What part of “no sex” don’t you understand?

What part of “no sex” don’t you understand?

If I were considering a vocation to the priesthood or religious life, I don’t think it would be in the Diocese of Jefferson City. From their vocations page:

What impact does one’s sexual orientation or lifestyle have on becoming a priest or religious?

Religious orders and dioceses are seeking people who are sexually integrated, regardless of whether they are homosexuals or heterosexuals. Being sexually integrated means having a strong sense of self and understanding one’s own affective needs. Candidates to religious life or the priesthood should also have the gifts and talents to live celibately. They should understand what are appropriate expressions of love in a celibate context.

Dioceses and religious communities, in working with candidates, look for “behavioral evidence” that celibacy is a possible lifestyle for a person.

When they muddle the idea of celibacy with “appropriate expressions of love” and “understanding one’s own affective needs”, it says to me that they’re looking for loopholes to the “you can’t have sex” rule. (And that’s not even considering the “it doesn’t matter if you’re gay or straight” nonsense at the beginning.)

  • I remember when I was in college seminary I had to listen to this kind of crap.  I would just sit there and smile.  I was afraid they would kick me out if I didn’t agree with their gobbledygook.

    To be frank, I didn’t know what the hell they are talking about.  As far as I am concerened, homosexuals should never, ever, be ordained and since priests are not married, they can’t have sex with women.

  • Father Ethan: can I just say you always make me so optimistic for the future? Thank you!

    I’ve read a lot on the progressive Catholic side about the so called ambiguity of celibacy – always used as an excuse for sexual sin (or at least giving it an opening ‘just in case’) and breaking vows, let’s face it.

  • I simply fail to understand what has prompted our entire culture to be so obsessed with identifying a person’s individuality in terms of who they desire to sin with.

  • Father Ethan, I like your style.  You remind me of my favorite priest in the world, Fr. Peter Stravinskas.  Faithful and feisty.

    Do you know Fr. Thomas Kosick?

  • “Gifts and talents” to live celibately?
    That’s hilarious.
    That’s like saying bc I’m married I hope I have the “gifts and talents” to live Humane Vitae. What happened to: if God calls you, and you respond, you will receive the GRACE to live out your VOCATION???? It’s not like deciding whether I have the gifts and talents to perform a certain job, ie: play the piano.

    I can’t think of a young man that I know who would sit around and think: Hmmm, do I have the gifts and talents to live celibately? This is bizarre and doesn’t resonate as “normal.” No wonder we don’t get new priests. The language doesn’t resonate with the Gospel or with “real” men.

  • I don’t think I spelled his name correctly.  I had the pleasure of meeting him when he lived in Omaha, NE as part of Fr. S.‘s order.  Seemed like a solid priest.

  • This whole topic amuses me because either one has sex or one doesn’t.  If one does, it seems to me they should at least be able to discern that they did.

    A person who can’t tell if they had sex or not is a little scary.  Should they have a driver’s license?  Should they ever be allowed on a jury? Should they be allowed to eat with a fork?

    Moreover, it’s just about as clear-cut who should have sex or not.  Married people, only with their spouses.  Anyone else, hell no.  Of course not.  What is so difficult about this?