The Padre
Posts: 4,558 
Location: Ontario
Location: Ontario
January 23rd, 2007, 04:17 AM
By Fr. Frank Barry and Thomas Plante, Ph.D., ABPP
Department of Psychology
Santa Clara University
© 2006 Thomas Plante
Fr. Frank Barry is a pseudonym for a priest and seminary faculty member who wishes to remain anonymous. Dr. Thomas Plante is a Professor and Chair of Psychology at Santa Clara University as well as a Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine.
On November 29th the Congregation for Catholic Education in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and with the approval of Benedict XVI issued an instruction on the admission of homosexual candidates to the seminary and Holy Orders. The instruction is singular in purpose: "whether to admit to the seminary and to holy orders candidates who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies." The instruction is a document for the entire world and should not be read as addressed only to the church in the United States.
The instruction is clear that active homosexuals cannot be admitted to seminaries or ordination. Neither can those who support "gay culture." Although not defined, this term likely assumes that a self-defined gay man intends to be sexually active and might have a personal agenda in conflict with church teaching. "Gay" came into popular usage in the 1970s and frequently denotes a homosexual person who is sexually active. However, this is not always the case, as "gay" is sometimes used to suggest a homosexual person who embraces their orientation. A homosexual orientation was created in 1869 as is defined by Webster's New World dictionary as "sexual desire for those of the same sex as oneself." It usually and only indicates the direction of one's sexual interest, largely dictated by biological, psychological, and social factors.
The instruction makes no judgement on the psychological maturity of individual homosexuals. No priest with a homosexual orientation should feel that this document classifies him as defective. In fact the instruction teaches that homosexual persons "must be accepted with respect and sensitivity" and should not suffer from any sign of unjust discrimination.
Aligning itself with John Paul II's 1992 Pastores Dabo Vobis, the instruction refers to the four integrated and complementary pillars or dimensions of priestly formation (i.e., human, spiritual, intellectual and pastoral). Within this understanding, the document highlights "the particular importance of human formation." One aspect of human formation is spotlighted, "affective maturity," that is, the ability to "relate correctly to both men and women." This term finds frequent expression in Pastores Dabo Vobis and means, among other things, "a responsible love" that touches the person in his physical, psychic and spiritual dimensions." Affective maturity assumes that a seminarian and priest bring to all human relationships a serene friendship and a deep brotherliness, with the capacity to renounce anything that is a threat to it. Affective maturity demands that a seminarian and priest be truly a master of oneself, able to be a "sincere gift of self" to all. (nos.43-44) Since affective maturity holds centre place in the instruction, the document should be interpreted as a pastoral guideline and not a canonical legislation.
Bishops, religious superiors and seminary personnel are not to admit to the seminary or ordination a candidate who does not demonstrate a stable and affective maturity. Seminary formation is not the time to solve major life issues such as addictive behaviours, sexual issues, financial irresponsibility, or an inability to work cooperatively with others. If a man has serious, unresolved issues or has developed a personal agenda that he might put ahead of the Gospel, he is not a good candidate for ordination. He does not sustain a stable and affective maturity. This norm applies to heterosexual candidates as well.
The instruction places "truth" at the centre of priestly discernment. It calls for an assessment of suitability for ordination and places this responsibility squarely on the candidate. He is called to trust the discernment of the church and not be dishonest. This admonishment places an equal responsibility on bishops, religious superiors and rectors to create a formative atmosphere that promotes a climate for this level of truth and honesty. Spiritual directors and confessors have the "duty to dissuade" from ordination candidates who display dishonesty about their sexual tendencies.
A critical point of discernment and judgement is called for in regard to those candidates with a deep-seated homosexual tendency. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's 1972 document Persona Humana refers to "tendency," making a distinction between a "false tendency" (for example, from bad education, bad example, from habit) and "is transitory or at least not incurable" and a tendency that is definitive due to "some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable." (section VIII) The Catechism of the Catholic Church likewise speaks of "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" and names such tendencies as "objectively disordered." (no. 235
According to reputable medical literature (e.g., Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 2002), a tendency is characterized by a "direct desire toward individuals of one's own sex" and "involves sexual intercourse between individuals of the same sex." Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary (2002) translates such a tendency to mean "someone who practices homosexuality" and possesses a "characteristic likelihood," a "predisposition to think, act, behave, or proceed in a particular way." Accordingly, the instruction may well be translating a "deep-seated homosexual tendency" in this fashion, indicating that a homosexual candidate who has a profound predisposition which drives him to unwavering homosexual activity cannot be admitted to the seminary or Holy Orders. We know of no bishop, religious superior, rector, spiritual director, or mentor who would disagree.
Discernment must include, then, an assessment between a candidate who experiences "a transitory problem," one who has "deep-seated homosexual tendencies," and one who has a homosexual orientation. Since the instruction calls for a discernment of suitability based primarily on affective maturity, this assessment cannot be known hypothetically, but only personally. If a particular homosexual candidate does not demonstrate a stable affective maturity but is driven by a homosexual tendency, then he should not be admitted. If a candidate's self-identification makes his homosexual orientation personally, socially, and politically decisive, he cannot be admitted. If a candidate's sexual orientation is the central driving element of his life, this will cause him and others problems, will create inner and outer stress, and will affect the unity of the priesthood. This is a source of scandal.
Finally, the instruction does not equate child sexual abuse with having a deeply-rooted homosexual tendency. It cannot be characterized solely as a response to the sexual abuse crisis in the United States. Nor can the instruction be described as an attempt to blame the clergy sex abuse crisis on homosexuals by equating homosexuality and peodophilia. In the U.S., the report from the National Review Board (NRB) as well as the John Jay Study indicated that 78% of clergy sexual abuse cases involved young people 11 to 17, with over 27% involving 15 to 17 years olds. Eighty-one percent of the reported victims were males.
For this reason, the NRB's report called for a "searching inquiry" about homosexuals as candidates for the seminary or Holy Orders due to "the culture today, and the male-oriented atmosphere of the seminary." The report indicates that bishops who chose to ordain homosexuals should first facilitate a "searching inquiry" to discern the possible presence of the sort of tendencies already referenced.
To be a good priest, a man needs a solid human formation psychologically. He needs to be a man of faith and prayer. He needs to be a secure man who fulfills his commitments to the priestly state of life, including a chaste celibacy. He needs to be faithful to the teaching of the church and not let it be diluted by a personal agenda. The accomplishment of all of this is even more God's work than the man's. A man in whom God has accomplished this good work is a good priest. There is nothing that can stop God's grace other than a man's willful refusal to accept it.
- - -
By Fr. Frank Barry and Thomas Plante, Ph.D., ABPP
Department of Psychology
Santa Clara University
© 2006 Thomas Plante
Fr. Frank Barry is a pseudonym for a priest and seminary faculty member who wishes to remain anonymous. Dr. Thomas Plante is a Professor and Chair of Psychology at Santa Clara University as well as a Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine.
On November 29th the Congregation for Catholic Education in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and with the approval of Benedict XVI issued an instruction on the admission of homosexual candidates to the seminary and Holy Orders. The instruction is singular in purpose: "whether to admit to the seminary and to holy orders candidates who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies." The instruction is a document for the entire world and should not be read as addressed only to the church in the United States.
The instruction is clear that active homosexuals cannot be admitted to seminaries or ordination. Neither can those who support "gay culture." Although not defined, this term likely assumes that a self-defined gay man intends to be sexually active and might have a personal agenda in conflict with church teaching. "Gay" came into popular usage in the 1970s and frequently denotes a homosexual person who is sexually active. However, this is not always the case, as "gay" is sometimes used to suggest a homosexual person who embraces their orientation. A homosexual orientation was created in 1869 as is defined by Webster's New World dictionary as "sexual desire for those of the same sex as oneself." It usually and only indicates the direction of one's sexual interest, largely dictated by biological, psychological, and social factors.
The instruction makes no judgement on the psychological maturity of individual homosexuals. No priest with a homosexual orientation should feel that this document classifies him as defective. In fact the instruction teaches that homosexual persons "must be accepted with respect and sensitivity" and should not suffer from any sign of unjust discrimination.
Aligning itself with John Paul II's 1992 Pastores Dabo Vobis, the instruction refers to the four integrated and complementary pillars or dimensions of priestly formation (i.e., human, spiritual, intellectual and pastoral). Within this understanding, the document highlights "the particular importance of human formation." One aspect of human formation is spotlighted, "affective maturity," that is, the ability to "relate correctly to both men and women." This term finds frequent expression in Pastores Dabo Vobis and means, among other things, "a responsible love" that touches the person in his physical, psychic and spiritual dimensions." Affective maturity assumes that a seminarian and priest bring to all human relationships a serene friendship and a deep brotherliness, with the capacity to renounce anything that is a threat to it. Affective maturity demands that a seminarian and priest be truly a master of oneself, able to be a "sincere gift of self" to all. (nos.43-44) Since affective maturity holds centre place in the instruction, the document should be interpreted as a pastoral guideline and not a canonical legislation.
Bishops, religious superiors and seminary personnel are not to admit to the seminary or ordination a candidate who does not demonstrate a stable and affective maturity. Seminary formation is not the time to solve major life issues such as addictive behaviours, sexual issues, financial irresponsibility, or an inability to work cooperatively with others. If a man has serious, unresolved issues or has developed a personal agenda that he might put ahead of the Gospel, he is not a good candidate for ordination. He does not sustain a stable and affective maturity. This norm applies to heterosexual candidates as well.
The instruction places "truth" at the centre of priestly discernment. It calls for an assessment of suitability for ordination and places this responsibility squarely on the candidate. He is called to trust the discernment of the church and not be dishonest. This admonishment places an equal responsibility on bishops, religious superiors and rectors to create a formative atmosphere that promotes a climate for this level of truth and honesty. Spiritual directors and confessors have the "duty to dissuade" from ordination candidates who display dishonesty about their sexual tendencies.
A critical point of discernment and judgement is called for in regard to those candidates with a deep-seated homosexual tendency. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's 1972 document Persona Humana refers to "tendency," making a distinction between a "false tendency" (for example, from bad education, bad example, from habit) and "is transitory or at least not incurable" and a tendency that is definitive due to "some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable." (section VIII) The Catechism of the Catholic Church likewise speaks of "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" and names such tendencies as "objectively disordered." (no. 235
According to reputable medical literature (e.g., Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 2002), a tendency is characterized by a "direct desire toward individuals of one's own sex" and "involves sexual intercourse between individuals of the same sex." Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary (2002) translates such a tendency to mean "someone who practices homosexuality" and possesses a "characteristic likelihood," a "predisposition to think, act, behave, or proceed in a particular way." Accordingly, the instruction may well be translating a "deep-seated homosexual tendency" in this fashion, indicating that a homosexual candidate who has a profound predisposition which drives him to unwavering homosexual activity cannot be admitted to the seminary or Holy Orders. We know of no bishop, religious superior, rector, spiritual director, or mentor who would disagree.
Discernment must include, then, an assessment between a candidate who experiences "a transitory problem," one who has "deep-seated homosexual tendencies," and one who has a homosexual orientation. Since the instruction calls for a discernment of suitability based primarily on affective maturity, this assessment cannot be known hypothetically, but only personally. If a particular homosexual candidate does not demonstrate a stable affective maturity but is driven by a homosexual tendency, then he should not be admitted. If a candidate's self-identification makes his homosexual orientation personally, socially, and politically decisive, he cannot be admitted. If a candidate's sexual orientation is the central driving element of his life, this will cause him and others problems, will create inner and outer stress, and will affect the unity of the priesthood. This is a source of scandal.
Finally, the instruction does not equate child sexual abuse with having a deeply-rooted homosexual tendency. It cannot be characterized solely as a response to the sexual abuse crisis in the United States. Nor can the instruction be described as an attempt to blame the clergy sex abuse crisis on homosexuals by equating homosexuality and peodophilia. In the U.S., the report from the National Review Board (NRB) as well as the John Jay Study indicated that 78% of clergy sexual abuse cases involved young people 11 to 17, with over 27% involving 15 to 17 years olds. Eighty-one percent of the reported victims were males.
For this reason, the NRB's report called for a "searching inquiry" about homosexuals as candidates for the seminary or Holy Orders due to "the culture today, and the male-oriented atmosphere of the seminary." The report indicates that bishops who chose to ordain homosexuals should first facilitate a "searching inquiry" to discern the possible presence of the sort of tendencies already referenced.
To be a good priest, a man needs a solid human formation psychologically. He needs to be a man of faith and prayer. He needs to be a secure man who fulfills his commitments to the priestly state of life, including a chaste celibacy. He needs to be faithful to the teaching of the church and not let it be diluted by a personal agenda. The accomplishment of all of this is even more God's work than the man's. A man in whom God has accomplished this good work is a good priest. There is nothing that can stop God's grace other than a man's willful refusal to accept it.
- - -
Senate Member
Posts: 6,500
January 23rd, 2007, 08:08 AM
I am not certain what or why this article/study has been hashed out yet again...
Homosexuality according to published numbers exists in all groups of males - not just those to apply for religious calling.
Teachers, athletic coaches, social workers, entertainers and artists, caregivers, medical workers, law enforcement, regular run of the mill professions such as business or law, etc.
What exactly is the point of this exercise? Does a priest have more accessibility or power over a younger member of society than a coach or a teacher or a rock band manager?
It is not whether a male is a homosexual, or a nun is a lesbian..... it is how they conduct themselves within their professional lives that is worthy of consideration.
The rest remains implication by innuendo. Mixing up homosexuality and the old bugaboo paedophilia.
I am not certain what or why this article/study has been hashed out yet again...
Homosexuality according to published numbers exists in all groups of males - not just those to apply for religious calling.
Teachers, athletic coaches, social workers, entertainers and artists, caregivers, medical workers, law enforcement, regular run of the mill professions such as business or law, etc.
What exactly is the point of this exercise? Does a priest have more accessibility or power over a younger member of society than a coach or a teacher or a rock band manager?
It is not whether a male is a homosexual, or a nun is a lesbian..... it is how they conduct themselves within their professional lives that is worthy of consideration.
The rest remains implication by innuendo. Mixing up homosexuality and the old bugaboo paedophilia.
A modern nomad
Posts: 1,118
Location: Berlin, Germany
Location: Berlin, Germany
January 23rd, 2007, 08:18 AM
boys_beware
Quoting Curiosity
As relates to the issue of mixing up homesexuality and paedophilia, here is a video that does it in a somewhat laughable way.
The rest remains implication by innuendo. Mixing up homosexuality and the old bugaboo paedophilia.
boys_beware
Bright Spark
Posts: 327
Location: Ont
Location: Ont
January 23rd, 2007, 09:01 AM
sanctus:
"If a candidate's self-identification makes his homosexual orientation personally, socially, and politically decisive, he cannot be admitted."
The self assessment of identity is not a reliable indicator. Self identity has a tool for discernment is itself not recognized by the Catholic Church. Identity of oneself to a sin aids the victim's resignment to it, and makes the statement the Church recognizes the stigma is a valid one. The Church discourages anyone to identify with the sin itself. This statement recognizes the legitimacy of self identification.
This is better seen in the broader context of habitual mortal sin in general. One who habitually fornicates could just as well identify himself as a fornicator,etc,etc. The solution would be for a candidate to assess himself in terms of propensity to sin mortally. He could conclude "I have a weakness to mortal sin." and disqualify himself. If he concluded that "I am gay therefore I disqualify myself", this would be wrong. In other words, if he has any weakness to any mortal sin he does not become a candidate for the priesthood.
The residue of absolved sin is not to be worn has a cloak for identity. Every form of detachment to the sin should be taken and cleansing should be total.
-------------------------------
Originally Posted by The Catechism of the Catholic Church
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.
------------------------------
Homosexuality and Hope
http://www.cathmed.org/publications/...ityarticle.htm
There are certainly circumstances, such as psychological disorders and traumatic experiences, which can, at times, render this chastity more difficult and there are conditions which can seriously diminish an individual's responsibility for lapses in chastity. These circumstances and conditions, however, do not negate free will or eliminate the power of grace. While many men and women who experience same-sex attractions say that their sexual desire for those of their own sex was experienced as a "given" (Chapman 1987[1]) this in no way implies a genetic predetermination or an unchangeable condition. Some surrendered to same-sex attractions because they were told that they were born with this inclination and that it was impossible to change the pattern of one's sexual attraction. Such persons may feel it is futile and hopeless to resist same-sex desires and embrace a "gay identity". These same persons may then feel oppressed by the fact that society and religion, in particular the Catholic Church, do not accept the expression of these desires in homosexual acts. (Schreier 1998[2])
AndyF
sanctus:
"If a candidate's self-identification makes his homosexual orientation personally, socially, and politically decisive, he cannot be admitted."
The self assessment of identity is not a reliable indicator. Self identity has a tool for discernment is itself not recognized by the Catholic Church. Identity of oneself to a sin aids the victim's resignment to it, and makes the statement the Church recognizes the stigma is a valid one. The Church discourages anyone to identify with the sin itself. This statement recognizes the legitimacy of self identification.
This is better seen in the broader context of habitual mortal sin in general. One who habitually fornicates could just as well identify himself as a fornicator,etc,etc. The solution would be for a candidate to assess himself in terms of propensity to sin mortally. He could conclude "I have a weakness to mortal sin." and disqualify himself. If he concluded that "I am gay therefore I disqualify myself", this would be wrong. In other words, if he has any weakness to any mortal sin he does not become a candidate for the priesthood.
The residue of absolved sin is not to be worn has a cloak for identity. Every form of detachment to the sin should be taken and cleansing should be total.
-------------------------------
Originally Posted by The Catechism of the Catholic Church
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.
------------------------------
Homosexuality and Hope
http://www.cathmed.org/publications/...ityarticle.htm
There are certainly circumstances, such as psychological disorders and traumatic experiences, which can, at times, render this chastity more difficult and there are conditions which can seriously diminish an individual's responsibility for lapses in chastity. These circumstances and conditions, however, do not negate free will or eliminate the power of grace. While many men and women who experience same-sex attractions say that their sexual desire for those of their own sex was experienced as a "given" (Chapman 1987[1]) this in no way implies a genetic predetermination or an unchangeable condition. Some surrendered to same-sex attractions because they were told that they were born with this inclination and that it was impossible to change the pattern of one's sexual attraction. Such persons may feel it is futile and hopeless to resist same-sex desires and embrace a "gay identity". These same persons may then feel oppressed by the fact that society and religion, in particular the Catholic Church, do not accept the expression of these desires in homosexual acts. (Schreier 1998[2])
AndyF
Genius
Posts: 998
Location: Was Victoria, now Ottawa
Location: Was Victoria, now Ottawa
January 23rd, 2007, 09:39 AM
I don’t think all that many gay people want to join a religious group stuck in the dark ages. Why does God make gay people if it's a sin? This crap I don’t believe. Two consenting adults are committing a sin, but the Church drags its heels when it comes to pedophiles. Stupid.
I don’t think all that many gay people want to join a religious group stuck in the dark ages. Why does God make gay people if it's a sin? This crap I don’t believe. Two consenting adults are committing a sin, but the Church drags its heels when it comes to pedophiles. Stupid.
