There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
(02-22-2011, 05:08 AM)Catholic Johnny Wrote:
(02-22-2011, 04:52 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: The persons are only impugned when they act:  they either act immorally or act by approving of immorality.  For there to be a sin, there has to be an action (or lack of action when one is required).  Having a disposition to sin is not a sin, it is a weakness and a fault.

That said, I don't disagree with you that Masculorum concubitores will not inherit the kingdom of God.  But they are actually doing something - they are sleeping with other men just as fornicators and such do something.   The effeminate lack virtue necessary - they lack perseverance; that is why they are condemned, not for an identity.

What St. Thomas said was those who were unworthyThat doesn't mean necessarily in mortal sin.  It goes to safeguarding the Sacraments.  They can be unworthy in the fact they aren't intelligent enough, they lack virtues, they are blind, etc. It is actually broader than you are interpreting it.

Now you are just flat out contradicting the words of Aquinas.  On the condemnation of the ordinary:

Whether he who raises the unworthy to [Holy] Orders commits a sin?

On the contrary, It is worse to raise the wicked to the sacred ministry, than not to correct those who are raised already. But Heli sinned mortally by not correcting his sons for their wickedness; wherefore "he fell backwards . . . and died" (1 Kings 4:18). Therefore he who promotes the unworthy does not escape sin.

Further, spiritual things must be set before temporal things in the Church. Now a man would commit a mortal sin were he knowingly to endanger the temporalities of the Church. Much more therefore is it a mortal sin to endanger spiritual things. But whoever promotes the unworthy endangers spiritual things, since according to Gregory (Hom. xii in Evang.) "if a man's life is contemptible, his preaching is liable to be despised"; and for the same reason all the spiritual things that he dispenses. Therefore he who promotes the unworthy sins mortally.

I answer that, Our Lord describes the faithful servant whom He has set "over His household to give them their measure of wheat." Hence he is guilty of unfaithfulness who gives any man Divine things above his measure: and whoso promotes the unworthy does this. Wherefore he commits a mortal crime, as being unfaithful to his sovereign Lord, especially since this is detrimental to the Church and to the Divine honor which is promoted by good ministers. For a man would be unfaithful to his earthly lord were he to place unworthy subjects in his offices.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, QQ 36.4 (emphasis mine)

and the priest:

On the contrary, Dionysius says (Ep. ad Demophil.): "It seems presumptuous for such a man, one to wit who is not enlightened, to lay hands on priestly things; he is not afraid nor ashamed, all unworthy that he is to take part in Divine things, with the thought that God does not see what he sees in himself; he thinks, by false pretense, to cheat Him Whom he falsely calls his Father; he dares to utter in the person of Christ, words polluted by his infamy, I will not call them prayers, over the Divine symbols." Therefore a priest is a blasphemer and a cheat if he exercises his order unworthily, and thus he sins mortally: and in like manner any other person in orders.

Further, holiness of life is required in one who receives an order, that he may be qualified to exercise it. Now a man sins mortally if he present himself for orders in mortal sin. Much more therefore does he sin mortally whenever he exercises his order.
   Q 64.A6

Quote:But, I see no point here.  If a bishop ordains a known homosexual, the bishop sins.  So what?  No one is denying that homosexuals are not fit for the priesthood.

BTW, do you want to stop with the grandstanding and cartoonish flowery language?  I find it annoying and pretentious, and it distracts from the content.  If not, OK, but then I'll start.

So what?  That's what concerns me. 

Well, what concerns me is your quasi heresy and dependence on Protestants.  You can avoid the question if you want, but then your citation means nothing, doesn't it?

As far as contradicting Aquinas, no I'm not.  You need to read the whole section including the objections and responses:

Quote:Objection 3. Further, everyone is bound to avoid sin, as far as he can. If therefore a bishop sins in promoting the unworthy, he is bound to take the utmost pains to know whether those who present themselves for Orders be worthy, by making a careful inquiry about their morals and knowledge, and yet seemingly this is not done anywhere.

Reply to Objection 3. It is at least required that the ordainer know that nothing contrary to holiness is in the candidate for ordination. But besides this he is required to take the greatest care, in proportion to the Order or office to be enjoined, so as [b]to be certain of the qualifications of those to be promoted, [/b]at least from the testification of others. This is the meaning of the Apostle when he says (1 Timothy 5:22): "Impose not hands lightly on any man."

Holiness alone does not make a candidate worthy.  As the objection points out, the bishop should make an inquiry about their knowledge, and as St. Thomas agrees, the qualifications should be certain.  Note that this is a requirement besides knowing the holiness of the candidate.  As I said, you are interpreting St. Thomas too narrowly.  If a bishop grants holy orders to an idiot, knowing the person to be an idiot, the bishop sins mortally.

You will also find the same comments about the worthiness of a candidate in the Roman Catechism.

Be that as it may, even if the bishop promotes an unworthy person, as long as there isn't an impediment to orders, the person receives orders even if they are in a state of mortal sin at the time or are a wicked person.

So, I still don't understand your point, but if you don't care to explain it, whatever.


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Historian - 02-22-2011, 05:20 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)