosexual married man has an affair. His wife is loving, but forgives him. He has another affair and is found out. His wife eventually forgives him again. Then the married man has another affair. How many times should this man's wife forgive and forget?

I though confession in the Catholic Church was a step towards metanoia, a change of heart. But if a homosexual priest is forgiven in this sacrament and then continues to return to active homosexuality, what should be done?

Ed

Didn't Someone once say something about forgiving seventy times seven ?

Ed,

I think what you're asking about here really is the mystery of sin. It seems very dramatic when we take a glaring sin like homosexuality but what about something like pride or lying? We dont have to go to confession for EVERY sin but we do have to repent of every sin. Meaning not all sins qualify for the confessional but every sin requires forgiveness. I am quite familiar with your line of thinking as it is one that I have shared for a very long time. It runs like this: if someone says they are sorry and repent then eventually they will quit doing the thing for which they have repented. We want to think that those who do not stop sinning are using the confessional as a justification. And perhaps there are some who are guilty of this. But by and large I have come to think that there is much more to the reality of sin in our lives than we care to recognize. Sin is real and it is real in all of our lives. When we consider this it appears that there really isnt much to the aforesaid line of thinking since we never really give up all our sins. Everyone of us has some sin that we cherish, even if we dont even realize it. We are loath to let it go. God does work many wonders in breaking the bonds of our sins throughout our lives, but few see the result of all their sins being taken care of before death. THus the universal teaching of the Church of purification after death. So what if one mans sin is glaring and ours may not be? Let us be as forgiving of others as we are of ourselves.

Jason

Ed,

I think the matter goes beyond the priesthood: how often should anyone be forgiven?

Confession of sin is as much a sign of renunciation and desire for forgiveness as it is medicinal. For deeply rooted sins, it may take many confessions and communions to eliminate its power over the penitent.

That said, any sin committed with a view to going to confession afterwards is compounded by the grave sin of presumption, which then also becomes something to confess. No one should abuse the merciful heart of the Father in such a way.

God bless,

Gordo

I'll just add that many passions are difficult to overcome, especially in today's world. For a significant number of men, the passion of lust is difficult to overcome because our society is saturated with the erotic. What Gordo says is correct that for some deeply rooted passions, multiple confessions and communions are needed. And no one but God really knows the full truth about anyone's heart. That being said, we can, and ought to make progress in the spiritual life. But the fathers also warn us that once one passion is conquered, the demons are at hand to rouse up another, especially pride.

Here is something that I think is helpful in discerning whether we are repentant or not. Take two persons who habitually fall into some sin, let's say a sin of lust since that is what we have been talking about. The unrepentant one takes his sin lightly, feels little or no remorse, and probably doesn't even bother to go to confession, or if he does, he doesn't confess the sin because he doesn't think it is a big deal. The other man feels deep and severe anger at himself and sorrow each time he sins. He resolves in his mind that he won't ever do it again. He makes a good confession. He puts up resistance for a few days (or weeks or months). But eventually, his passions become very strong and he succumbs. And so the cycle goes on...

The latter person I think is a repentant man, but he is weak and still trapped in the passions. And so it may take many years of ascesis for him to attain freedom.

Joe

Joe

This issue is personal to me for different reasons. I have family and friends who are gay and still practising Catholics. They have actually forced me to become more "orthodox" in practice and belief because I knew that I could not legitimately hold the Church's position on homosexuality if I was mildly holding other positions. These individuals now no that I hold to the Church's teaching on all issues and that I would be just as likely to call out their siblings over the issue of birth control as I would be on their open defiance of Catholic teaching. I generally keep my mouth shut on the issue and allow my actions to speak louder than words. However, I get quit irritated when the topic comes up in general and people start throwing around phrases such as -bigotry from ignorance....I probably knew more about the gay subculture than any other hetero, and that is precisely why I am so abhorrent to the culture now. I know exactly what goes on at the gay festivals and bars because I used to frequent them with my friends. I know that the worst most lascivious Frat party was nothing compared to the average gay bar. And I think that to compare the mental and spiritual damage of homosexuality to that of the average hetero man trying to overcome lustful temptations from our culture is ridiculous. The 2 cultures are night and day from the outsider perspective....I have watched "decent" homosexuals who had long time partners of a decade or more, do nasty things on the dance floor with 2 or 3 or 5 men in one night....where do you ever see in hetero society-a "normalized" heterosexual man with a wife or fiancee or steady girl friend get away with multiple partners in one night that his girlfriend or wife acknowledges. NEVER....He would be dead!

So we need to pray for men with SSA. From my experience the gay community makes it darn near impossible to leave-harassment abounds. And I tend to be very skeptical of those with SSA who live celibately but refuse to go through church related counseling. I don't truly believe that they are willing to entirely let go of their passions. They may be sincere in stating that they do not act upon their passions but if you are truly sincere in believing that homo acts are a sin then you would do something about it (Note that was not a commentary on what anyone wrote here-remember I have many personal relationships with gay men). I have seen too many gay men, say that they believe the church, go to confession but not extricate themselves from the gay community or their own mental SSA's and eventually end up back as practising gay Catholics. And I tend to believe that anyone who jumps up and down in a negative fashion about anti gay counseling (for lack of a better phrase), well I tend to question why they get all bent out of shape about the issue. From my personal experience, the people who get the most worked up over groups like Exodus are gay men who know deep in their souls that the group might actually work but they prefer not leave their sin behind-just like the most obnoxious people who smoke refuse to acknowlege that anti smoking programs work because they don't want to get over this sin either....I ought to know about that one too. So many sins for me to spent and eternity in Purgatory for!

And last, I know for a fact that there are actively practising homosexuals on this list and probably one gay priest who is celibate buts still identifies himself with the gay community. Gay friends of mine within the Church have made me aware of that. It is not my intention to speculate who wrote what and why, so please don't jump on me for that. I did not read the thread closely enough...I will pray for the 2 men who wrote in discussing their issues. Amen. The courage it most have taken for you to leave everything and go to confession is absolutely amazing to me. May God bless and grant you many happy years.

Sincerely,

Holly

good points, Holly. did you read the article in October "Christianity Today"?. you may enjoy it. I am not surprised that the Gay Catholics in your life have caused you to become more orthodox in practice. it is an irony that a number of UCC churches that are "open and affirming" have become more conservative in their collective theological understanding as Gay and Lesbian folks have left conservative churches where their sexuality was an issue and joined the much more liberal UCC. I can't help but gloat at the irony. these folks did not abandon their theology. just my observations.
Much Love,
Jonn

Joe,


A desert father was asked one day how you become a saint. His answer was, "You fall, and get up. You fall, and get up..."

The second person in your example would be well on their way to sainthood, even if they fall very frequently.

How do you know that smoking is a sin? Also, if you don't think that promiscuous, adulterous sex isn't all the rave among homosexuals, then you need to go visit an ecstasy bar or a swinger's club. Or, just go to any major city, get the newspaper and look in the personals section. I personally know of a baptist church where they have had a big problem with the well-to-do couples (and some deacons) swinging together.

Anyway, I think your comments are a bit presumptuous and judgmental. I think I better go have a cigarette.

Joe

Holly

I think you hit the nail on the head. Every time a homosexual suffers from severe depression and has suicidal thoughts, due to their own overwhelming shame, they're told by the Gay community that the real reason you're miserable is because society just won't accept you and let you be who you are. God allows us to wallow in sin if we choose to, but he will never let us enjoy the addiction.

Folks, "take the log out of your own eye, then you can see to take the speck out out of your brethren's."

Joe

Holly said:

And last, I know for a fact that there are actively practising homosexuals on this list and probably one gay priest who is celibate buts still identifies himself with the gay community. Gay friends of mine within the Church have made me aware of that. It is not my intention to speculate who wrote what and why, so please don't jump on me for that. I did not read the thread closely enough...

I think that this is very inappropriate and does nothing but tempt people to speculate and possibly gossip about forum members. Making this comment was completely unnecessary.

Joe

Joe,

Exactly what is presumptous and judgemental in my thoughts? If you are going to make a blanket statement then you need to be specific.

Smoking is a sin. Thy body is a temple thing. I have spent years overcoming that one. But I must say that I always find it amusing that when I open my mouth over this issue, someone always calls me judgemental. At no point did I condemn any one to hell or make a judgement on the state of their soul. It is not my place only God will decide that.

I remember during my Residence Assistance training in college that the best way for a gay person to undo the Christian individual was to get to know them personally. After they had established a relationship and acted sufficiently conservative in beliefs they were to slowly bring up the gay thing. If a relationship had been established it would be very difficult for the average individual to continue to stand up for their belief system. Apparently, the strategy worked because when I graduated in 1990 and came home espousing the beliefs of my gay friends, everyone around me was shocked. But 10 years later the same individuals are now supportive of gay rights, while I of course have watched nearly everyone of my gay friends self destruct. Intelligent, wonderful men who are dying from self indulgence, and lack of self control. I go to bed every night and weep for the men, who I know who have died or are dying! I go to bed every night and beg God to have mercy on my friends and family and use me as a living sacrifice to save their souls. How dare you call me presumptous or judgemental! Take the own speck out of your eye. Everytime I have a C section, I offer my life for thier souls. Did it ever occur to you that someone might love their gay friends so much that they would be willing to DIE to save their souls? I doubt it.

And the fact that some hetero commit adultery is a red herring. We all know that heterosexuals sin. Yes, we know it. But there is nothing to compare with the unfettered out of control gay life style. Nothing....I don't see heterosexual gay festivals where they fornicate in the streets and whip each other publicly in front of churches. The gay lifestyle is for the average gay man so far beyond what the average sinful heterosexual does. But the big difference is that your average sinning or non heterosexual couple doesn't get up on TV and try to defend public naked S&M as a right. Please.

Everyone is created in the image of God, even those at the Folsum Street Fair. I do not think myself any better than anyone else. I know that there are many gay men who probably know Jesus better than I ever could hope to. I am a sinner, I beg and plead for mercy. I beg for humility. I beg for forgiveness.

Holly

Joe,

It is necessary to make the comment. Because everyone needs to know the perspectives from which comments are made. The moderator commented that there were too many politically correct statements made. Well, I wonder why? I don't bother to look closely and speculate who wrote whay and why. And anyone who publicly came through and said-well this person said that therefore they must be-should have their thread removed. But I definitely think that it should be on the back of every person's mind whenever they read threads on this forum or any other Catholic or political forum that there are gay people lurking or posting just for this particular reason. To deny that is sheer naivete or stupidity. I know it because that was the gay game plan designed all the way back in the late 80's and early 90's by politically active gay college students. I was there as a "fag hag". I actually have the evidence, as journal and diary entries from nearly 20 years ago. So please don't call me crazy or a liar or delusional...

Holly

Very well, take this statement first,
I know that the worst most lascivious Frat party was nothing compared to the average gay bar.

Not only is this statement absurd (have you been to the most lascivious frat party?), it is the kind of statement made for rhetorical effect, to reinforce the notion that homosexuals, unlike other sinners, are somehow super-deviant.

Why is it ridiculous?

This is simply untrue. It happens all the time, hence swingers and the prevalence of adultery in our society. Also what does "normalized" mean? and why put "decent" in quotes? A heterosexual sinner is decent but a homosexual is not?

If this isn't a presumptuous and judgmental statement, then I don't know what is.

Again, if this is not presumptous and judgmental then I don't know what is. And do you consider all smokers to be obnoxious people?


And as I have already said, this comment was entirely unnecessary. If it is not your intention to speculate and you don't want us to, then why bring it up? Why create a climate of suspicion and fear?


Smoking in moderation is not a sin. It is no more a sin than drinking and eating in moderation are sins. Being addicted to smoking is a sinful attachment, however.

I was not judging you. I was pointing out that your comments are judgmental and presumptuous.

Joe