This writer’s time in a 1980s major seminary featured the following statement from the rector: “It doesn’t matter if you are homosexual or not, because we’re all going to be celibate.” The seminary was a venerable East-coast institution noted for its production of bishops; indeed, two of this writer’s classmates are now bishops. But was the rector’s statement true? No, because if a man does not like women, sexually speaking, he is not inclined to become a natural father. And if he does not have what it takes to be a natural father, then God does not have what He needs to elevate that man’s nature, through grace, to true supernatural fatherhood. The man can become a priest or bishop ontologically speaking, but he will never have genuine instincts of spiritual paternity. Grace builds on nature.
This thesis could only be controversial in a Church which has substituted human respect for transcendent truth.[1] The logic of the thing, considered without respect to persons, is pretty clear. Human attributes are raised to God through sacrifice—the word comes from the Latin: sacra facere, “to make holy.” A homosexual man does not sacrifice natural fatherhood to become a priest because a man cannot feel what a father naturally feels unless he feels for women as a man naturally does. Ordination of a homosexual therefore does not raise natural fatherhood to supernatural fatherhood. The man himself is raised to supernatural fatherhood, but he arrives without the requisite instincts.[2]
Further proof is seen in the parallel St. Thomas Aquinas identifies between natural fatherhood and the sacraments, which are the obvious core of priestly identity. In the Summa Contra Gentiles, Bk. 4, ch. 58, the great saint notes that just as “by generation or birth a thing must receive life,” so “in the spiritual life, also, the first thing is spiritual generation: by baptism.” “[S]econd,” he continues, “by growth it must arrive at its due size and strength,” and thus there “is spiritual growth leading to perfect strength: by the sacrament of confirmation.” “[T]hird, both for the preservation of life acquired by generation and for growth nourishment is necessary,” hence there “is spiritual nourishment: by the sacrament of the Eucharist.” And “a fourth thing is incidentally necessary; this is the healing of sick living things,” which finds its parallel in “spiritual healing; it takes place either in the soul alone through the sacrament of penance; or from the soul flows to the body [sic] when this is timely, through extreme unction.”
St. Thomas treats the remaining two sacraments in a similar way:
“[S]ome propagate and conserve the spiritual life in a spiritual ministry only, and this belongs to the sacrament of orders; and some belong to the bodily and spiritual life simultaneously, which takes place in the sacrament of matrimony where a man and a woman come together to beget offspring and to rear them in divine worship.”
What does this parallel, which seems unquestionably valid, tell us about the present life of the Church? Specifically, what happens when a significant percentage of priests and bishops have no personal interest in coming together with a woman to beget offspring? Well, to continue and apply the parallel, would a natural society flourish under such conditions? What would happen if a significant percentage of natural fathers were not attracted to women?
Some children would be born in such a society, yes, but would there be many? Would the families flourish? Would the society be vital and expansive?
The answer is clearly “no” because the men in it would, to a significant degree, not have the natural instincts of fatherhood. They would not be drawn to procreation, because they do not like women. Moreover, they would not want to see children grow, to feed them, to heal them, to the degree a man drawn to natural fatherhood does, because these natural drives begin with one thing: sexual attraction to women. Lose that, and while a man might function in a decent and even charitable way, he will never be the determined establisher of families seen in vital societies.
So, to take the next step, what do we see in the Church today? Are spiritual procreation, growth, feeding, and healing vigorously practiced? Or is the Church’s life nearly moribund in places, looking more like an old-folks’ home than a vital family? The Church today is exactly what one would expect if too many men ordained to be supernatural fathers can validly celebrate sacraments (just as homosexual men can naturally beget children) but do not have the drive to do so (just as homosexual men do not naturally find the prospect attractive).
All of this is without regard for the other problems a homosexual clergy present. Celibacy is therefore not the issue. The issue is fundamental suitability for ordination, and contrary to our rector’s optimism, homosexual men are not fit.
[1] For the traditional view, see https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html.
[2] “Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.” Ibid.