Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ban on Homosexual Men From (Catholic) Priesthood Was Always in Place - Decision from 810 AD Cited
LifeSite ^ | November 30, 2005

Posted on 11/30/2005 9:48:05 AM PST by NYer

Wednesday November 30, 2005

Ban on Homosexual Men From Priesthood Was Always in Place - Decision from 810 A.D. Cited
The term "homophobia" is "a slogan of intimidation", says Vatican consultant

ROME, November 30, 2005 (CWNews.com/LifeSiteNews.com) - A Vatican consultant, in an interview with the I Media news service, has observed that the Church has always taught that homosexuals should not become priests, since they suffer from a "structural incoherence" in their approach to human sexuality. The question of whether homosexual men should become priests has been raised repeatedly by Church leaders, and always answered negatively said Msgr. Tony Anatrella, a French Jesuit who is a consultant to the Pontifical Council on the Family. The French priest-psychologist cited decisions by the Council of Paris in 819, and the 3rd and 4th Lateran Councils in 1169 and 1215.

Writing in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, in an article that appeared alongside the newly released instruction on homosexuality and the priesthood, Msgr. Anatrella wrote that the new Vatican Instruction barring homosexuals from Catholic seminaries was necessary because "homosexuality has become an increasingly worrisome problem," adding that the acceptance of homosexuality could have a "destabilizing" effect on the lives of individuals and on society at large.

Msgr. Anatrella said that homosexuality is "a tendency and not an identity." The Catholic Church, he argued, has a duty to warn against the acceptance of an "incomplete and immature" approach to human sexuality.

In practice, Msgr. Anatrella said in the I Media interview, experience has shown that when homosexual men become priests-- even if they are committed to chaste living-- "pastoral relations are very much complicated, and sometimes the teaching of the Church is neglected." Even if homosexual men struggle to live in accordance with the teachings of the Church, he explained, "the psychological effects of their tendency have repercussions on the pastoral level." Thus the Church has recognized the "collateral effects" of same-sex attraction, and concluded that such men should not be ordained.

The French Jesuit conceded that the Instruction from the Vatican may provoke protests, particularly from homosexual men who are already serving in the priesthood. But he told I Media that such protests reflect the fact that "they have already put themselves in an uncomfortable situation." Priests who experience same-sex attractions should redouble their efforts to remain chaste, he said. But in any case, Msgr. Anatrella stated: "Within the clergy, homosexuals do not represent an important proportion; they are a minority."

When questioned as to whether the Church might be accused of "homophobia," the French psychologist reacted quickly. The term "homophobia," he said, is "a slogan of intimidation." The Instruction insists on respectful treatment of homosexual persons, he pointed out; the Vatican is not encouraging or condoning hatred for those who suffer same-sex impulses.

Nevertheless, Msgr. Anatrella said, the Church has a duty to ensure that candidates for the priesthood are properly suited for pastoral ministry. Echoing an argument from the Instruction, he observed that "the priesthood is not a right."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: benedictxvi; gaypriests; homosexual; pope; priesthood; vatican

1 posted on 11/30/2005 9:48:08 AM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: american colleen; Lady In Blue; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; ...
Several Vatican documents and letters over the years have said gays or men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained, regardless of whether they can remain celibate.

A Feb. 2, 1961, Vatican document, “Instruction on the Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders,” made clear homosexuals should be barred from the priesthood.

“(Advancement) to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers,” said the document from the then-Vatican’s congregation for religious.

A 1997 letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments says “admission may not take place if there exists a prudent doubt regarding the candidate’s suitability.” It does not specify that homosexuality constitutes a “prudent doubt,” but an American official at the Vatican, the Rev. Andrew Baker, has suggested in an article in the Jesuit magazine America that it does.

In 2002, Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estevez, then-prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, advised against allowing gays in the priesthood in a letter that was published in the congregation’s publication Notitiae.

The Vatican press office announced in November 2002, at the height of the U.S. clergy sex abuse scandal, that the Congregation for Catholic Education was drawing up guidelines for accepting candidates for the priesthood that would address the question of whether gays should be barred.

Catholic Ping - Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list


2 posted on 11/30/2005 9:49:22 AM PST by NYer (ôSocialism is the religion people get when they lose their religion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Admin Moderator

I posted this earlier this morning, but Moderator, please remove my posting, cause NYer has a much better ping list for this story.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1531148/posts


3 posted on 11/30/2005 9:52:18 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer
When questioned as to whether the Church might be accused of "homophobia," the French psychologist reacted quickly. The term "homophobia," he said, is "a slogan of intimidation." The Instruction insists on respectful treatment of homosexual persons, he pointed out; the Vatican is not encouraging or condoning hatred for those who suffer same-sex impulses.

God Bless this Jesuit!

4 posted on 11/30/2005 9:54:01 AM PST by frogjerk (LIBERALISM - Being miserable for no good reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Several Vatican documents and letters over the years have said gays or men with homosexual tendencies should not be ordained, regardless of whether they can remain celibate.

That's a slight misstatement. One who remains celibate doesn't even fall into the restriction.

Remember that the Church differentiates between the concupiscent desire (this sin that dwells within me that is not my sin" as Paul puts it) and sinful behavior. "Tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty" likely refers to actual behavior, not to the inclination to commit a particular kind of sin. In "the world", you're "gay" just from who you are attracted to. In the church, that's just a sinful inclination that you are given to conquer - as we all have.

5 posted on 11/30/2005 9:54:29 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer
When questioned as to whether the Church might be accused of "homophobia," the French psychologist reacted quickly. The term "homophobia," he said, is "a slogan of intimidation."

Also used as a rhetorical device to shift the psychological problem away from themselves.
6 posted on 11/30/2005 9:55:18 AM PST by Mulch (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mulch


Never liked the word homophobia.

Homo: homosapien

Phobia: an irrational fear

I fear homosapiens ?

I don`t fear perverts. It`s a natural feeling of disgust and revulsion.They cannot legislate against that.


7 posted on 11/30/2005 9:59:35 AM PST by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

A "phobia" is defined as an irrational or illogical fear.

What is the suffix connoting a perfectly rational dislike?

(Merriam-Webster Online defines "phobe" as "one fearing or averse to (something specified) e.g.,Francophobe " - I love their example!)


8 posted on 11/30/2005 10:00:20 AM PST by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: NYer
I was recently informed about how the left maintains that regarding homosexual acts as sins was an invention of the church in Medieval times. Their theories were laughable, of course, but it appears that many of them actually believe this nonsensical propaganda.
10 posted on 11/30/2005 10:02:42 AM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The term "homophobia," he said, is "a slogan of intimidation."
There's hope for the Jebbies yet.
11 posted on 11/30/2005 10:03:04 AM PST by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CYA; NYer
Why don't they just "ban" the high tide while they're at it...?

I believe you'll find that "the high tide" is not eligible to serve in the Roman Catholic priesthood either.

12 posted on 11/30/2005 10:03:52 AM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45
Never liked the word homophobia. Homo: homosapien .....It's even crazier. The "homo" is from the Greek meaning "the same" (homogenized). So we have irrational fear of the same.
13 posted on 11/30/2005 10:08:47 AM PST by bobsatwork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

A person who doesn't have sex but perhaps self-identifies as a gay man, and fantasizes regularly about sex with men or teenagers is not totally innocent, especially when the person indulges himself with it, as opposed to fighting it.

I lived celibate for over 15 years before I got married. Certainly didn't mean I was free of sexual sin or desire or want, but it does give me something of an idea of what long term celibacy feels like. It is not an easy lifestyle, and choices have to be made.

One of the things needful to realize is it's not good to make excuses for sinful behavior, even if it's not acted out in great measure. If a person thinks "This must be all right because this is how God made me" and thus starts to find reasons to disagree with the hard core teachings of the Church on faith and morals, then it's gone beyond sexual sin into a form of rebellion. It is no doubt up to the spiritual director of each seminarian to discern what is going on.

This is why Archbishop Chaput said that each person needs to be judged on a case by case basis.



14 posted on 11/30/2005 10:10:59 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

exactly.

We're not talking about banning people with homosexual leanings from life. We're talking about who is suitable, in the eyes of the Church, to be a priest, which is s privilege, not a right.


15 posted on 11/30/2005 10:13:47 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I hope that this isn't becoming something where everyone says 'We're already doing this' and ignores the document.

I think it's clear that over the years NOT everyone has been doing this.

Also I wonder, is there any kind of 'two adult rule' to ensure children are not left in the care of a potentially unscrupulous individual?


16 posted on 11/30/2005 10:15:42 AM PST by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Good to see some good Jesuits are still around. I remember many from my college days in the 80's. They will need to repopulate the order
17 posted on 11/30/2005 10:19:09 AM PST by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
They will need to repopulate the order

The Dominicans and Conventual Franciscans as well. It will happen ... God willing in our lifetime.

18 posted on 11/30/2005 10:24:42 AM PST by NYer (ôSocialism is the religion people get when they lose their religion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum
A person who doesn't have sex but perhaps self-identifies as a gay man, and fantasizes regularly about sex with men or teenagers is not totally innocent, especially when the person indulges himself with it, as opposed to fighting it.

Certainly.... but that's not the example I gave.

Your examples where the individual commits other actual sins are beside the point. The inclination (or "bent") toward sin is not, in itself, your sin. We are all born with a "bent" toward sin that we must struggle against. If mine happens to be gambling the food money each month and not homosexual sex - that's irrelevant. The question is whether the Holy Spirit is active in my life and guides my behavior or whether my "bent" does. A man who does NOT indulge in his "bent" is seeking the Lord's will regardless of WHAT the particular sin he's combating is.

The difference is that the Church needs must take a stand in one area over another because "the world" tries to tell us that this particular sin is not a sin at all... but rather just the way God wants you to be. To some extent it is that way with all sin... but homosexual behavior is defended far more stridently.

19 posted on 11/30/2005 10:33:58 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: x5452
.......ensure children are not left in the care of a potentially unscrupulous individual?

The question of their sexuality is never addressed to a potential priest???

20 posted on 11/30/2005 10:34:39 AM PST by B.O. Plenty (Islam, liberalism and abortions are terminal..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

You know, I WAS actually agreeing with you.


21 posted on 11/30/2005 10:35:12 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum
You know, I WAS actually agreeing with you.

So you're not any longer? :-)

22 posted on 11/30/2005 10:48:17 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: B.O. Plenty

(I am completely confused what your response means)


23 posted on 11/30/2005 10:53:58 AM PST by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

No, I agree with you still. There is a range where it's just the natural background of unwanted sinfulness that clutters all of our lives, even the most holy, then there's the point where people are feeding it, and it's up to the spiritual directors to know the difference and deal with it appropriately.


24 posted on 11/30/2005 10:57:13 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: IMRight
That's a slight misstatement.

No it's not. Anyone with a room temperature IQ knows what was meant in 1961 by the inclusion of "tendencies." Since 82% of the abuse cases involved homosexuals, the idea that it's safe to ordain homosexuals who claim they are celibate and can remain so for life is wishful thinking.

"Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers."

Main Entry: ten·den·cy
Pronunciation: 'ten-d&n(t)-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Medieval Latin tendentia, from Latin tendent-, tendens, present participle of tendere
1 a : direction or approach toward a place, object, effect, or limit b : a proneness to a particular kind of thought or action
2 a : the purposeful trend of something written or said : AIM b : deliberate but indirect advocacy

25 posted on 11/30/2005 10:58:19 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
No it's not. Anyone with a room temperature IQ knows what was meant in 1961 by the inclusion of "tendencies."

No offense, but that means you have a sub-room-temperature IQ. The Catholic Church very clearly differentiates between concupiscent desire and sinful actions.

Since 82% of the abuse cases involved homosexuals, the idea that it's safe to ordain homosexuals who claim they are celibate and can remain so for life is wishful thinking.

This may or may not be true... but it's irrelevant to the conversation.

"Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers."

Uh huh.... and the Church defines homosexuality as inappropriate behavior. It does not buy into what the world is selling.

26 posted on 11/30/2005 11:04:54 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The French priest-psychologist cited decisions by the Council of Paris in 819, and the 3rd and 4th Lateran Councils in 1169 and 1215.

Good find! Thanks.

27 posted on 11/30/2005 11:09:41 AM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
From the catechism (2357):

Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. "

Note that it is NOT the "exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex", but rather the behavior itself.

28 posted on 11/30/2005 11:11:15 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: IMRight
From the catechism (2358):

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.

So the orientation, or tendency as the Church puts it, is considered objectively disordered. That is why the Church put out the instruction reaffirming the ban on homosexual seminarians, chaste or not.

29 posted on 11/30/2005 1:03:21 PM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tuesday afternoon
So the orientation, or tendency as the Church puts it, is considered objectively disordered.

Of course it is.

That is why the Church put out the instruction reaffirming the ban on homosexual seminarians, chaste or not.

No they didn't. Or rather... not in the way you're implying it.

30 posted on 11/30/2005 1:15:58 PM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
NYer:"Good to see some good Jesuits are still around."

You said it! Usually I see or hear "Jesuit" and I start to automatically cringe for what will come next.

It is Pavlovian Jesuit-itis.

Very good to see a Jesuit who stands for truth regardless of the pressure or spin of the moment! We are on our way with the Holy Spirit! God bless him!!
31 posted on 11/30/2005 1:19:41 PM PST by klossg (GK - God is good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

Okay, explain where I'm wrong.


32 posted on 11/30/2005 1:46:06 PM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: x5452
Me too...it IS kind of confusing...the point I was trying to make was: is the question never asked of the prospective priest as to what his sexual persuasion may be. It occurs to me that the preisthood, with its access to young boys, would be kind of a magnet for a homosexual that leans toward pediofilia.

It would only make sense to me that "are you a homosexual" would be one of the questions that would be asked before any man is called to be a priest. I am not a Catholic, therefore know nothing about how a priest is made, but is there not some screening process, or background check for these guys?

33 posted on 11/30/2005 1:56:36 PM PST by B.O. Plenty (Islam, liberalism and abortions are terminal..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NYer
already, today in our local paper here in Spokane Washington, our esteemed Bishop Skylstad is saying he will continue to have priests that are homosexual but not "too" homosexual, to paraphrase him....

and there are other bishops stating the same thing!!!!!

God love homosexuals,and we have them on both sides of our families, but the bishops must listen to the POPE!!!!

I have to start investigating some EAstern Rite churches if this continues....

I just swear, with our diocese already in bankruptcy and the parishes and schools at risk, and this IDIOT is not going to obey the Pope...how can we as practicing Catholics continue to give money to these people?

34 posted on 11/30/2005 2:08:24 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IMRight
Nonsense

"A candidate who shows himself certainly unable to observe religious and priestly chastity, either because of frequent sins against chastity or because of a sexual bent of mind or excessive weakness of will, is not to be admitted to the minor seminary and, much less, to the novitiate or to profession. If he has already been accepted but is not yet perpetually professed, then he should be sent away immediately or advised to withdraw, according to individual cases, no matter what point in his formation he has already reached. Should he be perpetually professed, he is to be barred absolutely and permanently from tonsure and the reception of any Order, especially Sacred Orders. If circumstances should so demand, he shall be dismissed from the community, with due observance of the prescriptions of canon law."

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Main Entry: ten·den·cy
Pronunciation: 'ten-d&n(t)-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Medieval Latin tendentia, from Latin tendent-, tendens, present participle of tendere
1 a : direction or approach toward a place, object, effect, or limit b : a proneness to a particular kind of thought or action
2 a : the purposeful trend of something written or said : AIM b : deliberate but indirect advocacy

Main Entry: in·cli·na·tion
Pronunciation: "in-kl&-'nA-sh&n, "i[ng]-
Function: noun
1 a obsolete : natural disposition : CHARACTER b : a particular disposition of mind or character : PROPENSITY; especially : LIKING
2 : an act or the action of bending or inclining : as a : BOW, NOD b : a tilting of something
3 a : a deviation from the true vertical or horizontal : SLANT; also : the degree of such deviation b : an inclined surface : SLOPE c (1) : the angle determined by two lines or planes (2) : the angle made by a line with the x-axis measured counterclockwise from the positive direction of that axis
4 : a tendency to a particular aspect, state, character, or action
- in·cli·na·tion·al /-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective

35 posted on 11/30/2005 3:55:39 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cherry
I have to start investigating some EAstern Rite churches if this continues....

Like you, I live in a RC diocese run by a reprobate bishop. (To gain a better understanding of how this happened, click on this link. Following the death of our pastor, the bishop assigned a new priest who was "light in the loafers". After assessing the parish situation, he gradually began to make changes. At first, these were imperceptible to the average "pew catholic". Much attention was given to the church 'decor'. As the 'appearance' of the church improved, "pew catholics" oohed and aahed and invited their friends. The parish began to grow. Next on his agenda was to introduce changes to the liturgy which included inviting the young Confirmation students to perform liturgical dance, banned by the USCCB in the US. I fought him on this and won but the victory was short lived as he introduced other liturgical abuses.

Two years ago I compiled a list of other parishes within the community, including Eastern Catholic Churches. After attending Mass at different churches each week, the Maronite Catholic Church came up on the list. After one visit, I knew I was home.


Eastern Catholic bishops and cardinals offer a prayer service for JPII

The Catholic Church is both Western and Eastern. As most of us realize, the Church began in the East. Our Lord lived and died and resurrected in the Holy Land. The Church spread from Jerusalem throughout the known world. As the Church spread, it encountered different cultures and adapted, retaining from each culture what was consistent with the Gospel. In the city of Alexandria, the Church became very Egyptian; in Antioch it remained very Jewish; in Rome it took on an Italian appearance and in Constantinople it took on the trappings of the Roman imperial court. All the churches which developed this way were Eastern, except Rome. Most Catholics in the United States have their roots in Western Europe where the Roman rite predominated. It has been said that the Eastern Catholic Churches are "the best kept secret in the Catholic Church."

The Vatican II Council declared that "all should realize it is of supreme importance to understand, venerate, preserve, and foster the exceedingly rich liturgical and spiritual heritage of the Eastern churches, in order faithfully to preserve the fullness of Christian tradition" (Unitatis Redintegrato, 15). Pope John Paul II said that "the Catholic Church is both Eastern and Western."

Check your local community at the following link and look into attending an Eastern Catholic Liturgy (not to be confused with the Orthodox Church).

Eastern Catholic Churches in the U.S.

The Eastern Catholic Rites retain the rich heritage of our church, without the "novelties" introduced into the Novus Ordo liturgy. Incense is used throughout.

I attend a Maronite Catholic Church. The Consecration is in Aramaic, using the words and language of our Lord at the Last Supper. Communion is ONLY distributed by the priest. It is by intinction (the priest dips the consecrated host into the Precious Blood) and is ONLY received on the tongue. The priest administers communion with the words: "The Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is given to you for the remission of sin and eternal salvation".

A Roman Catholic may attend the Divine Liturgy at any Eastern Catholic Church. You can learn more about the 22 different liturgies at this link:

CATHOLIC RITES AND CHURCHES

Should you have any questions about the Eastern Catholic Churches, please do not hesitate to freepmail me. Good luck on your journey! I will keep you in my prayers.

36 posted on 11/30/2005 5:29:38 PM PST by NYer (ôSocialism is the religion people get when they lose their religion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: B.O. Plenty

You're getting very specific.

The OCA, as an example have a two adult rule whenever adults are supervising children. 2 adults need be present.

That's all I was asking.


37 posted on 11/30/2005 6:01:54 PM PST by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

But the sin is the fantasy, as it was when you, presumably straigt (or developmentally coherent according to the fine Jesuit) fantasize


38 posted on 11/30/2005 8:11:51 PM PST by The Cuban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: The Cuban
But the sin is the fantasy, as it was when you, presumably straigt (or developmentally coherent according to the fine Jesuit) fantasize

Exactly! And if a heterosexual candidate is consumed by such fantasies (even if he remains physically celibate) - he can't be a priest either.

39 posted on 12/01/2005 3:13:45 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Thanks.... but I'm a bit confused now. You started your post with "nonsense" as if you were disputing my point. Then you only posted things that supported my position.

Perhaps you were confused by this text as well? :-)

40 posted on 12/01/2005 3:17:07 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: tuesday afternoon
Okay, explain where I'm wrong.

The core misunderstanding is the conflicting terminology between the world and the Church.

Let's take a different example. If you have an alcoholism problem, the world calls you an "alcoholic" even if you haven't had a drink in ten years. The Church will occasionally use similar terminology for counseling purposes, but from a "sin" standpoint and (more important to our discussion) from a "can he be a priest" standpoint... you're simply a person whose concupiscence is a weakness for alcohol, but who (through the power of the Holt Spirit) has overcome this desire. You CAN be a priest.

If, however, you have been sober for a decade, but you are consumed with an ongoing strong desire for drink (or if you're heterosexual and technically "celibate" but in no way "chaste") you are consumed by this sinful desire and must not enter the priesthood.

41 posted on 12/01/2005 3:27:27 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

Yes, you are confused. Comprehension seems to be your Achilles' heel. Read the definitions for tendencies and inclination again until you understand them.


42 posted on 12/01/2005 9:44:59 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Yes, you are confused. Comprehension seems to be your Achilles' heel. Read the definitions for tendencies and inclination again until you understand them.

What... the "definitions" that you chose to select? And I'm supposed to just take your word that's the one that was intended? BOTH words can be (and ARE in the cited portion of the catechism) dealing specifically with actions. 2357 makes this quite clear.

You have demonstrated that you don't understand what the Church is saying here. But it's quite clear in the paragraph you cited. Those candidates who cannot remain chaste (regardless of the reason) may not be priests. Those who CAN remain chaste (regardless of which way their "orientation" would lead them to temptation) may.

43 posted on 12/01/2005 10:25:52 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

No I understand quite well what the Church is saying today and what it was saying in 1961.


44 posted on 12/01/2005 10:30:53 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
No I understand quite well what the Church is saying today and what it was saying in 1961.

IF you ever get around to backing that up in the face of contradictory evidence, you just let me know. :-)

45 posted on 12/01/2005 10:36:59 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: IMRight

Completely agree.


46 posted on 12/01/2005 7:33:45 PM PST by The Cuban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson