Should one who is afflicted with same-sex attraction or other such tendencies even bother considering the priestly or religious vocations?

-Ian

I am definitely no expert or authority but I would think that sexual attractions are hard for anyone entering the priesthood or religious life. Whether the attraction is heterosexual or same-sex, the problem is still one of temptation of the flesh, and still needs the grace of God to overcome.

I would definitely discuss it with a spiritual director, but I wouldn't give up thoughts of a vocation just because of this. We are all sinners who need to overcome sin in all its forms. You have my prayers.

I agree totally, couldn't have said it any better.

Nunsense speaks the truth.

Yep yep! Couldn't have said it better myself!

+

Actually, the Vatican has spoken on this and there are very clear guidelines. These, are our sure guides. It depends on if they are "deep seated" tendencies or the transient attractions experienced during adolescence.

I refer you to this document entitled "INSTRUCTION CONCERNING THE CRITERIA OF VOCATION DISCERNMENT
REGARDING PERSONS WITH HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES IN VIEW OF THEIR ADMISSION TO THE SEMINARY AND TO HOLY ORDERS" (cf below):
http://www.mfva.info/1/articles/instruction_seminaries.htm

And, this "Homosexuals and the Priesthood: Should Ordination Be Mine Because I Want It?" (cf below):
http://www.mfva.info/1/articles/homosexual_01.htm

Here is the text of the first link:

INSTRUCTION
CONCERNING THE CRITERIA
OF VOCATION DISCERNMENT
REGARDING PERSONS
WITH HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES
IN VIEW OF THEIR ADMISSION
TO THE SEMINARY AND TO HOLY ORDERS

ROME 2005

INTRODUCTION
In continuity with the teaching of Vatican Council II and, in particular, with the decree Optatam totius (1) on priestly formation, the Congregation for Catholic Education has published various documents to promote a suitable integral formation of future priests, offering orientations and precise norms on its diverse aspects. (2) In the meantime, the 1990 Synod of Bishops also reflected on priestly formation in current circumstances, with the intention of bringing to fulfillment the conciliar doctrine on this matter and of making it more explicit and incisive in the contemporary world. Following this synod, John Paul II published the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores dabo vobis (3)

In the light of this rich teaching, this current Instruction does not intend to deal with all questions of an affective or sexual nature that call for an attentive discernment during the entire period of formation. It contains norms concerning one particular question, which has been made more urgent by the current situation, and that is, the admission or not to the seminary and to Holy Orders of candidates who have deeply rooted homosexual tendencies.

1. Affective Maturity and Spiritual Paternity
According to the constant Tradition of the Church, only a baptized male may validly receive holy Ordination. (4) By means of the Sacrament of Orders, the Holy Spirit configures the candidate, in a new and specific title, to Jesus Christ: The priest, in fact, sacramentally represents Christ, Head, Pastor and Spouse of the Church. (5) Because of this configuration to Christ, the entire life of the holy minister must be animated by the giving of his entire person to the Church and by an authentic pastoral charity (6)

The candidate to the ordained ministry, therefore, must reach affective maturity. Such maturity enables him to place himself in a correct relationship with men and women, developing in himself a true sense of spiritual paternity with regards to the ecclesial community entrusted to him. (7)

2. Homosexuality and the Ordained Ministry
From Vatican Council II to today, various documents of the Magisterium – especially the Catechism of the Catholic Church – have confirmed the teaching of the Church on homosexuality. The Catechism distinguishes between homosexual acts and homosexual tendencies.

Regarding acts, it teaches that, in Sacred Scripture, these are presented as serious sins. Tradition has constantly considered them as intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law. Consequently, they can never be approved in any case whatsoever.

For that which concerns deeply rooted homosexual tendencies, as can be seen in a certain number of men and women, these too are objectively disordered and often are a trial for these persons. Such persons must be welcomed with respect and delicacy: every indication of unjust discrimination in their regards must be avoided. They are called to realize the will of God in their lives and to unite the difficulties they might encounter to the Lord’s sacrifice of the Cross. (8)

In the light of this teaching, this dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to clearly reaffirm that the Church, while deeply respecting the persons in question, (9) cannot admit to the Seminary or to Holy Orders those who practice homosexuality, who present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or who support the so-called ‘gay culture.

The above-mentioned persons are, in fact, in a situation that seriously hinders a correct relationship with men and women. Nor can the negative tendencies that can derive from the ordination of such persons with deeply rooted homosexual tendencies be overlooked.

If, on the other had, it is a question of homosexual tendencies that were only an expression of a passing problem such as, for example, that of an adolescence not yet completed, these must in any case be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

3. Discernment of the Suitability of Candidates by the Church
There are two aspects to every priestly vocation that cannot be separated: the free gift of God and the responsible freedom of man. Vocation is a gift of divine grace, received through the Church, in the Church and for serving the Church. Answering God’s call, a man offers himself freely to Him in love. (11) The desire alone to become a priest is not sufficient, and there is no right to receive Holy Orders. It is up to the Church – in her responsibility to define the necessary requisites for reception of the Sacraments instituted by Christ – to discern the suitability of one who wishes to enter the Seminary, (12) accompanying him during the formation years and calling him to Holy Orders, if he possesses the requisite qualities. (13)

The formation of the future priest must articulate, in an essential complementarity, the four dimensions of formation: human, spiritual, intellectual and pastoral. (14) In this context, what must be underscored is the particular relevance of human formation, the necessary foundation of all formation. (15) To admit a candidate to ordination to the diaconate, the Church must verify, among other things, that the affective maturity of the candidate to the priesthood has been reached. (16)

The call to Orders is the personal responsibility of the Bishop (17) or of the Major Superior. Taking into account the opinion of those to whom the formation has been entrusted, the Bishop or the Major Superior, before admitting a candidate to ordination, must reach a morally certain judgment about his qualities. In the event of a serious doubt in this regard, they must not admit him to ordination. (18)

Discernment about the vocation and the maturity of the candidate is also a serious duty of the rector and other formators in the seminary. Prior to every ordination, the rector must express his judgment on the qualities of the candidate that are requested by the Church. (19)

In discerning the suitability to ordination, the spiritual director has a very important duty. Even though bound by secrecy, he represents the Church in the internal forum. In his talks with a candidate, the spiritual director must especially remind him of the Church’s demands concerning priestly chastity and the specific affective maturity of the priest, as well as to help him to discern if he has the necessary qualities. (20) He has an obligation to evaluate all qualities of the (candidate’s) personality and to make sure that the candidate does not give evidence of sexual disturbances incompatible with the priesthood. If a candidate practices homosexuality or presents deeply rooted homosexual tendencies, his spiritual director, as well as his confessor, have the duty to dissuade him, in conscience, from proceeding to Ordination.

It is understood that the candidate himself is the primary person responsible for his own formation. (21) He must offer himself with trust to the discernment of the Church, of the Bishop who calls to Orders, of the rector of the seminary, of the spiritual director and of the other educators in the Seminary to whom the Bishop or Major Superior has entrusted the duty of forming future priests. It would be gravely dishonest if a candidate should hide his homosexuality in order to attain, notwithstanding everything, Ordination. Such an inauthentic behavior does not correspond to the spirit of truth, loyalty and availability that must mark the personality of one who believes he is called to serve Christ and His Church in the priestly ministry.

CONCLUSION
This Congregation reiterates the need for Bishops, Major Superiors and all interested parties who have responsibility to undertake an attentive discernment with regards to the suitability of candidates to Holy Orders, from admission to the Seminary up to Ordination. This discernment must be done in the light of a conception of ministerial priesthood in harmony with the teaching of the Church.

Bishops, Episcopal Conferences and Major Superiors should be vigilant so that the norms of this Instruction will be faithfully observed for the good of the candidates themselves and to thus always guarantee the Church suitable priests, true pastors according to the heart of Christ.

The Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XVI, on August 31, 2005, approved this present Instruction and ordered its publication.

Rome, November 4, 2005, Memory of St. Charles Borromeo, patron of Seminaries.



Zenon Card. Grocholewski,

Prefetto

J. Michael Miller, C.S.B.

Titular Arch. of Vertara

Secretary


Here is the text of the second link:

Homosexuals and the Priesthood:
Should ordination be mine because I want it?

16 July 2005

by Joshua R. LeBlanc

I have been increasingly agitated at various blogs that have chosen to believe that their word must be the divine Word of God and that all of their desires and wants are divinely inspired.

In doing so they have chosen to use their blogs to further their political agenda and spread odious fallacies. Do not misunderstand me; I am not a person who believes that labels are useless. I believe, and rightly so, that labels help us to identify who we are, where we fit into the whole grand scheme of things. We label ourselves Catholic to differentiate ourselves from other Christians who chose to reject portions of the historical teachings of Christ and his Church (this is a fact, not a jab at non-Catholics.) I do however have a problem with individuals, who erroneously claim the Church to be a bigot and the Pope to be “rooted in the exclusionary tendencies of the Roman Catholic Church across the ages.” To make such a statement is egregiously wrong.

To these individuals I say “get your facts straight before you start making accusations and claims!” One particular blogger, whom I will not name out of Christian charity, can never make up his mind on any subject. One day he is claiming that he accepts the teaching Magisterium of the Church, the next day he is shooting off at the mouth about Her as though he were a loose cannon! This type of display is schizophrenic at best and deliberately tyrannical at worst.

So as not to divert from the real subject from this post, I will make my point and get on with it. Individuals who make claims against the Church do so on three levels: Emotion, Personal Desire, and Certitude of Position.

Emotion

The individual I mention above’s entire argument that the Church is a bigot is based primarily on the fact that the Church is soon to release a document banning homosexuals from the priesthood of Jesus Christ. This particular individual believes he has a call to the priesthood and because of this, the Church is a bigot.I’d be very weary of making such a claim against an entity that has been around approximately 100 times longer than I have! Let’s get some facts straight about the Church and the Calling to the priesthood. As individuals we don’t call ourselves to the priesthood nor do we discern alone, we discern a possible call to the priesthood. As the Church that Jesus Christ founded, it is the Church’s responsibility to discern if an individual is indeed being called to the Priesthood or not. This call is never one that is decided by the individual, but by Jesus Christ himself through the ministry of the Church. Therefore, those who would claim “I am called to the priesthood but the Church won’t ordain me” are advocating fallacy and ignorance.


What is the practicality of barring homosexual men in the priesthood? For those of you who are unaware, I was a seminarian for 4 years discerning a call to the priesthood. In my four years of living in a seminary community, I have learned the practical reasons for barring homosexuals from the priesthood. In my early years, I even advocated that homosexual men should be allowed to be priests as long as they were celibate. My position has since changed.

I have learned that for many homosexual men that seminary has become somewhat of a haven, a place to “hide out” per se from the problems of the world. I would presume that many homosexual men who enter seminary enter with honest intentions – to presume otherwise is simply arrogance. I believe they want to truly live a celibate lifestyle, but for whatever reason many leave because they initially believe the problem will go away but find out that it doesn’t. I know this for a fact and have seen it with my own eyes. Some of my seminary brothers were indeed homosexual men and even to this day I consider some of them friends. I have learned that three different things happen to homosexuals when they enter the seminary. They either leave because they learn that being celibate is too difficult when you are constantly around other men, get kicked out because they have failed to remain celibate with others or they slip under radar, get ordained and don’t become very integrated individuals, therefore causing problems in the Church somewhere down the line – whether that be in inappropriate relationships or with regard to Church teaching. This is the case about 99% of the time. The 1% of men who don’t fall into this category do make good priests, but they will tell you it is very difficult to leave in a rectory with other priests. It is not this 1% that I am concerned about, but the 99% that have caused the church to be racked with sex abuse scandals and financial woes over the past thirty years. There are also those who will claim that it isn’t a problem for two homosexual men to live in a rectory together. This is nothing more than turning a blind eye. To assume this, one would also have to assume that a young couple could cohabitate and abstain from sexual relations. We all know this to not be the case.

As a heterosexual former seminarian, I will tell you it is also very difficult to discern a vocation when you have those homosexual men around you who aren’t committed to celibacy and are indeed fornicating with each other as though no one else knows about it. (As a side note I will not fault the administration of the particular seminary I attended for this sort of behavior. They did not know about it and when it did come to light these individuals were explicated.) It truly created a culture where those men who were heterosexual (and faithful to celibacy) were the minority and felt like odd men out. Is this the way that we promote vocations to the priesthood? This is sort of the same kind of phenomena you find going on in parishes these days where the number of altar boys is dwindling due to an increase of female altar servers. From this standpoint alone barring homosexuals from the priesthood is practical and not only is it practical – it’s actually vocation promoting for those men who are really dedicated to celibacy and Church teaching (not their own interpretation of it!)

Now that we’ve looked at the practical aspect, let’s look at some other issues regarding this blogger’s apparent enmity for the Catholic Church and the Pope.

Personal Desire

How does personal desire fit into the picture? When did we ever get the idea that when it comes to the commandments, laws, etc. of Christ and his Church that God gives a damn about what individuals want? If, as Paul says in his first letter to Timothy, the “Church is the Pillar and Bulwark of Truth,” then why do individuals constantly find it necessary to shoot off at the mouth as though he/she is the anointed Apostle of God and all knowledge comes through them? Let’s get something straight -- the Church is infallible in her teachings and the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. As individuals, the only thing we can be infallible in is the certitude of death and taxes – and even the second one is debatable..

The point I make is that Christ promised us he would be with us always, even until the end of time. Not through ourselves, but through the Church. When it comes to making a choice between “Catholics” like Frances Kissling, who are place themselves on pedestals of assumed authority or the true Pope, His Holiness Benedict XVI, most Catholics are going to err on the side of an individual who is anointed as the Vicar of Christ rather than the head of a make-believe Catholic organization that hasn’t gotten a dime in private Catholic donations in years!

Certitude of Position

The only way one could make such a preposterous claim that the Church is a bigot is because of assumed certitude that their modern day thoughts are the correct ones and that the Church’s teaching for the past 2000 years has been fabricated. It is highly suspect here as to whose position is the incorrect one.The problem in all of this lies in original sin, the sin of Adam, the sin of pride. We have placed our ideas, our thoughts and our wants up on the same pedestal as the commands of God the Most High. Let’s remember humility and deference to God, His Church, and His Vicar – Pope Benedict XVI! Simply becoming a member of a different religion doesn’t solve this problem. It is beyond understand why someone would choose to leave the Catholic Church, who choose to leave the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist for reasons based on pride. Let’s try adhering to the words of St. John “He must increase, I must decrease” Jn. 3:30.If you want to complain about the Church and its bigotries towards homosexuals, I suggest first reading the former Cardinal Ratzinger’s document on “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.” We then have to ask ourselves the importation question: Is the Church homophobic or are those members who disagree with Her heterophobic? You be the judge.

Joshua R. LeBlanc is the president of cyberCatholics.com.
This article is adapted from one that appeared on the website of cyberCatholics.com and is used by permission of the author, Joshua R. Leblanc

Annie, I applaud your charity and your wisdom.

Having just read the excerpts that Veritas posted, I can't see anything there to contradict the advice that you gave.

Thanks for the information and help. I'm especially relieved as to the distinction between deep seated tendencies and otherwise. I'll just have to deal with being that 1 percent the second article talks about.

Yours in Christ,
Ian

The second article is not a Vatican document. It is based on one man's personal experience. He may believe that homosexuality is the primary root of paedophilic scandals in the Church; I do not. Perhaps this is because I have come into contact with too many young people who were abused by paedophiles. I know the truth of the evidence put forward by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children: that the majority of paedophiles a.) are married men and b.) abuse their own children.

It is not accurate to blame the sex abuse scandals on homosexual clergy alone. Homosexual clergy may have participated, but it wasn't exclusively their fault and they certainly weren't alone in doing what they did.

She is very wise and very right.

I have spoken to many Vocation Directors over the years and the the answer has always been the same.
Their concern is, can the person entering live chastely, can they live celibately? No matter what the preference.
Can you learn to channel your 'thoughts and energies' into wholesome activities.

I would encourage you not to give up.
If God has a place for you there, He will make a way.

Absolutely NOT

Please explain why you think this.

hmm, dont feel i can reply to this here... this may have to move to the debate forum?

I think its pretty much self explanatory. Where have you been the last 10 years?

To Ian let me say I respect your honesty.

Let me say to Kafka you are fooling yourself if you think Ian is the first one asking.
I was in a community in 1974 and nothing was discussed outright but Ian is not struggling with anything new.

As far as moving this....why? His question is a part of his discernment. Vocation Director's deal with this question all the time.

I believe this discussion belongs here. We are not here just to discuss whatever makes us comfortable. How is this a "debate?" Someone has asked a question regarding religious life/priesthood. Sorry if the way they are asking doesn't make you happy, but this isn't about you.

This site should be here for EVERYONE who is discerning whatever they are discerning. Not just the things that we agree on or understand. We are all on different journeys. No one has the right to say that his is any less valid.

Ian is not looking to DEBATE he is sincerely asking questions.
Someday you may be the Vocation Director how do you plan on responding with someone asking the same questions?

What Would Jesus Do?

I couldn't agree with you more, opher.

Mother Teresa once said, "Every person is Christ for me, and since there is only one Jesus, that person is the one person in the world at that moment."

I've posed questions about my disabilities on the Vocation Station before. I've asked whether my difficulties would prevent me from being a good nun. While sexuality and disability are different things, they can both cause problems for discerners and they are both quite difficult to talk about honestly.

When I came here with my questions, I was welcomed and treated as a person. By everybody. But it seems that there are people on here who aren't willing to extend Ian the same courtesy. He doesn't even get the luxury of being addressed by name - he just gets "Absolutely NOT" and "I think this should be moved to the debate table". If you believe that a homosexual person could never make a good priest, at least show some charity in your judgment and remember that you are talking to a human being. When we respond to Ian's question, Ian should be the only person in the world for us. Our Christ.

Unfortunately, some people are unreasonably frightened of homosexuality. So they try to sort homosexual people into neatly labelled boxes, try to blame everything bad that has ever happened in the ranks of the clergy on 'the homosexuals', and try to legislate how far God's grace can go in giving such people the necessary patience and strength to follow a vocation to the religious life. They become 'issues' to be debated rather than Catholic brothers and sisters to be respected. It's much easier to love someone if they're like you, but where's the value in that?

+

Wasn't intending to pass of the second link as a Vatican Document. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

It is important to note the facts. According to the USCCB, over 80% of the "pedophilia" abuses here in the US were against post-pubescent young men. That is homosexuality. In the US clergy abuse scandals, the issue was homosexuality.

Again, it is nice that people are offering a lot of opinions and I respect the fact that people are trying to be compassionate, but we have to look at what the Church says about this and not offer false compassion and false hope. The Church in her Divine Wisdom must be our authority in this matter. She says:

In the light of this teaching, this dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to clearly reaffirm that the Church, while deeply respecting the persons in question, (9) cannot admit to the Seminary or to Holy Orders those who practice homosexuality, who present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or who support the so-called ‘gay culture.

I concur, if this does become a debate, and it is very close, it needs to be moved to debate.

+

Forgive me if I have misunderstood some of the posts, but I am a little concerned that so many of us have so unreservedly encouraged the religious/priestly vocation to someone with same-sex attractions. The Church has recently spoken very clearly about this. It is an extraordinary situation and must be approached with great caution and in a spirit of great docility and authentic humility before the Church our Lord established. This is not a minor circumstance of someone's being, but a very serious issue.

+

If you read what the Church has said, you will see that it is a bit more than the ability to live celibately. The Church in her wisdom and charity, has said:

The above-mentioned persons are, in fact, in a situation that seriously hinders a correct relationship with men and women. Nor can the negative tendencies that can derive from the ordination of such persons with deeply rooted homosexual tendencies be overlooked.

Furthermore, the Church has stated:

In discerning the suitability to ordination, the spiritual director has a very important duty. Even though bound by secrecy, he represents the Church in the internal forum. In his talks with a candidate, the spiritual director must especially remind him of the Church’s demands concerning priestly chastity and the specific affective maturity of the priest, as well as to help him to discern if he has the necessary qualities. (20) He has an obligation to evaluate all qualities of the (candidate’s) personality and to make sure that the candidate does not give evidence of sexual disturbances incompatible with the priesthood. If a candidate practices homosexuality or presents deeply rooted homosexual tendencies, his spiritual director, as well as his confessor, have the duty to dissuade him, in conscience, from proceeding to Ordination.

+

Double post.

If the 80% figure is correct, the scandal in the USA was very different from the scandal that took root in Britain. But the logic still does not hold up.

Homosexual clergymen gave into homosexual temptations and had homosexual sex. But there are also plenty of heterosexual priests who have given into temptations and initiated relationships with women - but they don't cause anywhere near the same amount of furore. There is a priest in a neighbouring parish who abandoned his vows to marry a secret girlfriend, but it wasn't trumpeted in the newspapers - presumably because the scandal wasn't 'exotic' enough to excite the attention of the press.

Yet both hetero- and homosexual priests have been unfaithful to their vocation and have inflicted damage on their community. There's nothing about being homosexual that makes you less likely to be dedicated to your calling, despite the popular stereotypes. There is a lot about the current structure of seminaries that might make it unreasonably difficult for a seminarian with this particular challenge to cope.

I'm in agreement with Veritas here. This situation must be approached with great caution. The 80% figure also comes immediately to mind. Yes, this was something stated by the USCCB.

I would read all the Church has said on this, pray a lot, and seek advice from a spiritual director.

Also, remember that there are certainly many ways in which to serve the Church, besides priestly or religious orders. There are many forms of single consecrated life also.


While this is true, the issue is definitely different with someone with a same-sex attraction because of the fact that generally religious sisters live among religious sisters, and brothers/priests among brothers/priests. That's what makes the situation so problematical. The welfare of other people and the religious community overall must very much be taken into account also.

Pedophelia does not equal homosexual.
They are both very different.
Look them up in the dictionary if there is any confusion.

Discernment is a "form" of debating. This man is asking questions and seeking help figuring out things in his life.
If that qualifies as a debate then Vocation Station needs to be moved. The whole purpose (I thought) was to respond to questions. I'm trying to respond, you don't have to agree with me but I have the right to be heard.....HERE ON VOCATION STATION. So does Ian.

One question I have regarding people's sexual practices. How can ANYONE prove that they are celibate, no matter what their preference? It is a tough thing to prove. We pretty much have to take a person's word for it.

I don't like what I'm seeing, not just here but overall within the Catholic Church when it comes to criteria for people considering the Priesthood or Religious Life. It seems that people are being told if you aren't young, healthy, or oh heaven forbid...perfect we don't want you. Is this "the Church" or is it a Country Club?"

+

If you are referreing to my previous post, please allow me to say:

No one is saying pedophilia =s homosexuality -as far as I can tell. What is being said, is that POST-pubescent males are not children. That, is not pedophilia, that is homosexuality. The media likes to equate the two, but they are very different. This is an important distinction.

+

No. Discernment isn't a form of debating, it is a form of right thinking and prudence -it is a matter of weighing a lot of different things in discerning the Holy Spirit. I do believe what is being referred to, is that if we are going to discuss the viability of homosexuals to enter the seminary or priesthood, that should go somewhere else. Because, as the document above clearly states, it has already been decided by the Church. This IS a place to share information, not to debate what is right or wrong.

Your "right" is totally up to dUSt and the guidelines he has created. This is a monarchy.

Finally, the Church realizes that no one is perfect. However, the priesthood is an exceptionally demanding calling. And, because of the position of authority, power, and influence it has, those men need to be exceptionally healthy in mind and reasonably healthy in body for the sake of their own salvation and those that they serve. It can seem difficult to understand at first, but in essence it really is the most compassionate and prudent path for the men themselves and the community. God established the Church as our guide -when we are inclined to differ in our opinion, we must seek to correct ourselves.

But also this includes, just as much, the welfare of the individual with a same-sex attraction. It would seem much more difficult to overcome this on a daily basis if living in such a religious community or seminary/rectory.

I would give ANYTHING to have a priest in my parish, I could care less if he was gay, straight, green, or walked on his hands. There are so few priests in southwest virginia that we would welcome with open arms a priest here. My pastor has 3 parishes.
And who are we to judge? There are plenty of homosexual priests in the ranks now. You are what you are. If you can control your sexual urges, be it for same sex or different sex, that is what is important.
And to DARE to equate gays and pedophiles is ridiculous and faulty thinking. They are not the same.

I have two things to say, both of which may be ignored, for it is only mho:

1. Please continue to distinguish the difference between attraction and deeply-rooted tendencies. The Church has made the distinction, so should we.

2. Ian, please know that we here can only give you advice and hope that our words may lead you one step closer to following the will of God, whatever it may be. The best advice we can give is this: find a great spiritual director, one who will listen to you and guide you to the Lord, who will help you to shed some light on what must be an incredibly confusing and frustrating time in your life. We at phatmass can not decide whether or not you have a vocation; it is not our job to do so. Only one who knows you, your story, and your struggles can really help you to know and follow the Lord's will. We can only offer our opinions (which you must accept with prudence and with prayer) and our prayers, which I hope you graciously accept.

You will be in my prayers. If you need help finding a spiritual director in your area, I'm sure we can help you find one, or at least set you on the path to someone who can lead you to one.

May God's Peace be with you,

In Jesus and Mary,
Lauren

Okay, this is scary...."right thinking" and who determines that? You. I don't think so.
The Holy Spirit does help, to a point. You have to be willing to listen.

Yes, I believe that discernment is a form of debating. It all depends on what your personal viewpoint of debate is. You are right this is a place to share information. No one here is "debating" as you perceive it. Why do you feel threatened? Ian asked a question, he is seeking information. We have responded. I don't know what posts you've been reading.

There is a group I believe called COURAGE that men and women from it are joining the religious life.
Oh well.

It isn't that I believe Ian is right or wrong. I don't know, I'm not his judge. The man asked "a simple question."
The reason I am responding as I am is because I don't like bullies. Never have, never will.
The purpose of VS it to have a (safe) place that people can come and ask, without feeling threatened.

I am not content to give "white bread" answers to keep the majority happy.
I am a teacher, if someone asks me a question I am answer them.

I am going to say one last thing Veritas and you can choose to take it how you will.

Do your self a favor and do not join religious life, at least not with the attitude you seem to have today.
This is my thinking and my life experience and I hope it will help you.

I was raised in a LARGE family, 8 kids, and Mom and Dad. I joined a religious community at the age of 15 and left it. The community was hypocritical and I asked the "wrong" questions. Or so I was told. At 18 I joined the Army.

My point is this....people are going to disagree with you, they have that right (funny isn't it.)
Not everyone who sees you coming is going to be happy about it, and that includes religious life.
The people around you are going to express themselves and not care what you think about it.
They shouldn't have to, trust me they are not going to.

Religious life is a "very small world" and all of the personalities in the world are "on display."
How are you going to deal with people that disagree with you? They have as much right to express their opinion as you. Hopefully you will learn to deal a little more charitably (maturely) with them then you have with this.
Only time will tell.

double post.

I think Kafka was just saying, these past ten years there have been many problems with homosexual priests. But that should NOT exclude everyone, I think.



Thanks, Margaret Clare. Loved reading your post, and I agree.



Veritas is right, discernment is definitely not debating, it is something wholly spiritual. Is God debating on what vocation each of us should have? Does He need to? No! He knows what we are called to do, and if we pray and search, (with God's grace!) we will follow His will. Where does debate go into any of this?

The Church isn't looking for perfect men...that's common sense, because, none of us are perfect. I am glad that the Church cares about who becomes our spiritual shepherds on earth! The men whom they choose have great responsibilities with the flock who is trusted in their care. If they didn't take great care in choosing priests, something would be wrong.



Yes!! Thank you Veritas.

Ianny, I will pray for you. That is the best thing we on PM can do!

I believe also that this situation should be treated with very great care...but, I am not wise enough to give any good advise. I will just say my prayers are with you, and following the Vatican's teachings on this subject is the best advise you can get!

God bless!

I was. . .

It will be harder for someone in that situation to enter religious life.

That does not mean it will be impossible.

+

No one is equating. Please read carefully.

"Who are we to judge"? Well, the Church established by Christ upon the Rock of Peter is the one to judge. They have the power, authority, right and responsibility to do judge and they have done so. The real question is: Who are we to think we know better than Christ? The Church speaks for Christ.

+

Wow. I haven't said anything uncharitable. You clearly are very upset and are making things personal: This isn't the place, or the way. This question was asked in a general way, and a general answer was given. No one is being attacked. I am simply stating what the Church does. I am sorry if you don't like it, but that has nothing to do with me. Phatmass is a place that represents and is deferential to the Church.

"right thinking" is a properly formed conscience, which is inline with Church teaching. Again, it has nothing to do with me and I have made no such suggestion.

Your personal opinions on my vocation are premature and uninfomed. Furthermore, it was completely inappropriate and unkind to air them publicly. They don't require a response. However, I hold no ill will towards you and am happy to discuss the matter at hand, which is the topic of this thread.

God Bless you.

Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give an explanation to everyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do
it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that be the will of God, than for doing evil. For Christ also suffered for
sins once, the righteous for the sake of the unrighteous, that he might lead you to God.
1 Peter 3:15-18
--------------------

Veritas simply answered a question. Its not personal, so kindly stop trying to make it so.
Respond to her points, and cut the personal attacks.

where is anyone being a bully? the only bully i see is you, inferring things into people's posts that were never there. veritas responded to ianny with documentation from the Vatican (or was it the USCCB? )

documentation has been provided. thread closed.