Posted on 04/03/2002 10:49:38 AM PST by Antoninus
The Good Catholic's Response to Bad Priests
Claudio R. Salvucci
April 3, 2002
Our sex-obsessed culture has deluded itself with the ridiculous Freudian error that every sexual thought or fantasy not acted upon is a repression.
So muddled with lust have we become, so enslaved to our own self-gratification, that too many of us can no longer even conceive of a life lived in virginal purity. We see no dignity in it, only a condition to be pitied.
So some are suggesting that the Catholic priesthood, in the face of all the recent scandals, accept those ideas and make a grudging concession to human lust.
And that is exactly wrong.
It was precisely by conceding to lust in the first place that the priesthood got into this awful mess.
One curiously omitted question emerges from all of these so-called pedophilia scandals: Why do an estimated 80-90 percent of the victims of these molestations happen to be teen-age boys? True pedophiles tend to prey on pre-pubescent members of the opposite sex - not same-sex adolescents, which characterizes a different disorder called ephebophilia.
Many of us obedient Catholics, so ready to grant priests and bishops the benefit of the doubt, are now slowly becoming aware of a vast gay network quietly tolerated in the seminaries, the priesthood and even in the highest levels of church hierarchy.
Two respected and highly acclaimed books: Fr. Donald Cozzens' "The Changing Face of the Priesthood" and Michael Rose's "Goodbye! Good Men" frankly admit that the priesthood is "becoming a gay profession." Our local Catholic radio station, WISP 1570, recently featured a hard-hitting show describing how seminarians encountered difficulties for being "too masculine." St. Sebastian's Angels, a networking Website for gay priests, was only recently shut down. An anonymous priest interviewed by the Boston Globe described the sexual propositioning, harassment and intimidation he faced at the hands of a gay subculture in the seminary - "and I know guys who left because of it."
So what is to be done about this problem?
Some American bishops have adopted this idea that having homosexual inclinations doesn't matter in the seminary, that as long as the candidate lives in celibacy, there's no sin in the orientation. That is of course theologically true, but is it psychologically wise?
Suppose, analogously, we were to take a priest with the normal male attractions, and drop him right smack into a convent of nuns: eating, working, bathing, and sleeping among the opposite sex, 24 hours a day. Well, that would be sheer madness, utter insanity. Of course, we hope he wouldn't do anything to violate his chastity, but meanwhile we've vastly multiplied his near occasions to sin - the opportunities for sexual temptation to be enflamed and acted upon.
That is exactly what we are doing when we ordain gay men.
Folks, the monasteries and rectories are barracks in the army of Jesus Christ; housing men with a divine mission for which they need to be focused, clear-headed, and free from distraction. Just as in the military, a community of strong men provides the best environment for that condition to be met.
When homosexuality enters this system, the whole thing becomes utter bedlam. Suddenly, the opportunities for sex are numerous and immediate. Perhaps that is why the priesthood is said to be sought by some homosexual men.
Certainly, not every homosexual priest will act upon his temptations, but what right do we have to put him in danger of doing so? Do we have no healthy respect for the weaknesses of human nature?
There is only one solution here, and it is this: the seminaries must refuse Holy Orders to those with same-sex attractions. Not just for the overall good of the priesthood, but for the good of their own souls. For it is no act of charity to let a man become a priest in this life, only to be tempted into damnation in the next.
Claudio Salvucci of Bristol reminds Catholics that the best thing to do for priests - good or bad - is to pray for them.
An archive of Salvucci's columns may be found at: The I, Claudio web site
Please, I understand the rules about birth control and all that. I understand that certain actions have consequences and that we must pay for our sins.
I didn't grow up catholic and a lot of what I imagine about being a catholic child is negative. It was in terms of what it would be like to grow up catholic that I was speaking. It seems they were very restricted about . . . I was thinking about the marvelous freedom and innocence I experienced growing up in a different era with one best friend who was catholic and one was presbyterian. It seems to me from what I have seen about parish life that catholic children grow up in a repressive atmosphere today. It is difficult to put it into words. I guess the easiest way to say it is that a person can have too much religion in their life. Religion doesn't necessarily equate with spirituality and holiness.
My little catholic friend and I parted when she went off to catholic school. I begged my parents to let me go there and was sad about it for a couple years or so. Now the older I get I am sometimes glad that I went through the public schools and got a real taste of life.
Sometimes I wonder what catholic men are really like. The nice ones. I know there are some real scumbag catholic men but most of them would be considered nice by society but they . . .seem to lack kindness and compassion. But they would almost give their lives to save the church.
I know catholics can have a lot of fun when they are adults and much of that involves drinking. Some of that is no different from protestants. You just see the ugly side of people when they are drinking.
When I first got interested in the catholic church, I wanted to go to a dinner for St. Patrick's day. I took my granddaughter and her friend (had a hard time getting the little girl's father's permission to go but he relented - think it was the Lutheran/Catholic thing but can't be sure.
When we got to the dinner I paid (can't remember how much) and there wasn't anywhere to sit. We had to sit on the floor as a few others did, too. People just stepped around us. I still don't know how I feel about it but, looking back, I didn't feel particularly welcome although after dinner I think some person offered for me to come sit with them,
It didn't keep me out of the church but I guess I expected something that wasn't there. It was the clique thing. Catholics are very tight with each other.
I don't know why I am telling you any of this, but from your writing you come across like so many men. Observe the rules at all costs but don't let yourself see the pain and suffering right under your noses.
Now I don't need to lecture you about what some protestant men are like. I found out the hard way.
Idiots because they will cost the Faithful perhaps 100 million dollars which might have been spent on the poor or on Pensions for the Nuns who dedicated their total lives to Christ in the service of the church.
And where will they get the money to pay for their stupid and secret machinations,why , they will sell off properties ,close schools and fritter away the money on lawyers, because they couldn't tell the truth.
Both Law and Egan believed they were above the civil law and used the good offices of a Cardinal to lie and deceive the Faithful Catholics who trusted them.
Look up the "Vision of Garabandal" and see what our Blessed Mother thought of these Clerics who would lead the faithful to perdition.
They squandered their credibility,they brought Scandal on the Church,and they Knowingly allowed the continued abuse of the most vulnerable in their flock.
If you continue to defend these guys, you are an enabler just as sure as if you gave the OK to Geoghan.
I trust you could find better use of your loyalties than to support clerical scoundrels.
Besides availability, in what ways?
Know that I'm not promoting the elimination of the discipline. I see great value in it. Just probing, as it were. But if celibacy is a calling, and I've been told that it is, then having some married priests wouldn't affect those who choose celibacy, would they?
Married priests in the Catholic Church TODAY are NOT part-time! How many times does that have to be told to you before you get it?
American Catholics will not tolerate becoming a "missionary country" when it doesn't have to be. Besides, does Africa have 10,000 clergy to spare? I doubt it.
You are about 25 but it's not real firm. Claudio is 35 or older. My intuition isn't functioning real well on this I must say. Sometimes I'm pretty good and sometimes I am just plain wrong. At least I don't sense you are a pervert ;-) Daughter just brought in a guy from AA and I got kinda alarming vibes . . .think he was Baptist though. This is a terrible thing to say, but women have to be careful of men who claim to be Christian, especially the splinter types. Some of them are downright dangerous. So I will be the first to say this is not a catholic problem.
As to some of my other comments, they seem rather petty in light of the terrible things going on in the ME and the church troubles that has surfaced. For that, I apologize.
Make that have surfaced. Verb agreement. I know better. Catholics are pretty good grammarians for the most part. Good educations.
First, I take it that you assume that I speak of an entirely married priesthood. I do not. Second, your statement assumes that every priest lives out his vows in total commitment. Most don't. I know numerous priests in our diocese. Most are very good priests, some exceptional. But few live out the standard that you have expressed. In fact, I know many that see there priesthood more like a job rather than a vocation. Third, you just slapped in the face every hard working married priest and deacon that is out there living their life totally dedicated to God and the apostolate with your half-assed statement. Pardon my french.
Do you take me for a liberal? I am far from it. And I'm not a dissident; just debating a point of view. But my point of view already exists; in the eastern rite and amongst the few converts who were given dispensation by the Vatican. My point is, if celibacy is presented and taught properly, like you just described, young or old unmarried men will still take the vows. But currently in the latin rite, there is absolutly no room for married men in the priesthood. And those men who feel a drawing to the priesthood who could be of tremendous value to the people of God, simply cannot. The grace cannot be imparted on them simply because they are married. And yet this is not a universal discipline. I don't see it changing soon, and maybe never. That is the call of the bishops in communion with the pope. So be it. I accept whatever the Holy Father in communion with the bishops state; that's why I accept the current discipline.
BTW, I have a total commitment to the Lord in my marriage and in the apostolate. And I pray, when orders is conferred on me in October, that the sacramental grace will make my work and ministry that much more efficacious.
One of their goals, in 1982, was to force seminaries to accept practicing and avowed homosexuals, through whatever means possible, including denial of federal funds. Anybody remember "New Ways Ministry"? Well, they were only one group among dozens upon dozens of organizations pushing for homosexuals in our seminaries.
Our bishops need to get to the root of this problem, without haste, and yank it out! I am sure that if the bishops do their job, Our Lord will reward their effort with an abundance of good, healthy men who are waiting for the special and heroic task of working as a shepherd of souls.
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.