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. - Source 1961 Criteria
An author at Crisis has a post contrasting the 'homosexualist' priest with the priest who may have homosexual tendencies. Sorry - but that distinction may be difficult to ascertain these days. Once again, an article such as this gives false hope to the homosexual man convinced he has a vocation, although he is unable to integrate his sexuality and live chastely.
One would have to be blind not to have seen the results of ignoring the 1961 admonition I cite at the beginning of the post. People have to wake up. How many priests removed from ministry, how many in jail? How many have been sponsored by bishops who shared the same tendencies? How many candidates were given false hope and or assurances they have a vocation? I have known men who searched for a bishop to sponsor and ordain them, convinced God told them they have a vocation. So often we are deceived by our own opinion or the bad spiritual direction of another.
I'm reminded of something Fr. Geiger wrote several years ago, referencing private revelations, I think it works in regard to this post as well, again, I may be wrong.
[T]he autonomous personal conscience sometimes lays claim to a false discernment when it sets private revelation and presumed personal graces against the magisterium. The desire for union with God sometimes leads individuals to attach themselves to extraordinary manifestations of the “spirit,” but in such a way that weakens their attachment to the Church. Thus, Catholics continue to embrace New Age spirituality, or some dubious private revelation, or a personal insight even though they know that their conviction runs contrary to Church teaching or discipline.
The discernment of spirits is so important today because there are many voices competing for our attention, and it is all so easy to assume that that what we hear, or even what we think and say comes from God. - Fr. Geiger
Again - I may be wrong. But just remember, "No one takes this honor upon himself but only when called by God." Pope Francis emphasizes the need for discernment, humble discernment, and he too recommended against admitting homosexuals to seminary, saying: “if you have even the slightest doubt it's better not to let them enter."
Holy crap! Read this!
While on my way to work tonight, I thought about this latest scandal and I fail to understand it. The ugliness of it, the perversion of it, the complete disrespect for holiness, purity, truth. If everything is to be believed, why bother making promises to our Lord on the day of your priestly ordination if those same promises are to be sullied and trampled upon later?
ReplyDeleteThe Sacrament of Holy Orders!!! It's like taking the marriage vow and making the promise of being open to life before the throne of Almighty God and then turning around and going on birth control with the intention of having one kid ... maybe two. The attitude is the same, "no one is going to tell me what to do, how to do it or when to do it. I'm going to do it my way."
Of course, I cannot pretend to know the mind of these folks who closed themselves off from the Lord. They had to have closed themselves off otherwise, how can such depravity exist? And for so long? Choosing reputation, power, the admiration of men over the sacred vow ... it boggles the mind, it really does.
And please ... those who are staring to make claims about how St. JPII, Benedict or Papa Francis knew and kept quiet ... PROVE IT.
Let me add something else that came to mind then I am done with my rant. ×-×
DeleteFather Benedict Groeshel (que en paz descanse) was as solid and faithful a priest and son of the Church if ever there was one. I heard him speak many times at many conventions and had the wonderful privilege of going on a retreat with him as the featured retreat master. How dare some imply that he knew things or covered up for some just because he would not spill the beans on them or name names. He was a psychologist for the archdiocese of New York and was probably working with these priests who had all kinds of issues. He may have heard their confessions, witnessed their breakdowns, knew their weaknesses. He gained their trust and had to keep what they shared with him confidential unless he knew otherwise. I give Father G the full benefit of doubt in this matter and refuse to consider the smears and ugly rumors that are now being sown to tarnish his good name.
Why not organize prayer campaigns, have Masses said, holy hours initiated, for the conversion and salvation of all seminarians, priests, bishops, cardinals rather than sling mud around?
I might be more inclined to take what you have to say more seriously if charity reigned.
Thanks for allowing me to borrow the soap box dear Terry. 0430 on the West Coast. 😆
Yeah - I have trouble with the Fr. Groeschel stories - unfortunately we can't hear his side. I think Fr. G was always very good and he represents an actual bridge between the old way of handling these cases and the new way. He also had some 'old fashioned' controversial ideas which when expressed many wrongly assumed he was blaming the victim. Upon first reading the lastest I was a bit shaken - but it's hearsay and as I said, we have no explanation or defense from Fr. B. I also agree the Popes have not covered up or ignored reports. It's a little like the conduct surrounding the 3rd secret - was there a need to make that public? Likewise, was there a need for the public to know that people like McCarrick had affairs? I say that in the sense that there is good reason to avoid scandalizing the faithful - that is not at all the same as saving face for the Church or protecting the Church's image. I think the critics believe that is synonymous - it isn't.
Delete