As Church Shifts, a Cardinal Welcomes Gays; They Embrace a ‘Miracle’

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

I don’t see what those people see* in *communion. Are they eucharistolaters?

I don’t go to communion at any denomination any more, because as a single no Christian wants me on their ministry team, they don’t want to be on my ministry team, they don’t wan’t me to pray for them, they don’t want to pray for me, they don’t want me to explain and encourage their faith.

What would be a rather good thing (let’s hope) would be if this means Archbishop Tobin is giving the two fingers up to the High Demand Movements.

 

[Peter_J]

Peter, I am not dismissing you or your experience, but perhaps your comment reflects part of the difficulty here. “I haven’t spoken to enough gay Catholics…”

So it seems that you and perhaps many others are speaking hypothetically, which is very different from the day to day realities of LGBTQ men and women who are Catholic, either practicing or marginalized. It is a very different discussion when this is NOT hypothetical in the least bit, but rather is about you, someone you love, or someone in the next pew over.

I live in San Francisco. Every other person you meet here is gay. It’s normal. Gay men and women and their families are a part of every day life. My parish is predominantly gay; my priest is gay; my friends are gay; my colleagues are gay. The checkers at Safeway are gay. Some are single; some are married; some are parents; some are aging and worrying about who’s going to care for them. They are the people next door.

And our churches having gay members isn’t true for only non-Catholic churches but the Catholic parishes and schools here have gay members, some with families, and they have gay priests too. It’s totally normal here.

I also know that in the Episcopal church (which I can only speak of because I know it from the inside), we have many former Catholics who do not feel welcome in their own denomination. Some are former priests. Most are just men and women who are welcome at our table and not so much at yours.

So what I am trying to get across here is that we are speaking about real people who are living their lives day to day, going to work, going to church, having a husband or wife, and loving God. “They” are not hypothetical. “They” are your brothers and sisters in Christ.

OK, I’m done.

(But one more thing… 12-step program??? Really??? You think someone who is gay should be - or IS being - told to go to a 12-step program? Lordy.)

Good post.

Until about a year ago I pretty much never even got into threads like this one (I changed my habits, due in large part to a close friend who is bisexual). Looking back at my old self I sometimes think “Wow I was pretty ignorant about a lot of things” (e.g. the pervasiveness of the “ex gay” movement and how many people want homosexual persons to stay in the closet, not to mention what they suffer in places like Russia, etc.).

 

[reggieM]

So it is a sin to identify as a homosexual?

If identifying as a homosexual means “I want to have sex with a man” then yes.
If identifying as a homosexual means “I struggle against SS temptations” then no.

My point is that those who identify as homosexuals usually are the first category. They don’t view the desire as a temptation towards evil.

Or do you believe the whole “there is no such thing as a homosexual person” angle, even though the Pope himself uses the word “homosexual”?

I don’t like to identify a person by their sinful inclinations – for myself I find it better to think of the person in goodness and wholeness and not defined by their flaws.

You seem to be using the latter definition, for how can you have a desire to have a desire?

I can desire an impure relationship with someone. I can desire to lust. Jesus said that was a sin.

But is it the truth that “it is a sin even to identify as a homosexual” even though you and many other are claiming that is the Church position?

As I said, it’s a sin to consciously desire a sexual relationship with a person of the same sex. If identifying oneself as a homosexual means that the person suffers from temptations to that particular sin, then I think it’s not a virtuous way to refer to oneself. We should go around saying that we are what our sins are. It can be a good practice for humility but we should show care for ourselves and not ignore or dimiss the good things God is doing in us to help build virtue.
Yes, many saints publicly referred to themselves as sinners - but this is best done in a general sense.
If identifying as a homosexual is used in this way, to humiliate oneself, that could be a good thing, but shouldn’t be done without advice from one’s spiritual director.

Hopefully I will not offend gay people with this example, but many alcoholics, even those who have abstained from alcohol for years, will go to AA meetings and state “I am an alcoholic”. Is that a sin, too, to identify as an alcoholic, even if you are not drinking?

That’s a very good example, and yes you’re right.
If a person is equating homosexuality with a sexual-addiction that they need to make public for reasons of accountability, then that’s a good theraputic technique.
It would be a sin for an alcoholic to consciously and deliberately (as it is for anyone, alcoholic or not) want to get drunk. The same is true for the homosexual.
Those in AA also will be open about another factor. “Hi, I’m an alcoholic. I’ve been sober for 4 years.”
A person with homosexual inclinations could say the same: “I’m a homosexual who has been chaste/sober for 4 years”.
If you think the self-identification of homosexuality should be limited to cases like that, I’ll fully support you.

And while the Church doesn’t teach that drinking alcohol is a sin, it DOES teach that drunkenness is a sin, and most alcoholics have an inclination to not only drink but to get drunk. So should we come up with some other term for being an alcoholic, such as “intoxicating beverage attraction”?

Not following this. Alcoholic is a fine term for what you’re talking about - addiction to drunkenness.
If you want “homosexual” to mean “addiction to sinful sexual behavior” that sounds good to me.

ETA: And to make this even more simple: It is a sin to sin, but it is NOT a sin to identify as a sinner, is it? Or should we say we are all sin-attracted, instead?

Again, certainly. I was using a different sense of the word homosexual which, in society today, does not mean “I am addicted to sinful sexual behavior”.
If homosexual meant that, then it’s not a sin to say it. We could debate if it is the best way to refer to ourselves (I do debate the life-time label given to alcoholics in AA, but it does seem to work on a practical level so this is a prudential judgement) by going around announcing our predominant temptation or sin pattern, but it can have a good effect.

Yes, we are all sin-attracted, but as I said before, I think it’s better in giving glory to God and thanks for the good things He does for us to focus on how He helps us overcome our sins and become a New Creature in Christ!

But nonetheless – good thoughts and you offered many good things to think about.
Thanks

 

[at9009]

Hopefully I will not offend gay people with this example, but many alcoholics, even those who have abstained from alcohol for years, will go to AA meetings and state “I am an alcoholic”. Is that a sin, too, to identify as an alcoholic, even if you are not drinking? And while the Church doesn’t teach that drinking alcohol is a sin, it DOES teach that drunkenness is a sin, and most alcoholics have an inclination to not only drink but to get drunk. So should we come up with some other term for being an alcoholic, such as “intoxicating beverage attraction”?

ETA: And to make this even more simple: It is a sin to sin, but it is NOT a sin to identify as a sinner, is it? Or should we say we are all sin-attracted, instead?

Doesn’t offend me. It’s an imperfect analogy, but it is a useful tool (with alcoholism, you can avoid the bar completely, with sexuality related issues, you can’t really avoid people entirely. Additionally, I find it imperfect because at times it seems to imply that the gay/ssa person has a uncontrollable impulse to engage in acts akin to an alcoholic (i.e. sexual addiction which I think goes beyond just having same sex temptations).

With that being said, I tend to use a disability kind of thinking with regards to my sexuality. Kinda like how a deaf person though can’t hear, but being deaf leads to an entirely different perspective because of being deaf. It kinda colors the way they see the world differently which encompasses more than just who I’m attracted to but not necessarily easy to describe. Downside is just means in my particular cross I have a particular set of temptations.

 

[St_Francis]

First of all, my hat is off to the gay Catholics here who commit themselves to live out Church teaching knowing this will result in backlash both from “gay activists” and Catholics who apparently think it is sinful to even identify as gay and so demand you give up a core part of your identity as a price of entry.

I second this: very well-put.

No, that is not necessarily the case. And you are jumping from people “celebrating SSA” (the attraction) to “celebrating sinful acts”, as if they come yoked together and it is impossible to celebrate the orientation without celebrating the acts.

It is not that simple. The bloggers at the Spiritual Friendship site do indeed publicize their SSA and are certainly not ashamed of it, many of Eve Tushnet’s work I find to be even “celebratory” of her orientation yet she does not “celebrate” the acts.

I am not an expert on the entirety of the set of humans who identify as GLBT, so I don’t know the entire range of attitudes towards any of these situations. I think that most people would understand that I meant people who walk semi-naked in a Gay Pride parade or who say SSA is a gift in any context other than that a cross is a gift to us.

So yes, *for those I described as celebratory, *the acts as well as the condition are celbrated. If you have a better word for them, please let me tell me what it is.

 

[reggieM]

I don’t see what those people see* in *communion. Are they eucharistolaters?

Are you familiar with the Catholic doctrine of Eucharist and how it is different from other denominations?

I don’t go to communion at any denomination any more, because as a single no Christian wants me on their ministry team, they don’t want to be on my ministry team, they don’t wan’t me to pray for them, they don’t want to pray for me, they don’t want me to explain and encourage their faith.

I am sympathetic to part of that (I don’t think they’ll refuse your prayers for them) and it is something you are suffering. A difficult cross, certainly.
In my view, a single Christian vocation is difficult to sort out and it takes a lot of discernment to know what God really wants you to do.
A single man (after a certain age especially) is often not trusted in society. It’s the same in the Church, unless you’re in religious orders of some kind. If you’re a widowers and can go around with your kids, you’ll have a big advantage. A life-long bachelor will have the problems you speak of.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I don’t see what those people see* in *communion. Are they eucharistolaters?

I don’t go to communion at any denomination any more, because as a single no Christian wants me on their ministry team, they don’t want to be on my ministry team, **they don’t wan’t me to pray for them, they don’t want to pray for me, **they don’t want me to explain and encourage their faith.

What would be a rather good thing (let’s hope) would be if this means Archbishop Tobin is giving the two fingers up to the High Demand Movements.

Will you pray for me and other CAF posters? I welcome your prayers.

 

[reggieM]

Doesn’t offend me. It’s an imperfect analogy, but it is a useful tool (with alcoholism, you can avoid the bar completely, with sexuality related issues, you can’t really avoid people entirely. Additionally, I find it imperfect because at times it seems to imply that the gay/ssa person has a uncontrollable impulse to engage in acts akin to an alcoholic (i.e. sexual addiction which I think goes beyond just having same sex temptations).

Agreed that just having temptations, even very frequently, doesn’t equal a sex addiction. But as with any temptations we have, God allows them so we can think about ourselves and build the opposite virtues. We don’t always get the answer to “why is this so attractive to me?” but it can be worth thinking about it. Sometimes we can discover that our temptations are a signal about something inside of us that is needy.

The temptation of whatever kind is usually not “I want to do something evil to hurt myself and others” - although sometimes it is that, and if so, the question “why do I want to hurt myself and others?” is important. But it’s the other way “this will make me feel better, or I need this …” for an apparent good. Of course, the Devil helps with that kind of thing, making the sin seem like it’s the only answer to the problem.
But if we think about it - “why am I needy for this?” we can find a good way to fill the need rather than a sinful way. God can show us that, and there can be healing which will take away a lot of the temptations (or maybe all of them for that particular sin). Then other temptations will come along of a different kind - to test different virtues.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

But if we think about it - “why am I needy for this?” we can find a good way to fill the need rather than a sinful way. God can show us that, and there can be healing which will take away a lot of the temptations (or maybe all of them for that particular sin). Then other temptations will come along of a different kind - to test different virtues.

So you believe in the ex-gay narrative? I wouldn’t go as far as to deny the possibility of miraculous healing. But that doesn’t mean people who don’t experience that are somehow bad Christians who don’t really want to be healed, and hence are attached to their temptations, and hence sinning.

Not sure if that’s your angle here but I’ve noticed many people use the “if gays really believed in Church teaching they’d be praying to God to be cured, and if they really were sincere they would be” to justify their assumption that “All gay people are unrepentant sinners who have a guaranteed ticket to Hell, and so the Church is just wasting everyone’s time trying to welcome them.”

 

[at9009]

Agreed that just having temptations, even very frequently, doesn’t equal a sex addiction. But as with any temptations we have, God allows them so we can think about ourselves and build the opposite virtues. We don’t always get the answer to “why is this so attractive to me?” but it can be worth thinking about it. Sometimes we can discover that our temptations are a signal about something inside of us that is needy.

But if we think about it - “why am I needy for this?” we can find a good way to fill the need rather than a sinful way. God can show us that, and there can be healing which will take away a lot of the temptations (or maybe all of them for that particular sin). Then other temptations will come along of a different kind - to test different virtues.

OR you know it could be a reflection of the fall and a person’s own concupiscence that is a part of the cross they carry this side of heaven. Not every person who has same sex attractions is because of some pseudopsychological reasons (i.e. beliefs perpetuated by groups like NARTH). Sometimes it simply is the person’s thorn in the side this side of Heaven.

 

[EIF5A]

So you believe in the ex-gay narrative? I wouldn’t go as far as to deny the possibility of miraculous healing. But that doesn’t mean people who don’t experience that are somehow bad Christians who don’t really want to be healed, and hence are attached to their temptations, and hence sinning.

Not sure if that’s your angle here but I’ve noticed many people use the **“if gays really believed in Church teaching they’d be praying to God to be cured, and if they really were sincere they would be” **to justify their assumption that “All gay people are unrepentant sinners who have a guaranteed ticket to Hell, and so the Church is just wasting everyone’s time trying to welcome them.”

(bold added)

That is certainly not the Catholic position. Some Catholics may have that erroneous view, but that is not taught by Scripture nor the Catechism nor the Magisterium.

As gay Catholics, we know what is and is not allowed, and we pray for grace to resist temptation (of every kind regardless of orientation). We don’t always respond to that grace however…

Catholics also don’t promote the ex-gay narrative as in turning gay to straight. It is not required nor even expected.

Each person is capable of obtaining merit by cooperating with grace to resist sinful inclinations. I suppose in a way, gays and lesbians can offer to God something unique that many holy saints could not because they could not face the same temptations and trials.

 

[Peter_J]

(bold added)

That is certainly not the Catholic position. Some Catholics may have that erroneous view, but that is not taught by Scripture nor the Catechism nor the Magisterium.

Amen!

I don’t know what TITW’s experiences have been, but speaking as someone who has spoken to quite a lot of so-called traditionalist Catholics over the years, I’ve heard quite a lot of longing for the “good old days” – the days when, among other things, gay people were often afraid to even come out of the closet. But I wonder how many people who want those days back can explain the fact that as late as the 1940s doctors were performing lobotomies on homosexual persons to supposedly fix them. Or can we all finally agree that each time period has its evils?

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Amen!

I don’t know what TITW’s experiences have been, but speaking as someone who has spoken to quite a lot of so-called traditionalist Catholics over the years, I’ve heard quite a lot of longing for the “good old days” – the days when, among other things, gay people were often afraid to even come out of the closet.

I think many traditionalists don’t even want to think about the issue and hence the demands that those with SSA be totally silent about their cross. When questioned on how practical that is, they are quick to equate SSA with pedophilia, bestiality, etc.

I realize that much of the ex-gay ideology is a fundamentalist one, not a Catholic one. As is the lack of distinguishing between sexual attraction and lust and therefore concluding “Even to be attracted to the same sex is sinful, hence all with SSA are damned, tough cookies. The only hope is that God will provide a miraculous healing.”

 

[St_Francis]

So you believe in the ex-gay narrative?

Answer below.

I wouldn’t go as far as to deny the possibility of miraculous healing. But that doesn’t mean people who don’t experience that are somehow bad Christians who don’t really want to be healed, and hence are attached to their temptations, and hence sinning.

Not sure if that’s your angle here but I’ve noticed many people use the “if gays really believed in Church teaching they’d be praying to God to be cured, and if they really were sincere they would be” to justify their assumption that “All gay people are unrepentant sinners who have a guaranteed ticket to Hell, and so the Church is just wasting everyone’s time trying to welcome them.”

Despite Christ’s telling us we must pick up our crosses, many Protestant groups do not have a good grasp on redemptive suffering, so they end up having this type of idea. It is absolutely not limited to homosexual people: they will zap anyone with this, handicapped, cancer, etc., if you don’t get better, it’s because you did something wrong: lack of faith, not praying enough, etc.

This is completely antithetical to the Catholic view. First, we believe temptations are a cross, not a sign of our evil natures, but of our fallen or wounded natures. Second, we have many canonized saints who suffered from a cross until the day they died. Third, we don’t believe a “good” life is a sign of God’s favor, in fact, those who are highly favored seem to suffer *more *than regular people!

Now, Catholics do believe in miracles, but we do not believe we should expect them or think it is a sign of anything. So,mdo I believe someone could be “cured” of homosexual attraction by a miracle? Of course! Do I think it happens often? No, nor do I think that absence is meaningful.

However, I have heard that some people have experienced a change or diminution of SSA. I am not talking about people who are abused by aversion therapy bit those who by other means experienced sufficient change that they themselves felt changed. A man who once experienced sexual attraction to members only of his own sex exeriences a change which allows him to marry and have a marital relationship with a woman, etc. Apparently the distribution is in thirds: one third begin to experience attraction to the opposite sex, one sufficient reduction of attraction that they no longer feel "troubled, and a third who experience no change.

In that respect, I do believe that *some *may become “ex-gay,” but not all.

 

[reggieM]

So you believe in the ex-gay narrative? I wouldn’t go as far as to deny the possibility of miraculous healing.

It’s good you wouldn’t deny that. Of course, every true healing from a sinful condition is miraculous. As Catholics, we know miracles are not as rare as some would believe. We have a very great one every day from the altar.

But the point here is that we shouldn’t be skeptical about the ability a person has to change his mental habits. I’ve seen it done. Call it ex-gay or whatever but a man living the gay lifestyle for years, then changed his mental orientation and is now been happily married for 15 years.

Having homosexual inclinations is not some kind of mysterious state of being, as it is made to be. It has its unique challenges, sure. But a man who has been struggling against homosexual temptations, for let’s say, 20 years - will learn quite a lot. What are the occasions of sin. What are the triggers for temptation. Eventualy, if that guy is thoughtful, he will discover why he has this attraction.

All sin is irrational in that it goes against God. But some sins are even more irrational than others, and homosexual acts are among those. When a person thinks about why they are interested in that - why it is a temptation, some insights can come (and many gay people find that). "Why am I interested in this? What is my attitude towards women? Can I find a reason? Many classic cases are a desire for more masculinity (for men) in one’s life and homosexuality is a search for that unitive bond. That is sometimes (not always) easy to trace.

So, I’d suggest that you have some openness to gays who want to change and who find this temptation unwanted and bothersome. Temptations can be reduced and, n some cases (not all) eliminated. Certainly, Satan may afflict us for various reasons and we have to accept it.

But I’d say this – if a man said to me that he frequently had temptations to suicide, I wouldn’t merely say “that’s your cross, live with it”. Suicide is not just another sin among many. There are reasons why a person is tempted that way – the more rare of them is that Satan has pushed them to depression. Usually, suicidal temptations can be traced to other causes.

The same is true of homosexuality. A person who is tempted this way wants something that is irrational in a more obvious way, like suicide. Or we could take something even closer – a man who is tempted to pedophile sex, for example with girls under the age of 8 yrs old. Again, that is irrational. A man who continually has that temptation should try to figure out if it might be coming from a defect in his own personality. The most rare cases would be that Satan just afflicted a guy with a desire for pedophilia – but I don’t doubt it happens.

Often, any kind of lust temptation can be traced to some basic root-sins, and those sins strike at the personality of the person.

But that doesn’t mean people who don’t experience that are somehow bad Christians who don’t really want to be healed, and hence are attached to their temptations, and hence sinning.

You’re defending something, and that’s great. Of course I never said that. You could have just as easily insisted “some people who don’t experience healing are, indeed, bad Christians who don’t want to be healed” and you’d be just as correct. So, if you can affirm one thing and it’s opposite and be just as correct either way - I’d think you’d either need to affirm both or think of a reason why you’re only telling me that one thing.

Not sure if that’s your angle here

Yes, it’s obvious that you don’t know what my angle is and you’ve come very close to putting words in my mouth that I didn’t say - but hey, we’re open for all kinds of opinions here on CAF so if my thoughts generated something you wanted to talk about, even if totally irrelevant to what I said - that’s probably a good thing!

but I’ve noticed many people use the "if gays really believed in Church teaching they’d be praying to God to be cured,

I haven’t noticed me saying that, but as above - your opinions here are welcome.

All gay people are unrepentant sinners who have a guaranteed ticket to Hell, and so the Church is just wasting everyone’s time trying to welcome them."

Again, I haven’t seen anybody on CAF say that, but maybe I just haven’t encountered them yet.

 

[reggieM]

OR you know it could be a reflection of the fall and a person’s own concupiscence that is a part of the cross they carry this side of heaven. Not every person who has same sex attractions is because of some pseudopsychological reasons (i.e. beliefs perpetuated by groups like NARTH).

As I said above, a man who struggles with a desire to have sex with other men, will eventually discover something more about his temptations than merely “this is a cross”. There are reasons why we want to do certain things and not others.
As I said above, a man who is tempted frequently to want sex with pre-pubescent girls should, at least, try to find some pychological reason for that.
Nobody said this will work in every case. But there are real-not-pseudo psychological reasons why people are tempted towards some sins.
I would just advise you to be open to that, and realize many gay people (with the help of NARTH or other therapy) have reduced and eliminated those temptations.
As I mentioned, a man who is continually tempted to commit suicide will not usually be told that this is just concupiscence and “just try to live with it”.
Wanting sex with someone of your own sex is an irrational desire. With some thought, reasons for that desire can and do emerge. I know, personally, several men who were gay and now are not. One I know quite well has been married to a woman happily for 15 years.
So, let’s not condemn people who actually can change their mental habits.
We should not underestimate the power of God.
Homosexual acts are sinful. So, why would God lack the power and desire to take them away entirely?

 

[reggieM]

Many people in our society, even good Catholics, have kind of a vested interest in protecting the “gay identity”, as if this sin is virtually impossible to overcome at the level of temptations.
This is done, understandably, as a means of being charitable to people who struggle with this temptation.
But men struggle with pornography addiction also (you might find a few right here on CAF) - which is a very similar kind of sin to homosexuality.
It’s a sin of lust - for illicit sexual acts. But we don’t tend to protect the identity of men tempted that way. It may be a cross for them, a thorn in the flesh - but usually if a guy is tempted to pornography, we try to look at the underlying reasons.

 

[StudentMI]

You’re making a sweeping statement here that is false.
You’re saying that “our desires are not evil”.
But of course our desires can be good or evil. If I desire to murder someone, that is not only a sin but it’s the basis of pre-meditated murder.

Now, you might be saying “homosexual desires” are not evil - they’re just neutral.
Well, if they’re unconscious desires or orientations - yes, they’re just physio-emotional movements. But anybody who identifies himself as a homosexual has gone beyond that unconscious stage. The desire has become part of the identity.

I’ll trust the priest who wrote the article that said such feelings are neutral. If I caused confusion over the word desire instead of feeling, that’s my bad. But my point still stands.

The part about identifying as homosexual: no sin. I’ve never been a fan of the small clique that uses SSA instead of gay or homosexual. Pope Francis used the term gay. Pope Francis also.embraced a gay man and his partner when he visited the US.

And before someone mentions Courage: I was part of Courage. I left. Just because it is an apostolate doesn’t mean there can’t be other orthodox organizations. Just to be clear, an orthodox priest I knew who ran our Courage group and who I still speak with from time to time saw no problem in me calling myself gay or homosexual. He also said as much about feelings being neutral. And he has an STL doctorate. So…

 

[Peter_J]

I feel like this might be a good time to remind everyone that this thread is about the event that Cardinal Tobin arranged. If we want to talk about the ex-gay movement, why don’t we start a thread for that?

 

[reggieM]

I’ll trust the priest who wrote the article that said such feelings are neutral. If I caused confusion over the word desire instead of feeling, that’s my bad.

That’s ok. Yes, feelings are different from desires.
I’m glad you gave Courage a try. Yes, there are other orthodox groups. Even just a Catholic men’s group might be helpful - there are single guys who join those (they won’t help with gay issues specifically, but just with virtuous living).
As I said, there are various reasons and intentions a person may have for calling himself gay or homosexual. Some of those are bad others not sinful. We could probably say that “most of the time” a person who identifies himself as homosexual is making a conscious decision about what he wants to do – but that’s just an indication of our culture. Yes, true - it’s not necessarily the case that everyone would do that.
I thought of another good reason why the label could (and actually should) be used.
I asked a gay friend (celibate Catholic) why he didn’t want to go to the gym and work out.
He said it was a place that was an occasion of sin for him - and that made a lot of sense. Identifying himself as gay would be helpful if he had a job, for example, that put him in a situation with men like that.
Or even if he found a woman who was taking an interest in him. In fairness to her, he could explain his orientation that way.
So, it can be a helpful term to use, for the right reasons.
I just get concerned when a person wants to lock himself in to an identity like that. There’s a “gay culture” that will help convince a person that this tendency and temptations are “who he really is”. That may be fine in some ways, but there’s a risk of rationalizing the sin in many cases.
A man can be single and celibate for a lot of reasons that he does not need to explain.
Also, as I said elsewhere, in some cases (not all) it’s possible for a gay person to discover aspects in his mental habits and emotional needs that can move him away from a gay-identity.