Question about same sex "relationships"? SSA in general

[zamyrabyrd]

You are kind of making my point for me. When in our culture did love become equated to sexual romantic relationship? That is my point. Friendships which are built upon love are pivotal for most people. Now in friendship there isn’t sex yet there is still love. I am trying to do the exact opposite of reducing people to sex, but rather expanding our understanding of love to include love within the confides of friendship.

So many people in our culture feel like they can’t have love because they are unable to marry whether that be because of same sex attraction, divorce, or what ever. The important distinction we need to make as Catholics is that they are not without love. They may not be able to express love within a marriage, BUT they do have friendships and families where they can show and receive love (Obviously not the same as marital love but it is no less significant). Additionally, we really need to emphasize that people are beloved daughters and sons of Christ who loved them so much He willingly died for our sins (Romans 5:8). Helping people realize they still have love and support makes it easier for the person to carry up their cross. Secular society wants to tell us that the only way to happiness and fulfillment is within the confides of a sexual romantic relationship (regardless of the morality). We, as Catholics, need to counter that with the truth that God doesn’t call everyone to marriage and that there is love and fulfillment within the confides of a celibate vocation (whether that be a religious vocation or some other path God has layed out for the person). (And that marriage though rewarding often comes with its own trials and tribulations.

Much of the confusion in discussing “love” is that in English we have only one word for it. The Greeks had 6, so they did not conflate eros and friendship. This is worth quoting:

Eros, or sexual passion
The first kind of love was eros, named after the Greek god of fertility, and it represented the idea of sexual passion and desire. But the Greeks didn’t always think of it as something positive, as we tend to do today. In fact, eros was viewed as a dangerous, fiery, and irrational form of love that could take hold of you and possess you—an attitude shared by many later spiritual thinkers, such as the Christian writer C.S. Lewis.
Eros involved a loss of control that frightened the Greeks. Which is odd, because losing control is precisely what many people now seek in a relationship. Don’t we all hope to fall “madly” in love?

Philia, or deep friendship
The second variety of love was philia or friendship, which the Greeks valued far more than the base sexuality of eros. Philia concerned the deep comradely friendship that developed between brothers in arms who had fought side by side on the battlefield. It was about showing loyalty to your friends, sacrificing for them, as well as sharing your emotions with them. (Another kind of philia, sometimes called storge, embodied the love between parents and their children.)

Agape, or love for everyone
The fourth love, and perhaps the most radical, was agape or selfless love. This was a love that you extended to all people, whether family members or distant strangers. Agape was later translated into Latin as caritas, which is the origin of our word “charity.”

C.S. Lewis referred to it as “gift love,” the highest form of Christian love. But it also appears in other religious traditions, such as the idea of mettā or “universal loving kindness” in Theravāda Buddhism.
There is growing evidence that agape is in a dangerous decline in many countries. Empathy levels in the U.S. have declined sharply over the past 40 years, with the steepest fall occurring in the past decade. We urgently need to revive our capacity to care about strangers.

yesmagazine.org/happiness/the-ancient-greeks-6-words-for-love-and-why-knowing-them-can-change-your-life

Do you not see how you are being a little uncharitable? You seem to be implying that all people within a same sex arrangement are bent on some type of nefarious plan. Additionally you are implying that all same sex arrangements contain a sexual component to a relationship. Finally although some people with SSA do fit into the narrative of neglect, abuse, and/or molestation, many do not. The Catholic Church position of the etiology of same sex attraction is its unknown or at least largely unexplained at this point (It’s most likely due to different things for different individuals). What it does teaches is how for a person with same sex attraction to live out a life aimed towards sanctification (Just like everyone should strive to honor and follow God’s Will for them). I apologize for the long ramble (I tend to do that), but I hope this somewhat clarifies my position.

I am not being uncharitable at all and don’t need an inference or lecture by you that I might be. The homosexualist agenda IS a nefarious plan. Marriage was something that gays never really wanted as long as they prefer in the main, open relationships. In fact, when they have a chance to make their relationships official, a small percentage opt to do so. This catering to a small minority has vast, negative implications for the rest of society.

To sum up, when civil life and societal ties are brutal, when empathy is at a low, when families are downgraded and split up, we are a loveless culture. Loneliness and pain are expressed in music. It is no surprise that people try to seek love in inappropriate places, or rather where they are going to be disappointed time and again. This is the bane of pornography and promiscuity. It’s interesting and pathetic to read about Hugh Hefner’s declining years. With all that sex and money, he got (in the words of Mick Jagger) in the end “no satisfaction”.

 

[at9009]

Much of the confusion in discussing “love” is that in English we have only one word for it. The Greeks had 6, so they did not conflate eros and friendship. This is worth quoting:

Thank you for your description about the 6 difference meanings of love from the Greeks. I think it would be tremendously helpful for our society if we could work on helping others understand both philia and agape.

You’re definitely right about a decline in empathy and agape in many countries (including mine). It’s not an easy fix, but I hope and believe that when we show agape and empathy for others, it can help plant a seed and change their hearts. One simple act of compassion can go a long way and I believe God can use us in some way to help our society.

I am not being uncharitable at all and don’t need an inference or lecture by you that I might be.

I apologize if it my tone came off as a lecture; that wasn’t my intention. I was trying to provide my perspective, and I definitely could have worded it better. It can be kind of hard to have actual conversations and truly understand the person’s intention and tone they intended for, so once again I apologize.

Maybe I can try to reword this in a better way. When statements are said that individuals with SSA have SSA because X without even listening to a person’s story, it negates the person’s own life narrative. For some with SSA, they did grow up with neglect, abuse, etc. But not all who have SSA did, and not all people with neglect, abuse, etc now have SSA.

Other statements that make insinuations about SSA individuals own behaviors and motivations are just as frustrating. Not every person with SSA is promiscuous. Some indeed are like the study you found, others aren’t, and some are even celibate. The fact that many generalize SSA individuals to basically all as promiscuous and living a hedonistic lifestyle is what feels uncharitable.

Other statements that treat individuals with SSA as hostile towards people of faith with either an open or subvert intent to eliminate faith is just as frustrating. Not all SSA individuals are hostile to faith. Some are, some are misguided about sexual morality, and others are adhering to traditional principles. The broadstroke that views SSA people as part of a ‘homosexualist agenda’ can end up being kind of self-fullfilling prophecy and uncharitable. When an SSA person feels like people of faith view them as a hostile threat or Trojan horse, they are going to feel rejected by the faith and may end up being antagonistic towards faith.

I hope this better explains what I was trying to say.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Thank you for your description about the 6 difference meanings of love from the Greeks. I think it would be tremendously helpful for our society if we could work on helping others understand both philia and agape.

You’re definitely right about a decline in empathy and agape in many countries (including mine). It’s not an easy fix, but I hope and believe that when we show agape and empathy for others, it can help plant a seed and change their hearts. One simple act of compassion can go a long way and I believe God can use us in some way to help our society.

I apologize if it my tone came off as a lecture; that wasn’t my intention. I was trying to provide my perspective, and I definitely could have worded it better. It can be kind of hard to have actual conversations and truly understand the person’s intention and tone they intended for, so once again I apologize.

Maybe I can try to reword this in a better way. When statements are said that individuals with SSA have SSA because X without even listening to a person’s story, it negates the person’s own life narrative. For some with SSA, they did grow up with neglect, abuse, etc. But not all who have SSA did, and not all people with neglect, abuse, etc now have SSA.

Other statements that make insinuations about SSA individuals own behaviors and motivations are just as frustrating. Not every person with SSA is promiscuous. Some indeed are like the study you found, others aren’t, and some are even celibate. The fact that many generalize SSA individuals to basically all as promiscuous and living a hedonistic lifestyle is what feels uncharitable.

Other statements that treat individuals with SSA as hostile towards people of faith with either an open or subvert intent to eliminate faith is just as frustrating. Not all SSA individuals are hostile to faith. Some are, some are misguided about sexual morality, and others are adhering to traditional principles. The broadstroke that views SSA people as part of a ‘homosexualist agenda’ can end up being kind of self-fullfilling prophecy and uncharitable. When an SSA person feels like people of faith view them as a hostile threat or Trojan horse, they are going to feel rejected by the faith and may end up being antagonistic towards faith.

I hope this better explains what I was trying to say.

I am truly sorry but the conclusions I have drawn after keeping an open mind for so long are overwhelmingly negative. I don’t want to go into the damage that has been done to my own life that I wrote about in other threads starting from early adolescence. Because of this, I don’t need nor want sensitivity training.

There is definitely an agenda to destroy the family and the one worlders are jumping on the bandwagon of gay rights. There are quite a few gays who don’t want the implosion of the family, and who appreciate the fact they had actual mothers and fathers.

I am just sick and tired of this subject and having to hear about it 24/7. It all started with ‘no one should bother about what goes on in one’s own bedrooms’. For goodness sakes, PLEASE keep it there, not marching down the streets. No one is persecuting you in the West. You can “love” whom you want. What’s the matter?

There are REAL problems in the world like massacres, disease and starvation. I’d rather talk about North Korea or the 4.5 million Ethiopians who need urgent help because of an unprecedented drought similar to the disastrous one 30 years ago.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Okay this is something that I’m wondering about. I know the church wants people with same sex attraction to stay chaste and abstinent, but what about those people who don’t see themselves in that life. I mean if you walk into a gay hang out place or gay club, and told them “hey the church loves you, we just want you to stay single, chaste and be abstinent”, how are they supposed to take that? Is it fair that they cannot share love with another human being?? I’m not sure if I’m making myself clear, but there are people who just don’t see themselves living alone in a house with no one else to love and support them, they need someone else. Does the church not know what to do with people with same sex attraction? Would it ever in the future change its laws?? What do you all think should happen or is going to happen? Could a same sex relationship with no sex even exist? It seems so easy to tell someone that they should be chaste and single and abstinent etc, but usually, it’s a married man or woman who says this, someone who has no idea about living or conforming to this. What is the church going to do about people with same sex attraction? I hope I don’t sound like I’m attacking the church, but from what I’ve read it seems like everyone just keeps trying to shut people with SSA up. Thoughts and opinions?

The Church wants everyone outside of marriage to practice celibacy and chastity, not just SSA individuals. So I don’t see that as unreasonable or unfair. Do heterosexual single people get off the hook of chastity because they don’t have a mate? No. So why would that be any different for SSA’s?

Now, as far as them marrying and wanting family. That is still possible. They can still get married. They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex and have a family. That would require them to accept themselves as they actually are, as there bodies are, rather than what their ‘sexual orientation’ is telling them. In other words no person is born with a homosexual body. The sexual organs they have are either male or female, and only work in the way in which they were made to produce offspring, that is with a male and female together. There is a psychologist who has helped people to do this, to accept themselves as they actually are. And, some of these have gone on to be married. He was on Catholic Answers awhile back. I don’t have his name right now.

 

[Sarah_B_Good]

There are REAL problems in the world like massacres, disease and starvation. I’d rather talk about North Korea or the 4.5 million Ethiopians who need urgent help because of an unprecedented drought similar to the disastrous one 30 years ago.

Then perhaps you should go do that.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

So? What does this do with the topic of this thread?

Heterosexuals have to repent of their lust just like homosexuals do.

You don’t see it as the same sin. Especially in marriage. There is lust in marriage, otherwise, the conjugal act could not be performed.

 

[Wesrock]

Heterosexuals have to repent of their lust just like homosexuals do.

You don’t see it as the same sin. Especially in marriage. There is lust in marriage, otherwise, the conjugal act could not be performed.

Sexual desire is not lust – or at least it’s not what the church condemns and it does not equate the too.

**2351 **Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

There can be lust in marriage and in people with heterosexual attraction. But lust isn’t a healthy part of the sex act.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Where’s the OP? I hate it when they just throw out a question and run.

 

[hausofferni]

Where’s the OP? I hate it when they just throw out a question and run.

Right here I’m just fascinated by everyone’s responses.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Right here I’m just fascinated by everyone’s responses.

Got anything to add?

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Although I appreciate these very important points (that love is not only expressed sexually, etc.), I think it is a bit of a word game in this context. Because at the end of the day, according to church teaching, gay persons are still forbidden to share a life of love with someone they “fall in love” with. Sexual acts are some of the most profound ways of expressing love and commitment, and the church not only forbids gay activity, but it looks down upon any motion towards a relationship of this sort. The catechism speaks of “disinterested friendships” as acceptable between gay persons. But, ultimately, however you want to define love, gay persons are not able to experience a profound love that is built into human nature. At least, not without committing grave sin.
​

Sex is overrated. In Catholicism love for one’s friends has historically been regarded as a greater love than that towards a spouse.

This is false and is rooted in secular egoism. The most profound expression of love is detached self giving as exemplified by Jesus’ death on the Cross.

This is a false claim based on a faulty definition of love.
​

According to Jesus the highest love is dying for one’s friend(s).

For some reason my fellow Catholics categorize sin through rank, ranking which sin is above another in disgust.

What my fellow Catholics don’t suggest of themselves is that in fact their lust for their partner is their sin too. SSA is the same sin as hetero-attraction. It’s sex.

I wish my fellow Catholics would see with true eyes that lust is part of their sexual sin.

Yes it may be that sex is legitimized by marriage, however, the sin of lust is still there. It’s not just love when you lay with your partner. There is the suggestion of lust in the genitals with all sex. If it wasn’t for lust then there would be no arousal.

To a married Catholic this becomes a holy sin, one ordained by God. Lust is sin, nonetheless. I find that people have trouble admitting to this sin.

Jesus even says that if you lust after a woman then you have committed adultery in your heart. People make marriage the exception, rather than become like Christ, as he was a virgin.

You see married people can’t become like Christ, as he was a virgin.

"CCC:

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

There are ordinate and inordinate levels of desire. Married heterosexual couples are certainly capable of lusting after a spouse, that said they don’t necessarily lust after their spouse.

Married people can still go to Heaven.

You don’t want to admit your lust.

Remember, Jesus was a virgin. He had no lust for anyone, neither was he married. And yet you do not want to admit lust, your sin, according to Jesus’ example?

What is better than marriage, other than the Lord’s sanctity? If Jesus truly sanctifies you then you would become as he is, a single one. Isn’t the point of our faith is to become like the Father by imitating the son? And yet the son was not married. How can you say that you become perfect like God is perfect when you disregard even this example Jesus has laid out?

It is because you are dependent upon the flesh as a human being. You were born into the world empty and you seek not the one who can fill that emptiness, Our Lord Jesus. Rather you would seek it in a partner that is a human being.

Marriage does not trump the Lord’s example.

Look, I’m a virgin who completely intends to die a virgin and has gotten flak on the forum for pointing out that celibacy is a superior good to marriage and I recognise marriage is still a good, not as a great a good, but a good nonetheless.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Sex is overrated. In Catholicism love for one’s friends has historically been regarded as a greater love than that towards a spouse.
According to Jesus the highest love is dying for one’s friend(s).
There are ordinate and inordinate levels of desire. Married heterosexual couples are certainly capable of lusting after a spouse, that said they don’t necessarily lust after their spouse.
Married people can still go to Heaven.
Look, I’m a virgin who completely intends to die a virgin and has gotten flak on the forum for pointing out that celibacy is a superior good to marriage and I recognise marriage is still a good, not as a great a good, but a good nonetheless.

Thank you for your post. It is inspirational and encouraging that not everyone is swept up in popular culture. Unfortunately, the romantic fallacy is so embedded in our thinking, it is daunting to try and free oneself from it.

We just take for granted the assumptions of being swept up by Prince Charming and living happily ever after in a caricature of a Disney Castle. “Bold and Beautiful” wouldn’t have been so wildly popular if it didn’t draw from that well of popular sentiment. It wouldn’t have lasted for decades, if there was actually closure with any of the characters. The fact that there still isn’t disproves its premise.

One of my big wake-up calls was reading Robin Norwood’s “Women Who Love Too Much” 25 years ago. While the title is somewhat misleading but probably a good draw for the public to buy it, there were gems of wisdom that really stuck with me and helped me out of that morass of thinking that a relationship could solve one’s problems.

Wow, did I assume that? Well, almost everyone around did, not to mention all the messages from the media and literature. I am not saying that romantic love is not possible, but that it is complex. Conventional wisdom understood the inevitable falling off of the initial excitement of attraction and courtship. Her books helped me to distinguish between love and addiction.

I am sorry to say this but the frequent consecutive flames of some people I know who happen to be gay but this can happen with anyone, I suppose, are just that. This is something we are supposed to grow out of after adolescence and perhaps not believe in the fiction of this kind of love that almost always turns out in the end to be a disappointment since it can NEVER come up to such wild expectations.

This is not to put the lid on romance and love. On the contrary, life is actually much better without that kind of addictive thinking. I enjoy life much more once I got that out of my system. And this is what is so bad about the sexualization of children. It makes sex center stage so it knocks everything else out. That’s why we can hear a phrase like “same sex” friendship that has to introduce that term into chaste relationships because everything is supposed to be sex.

Wisdom of the ages, no matter what culture, realized that passion has to be controlled, just like fire, otherwise we get consumed by it.

 

[Recov_Catholic]

I am truly sorry but the conclusions I have drawn after keeping an open mind for so long are overwhelmingly negative. I don’t want to go into the damage that has been done to my own life that I wrote about in other threads starting from early adolescence. Because of this, I don’t need nor want sensitivity training.

There is definitely an agenda to destroy the family and the one worlders are jumping on the bandwagon of gay rights. There are quite a few gays who don’t want the implosion of the family, and who appreciate the fact they had actual mothers and fathers.

I am just sick and tired of this subject and having to hear about it 24/7. It all started with ‘no one should bother about what goes on in one’s own bedrooms’. For goodness sakes, PLEASE keep it there, not marching down the streets. No one is persecuting you in the West. You can “love” whom you want. What’s the matter?

There are REAL problems in the world like massacres, disease and starvation. I’d rather talk about North Korea or the 4.5 million Ethiopians who need urgent help because of an unprecedented drought similar to the disastrous one 30 years ago.

I kissed a man when I was 22 years. Other than that I have never engaged in any same sex sexual activity. In my 40s I am still a virgin. I have not otherwise violated Church teaching and I still have never felt welcomed in the Church because of people like you. You may think you are hiding your disdain and contempt, but we can see it. The Church only pushes us away. It just wishes we didn’t exist. What I am sick of is people saying they love the sinner, when in reality they hate the sin and the sinner. God is capable of separating the two, but human beings are not. It’s just a nice thing to say. Nice, but meaningless.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I kissed a man when I was 22 years. Other than that I have never engaged in any same sex sexual activity. In my 40s I am still a virgin. I have not otherwise violated Church teaching and I still have never felt welcomed in the Church because of people like you. You may think you are hiding your disdain and contempt, but we can see it. The Church only pushes us away. It just wishes we didn’t exist. What I am sick of is people saying they love the sinner, when in reality they hate the sin and the sinner. God is capable of separating the two, but human beings are not. It’s just a nice thing to say. Nice, but meaningless.

If I have a jaundiced view, it is because of the very real damage that was done to my life. Now after all those years, I see the same but even far greater harm to society.
I don’t know your actual history, nor do I care for that matter, since I do come from a time when people didn’t talk about what should be their private activity. In fact, maybe if you did keep your sexual matters to yourself, people would be more “welcoming”.

 

[at9009]

I kissed a man when I was 22 years. Other than that I have never engaged in any same sex sexual activity. In my 40s I am still a virgin. I have not otherwise violated Church teaching and I still have never felt welcomed in the Church because of people like you. You may think you are hiding your disdain and contempt, but we can see it. The Church only pushes us away. It just wishes we didn’t exist. What I am sick of is people saying they love the sinner, when in reality they hate the sin and the sinner. God is capable of separating the two, but human beings are not. It’s just a nice thing to say. Nice, but meaningless.

I’m sorry you don’t always feel welcome in the Church, (I definitely understand that feeling). You may feel like people within the Church do not want to welcome you, but please remember that Christ and the Church always welcome you. For me, even when I don’t feel welcomed, celebrating the mass and receiving the Eucharist (when I am able to) help sustain and strengthen my faith.

Also thank you for your commitment and resilience in following Church teaching. I will be praying for you my friend that you find the home within the Church you are seeking. God bless and have a great weekend.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I’m sorry you don’t always feel welcome in the Church, (I definitely understand that feeling). You may feel like people within the Church do not want to welcome you, but please remember that Christ and the Church always welcome you. For me, even when I don’t feel welcomed, celebrating the mass and receiving the Eucharist (when I am able to) help sustain and strengthen my faith.

Also thank you for your commitment and resilience in following Church teaching. I will be praying for you my friend that you find the home within the Church you are seeking. God bless and have a great weekend.

Just for the record, being “welcome” in a church, no matter where, really depends on those inside. I have had actual abuse in a church setting, a Catholic school no less, where I was teaching being physically attacked by a nun who told me in no uncertain words, “to go away, we don’t want you”!!! This was 10 years ago only a week after my father passed away where I was not present (I live abroad) while also being persecuted and cheated by Catholic church goers in my family.

I subscribe to “By their fruits, ye shall know them”. There are a lot of people pretending to be religious and that goes for clergy as well. When I went to the Superior to complain, I was fired at the end of term. I have learned to separate just as you said Christ and the Church that should not defined by the people in it.

 

[Sneaux]

I kissed a man when I was 22 years. Other than that I have never engaged in any same sex sexual activity. In my 40s I am still a virgin. I have not otherwise violated Church teaching and I still have never felt welcomed in the Church because of people like you. You may think you are hiding your disdain and contempt, but we can see it. The Church only pushes us away. It just wishes we didn’t exist. What I am sick of is people saying they love the sinner, when in reality they hate the sin and the sinner. God is capable of separating the two, but human beings are not. It’s just a nice thing to say. Nice, but meaningless.

Someone finally said it. Thank God, struggling with SSA has made it a frustration with trying to connect with other devout Catholics. They’ll say they follow Church teaching and that they’re more accepting than Protestants, in case of the teachings of the Church, it’s absolutely more accepting that most Protestant teachings, but Catholics are not more accepting, or tolerant is more the right word than Protestants. It is okay to be disgusted by the act, that’s one thing, but to be disgusted by the entirety of the human being is another. I admit, that I used to live as a lesbian, but I haven’t in years. Have I had struggles? Yes, but I haven’t given in. When other devout Catholics find that out, they act like I’m a creature they’ve never seen or like I’m an under cover Satanist. The one’s who don’t act like that talk about other people with SSA, and then say “Well you’re different ”

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

If you don’t want to live alone without love get a dog.

 

[Wesrock]

I’m sorry for those who still feel shunned in the churches and by their community. It’s my hope that newer generations will be more accepting of those who struggle, and I think this is a large part of what Pope Francis has been trying to encourage Catholics to do.

 

[Recov_Catholic]

I’m sorry you don’t always feel welcome in the Church, (I definitely understand that feeling). You may feel like people within the Church do not want to welcome you, but please remember that Christ and the Church always welcome you. For me, even when I don’t feel welcomed, celebrating the mass and receiving the Eucharist (when I am able to) help sustain and strengthen my faith.

Also thank you for your commitment and resilience in following Church teaching. I will be praying for you my friend that you find the home within the Church you are seeking. God bless and have a great weekend.

Thank you, but unfortunately it has nothing to do with commitment to Catholic teaching. It’s that I’m a broken person, incapable of even considering a sexual relationship. I went through many years of reparative therapy to try to change, to try to be acceptable to the Church and pleasing to God, but instead it destroyed me. I don’t even feel like a sexual being anymore. And sadly, they still consider me a success story when I’m anything but a success. They damaged my relationship with my family, made me feel like a stranger to myself, and destroyed my relationship with God. I used to feel God’s presence in my life, but I don’t anymore.

I am very slowly attempting to heal from this damage, but in the mean time I just try to warn others to stay away from this dangerous form of therapy. In therapy I changed my voice, my walk, my mannerisms, my interests, my interactions with other people, learned to ignore my instincts, adopted a “fake it til you make it” sort of mentality. After a while, you feel like an actor who’s sacrificed everything in their own life to play a role. You can fool people and it might feel good at first to feel such acceptance, but it’s not real. Whenever people tell you they love you, but now change everything about yourself, they don’t really love you. For me, the love of the Church feels exactly like that.