Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

No, I am not becoming a source of ecclesiastical gossip. Unfortunately, we have more than enough of those blogs already. Even if I were to have learned something from a friend or anonymous source I would not publish it in search of satisfying that sinful blogger’s pride (i.e. more hits). Nor do I intend to prognosticate (even if it might sound like it). Rather, I am trying to make some distinctions. You see, it seems to me that even orthodox Catholic writers often fall into the trap of using terms like “gay” and “homosexual” in a way that furthers misunderstanding.

First, the term “gay” itself is one which presupposes an agenda. Namely, it presupposes that the person not only acts on his homosexual tendencies but that he publicly advocates a political agenda which, if not giving those practicing homosexual acts pride of place in society, gays at least lobby to ensure that the public accepts homosexual actions as legitimate. In this sense, of course no gay person can be considered suited for priestly ordination. However, what about those who have the (yes it is) disorder of same sex attraction. Here, I think that there are in fact some further distinctions to be made.

First, notice I say those with homosexual tendencies rather than homosexuals. That is for the very reason that too often those who push the homosexual agenda try to make the claim that their desires define who they are as persons. In other words, the person in his very being is “gay.” This is as logical as say that the desires of pedophiliac define who he is as a person. His is a pedophiliac in his very being. Will and desire do not change human nature. If it is a disorder than it can be cured, though as with addicts, sometimes a cure is much more difficult and tenuous for those who have relinquished themselves to their desires for long periods of time. In any case, these real differences bear significantly on understanding the Church’s policy. If someone’s same sex attraction is not part of their very being than it would be fair to say that one could ordain someone who, in the past, did have same sex attraction disorders and still be able to have a Church policy against ordaining a “homosexual.” In other words, someone is not homosexual if he no longer suffers from same sex attraction. So what has the Church said in the past on the subject.

Well, as recently as 2002, the Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments sent a letter to the Congregation for the Clergy on the issue of ordaining those with same sex attraction to the priesthood. The letter said:

Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Notice the clarification on what the letter means by “homosexual.” It takes pains to avoid the insinuation that homosexuality is ontological. But on the issue of the forthcoming policy, this letter certainly does not provide assurance of what the impending document will say. Nevertheless, it does suggest that any lessening of this restriction will be exactly that. However, it could also be that further nuance is necessary. There are varying degrees of homosexual tendencies. Certainly, one who has lived a life of homosexual license would be much more pastorally imprudent to ordain than a man who has never acted on his disordered tendencies. There may also be those who have confused tendencies with attractions to both men and women but who have never acted on them. There may also be those with an occasional temptation which is quickly put aside. Within these degrees of disorder, the Church will affirm a policy based upon prudence and sound anthropology.

Simply based upon sound theological anthropology, I suspect that guidelines (but probably not precise criteria) will be provided which attempts to ascertain the degree to which a disorder may be present. It seems to me that any guidelines should try to help define when a person is sufficiently “cured” of the same sex attraction disorder to be theologically and pastorally suited to act in the Person of the Bridegroom. Any way, it is from this perspective which I will read the policy when it is made public.