Gay, Catholic, struggling with conversion

[Leegal]

The issues we deal with here on earth are not anything like what heaven will be. We are discussing temporal stuff (sex, and throwing around terms and definitions) and then applying it to heaven. I think it’s going to be unlike anything you or anyone can imagine – including, or excluding, gender and sex. These are temporal concerns. I could argue what the Church teaches, but the OP is not asking about any of that.

Second, there’s a difference between gender identity and sexual orientation, but the OP did not ask for more labels and definitions. In fact, the Church cautions against breaking people down into a classification based upon a single term, quality, gender or orientation. We must take his post on it’s face.

Last, the OP asked how it is that he cannot feel the Presence. He goes to Mass, participates, practices celibacy, goes to confession – yet he feels empty as though something is missing and he cannot find the Holy Spirit.

With that thought in mind, I suggest the he speak to a priest/confessor more specifically as to why he feels he cannot feel the Presence, despite following the “Way.” The priest might have greater insight.

He asked for prayer. I will pray for him.

 

[LPS]

Student26, I’m sorry this thread devolved into squabbling about how you choose to identify yourself.

You might want to look into “the dark night of the soul” as there are some excellent writings online about it. Even when Job and Tobit waited on God (not hearing Him nor feeling Him close) they continued to trust that He was there, and did not speak against Him.

I don’t know if you are familiar with this blog but it is written by a young man who identifies himself as “gay and Catholic.” Though same-sex attraction is not something I struggle with, I check his blog every day. He has amazing maturity and writes about many topics; many of our struggles boil down to universal challenges everyone faces and I think you’ll really like his blog.

I think you are on the right track and I admire you for your courage; I believe God wants to continue His good work in each of us and though your struggles are different than mine, we ALL have them. We choose either to turn ourselves over to them, or to God.

God bless you on your journey!

 

[LPS]

Last, the OP asked how it is that he cannot feel the Presence. He goes to Mass, participates, practices celibacy, goes to confession – yet he feels empty as though something is missing and he cannot find the Holy Spirit.

With that thought in mind, I suggest the he speak to a priest/confessor more specifically as to why he feels he cannot feel the Presence, despite following the “Way.” The priest might have greater insight.

He asked for prayer. I will pray for him.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Second, there’s a difference between gender identity and sexual orientation, but the OP did not ask for more labels and definitions. In fact, the Church cautions against breaking people down into a classification based upon a single term, quality, gender or orientation. We must take his post on it’s face.

Then why did you?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

That doesn’t mean that they will not be men and women in heaven. This goes against what you said about sexual activity not being that which defines our gender identity. This also goes against the idea of a bodily resurrection. To me the above simply means that the object of our sexuality will no-longer be relevant in terms of “sexual activity” because our focus will be on God alone. But we will retain our sexually identity as a glorification of Gods creative act. Sexuality will always and forever be apart of who we are.

It is also a possible interpretation that we will still make love in heaven, but not for creating babies or self gratification, but as a symbolic expression of Gods love and its unitive features. Marriage will no-longer be relevant simply because its purpose (bringing new life into the world within a loving family) will no-longer exist.

Of course we will still be If you are a man your soul is male, if you are a woman your soul is female, that is obviously retained on death.

I’m talking about sexuality as in heterosexuality and homosexuality not gender identity. Sexuality and gender identity are two distinct things.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Of course we will still be If you are a man your soul is male, if you are a woman your soul is female, that is obviously retained on death.

I’m talking about sexuality as in heterosexuality and homosexuality not gender identity. Sexuality and gender identity are two distinct things.

That depends on what you mean by sexuality. For me sexuality is your gender identity. Heterosexuality is your gender identity. Sexuality is something you are, not simply something you do.

 

[Justicia_et_Pax]

Great to see the predictable bull on this thread

 

[onjac]

I would comment on what others have posted in this thread but I don’t think that I would be actually be responding to your original post in that way. I’m not in the same boat as you. I don’t bear such a cross. But like everybody else, I have everyday struggles. Mine is more of a sexual nature of sorts and it’s just not easy to get over it.

I have to rely a lot on prayer and on God’s help to become a better than I am now. I’m not a very emotional person in real life. Sometimes, I suddenly get thoughts like “Why did this happen to XX or why did XX get this sign but not me?” or “Why do I believe in God”. I do worry that I’m just going through the motions and not really giving it my all. It makes me realize just how tough it is to be Catholic.Most of the time, I wonder if I am even capable of feeling His presence (like others seem to do). But He is definitely there because some things have happened to me (particularly as of late) that I can’t attribute to anything but to Him even though it takes a while to figure it out.

Aside from prayer, I spend time read works by our dear Pope Benedict XVI. His talent for writing, his accessibility, his insight and such unwavering belief really helps me a lot in reminding why I should keep reaching out for God and continue trying to become Catholic even though I don’t think I feel His Presence.

I don’t think if what I posted helped you in any way. But I do truly empathize with what you’re going through and I’ll keep you in my prayers.

Stay strong. Keep on praying no matter what.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

That depends on what you mean by sexuality. For me sexuality is your gender identity. Heterosexuality is your gender identity. Sexuality is something you are, not simply something you do.

MindOverMatter, I think that if we understand “gender” when we speak of “sexuality,” and then speak of “heterosexuality” as our “gender” or “gender identity” that we begin to seriously confuse terms. Heterosexuality refers to a particular orientation of affection and is a word that arose, if I remember correctly, a few years after the term “homosexuality.” Both were coined in order to label different directions of human affection, and the existence of the one term necessitates the existence of the other–that’s how binaries work, and the words were born out of a binary way of thinking about human affections. (The dialectic, in fact, requires a third term to synthesize the binary, and, naturally, that term is “bisexuality” which also arose around the same time as the other two.)

Gender, of course, is much more than our affections and carries with it a whole series of responsibilities, connotations, roles that need to be played, what-have-you. And you’re right–it connotes something that we are and also helps to determine, in many ways, what a culture expects from us in terms of however it understands gender roles (masculine and feminine–which is not to say that gender determines these things, but that cultures understand them differently according to how they believe gender should be expressed). The keynote of gender is responsibility.

But to say that our responsibility as men or women qua men or women is to be heterosexual in our affections is going a bit far. Not even the catechism suggests such a thing (otherwise, it would demand that homosexuals become heterosexual, and it doesn’t). Confusing gender with heterosexuality suggests that it is our natural moral responsibility to be attracted to the opposite sex, presumably for the purposes of marriage and procreation. But that means that if someone chooses to be celibate, that they are, in fact, being irresponsible, because they are thwarting their heterosexual gender by failing to meet the responsibilities that their heterosexual gender ultimately requires of them: marriage and procreation. Celibacy, in other words, would be anti-nature and immoral.

Many protestant reformers would make that argument. But Catholic tradition does not make that argument. We know that chastity in celibacy can be the choice or the calling of many people, and that such a choice or calling can also serve as the fulfillment of their gender, regardless of the direction of their affections. Thus, heterosexuality cannot be an imperative in the way that gender is. It is little wonder, therefore, that (and I wish Hadrianus were here!) “heterosexuality” is never mentioned in the catechism, and that the term “sexualitas” is apparently understood to mean “gender,” though different translations may not make that as clear as they could. But what is clear is that heterosexuality is not one’s gender, nor is it one’s gender destiny if such a thing can be conceived of–at least not in the sense that the word “heterosexuality” is usually understood.

Now it is true that the RCC understands sex to be something that can only happen, morally, in marriage, and that marriage is between a man and a woman. But this is not to say that heterosexuality is our gender, but that marriage and sex in marriage are dynamic possibilities of the moral expression of our gender, as is celibacy. (The distinction may be fine, but it’s real.) The RCC does not understand there to be any other moral possibility. Which is certainly fine. But none of that suggests that heterosexuality is our gender.

Sorry to quibble so much. And I don’t intend this to be adversarial in the least. But I think we do ourselves a significant dis-service when we start making two very different terms (gender and heterosexuality) equivalents for each other–unless it is our enterprise to totally re-define one or both terms. But that doesn’t seem to be the intention here.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is Grace and Mercy! Deo Gratias!

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Heterosexuality refers to a particular orientation of affection and is a word that arose, if I remember correctly, a few years after the term “homosexuality.” Both were coined in order to label different directions of human affection, and the existence of the one term necessitates the existence of the other–that’s how binaries work, and the words were born out of a binary way of thinking about human affections. (The dialectic, in fact, requires a third term to synthesize the binary, and, naturally, that term is “bisexuality” which also arose around the same time as the other two.)

I understand that these terms exist to differentiate between different attractions. However it doesn’t stop with attraction, but also includes identity. In other-words society has assumed that if you are attracted to men then it is your sexual identity to be with a man. They think that the object of attraction determines the purpose of attraction. The problem is, homosexuality is not a sexuality or true sexual identity anymore than being attracted to animals is a sexuality or identity. The differentiation itself is built on a false premise; the idea that sexual identity is defined by attraction as opposed to gender.

My sexuality is defined first and foremost by the intrinsic meaning of my gender; not my attraction.

But to say that our responsibility as men or women qua men or women is to be heterosexual in our affections is going a bit far.

The purpose of our gender is necessarily heterosexual in its nature and meaning. That is not to say however that other goods which transcend the purpose of sexuality do not arise. It is not immoral to be celebate if by doing so you are serving a greater good than sexuality. It is our moral duty to find a partner and bring new life into the world, unless circumstances are as such that this is not possible or not appropriate. Sometimes its not appropriate to have a partner in some circumstances, in which case celibacy is morally valid given those circumstances. Outside these circumstances choosing to be single is a selfish act. Sometimes a greater good can nullify our duty to lesser goods. Being a priest nullifies the duty to get married.
While the nature of our gender may not be fulfilled by being unmarried, it is not the same thing as contradicting your nature (as is the case with homosexual behavior), if you understand that the absolute purpose of nature is to serve God. To be unfulfilled in some respect is not necessarily the same as contradicting your nature if we do in fact exist for purposes that are higher in function and importance than the fulfillment of our sexuality.

Confusing gender with heterosexuality

I am not confusing the two terms but rather i am saying that one naturally and meaningfully follows from the other; and thus in that respect it is warranted to describe all men and women as heterosexual in so far as that is the natural essential end of being a man or a women. Manhood is intrinsically heterosexual in function, regardless of whether one has the accompanying attractions or not.

Many protestant reformers would make that argument. But Catholic tradition does not make that argument. We know that chastity in celibacy can be the choice or the calling of many people, and that such a choice or calling can also serve as the fulfillment of their gender, regardless of the direction of their affections.

I have not said that celibacy is wrong. However celibacy and chastity is only valid within a certain context.

Thus, heterosexuality cannot be an imperative in the way that gender is. It is little wonder, therefore, that (and I wish Hadrianus were here!) “heterosexuality” is never mentioned in the catechism, and that the term “sexualitas” is apparently understood to mean “gender,” though different translations may not make that as clear as they could.

You are correct insofar as the political use of the term is concerned.

Now it is true that the RCC understands sex to be something that can only happen, morally, in marriage, and that marriage is between a man and a woman.

That understanding is only meaningful if you understand heterosexuality to be intrinsic to gender identity.

The RCC does not understand there to be any other moral possibility. Which is certainly fine. But none of that suggests that heterosexuality is our gender.

This makes no rational sense if the church does not truly believe that heterosexuality is the natural end of our gender identity.

And I don’t intend this to be adversarial in the least. But I think we do ourselves a significant dis-service when we start making two very different terms (gender and heterosexuality) equivalents for each other–unless it is our enterprise to totally re-define one or both terms.

I don’t define heterosexuality as one sexuality among others. There is no such thing as homosexuality or bisexuality, because sexual identity does not begin with attraction, it begins with your gender.

If heterosexuality is only meaningful in terms of having a particular attraction, then i would have to agree that the absence of that attraction would mean that you are not heterosexual. But i understand heterosexuality to be more than an attraction.

 

[Kolbe300]

Student26,

I don’t know if you are still following this thread at all, but I am very sorry that it has become a debate over the word “gay,” when that is the last thing you were asking for or needing.

I just want you to know that you are not alone. Like you, I am a devout Catholic who happens to be gay. I know exactly how difficult things can be. Spiritual dryness is a battle we will all face, and I know how hard it is when you feel as if you’re fighting that battle completely alone. Just know that you are not alone. I will be praying for you every day.

I thought of Mother Teresa’s battle with spiritual darkness while reading your post. Although she received so little spiritual consolation, she kept the faith. She never stopped fighting the good fight. One thing to remember is this: when you turn to prayer and the Sacraments during those times when it is the last thing in the world you feel like doing, you are showing God an even greater faith than a person who turns to Him in times of spiritual exctasy. It takes great faith to turn to God when he seems so distant.

I read your post and thought, “Here is a guy with such great faith.” Don’t let that faith fade. Continue to reach out to Him in prayer and the Sacraments and He will bring you peace. I promise you that. The suffering you endure in that spiritual dryness is redemptive. It strengthens your faith, it strengthens your spirit, and you will always walk away a stronger person on the other side.

One thing I would highly recommend is to volunteer in service of some kind, especially the service of the poor. When you give of yourself through love, God shows himself in ways that are indescribable. I have been touched by the Spirit more times in the presence of the poor than any other times in my life. You may not feel God right now, but you can go find Him in the least of those among us. And He will reveal Himself to you.

I hope and pray that you know you aren’t alone. I’m sorry the thread was so derailed. This isn’t always the best place to find help. If you can find a good priest you trust and like, spiritual direction can be invaluable.

Fight the good fight, my friend. It’ll be so worth it!

Peace and Prayers!
Kolbe

 

[LPS]

Student26,
One thing I would highly recommend is to volunteer in service of some kind, especially the service of the poor. When you give of yourself through love, God shows himself in ways that are indescribable. I have been touched by the Spirit more times in the presence of the poor than any other times in my life. You may not feel God right now, but you can go find Him in the least of those among us. And He will reveal Himself to you.

I would second this. When I went through my own dark night, I found great blessings in changing my focus from “me” (my suffering) to others instead.

Thinking of you Student26 and continuing to pray for you. :grouphug:

 

[Hadrianus]

Grace & Peace!

MindOverMatter, I think that if we understand “gender” when we speak of “sexuality,” and then speak of “heterosexuality” as our “gender” or “gender identity” that we begin to seriously confuse terms. Heterosexuality refers to a particular orientation of affection and is a word that arose, if I remember correctly, a few years after the term “homosexuality.” Both were coined in order to label different directions of human affection, and the existence of the one term necessitates the existence of the other–that’s how binaries work, and the words were born out of a binary way of thinking about human affections. (The dialectic, in fact, requires a third term to synthesize the binary, and, naturally, that term is “bisexuality” which also arose around the same time as the other two.)

Gender, of course, is much more than our affections and carries with it a whole series of responsibilities, connotations, roles that need to be played, what-have-you. And you’re right–it connotes something that we are and also helps to determine, in many ways, what a culture expects from us in terms of however it understands gender roles (masculine and feminine–which is not to say that gender determines these things, but that cultures understand them differently according to how they believe gender should be expressed). The keynote of gender is responsibility.

But to say that our responsibility as men or women qua men or women is to be heterosexual in our affections is going a bit far. Not even the catechism suggests such a thing (otherwise, it would demand that homosexuals become heterosexual, and it doesn’t). Confusing gender with heterosexuality suggests that it is our natural moral responsibility to be attracted to the opposite sex, presumably for the purposes of marriage and procreation. But that means that if someone chooses to be celibate, that they are, in fact, being irresponsible, because they are thwarting their heterosexual gender by failing to meet the responsibilities that their heterosexual gender ultimately requires of them: marriage and procreation. Celibacy, in other words, would be anti-nature and immoral.

Many protestant reformers would make that argument. But Catholic tradition does not make that argument. We know that chastity in celibacy can be the choice or the calling of many people, and that such a choice or calling can also serve as the fulfillment of their gender, regardless of the direction of their affections. Thus, heterosexuality cannot be an imperative in the way that gender is. It is little wonder, therefore, that (and I wish Hadrianus were here!) “heterosexuality” is never mentioned in the catechism, and that the term “sexualitas” is apparently understood to mean “gender,” though different translations may not make that as clear as they could. But what is clear is that heterosexuality is not one’s gender, nor is it one’s gender destiny if such a thing can be conceived of–at least not in the sense that the word “heterosexuality” is usually understood.

Now it is true that the RCC understands sex to be something that can only happen, morally, in marriage, and that marriage is between a man and a woman. But this is not to say that heterosexuality is our gender, but that marriage and sex in marriage are dynamic possibilities of the moral expression of our gender, as is celibacy. (The distinction may be fine, but it’s real.) The RCC does not understand there to be any other moral possibility. Which is certainly fine. But none of that suggests that heterosexuality is our gender.

You have conjured me up, so here I am. I really don’t have much to add to what you say, which strikes me as clear and reasonable. Personally, I don’t care for the terms 'gender" and “gender identity” when referring to human beings rather than Latin or German nouns. These very constructs are extremely recent and exist almost exclusively in the English speaking world.

Over the past 40 years or so we have created a new vocabulary with the result that clarity of thought has been somewhat lost. “Sexuality” is itself a rather vague term and appears to mean different things to different people. I believe it was first coined by the German school of sex psychology by psychologists such as Krafft-Ebbing in his “Psychopathia Sexualis” and what not used in a particularly positive way.

Catholic theologians have employed the term only since the 1960’s and generally in the sense of what we now in English call gender, as is the case with the Catechism. Obviously, the Church being international, it can’t use the term “gender” in its universal documents as not only would the concept as now used in English be untranslatable into Latin, except as “sexualitas.”–literally, the Latin word for gender is “genus”—it wouldn’t make much sense in a number of other living languages as well.

We can’t say much about heaven, except by means of the via negativa. that is to say by about what it isn’t. It is clear from Our Lord’s words that there will be no sexual desire in heaven, but that is about all we know regarding sexuality in that sphere. Now it is reasonable to assume that maleness and femaleness possess a transcendent value and that these will be retained in heaven; but their transcendent meaning is clearly other than their procreative function here on earth. Also the rare but real existence of people who are biologically intersex, poses the question of which sex (ie gender) they would belong to in a perfect world.

 

[Hadrianus]

PS I think as Catholics we often have a temptation to say more about things than the Church herself does. No one really speaks for the Church’s magisterium except that magisterium, and only the magisterium is the correct interpreter of Scripture and Tradition.
This doesn’t mean that we can’t speculate, or use our own ingenuity in defending Catholic doctrine. But the temptation is strong to present our own reasonings as Catholic teaching, especially in areas where the Church herself hasn’t really said very much.

 

[Hadrianus]

Student26,

I don’t know if you are still following this thread at all, but I am very sorry that it has become a debate over the word “gay,” when that is the last thing you were asking for or needing.

I just want you to know that you are not alone. Like you, I am a devout Catholic who happens to be gay. I know exactly how difficult things can be. Spiritual dryness is a battle we will all face, and I know how hard it is when you feel as if you’re fighting that battle completely alone. Just know that you are not alone. I will be praying for you every day.

I thought of Mother Teresa’s battle with spiritual darkness while reading your post. Although she received so little spiritual consolation, she kept the faith. She never stopped fighting the good fight. One thing to remember is this: when you turn to prayer and the Sacraments during those times when it is the last thing in the world you feel like doing, you are showing God an even greater faith than a person who turns to Him in times of spiritual exctasy. It takes great faith to turn to God when he seems so distant.

I read your post and thought, “Here is a guy with such great faith.” Don’t let that faith fade. Continue to reach out to Him in prayer and the Sacraments and He will bring you peace. I promise you that. The suffering you endure in that spiritual dryness is redemptive. It strengthens your faith, it strengthens your spirit, and you will always walk away a stronger person on the other side.

One thing I would highly recommend is to volunteer in service of some kind, especially the service of the poor. When you give of yourself through love, God shows himself in ways that are indescribable. I have been touched by the Spirit more times in the presence of the poor than any other times in my life. You may not feel God right now, but you can go find Him in the least of those among us. And He will reveal Himself to you.

I hope and pray that you know you aren’t alone. I’m sorry the thread was so derailed. This isn’t always the best place to find help. If you can find a good priest you trust and like, spiritual direction can be invaluable.

Fight the good fight, my friend. It’ll be so worth it!

Peace and Prayers!
Kolbe

Excellent post Kolbe!

 

[MindOverMatter2]

It is clear from Our Lord’s words that there will be no sexual desire in heaven, but that is about all we know regarding sexuality in that sphere.

Where in scripture does it say these exact words? I am not saying its wrong. But surely this is an interpretation that you feel to be justified and reasonable?

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Personally, I don’t care for the terms 'gender" and “gender identity” when referring to human beings rather than Latin or German nouns. These very constructs are extremely recent and exist almost exclusively in the English speaking world.

.

The absence of words in different cultures or the recent symbolic representation of attributes is not in and of itself evidence that such words do not meaningfully correspond to our actual natures. If you came across a culture that had no word for God or only recently invented the word, would that mean that the meaning of that word does not correspond to a real entity?

Of course not.

Thats all i have left to say on the matter.

 

[sarahq]

Saying a prayer for you!

God bless
Sarah

 

[DevotedChild]

Student,

I know exactly what you are going through and i am sorry that the posters have gotten off topic. To explain my understanding more fully i must say this, I am empathetic and feel not just my emotions but the emotions of others but it causes problems for me in my own emotions because when I first feel a new emotion it is so much stronger, intensified, and exaggerated beyond the point to what the emotion really is, so sometimes I don’t know what i am feeling exactly. I grew up sometimes wanting attention and love from friends and just the fact that I love them so much that my gift blows it out of proportion to the point of me wanting to do something that would be morally wrong. This was especially hard on me when I was having a lot of trouble with my depression and during the time I was depressed, I went through a spiritual dryness that felt similar to a “dark night of the soul” but not as strong as some of the saints went through.
o
Our Holy Mother does not like to see her children suffer and will take your plea to Jesus if you just ask her. I found the rosary very comforting. Also pray to your guardian angels and remember that they are always with you, helping you, and loving you. Let them console you and take to Christ, who is always in there sight. I have found my comfort in my angels. Come to know them as friends.

I will pray for you and may God Bless you with many blessings!

 

[Hadrianus]

Where in scripture does it say these exact words? I am not saying its wrong. But surely this is an interpretation that you feel to be justified and reasonable?

It comes from Our Lord’s own words. I know of no Catholic theologian in the last 2,000 years who suggests that there would be sexual desire in heaven. As there will be no marriage and no reproduction, what purpose would sexual desire fulfill, and towards whom could it be directed? I don,'t think there has ever been a Church pronouncement on the matter, but the Catholic theological tradition is clear.