Pope Benedict on homosexual priests:
” “Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don’t want to get married anyway,” the pope said.
The pope cited a 2005 Vatican document that drew a sharp line against priestly ordination of homosexuals. He said the document emphasized that homosexual candidates cannot become priests because their sexual orientation interferes with “the proper sense of paternity” that belongs to the priesthood.
The pope said it was important to select priestly candidates very carefully, “to head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality.” “
Bishop Matthew Clark on homosexual priests:
“This wide range of goals or challenges for priestly formation applies to any candidate for priesthood, whether homosexual or heterosexual. The fundamental concern of formation for a life of celibate chastity is for sexual maturity, not sexual orientation. Good seminary formation needs to provide an environment in which both heterosexual and homosexual candidates can grow to commit themselves wholeheartedly, even joyfully, to chaste and faithful celibacy.… to gay young men who are considering a vocation to priesthood. We try to treat all inquiries fairly. You will be no exception.”
Hmm… There seems to be a difference, doesn’t there?
Tags: Bishop Clark, Homosexuality
|
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 24th, 2010 at 5:23 PM .
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
We need psychologically stable men to become priests. The worry about men with homosexual tendencies is that under situations of extreme stress, they might revert to homosexual behevior. By nature, men with homosexual tendencies are not emotionally mature so the Bishop contradicts his own statement.
Why are you fools still allowing people to post comments on this subject if you keep deleting them. Man you guys are so one sided. It’s almost like the liberal media. They won’t let other people have their say. Maybe you should NEVER allow a negative comment about Bishop Clark. Maybe you all should be obedient to him like you’re supposed to. He is our shephard.
Anonymous 7:59, I believe our bishop leads by example. I am as obedient to him as he is to the pope.
Anonymous 7:59 – As blog administrators, such decisions rest solely with us. I deleted a comment which insinuated that the bishop may or may not be gay. Such things, while I understand the high emotions behind them, are not really in the best interest of this site. Therefore, I deleted it.
On another note, we are obedient to him. Show me anywhere where we have flouted his authority. He subject ourselves to it rather than try to buck the system. We have criticisms, but remember – even St. Paul criticized St. Peter in the epistles he wrote. We never make personal attacks on anyone. Rather, we point out where people have strayed into open and willful error concerning theological, liturgical, and sacramental matters. Judas was an apostle, and with your logic, we should say, “Well, he was an Apostle, so I guess turning Jesus over to Pilate is fine. After all . . . Apostles and their successors can’t make mistakes.” Well, they can.
If you have a problem with the way I run this site, that’s fine. Just don’t complain about it. You read by choice, not by compunction. I would rather not have my inbox cluttered by things like this on a day I would prefer to spend with family and friends.
Anonymous 8:25 – Well said.
I echo Gen’s concerns. Please no comments calling the bishop a homosexual or the blog staff morons. While both could potentially be true, especially the latter ( 😉 ), I do not wish to engage in that kind of speculation here. Thanks.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Gen,I think you meant “flouted” his authority.Flaunting authority is an activity you tend to associate with Joan Sobala (with reference to her own,as she flouts that of the canons).
I told Mozilla it was wrong three times. I guess it just doesn’t learn.
Think about it. We are all called to treat everyone as God’s children. MAny homosexual activists and leaders in the Church say homosexuals have the same rights as hetrosexuals and that the homosexual life style is as equal as the heterosexual life style. But if someone calls someone a homosexual, it is interpreted as a derogatory statement. Can you really have it both ways?
Think about it. We are all called to treat everyone as God’s children. MAny homosexual activists and leaders in the Church say homosexuals have the same rights as hetrosexuals and that the homosexual life style is as equal as the heterosexual life style. But if someone calls someone a homosexual, it is interpreted as a derogatory statement. Can you really have it both ways
I’m not sure what you mean. Discussions about errors such as equality of hereosexual life style and the homosexual lifestyle are acceptable, (however I would note–the only sexual contact morally permissible is between a man and a woman married to each other, so the homosexual vs. heterosexual “life-style” is confusing at best, but I digress.)
Saying “X person is gay” without any proof however, doesn’t rise to the level of salacious gossip, and as such should be removed.
From the dust that settled around Vatican II, we have been left with a religion that has become far too personal, too far removed from retroprocity in this life. As a Catholic, I find it very difficult to see the Pope stating a clear line in the sand for priesthood and Homosexuality, and Bishop Clark inviting Homosexuality into the Priesthood. In this age of instant media and supposed hard line from this Pope, why hasn’t the Church defrocked this Bishop? The Bishop’s invitation is not worthy of such action? What is?
What difference does it make? How many vocations has Rochester produced in the Clark years?
You guys have a total of four major seminarians. [For the record, the DoR currently has 9 seminarians, and one transitional deacon. They haven’t bothered to update the seminarian page on the website, which shows how low a priority the priesthood is in this diocese] I spent several years in Ithaca and drove 2 hours south most Sundays to assist Mass in Scranton, PA. Clark has turned Rochester into a black hole. This kind of thing from him is hardly a surprise.
Can any human really be the moral judge on this issue? I do not feel like just because you are a homosexual priest you will use your power in a negative way toward anyone. I was raised Catholic, and I met many homosexuals who struggled to maintain their relationship with God through the Catholic church. In the end, they always felt that they had to leave the church, in order to be themselves. I think that the Church’s take on this issue is beyond them. Time will lead us all to the answers we seek. I mean, they pardoned Galileo. We need to pray, and accept God’s love for all of us. And in doing that, I am not sure that we will feel that a father will abandon a single one of His children.
Meaning what exactly? Partaking in homosexual acts?