Skip to comments.Seminary ouster of outspoken gay points up issues
Posted on 11/25/2002 5:28:36 AM PST by american colleenEdited on 04/13/2004 2:08:36 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
As a student at Harvard and then Yale, where different lifestyles mix uneventfully, Gavan Meehan found it easy and comfortable to be publicly gay. But after an inner tug to the priesthood drew him last year to St. John's Seminary in Brighton, his upfront acknowledgement of his sexual orientation brought a far different response.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Father Coyne is supposed to be one of the more "orthodox" priests in the Boston Archdiocese. Has he not seen, or is he not aware of the 1961 Vatican directive that indicates NO men of homosexual orientation shall be ordained?
I am fit to be tied and I am searching for Fr. Coyne's e-mail address so I can send him the statement from the Vatican barring homosexuals from being ordained. So far no luck, but I will find it.
At the same time, a man is who opposite sex oriented can be ordained as long as he understands and is accepting of the vow of celibacy. Why is it when a heterosexual seminarian is dismissed we dont hear about it and when a gay candidate is dismissed they use the dismissal as a platform to complain about the Church?
Also, at a church gathering in Hartford, he was critical of the seminary for teaching that homosexuality is a moral choice and for discouraging discussions about ordination of women.
Bishop Lennon made the right decision not to ordain Meehan. He would have been a problem.
<> Oh my,...Tsk, tsk, there must be action taken...<>
When the Vatican clearly says:
"Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality or pederasty should be excluded from religious vows and ordination," because priestly ministry would place such persons in "grave danger".
There was a second collection taken up in my parish (probably all parishes within the Arch. of Boston) a few months ago for the St. John's Seminary. I remember my parish priest told us we should contribute because the seminary has been cleaned up. He must have forgotten to add: "of course, it depends on the meaning of 'cleaned up'."
I'm just disgusted.
But the issue to my way of thinking, is how did this guy get in the seminary in the first place? He was up front about his sexual orientation and it was known that he was afflicted with same sex attraction. Do the powers that be just throw out the disruptive homosexuals who are vocal and leave in the quiet homosexuals? How does this square with the Vatican directive of 1961?
Ok, so he bears false witness in addition to being a sodomite and he wonders why he won't make a good priest? I think he's missing a few basic points.
"I felt like I had to point out the hypocrisy," said Meehan. "If you talk about being gay, even if you're celibate..."
I wonder, when he "talk(s) about being gay", does he ever use the word "Abomination?"
Hey, I've been dying to tell this to someone cuz the glow is still on... I attended Mass and had lunch with Deal Hudson yesterday!!! He flew into Boston just to meet with some of the faithful who deal with VOTF (VOTF is really strong and divisive here). He did this for nothing, he only wanted to give moral support. Anyhow, he was fantastic (and lest I change the subject) he cited the stats he printed in the December edition of Crisis magazine (and we each got a free copy, too) detailing how 72% of Vat II generation priests say Catholics can disagree with Church teachings and "remain faithful" and only 60% say that JPII's moral views are "about right."
My point is that the statement you cited is really no surprise when the majority of priests disagree with, and do not teach what the magesterium teaches, but still consider themselves "faithful Catholics."
Thats my point. The key word here is perverse. Fr. Coyne was correct when he stated The judgment call is whether or not a man is committed to a celibate lifestyle and all that entails.''
Granted a homosexual orientation is disordered however, I wouldnt conclude its impossible for someone with a homosexual orientation to be celibate.
My guess is no.
Rev. Christopher J.Coyne Visiting Priest Weekends 616-254-2610
Me neither. However, in light of the current "situation," I would err on the side of no admittance. After all, ALL priests take the vow of celibacy freely and are taught (I think) all during seminary that they are to be celibate. Taking into consideration the abusing priests is one aspect of homosexuality, but lest we forget, priests are dying from AIDS at a rate approx. four times greater than the average of the homosexual population. Something ain't right with "Those affected by the perverse inclination to homosexuality" it seems.
Let me know if you get a response.
It appears that's the current situation and if that's what it takes so be it. I just didn't see anything wrong with Father Coyne's statement.
No the key phrase is perverse inclination along with the definition of perverse. The bottom line is that the ordination of homosexuals and pedophiles was banned in writing in 1961, whether they are in the closet, out, celibate or active. Coyne and all the other homosexual apologists in the episcopacy and laity want to split hairs and that is a right they do not have in the Church.
perverse (per-vûrs´, pûr´vûrs´) adjective
1. Directed away from what is right or good; perverted.
2. Obstinately persisting in an error or a fault; wrongly self-willed or stubborn.
3. a. Marked by a disposition to oppose and contradict. b. Arising from such a disposition. See synonyms at contrary.
4. Cranky; peevish.
Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
I will write a short and concise (I hope) note to him and ask him to clarify his stance and the 1961 Vatican directive. If I get a reply, I will post it here. I'm just sick and tired of the lack of adherence to magisterium teaching that I find here. Plus, VOTF supports the ordination of homosexuals (and women and married priests)... that should tell us something.
I don't see any "wiggle" room here, what am I missing?
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.