Can one be a gay or lesbian Catholic and still have a chaste romantic relationship?

[ddarko]

catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0001.html

I just found this article online - it adds more information about SSA, chastity and the group Courage. The SSA writer converted into the Church - interesting read and insightful.

Out of the Closet and into Chastity by David Morrison - “My pilgrimage from being a homosexual-rights activist to living life as a chaste Catholic began in earnest when I read the writings of a modern-day Protestant martyr, Dietrich Bonhoeffer.”

I also was reading online where SSA couples - who were once romantically/sexually involved - loss interest in contining that relationship. However, they remain together and are committed to that person emotionally.

What does it mean to say committed emotionally?

I think you are failing to realize that getting a sexual kick out of someone is not Moral. Being friends is also a commitment and that is the only proper commitment ssa people can have.

Do you think a priest can have a chaste romantic relationship with a parishioner as well? No, right? Same thing goes here.

God Bless

 

[PJM]

=Holly3278;7255966]Hey everyone. I was just wondering, if someone is a gay or lesbian Catholic, can they still have a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex so long as it is chaste? Personally, I lean towards no since homosexuality is objectively disordered. But what does the Church actually teach on this?

IF by “romantic” you mean with physical intimacy; absolutely NOT! (If on the other hand} no physical intimacy is involved AND both partis are in agreement; then I supose it would be possible. Without intimacy the church would have no problem with the relationship, beyond th unnecessary risk of the “near Ocassion of Sin.” Which ought to be avoided.

 

[ddarko]

IF by “romantic” you mean with physical intimacy; absolutely NOT! (If on the other hand} no physical intimacy is involved AND both partis are in agreement; then I supose it would be possible. Without intimacy the church would have no problem with the relationship, beyond th unnecessary risk of the “near Ocassion of Sin.” Which ought to be avoided.

How is this concept of “romantic” different from friends?

If it is in the fact that “I get sexual gratification from this relationship”, then it is still Immoral. One is not allowed to use people this way. Would you not agree?

The purpose of a romantic relationship, whether physical or emotional should be with the goal to marry the person. Otherwise it is immoral.

God Bless

 

[Holly3278]

Actually, for me, it’s deeper than simply wanting to have sexual relationships, it’s about feeling like a freak who has no place in society or in God’s kingdom. I’m 39 years old. I look back and see wasted time and effort. I see people out in the real world and see men and women paired off living normal lives and where am I? I’m pretty much a loser. I have 20 years with my employer and am barely above entry-level even though I’m capable of so much more. I am cursed with same-sex attractions. I have two friends and few acquaintances that I consider pleasant company. I trust few people, mostly because of the most loathsome curse if same-sex attractions I have been cruelly saddled with. I fear that if people got to know me, they’d hate me just as much as I hate myself due to the same-sex attractions.

When I think of the possibility of creating relationships with women, I only see them seeing me as a freak or a pervert and not wanting to get to know me. Especially considering I hate by body, the loathsome, blubbery thing it is, I would be ashamed to even ask a woman to marry me knowing she would have to sully her vision with my disgusting body. I see any moment of intimacy with a woman as being sheer torture that I would offend her or she would think I’m a disgusting perverted freak if I even looked at hear.

Yes, low self-esteem is part of same-sex attractions.

Hi there LCMS_No_More. I am sorry to hear of your struggle with same-sex attraction. I also suffer from same-sex attraction. For me, it is not constant though and I am much more attracted to the opposite sex than I am to the same sex.

I just wanted to tell you how sorry I am that you must struggle with this cross. We all have crosses. In addition to same-sex attraction, I also suffer from the cross of obesity, depression, borderline personality disorder, anxiety disorder, and many physical problems. I also often feel out of place because I cannot act or be like your average healthy person out there. Believe me, I don’t like it but I accept that this is God’s cross for me to bear. The only thing that we can really do is embrace our cross and continue to struggle. I know it’s hard but these are crosses that either cannot be gotten rid of or cannot easily be gotten rid of. It does, however, help me to know that everyone is given some sort of cross to bear. Others have more of a cross than some. However, it also helps to know that God will never give us a cross to heavy to carry.

God Bless,
Holly

 

[ignatius777]

False. From the Catechism:

For the non-married, that means no sex. For the married, that means unitive sex that is open to life.

Did you NOT read where I said catholic married couples are called to period of chastity?? If all you want is a platform to preach this isnt the place. Even the cathecism says chaste acording to their particular place in life. The church does not believe married people should be chaste always. You need to think rationally

 

[Bookcat]

Did you NOT read where I said catholic married couples are called to period of chastity?? If all you want is a platform to preach this isnt the place. Even the cathecism says chaste acording to their particular place in life. The church does not believe married people should be chaste always. You need to think rationally

This is not quite correct…

The Church believes and professes and proclaims that all Married persons are to be “Chaste always!”

(I know what you prob. mean here…but the wording needs a bit of twiqueing)

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Did you NOT read where I said catholic married couples are called to period of chastity?? If all you want is a platform to preach this isnt the place. Even the cathecism says chaste acording to their particular place in life. The church does not believe married people should be chaste always. You need to think rationally

You need to learn the definitions of words:

Celibate = no sex.

Chaste is what is defined in the Catechism. For singles, it means no sex. For marrieds, it means sex is permitted where it is open to life and unitive. In other words, a married couple in the middle of the act where they are acting in a way that is open to life are behaving exactly as chaste as a virgin priest.

 

[ignatius777]

You need to learn the definitions of words:

Celibate = no sex.

Chaste is what is defined in the Catechism. For singles, it means no sex. For marrieds, it means sex is permitted where it is open to life and unitive. In other words, a married couple in the middle of the act where they are acting in a way that is open to life are behaving exactly as chaste as a virgin priest.

You are stretching it but thats fine with me. Homosexual “sex” is not open to life so fails all tests of chastity, chaste, no sex, etc etc etc…Its quite simple isnt it

 

[LCMS_No_More]

You are stretching it but thats fine with me. Homosexual “sex” is not open to life so fails all tests of chastity, chaste, no sex, etc etc etc…Its quite simple isnt it

Where did you pull this from? Read very, very carefully what I said.

LCMS_No_More:

What is different is that while heterosexual persons can express their sexuality under the right circumstances, homosexual persons may never, ever under any circumstances whatsoever express their sexuality.

Any questions?

 

[Bookcat]

In other words, a married couple in the middle of the act where they are acting in a way that is open to life are behaving exactly as chaste as a virgin priest.

I would not say “exactly”

Yes both can be chaste. And are to be chaste.

But celibacy for the sake of the kingdom is in a very particular category of chastity…

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I would not say “exactly”

Yes both can be chaste. And are to be chaste.

But celibacy for the sake of the kingdom is in a very particular category of chastity…

And I would say that CHOSEN celibacy gains one merit.

UNCHOSEN celibacy gains one nothing.

Since a heterosexual person can CHOOSE celibacy in the priesthood or religious life, they gain merit by that choice. A heterosexual person can CHOOSE to remain a celibate single and gain merit by that choice. A homosexual has NO CHOICE but to remain a celibate single. Since one remains celibate out of obligation and not by choice, there is no merit gained by it.

For the homosexually cursed person, there is only danger.

 

[ddarko]

And I would say that CHOSEN celibacy gains one merit.

UNCHOSEN celibacy gains one nothing.

Since a heterosexual person can CHOOSE celibacy in the priesthood or religious life, they gain merit by that choice. A heterosexual person can CHOOSE to remain a celibate single and gain merit by that choice. A homosexual has NO CHOICE but to remain a celibate single. Since one remains celibate out of obligation and not by choice, there is no merit gained by it.

For the homosexually cursed person, there is only danger.

Woah, you are being so negative here.

A Homosexual has a lot of “merit” in God’s eyes by remaining a celibate single. He/she is refusing one of the strongest urges in a time where many would encourage such urges to be freely explored.

Just ask yourself, aren’t we all called to live according to the will of God? So then saints would not really be saints according to your view since none of us have a choice to do bad anyways.

Therefore, I think the way you are looking at it is very wrong. The fact that you as someone who struggles with SSA is being obedient to God’s will and command and trying to live a chaste and celibate single life is truly admirable. I’ve met so many who don’t even consider that an option. So keep it up my friend.

As an aside, I wouldn’t look at it as “merit”. I would define it as “pleasing” in God’s eyes. I believe that a homosexual person has been given a unique opportunity to bear the cross with Christ. Join your pain and suffering with the Lord. It would please God just as anything a heterosexual could do.

I would also like to recommend to you the life story of St. Gertrude the Great.

God Bless

 

[AndyF]

One of our responsibilities is to launch an offensive against sin. Allowing entertainment of delectable forbidden things is an invite. These positions then become launching points for more aggressive assaults, has they by default give permission to do so.

 

[Bookcat]

And I would say that CHOSEN celibacy gains one merit.

UNCHOSEN celibacy gains one nothing.

Since a heterosexual person can CHOOSE celibacy in the priesthood or religious life, they gain merit by that choice. A heterosexual person can CHOOSE to remain a celibate single and gain merit by that choice. A homosexual has NO CHOICE but to remain a celibate single. Since one remains celibate out of obligation and not by choice, there is no merit gained by it.

For the homosexually cursed person, there is only danger.

Yes there is great “merit” etc in being celebate for the sake of the Kingdom…

(I am not saying they they or the hetrosexual single person who is not married is the same…of course not)

But aside from this…the Person with homosexual difficulties can of course merit and be very holy…(I would not say “cursed” by the way…) so they like the rest of Christians are to follow Christ in chastity and love and be more and more conformed to him.

There is not the same kind of merit for them as a person who chooses *by grace to be celebate for the Kingdom…but there is merit and a life of grace and holiness for them as for other Christians…

 

[Joe_5859]

Did you NOT read where I said catholic married couples are called to period of chastity?? If all you want is a platform to preach this isnt the place. Even the cathecism says chaste acording to their particular place in life. The church does not believe married people should be chaste always. You need to think rationally

Ignatius, I think you are confusing chastity with celibacy. All Christians are called to live chastely at all times regardless of state of life. Chastity is not equivalent to “no sex”; rather, chastity means expressing our sexuality according to our state in life. For married people, that means they can have sexual relations while simultaneously being chaste.

I would disagree with LCMS’s statement “homosexual persons may never, ever under any circumstances whatsoever express their sexuality.” Those who are not married cannot express their sexuality genitally, but that doesn’t mean it cannot be expressed in other ways.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I would disagree with LCMS’s statement “homosexual persons may never, ever under any circumstances whatsoever express their sexuality.” Those who are not married cannot express their sexuality genitally, but that doesn’t mean it cannot be expressed in other ways.

It depends on what you mean by sexuality. If you mean gender, then a homosexual male can express his maleness (such as it is), and you’re correct. I’m talking about sexuality in terms of sex not only gender.

 

[m134e5]

There’s nothing wrong with very close, very profound, chaste friendships between two people of the same sex, however a “romantic” relationship is inappropriate between people who could never be free to marry each other. It can be difficult for a man struggling with homosexual tendencies to understand HOW to have these friendships- because male interaction tends to be focused much more on action than on words (that’s why, in stores, you find so many cards and coffee table books for women- where they say all kinds of nice, cute, inspirational things about friendship- but there aren’t nearly as many things like that for men) and their struggle with homosexuality is often directly linked to the fact that they did not experience- or recognize that they were experiencing- the action that leads to and maintains male friendships.

 

[ignatius777]

Where did you pull this from? Read very, very carefully what I said.

Any questions?

Sure I have a question…So what?

Too bad you are too singularly focused on an agenda point but the poin I was making was everyone NOT married must be chaste. This includes homosexuals heterosexuals and “sexuals” of every other description. Homosexuals are in no different a boat then anyone else.

 

[davidv]

Sure I have a question…So what?

Too bad you are too singularly focused on an agenda point but the poin I was making was everyone NOT married must be chaste. This includes homosexuals heterosexuals and “sexuals” of every other description. Homosexuals are in no different a boat then anyone else.

To be very clear:

Celebate = not married
Chaste = expressing ones sexuality appropriate to one state in life.

CCC:

2349 "People should cultivate [chastity] in the way that is suited to their state of life. Some profess virginity or consecrated celibacy which enables them to give themselves to God alone with an undivided heart in a remarkable manner. Others live in the way prescribed for all by the moral law, whether they are married or single."136 Married people are called to live conjugal chastity; others practice chastity in continence:

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Sure I have a question…So what?

Too bad you are too singularly focused on an agenda point but the poin I was making was everyone NOT married must be chaste. This includes homosexuals heterosexuals and “sexuals” of every other description. Homosexuals are in no different a boat then anyone else.

What do you think my agenda point is, pray tell?