Introduction

Pope Benedict XVI on August 31, 2005, approved the Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with Regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders by the Congregation for Catholic Education (2005), thereby affirming the constant tradition of the Roman Catholic Church regarding the nature of a priestly vocation and addressing the particular question of whether seminaries should admit candidates who have “deep-seated homosexual tendencies.” This instruction, written in response to misunderstandings on this issue within contemporary culture, makes reference to numerous Roman Catholic Church documents on chaste celibacy and human sexuality relevant to the priestly vocation but focuses on the need for the Roman Catholic Church to discern whether a candidate possesses the affective maturity necessary to be a spiritual father and icon of Christ. Bishops, religious superiors, and seminary administrators are now faced with the task of implementing this instruction, i.e., of evaluating whether their current methods of discernment consider this factor appropriately and, if not, how to enhance their admissions process to include this.

The psychological evaluation can be a helpful tool in the discernment process and is already a standard procedure for admission as a seminarian to many dioceses and religious congregations in the USA. However, from personal experience both as a clinical psychologist who conducts evaluations and a seminary administrator who has read evaluations by numerous psychologists, I have witnessed a wide range of assessment styles whose usefulness to the discernment process varied. Perhaps this is due to the need for clearer referral questions, i.e., foci for assessment particular to Roman Catholic seminarians.

This article will address the particular question raised by the instruction of the Congregation for Catholic Education. After describing the content of the Vatican document in terms of the positive qualities sought in a vocation, I shall discuss the role of the psychological evaluator in the discernment process and suggest specific methods for assessing affective maturity in relation to the question of homosexual tendencies.

Purpose of the Vatican instruction

It is essential to understand the nature of the instruction and the role of the Congregation which promulgated it in order to evaluate potential candidates. The document begins:

In continuity with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and, in particular, with the Decree Optatam Totius on priestly formation, the Congregation for Catholic Education has published various documents with the aim of promoting a suitable, integral formation of future priests, by offering guidelines and precise norms regarding its diverse aspects. (Congregation for Catholic Education 2005, p. 3)

The Congregation further asserts that, in this particular instruction, they do not wish to repeat previous statements that cover a comprehensive instruction on chaste celibacy and human sexuality, but rather to attend to the particular issue of the admission of candidates for the priesthood who have “deep-seated homosexual tendencies.” Their task is not to address doctrinal questions per se, but to provide guidance to bishops, religious superiors, and seminary administrators who form men for the priesthood.

Therefore, it should not be surprising that the instruction focuses principally on discerning essential qualities of the candidate for priesthood in response to this particular question of homosexual tendencies. The thoughtful approach of the Congregation emphasizes three key points to be considered in the admissions process: the nature of the priestly vocation, the inadmissibility of men who lack qualities necessary for the priesthood, and the essential role of the Roman Catholic Church in discerning a priestly vocation.

The nature of the priestly vocation

According to the Congregation for Catholic Education (2005), “discernment [for ordination] must be done in light of a conception of the ministerial priesthood that is in accordance with the teaching of the Church” (p.3). Ordination to the priesthood is an act of the Holy Spirit that configures a man to Christ in a particular way. The “priest, in fact, sacramentally represents Christ, the head, shepherd and spouse of the Church. Because of this configuration to Christ, the entire life of the sacred minister must be animated by the gift of his whole person to the Church. . . . ” (p.3). Pope John Paul II (1992) had emphasized this point in Pastores Dabo Vobis, an apostolic exhortation on the formation of priests:

The priest is called to be the living image of Jesus Christ, the Spouse of the Church. . . . In his spiritual life, therefore, he is called to live out Christ’s spousal love toward the Church, his bride. Therefore, the priest’s life ought to radiate this spousal character, which demands that he be a witness to Christ’s spousal love. (¶22)

This spousal love presupposes affective maturity. A candidate for the priesthood should have the ability to love others as Christ loves them. The qualities of spiritual spouse and father are essential, since a priest is an icon of Christ and acts in persona Christi capitis.

John Paul II (1993) provided a beautiful description of the nature of spousal love in his book, Love and Responsibility, contrasting three kinds of love: sympathy, friendship, and betrothal. Sympathy involves emotional attraction to another and is a common experience in courtship and other situations in which a person experiences tender or passionate feelings for another. Friendship begins with sympathy but surpasses it. Over time a person chooses to love another, not because of present feelings of attraction but because of a desire to commit himself to the other. Betrothal is a donation of oneself to the other, best exemplified by Christ on the cross, who died out of love for all people. Spousal love entails a total self giving. Reciprocal spousal love is the goal of Christian marriage. In the case of priesthood, a man offers his life for his spouse, the Roman Catholic Church, with the confidence and generosity of Christ, who willingly embraced the cross. Affective maturity involves the capacity to love in this manner.

Pastores Dabo Vobis uses this nuptial imagery in describing chaste celibacy. It also describes the relationship between priestly celibacy and spiritual fatherhood:

Celibacy, then, is to be welcomed and continually renewed with a free and loving decision as a priceless gift from God, as an “incentive to pastoral charity” as a singular sharing in God’s fatherhood and in the fruitfulness of the Church, and as a witness to the world of the eschatological kingdom (John Paul II 1992, ¶ 29).

Candidates who are inadmissible

The Congregation for Catholic Education (2005) tried to be as explicit as possible in stating what conditions would preclude admission to the seminary or priesthood in the case of homosexuality:

. . . this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture.” (p.3)

While discussion abounds on the correct interpretation of the document, a careful reading of the instruction leaves no doubt that even chaste men with homosexual tendencies may not be admitted to ordination. The only exception would be an individual whose homosexual tendencies “were only the expression of a transitory problem” (p.3). This would not be uncommon in young men who are still maturing in their sexual identity; however, such individuals would need to demonstrate that these tendencies were “clearly overcome at least 3 years before ordination to the diaconate” (p.3).

It is crucial to note that the instruction does not refer to “homosexual orientation” or “homosexual persons,” but always to “homosexual tendencies” and “practicing homosexuality.” Understanding this difference in perspective between the Roman Catholic Church and many people in contemporary society is fundamental for those who participate in the process of discernment. Perhaps it was an attempt by the Congregation for Catholic Education not to identify the person primarily as “homosexual,” as had been the case in other church documents (see Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 1987, 1992, 2003). This would be contrary to the viewpoint which asserts that an individual is either a homosexual person, a heterosexual person, or a person of some other particular sexual orientation. The following sections of this article will address the perspectives of psychological evaluators and those who have developed particular assessment techniques regarding the issue of language and the classification of homosexual orientation. Here it is sufficient to indicate the position of the Roman Catholic Church as reflected in the language of this instruction: men who are sexually attracted to other men do not possess those qualities necessary to be icons of Christ and spiritual fathers. They “find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women” (Congregation for Catholic Education 2005, p.3).

Discernment of a priestly vocation

The desire alone to become a priest is not sufficient, and there does not exist a right to receive sacred ordination. It belongs to the Church—in her responsibility to define the necessary requirements for receiving the sacraments instituted by Christ—to discern the suitability of him who desires to enter the seminary, to accompany him during his years of formation, and to call him to holy orders if he is judged to possess the necessary qualities. (Congregation for Catholic Education 2005, p.3).

Both the individual and the Roman Catholic Church discern a vocation. It is essential that a man experience a spiritual call to the priesthood before he proceeds to the seminary and that he submit himself to a process of formation for this vocation. However, the bishop or religious superior has the ultimate task of discerning on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church whether the call is authentic.

In situations involving homosexual tendencies within a person, it is essential that the candidate honestly cooperate with the Roman Catholic Church in the processes of admission and formation. Someone who acts out homosexually, participates in or promotes the “gay” culture, or knows he has deep-seated homosexual tendencies, should not apply for the seminary. The question of further discernment is primarily in regard to whether someone has experienced a “transitory problem.” The Congregation for Catholic Education (2005) is careful to offer only one example of what “transitory problem” means, referring to “an adolescence not superseded” (p.3). Instead of pointing to numerous possible exceptions, the document emphasizes the need to discern a vocation “. . . in light of a conception of the ministerial priesthood that is in accordance with the teaching of the Church” (p.3). A person must have the affective maturity necessary for relating to both men and women as Christ loves the Church.

Role of the psychological evaluator

Psychological evaluation is a service provided for a variety of purposes to a diversity of peoples. It is essential that the evaluator first determine the specific referral question of the examinee as well as of the party requesting the assessment before beginning the evaluation process. In light of the particular question of homosexual tendencies, the psychologist assessing candidates for the Roman Catholic priesthood is faced with a unique situation: the possibility of dual diversities—one of religion and the other of sexual orientation. Which is primary in the case of a conflict? It is important that the client determine this, assuming he is competent, well informed, and free to make the decision (Yarhouse 1998; Yarhouse and Burkett 2002).

The instruction by the Congregation for Catholic Education challenges the candidate to be honest about his sexuality, both in the process of admission to the seminary and in the context of spiritual direction, since he is the one primarily responsible for his own formation. According to the Congregation, not to disclose the existence of homosexual tendencies would demonstrate a lack of faith in the work of the Holy Spirit and the wisdom of the Roman Catholic Church a candidate seeks to serve.

In the evaluation of a candidate for the Roman Catholic priesthood, the party requesting the assessment, i.e., a diocese or religious order, has the right to ask for specific information. Ethical principles of psychologists as well as canon law give priority to the rights of the candidate in the decision of disclosing particular information (Costello 1985). However, as there is no question that the evaluator needs to be free to disclose information relevant to possible mental illnesses or personality traits which would interfere with formation for the priesthood, in a similar way, an evaluator would need to comment on any difficulties relevant to the affective maturity of a candidate, since this is an essential requirement for the priesthood. If the health or reputation of a candidate would be at risk due to any disclosure by the evaluator, the candidate would always be free to withdraw his permission for the release of information, which had been signed at the beginning of the assessment process.

Psychologists can do much to facilitate the evaluation procedure. First, it is helpful for the evaluator to be specific in drawing up the release of information, discussing ahead of time what kinds of information would be included in the evaluation report. In discussing the difficulty of providing adequate information to homosexual men seeking therapeutic treatment, Yarhouse (1998) suggests that it would be important for therapists to offer “advanced informed consent” before beginning a process of therapy. In other words, the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing particular courses of action about a variety of methods of therapy are adequately presented to a client. In a similar way, the psychologist evaluator needs to point out the consequences of releasing information in this particular situation and to make sure the client is aware of his options. The psychologist has a positive role in helping a candidate approach the discernment of his vocation with an open heart.

Second, the psychologist has the ability to evaluate the nature of homosexual tendencies within individuals from a professional perspective, an important service to a Church that strives to teach essential principles of faith without claiming any special knowledge specific to the field of science and the practice of mental health (John Paul II 1998). Without the cooperation of mental health professionals, vocation directors would need to rely on personal opinions and anecdotal data regarding homosexual tendencies, how these develop within men, and how to distinguish tendencies which are transitory.

In my own experience as a psychologist in seminary settings, there have been occasional instances in which a young man sought my advice, afraid after having had a homosexual temptation. I generally recommend that he tries to understand what has moved him to feel this way. Having an open mind and the advantage of having worked with many young men, I help the seminarian to explore the situation in a rational, relaxed manner. Often the experience is seen as a transitory one. In any case, I encourage the person to work toward greater affective maturity. While not the topic of this article, it is important that mental health professionals recognize the invaluable help they can be to those discerning a call to chaste celibacy.

Finally, the psychologist can offer helpful recommendations to those who have homosexual tendencies, either in light of probable non-admittance to the seminary, or in the case of those with a transitory problem, in the form of a course of treatment that can lead to greater affective maturity. To experience rejection in the pursuit of a vocation can be a painful experience, and mental health professionals can recommend resources that can help an individual to deal with such disappointment.

It is helpful for the psychologist to discuss the psychological evaluation process thoroughly with the vocation director or other representative of the Roman Catholic Church requesting an assessment. Batsis (1993) presented a questionnaire to almost 300 vocation directors in order to understand their attitudes regarding the evaluation process. He recommended that there be a close working relationship between the psychologist and the Roman Catholic Church party requesting an evaluation.

Developing an assessment protocol

Due to numerous disagreements regarding the nature of homosexuality, sexual identity development, and the classification of individuals, there is no single instrument for assessment of homosexual tendencies that would be acceptable to a majority of psychologists. Randall Sell (1997) reviewed the changing understanding of sexual orientation in literature and various attempts at measuring sexual orientation that he believes are inadequate. According to the Ethics Code of the American Psychological Association (APA; 2002), when psychologists do not employ instruments whose validity and reliability for a particular population have been established, they are to “describe the strengths and limitations of test results and interpretation.” They cannot claim validity for psychological test results based largely on subjective experience unless they indicate clearly that such is the case.

While specific instruments may not be able to offer conclusive evidence regarding whether or not a seminarian has deep-seated homosexual tendencies, a comprehensive evaluation of relevant factors can aid the effective judgment of evaluators. I believe a standard assessment protocol for seminarians should include the following: autobiography, medical history, clinical interview which thoroughly explores sexual history and interests, objective tests such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – 2nd Edition (MMPI-2) or Sixteen Personality Factor Test (16PF), intelligence tests (e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – 3rd Edition [WAIS-III]) for those who have not completed a college degree, and projective measures, including the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test (T.A.T.), and Sentence Completion Test.

I do not use the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory – 3rd Edition (MCMI-III) unless doing secondary testing on an individual, largely because this instrument is designed specifically for psychiatric populations. This is an important principle to consider when testing for homosexual tendencies or significant pathologies, such as potential for child abuse (Songy 2003). Unless an instrument is validated within a non-psychiatric population, one cannot conclude that results obtained are valid within a non-psychiatric population. Information from projective tests should be interpreted cautiously, and only by a seasoned clinician.

The issue of assessing the nature of any homosexual tendencies can be handled within the interview itself. Protocol questions can be developed in consideration of several factors: biological factors, childhood gender identity development, development of masculine traits, experience of child abuse, sexual orientation and identity, and the requirements of chaste celibacy.

Biological factors

While several studies (Bailey and Pillard 1991; Gladue et al. 1984; LeVay 1991; Pinel 1993; Tourney 1975) have explored various biological theories of etiology, including differences in androgen and estrogen hormone levels, prenatal hormone levels, postmortem neuroanatomy, etc., there is “no definitive evidence that the neurological development of homosexuals is any different than the neurological development of heterosexuals” (Morales 2000; see also Byne and Parsons 1993). However, questions regarding homosexual tendencies in the family and extended family of a seminary candidate still serve a useful purpose, as do questions regarding history of psychiatric illness in the family.

Childhood gender identity and the development of masculine traits

Except in the rare case of a child born who appears sexually ambiguous, children are easily classified as boys or girls at birth. Gender identity is a basic component of sexual identity that refers to the individual’s experience and understanding of being male or female. Children also learn specific social sex-roles, seen in how they dress, interact socially, choose particular interests, etc., according to qualities a culture labels as either masculine or feminine (Shively and De Cecco 1977).

Several authors have researched the hypothesis that behaviors indicative of gender conformity and nonconformity in childhood may point to future homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual identification. Examples of male gender conforming behaviors include rough-and-tumble play, participating in boys’ games, and expressing a desire to grow up and be like one’s father. Nonconforming behaviors include playing with dolls, preferring the company of girls and older women, participating in girls’ games and dressing like a girl. Phillips and Over (1992) conducted a study in which they demonstrated that, while there were definite consistencies between childhood gender identity and adult sexual orientation, individual cases varied quite a bit. They used the Boyhood Gender Conformity Scale, developed at the University of Indiana (Hockenberry and Billingham 1987) and supplemented this instrument with seven questions from other researchers (Freund et al. 1977; Harry 1983; Roberts et al. 1987).

It would be helpful for a psychologist in the course of an interview to ask questions regarding boyhood gender identity development and to explore a candidate’s understanding of his own masculine development and how he has learned to relate to males and females.

An important consideration in the development of masculine traits and sexual identity is the influence of parents. Bell et al. (1981) conducted a major study to assess how interactions between parents and children affect the development of homosexual tendencies, since some had hypothesized that the behavior of domineering mothers or submissive fathers could influence children’s experience of gender and choices of sexual object. They concluded that there was insufficient evidence to posit a causal link between the influence of a domineering mother and homosexual behaviors; however, there was data to suggest that a significantly greater number of men with homosexual inclinations had experienced fathers who were detached and not affectionate. Gerard van den Aardweg (1985), in reviewing over 200 of his cases involving homosexuals, identified a high percentage of clients who had overly anxious mothers and detached fathers who did not participate as much in their sons’ upbringing.

History of child abuse

Childhood trauma, especially sexual abuse, often contributes to problems in future sexual expression. In a study of the sexual behavior of over 3000 Americans (Laumann et al. 1994), it was determined that the rate of men reporting a homosexual orientation was over three times greater for those who had been sexually abused as children. The evaluator should ask questions about any history of sexual abuse, especially noting how an abused client has dealt with this history and whether he has experienced sufficient healing to feel comfortable about his own sexual identity and his ability to work with others.

Sexual orientation

When Kinsey et al. (1948) published Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948, they posited a bipolar system of sexual orientation, employing a continuum. At the time it would have seemed quite insightful compared to previous models, suggesting that one could view sexual orientation on a scale from 0 to 6, ranging from the person who was strictly heterosexual to one who was strictly homosexual. Since then, others have offered various methods for viewing sexual orientation that consider more dimensions of the individual as well as a greater variety of possible orientations. Bell and Weinberg (1978) modified the Kinsey scale to distinguish one continuum of behavior and another of fantasy. The Klein Sexual Orientation Grid (Klein et al. 1985) considers seven dimensions of sexual orientation, according to an individual’s past, present, and ideal choices. Eli Coleman (1987) proposed a nine-dimensional model that uses elements from the above authors, considers the individual’s self-acceptance of orientation, and allows for less rigid responses. Other authors (see, e.g., Kauth and Kalichman 1995) have proposed models which allow for even greater diversity in orientation, especially in order to include bisexuality in the consideration of orientation.

Chung and Katayama (1996) conducted a literature review of various methods for assessing sexual orientation in The Journal of Homosexuality from 1974–1993. They identified five methods—indicative of a great deal of inconsistency—and suggested that it would be preferable to assess “two domain dimensions of sexual orientation: affective preference and physical/sexual preference” (p. 60). They make a couple of assumptions, relying on the research of others, concluding that sexual orientation is “relatively stable” and sexual identity more changeable, depending on an individual’s identity development.

In developing a protocol, a psychologist should be knowledgeable of various methods used to assess sexual orientation and choose different questions that address various aspects of homosexual attraction and behavior, i.e., preference, attitude, thought, fantasy, experience over time, desires, etc.

Objective measures

General objective tests of psychopathology do not provide adequate subtest measures for the assessment of homosexual tendencies. For example, the original MMPI Masculinity–Femininity Scale was intended to screen for homosexuality, using items which referred to typically masculine or feminine behaviors. However, for a long time, the validity of this scale has been questioned (Wong 1984).

Other possible objective instruments include those which measure sexual behaviors in a general sense and those which look more specifically at sexual behaviors and orientation. Paitich et al. (1977) developed the Clarke Sexual History Questionnaire, a thorough instrument, which addresses a wide variety of sexual interests, behaviors, and attitudes in order to assess for anomalous behaviors. It claims to be potentially useful as an instrument for adolescents and other sexually inexperienced males, since some of the items refer to either “desire” or “disgust” regarding particular sexual behaviors. However, it is important to remember that the original subjects in the development of this test were patients in a psychiatric facility, and most were sex offenders. The contemporary version of this instrument, the Clarke Sexual History Questionnaire – Revised, is still considered an instrument to evaluate a sex offender’s sexual preferences and anomalous behaviors (Spies and Plake 2005).

Briefer measures include a 45-item instrument by Berkey et al. 1990 that evaluates sexual orientation according to heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual orientations with variations according to past and present experiences and having changed from one orientation to another. Also, Snell et al. (1993) developed the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire, a 60-item instrument which addresses general attitudes of an individual toward sexuality, including self-esteem issues, motivation, anxiety, etc.

In their article on consistency and change in sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth, Rosario et al. 2006 identify several relevant factors of sexual identity formation: sexual identity, psychosexual development milestones, sociosexual developmental milestones, current sexual orientation, and recent sexual behaviors. They also identify measures of identity integration: attitudes toward homosexuality, comfort with homosexuality, self-disclosure of sexual identity to others, certainty about, comfort with, and self-acceptance of homosexuality. Their study employed several instruments, including the Sexual Risk Behavior Assessment—Youth; the Coming Out Measure of Identities, Revised; and a 33-item scale based on the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory.

Questions regarding chaste celibacy

Psychologists need to include interview protocol questions which address the issue of homosexual tendencies in light of what the Congregation for Catholic Education identifies as necessary requirements for chaste celibacy—the capacity for affective maturity and spiritual fatherhood. Such questions would explore a candidate’s understanding of loving others as Christ loves. How does he understand this? How does he express this concretely in his own life? What is his experience of friendship? Does he desire to be a spiritual father? If so, how did this desire develop? How does he envision himself as an icon of Christ or someone who is called to act in persona Christi capitis? In my experience of interviewing candidates, many have only begun to explore the true meaning of chaste celibacy. However, the questions themselves reveal significant information regarding the underlying attitudes of a candidate.

In the case of someone having experienced transitory homosexual tendencies, it would be important for the evaluator to understand how these came about and what had changed in the person’s life to indicate that such tendencies were only transitory. The psychologist should also evaluate whether the candidate should explore the issue further in the context of spiritual direction or therapy.

Conclusion

It is essential that a psychologist agree to evaluate a candidate for the Roman Catholic priesthood only if he or she is able to view the Congregation for Catholic Education’s 2005 instruction in a positive way. The APA ethics code (APA 2002) requires that someone working with diverse populations be competent, i.e., knowledgeable about particular issues of a given group and comfortable with not imposing his or her own values on the client. Professionals appropriately refuse to engage in therapy or testing with clients when they know they are not competent to deal with particular issues or populations. Given the fact that there are dual diversity issues in situations involving the evaluation of a candidate who may have homosexual tendencies, the psychologist would also need to ensure that the client is aware of the client’s options in agreeing to undergo the evaluation and releasing information to a diocese or religious superior.

Developing an assessment protocol to address the issue of possible homosexual tendencies is an important process and can be of tremendous service to vocational discernment. Psychologists have an important role to play, since vocation directors are generally trained only in the areas of philosophy and theology.

Psychologists wishing to evaluate seminarians need to develop specific competencies in the assessment and treatment of Roman Catholics. Several programs which promote the integration of Catholic philosophy, theology, and spirituality with psychology can be good resources. However, the nature of the integration process varies according to programs. I would propose that a good litmus test in selecting a particular program would be to ask how they view this particular instruction by the Congregation for Catholic Education and other official Church teachings.

Integrating a particular theology and psychology requires both elements—sound psychology and sound theology. Programs which strive to do both should be able to provide the best resources for those competencies necessary for the evaluation of Roman Catholic seminarians.