What does it look like to be gay – and a practicing Catholic?

[cjforJesus]

So we have actually gone from discussing how a gay Catholic can live out their vocation in conformity with Church teaching to evolution,the existence of the soul,and the legal and medical definition of personhood ?? I bet the mods are realty scratching their old heads about this one,lol.

 

[bobballen_18]

It’s funny that according to you, the human person-hood of gays is obvious based on Natural Law, but most people in this forum would claim that it is also just as obvious based on that same Natural Law that our marriages, relationships and families do not deserve the same respect and protection as heterosexual marriages, relationships and families.

I object to that claim. Yes, if by “our marriages” you mean same-sex marriages, then you’re right that many on this forum will definitely argue that your “marriage” doesn’t deserve the same respect and protection as a “heterosexual” marriage. Because it doesn’t. But no one with their head on straight is saying people with SSA don’t deserve relationships and families. In fact, if we’re talking about pursuit of actual marriage, we’re not saying you don’t deserve marriage either.

Let’s not act as if it’s all just a prejudice against people with SSA, OK? Many on here would say the same thing about non-SSA but disordered marriages, relationships, and families not deserving the “same respect and protection” as rightly ordered ones, depending on what marriages, relationships, and families we’re talking about.

Furthermore (and fortunately, since many of us wouldn’t qualify if this were the case), personhood is not defined by whether or not one participates in disordered relationships, so saying that a same-sex “marriage” doesn’t deserve the same “respect and protection” as an actual marriage is not equivalent to denying the personhood of the people involved. So I see no discrepancy or anything “funny” there, as you put it.

 

[randomuser]

Let’s not act as if it’s all just a prejudice against people with SSA, OK? Many on here would say the same thing about non-SSA but disordered marriages, relationships, and families not deserving the “same respect and protection” as rightly ordered ones, depending on what marriages, relationships, and families we’re talking about.

Furthermore (and fortunately, since many of us wouldn’t qualify if this were the case), personhood is not defined by whether or not one participates in disordered relationships, so saying that a same-sex “marriage” doesn’t deserve the same “respect and protection” as an actual marriage is not equivalent to denying the personhood of the people involved. So I see no discrepancy or anything “funny” there, as you put it.

Since when has there been prejudice against “people with SSA”? I thought the whole point of “SSA” was it doesn’t mean you’re gay and you don’t have deep-seated homosexual tendencies; therefore, on what possible basis would anyone be prejudice against you? Now, I’m REALLY confused.

 

[adrift]

Your claim that the meaning of words such as “human” and “person” are all self evident and obvious is not true. If it was all obvious and self evident, then we would not be having disagreements in this country about whether a fetus is a person and deserves the same protections as other persons. There would be no disagreements about abortion in this country if it was all obvious. Even figuring out what divides “humans” from the animal world is not obvious and must be defined. Is it a soul (something which cannot be observed and scientifically demonstrated) that makes us human? Is it our superior intelligence that makes us human?

The reason there is a debate is not because it isn’t obvious but because they want to kill without impunity.

 

[adrift]

Since when has there been prejudice against “people with SSA”? I thought the whole point of “SSA” was it doesn’t mean you’re gay and you don’t have deep-seated homosexual tendencies; therefore, on what possible basis would anyone be prejudice against you? Now, I’m REALLY confused.

Your confused? Nothing you wrote made sense:shrug:

 

[randomuser]

Your confused? Nothing you wrote made sense:shrug:

Of course it makes sense. There’s an uphill battle to get Catholics to use “SSA” instead of “gay.” Why can’t we say “gay” anymore? Because using the word “gay” somehow means acceptance of the ‘gay lifestyle.’ (I don’t see how that’s a rational or reasonable explanation, but…ok, fine.) And besides, people with “SSA” might not even be gay. So, based upon that, when someone expresses umbrage about personhood and homosexuals, there’s mention of prejudice against “people with SSA.” To which I ask: I wasn’t aware that “people with SSA,” since many of them deny they’re gay, even encounter prejudice.

I don’t know how much clearer I could be in expressing my confusion. If, as you say, it doesn’t make sense, that’s because the rationale behind the whole “SSA” thing doesn’t make much sense, either.

 

[adrift]

Of course it makes sense. There’s an uphill battle to get Catholics to use “SSA” instead of “gay.” Why can’t we say “gay” anymore? Because using the word “gay” somehow means acceptance of the ‘gay lifestyle.’ (I don’t see how that’s a rational or reasonable explanation, but…ok, fine.) And besides, people with “SSA” might not even be gay. So, based upon that, when someone expresses umbrage about personhood and homosexuals, there’s mention of prejudice against “people with SSA.” To which I ask: I wasn’t aware that “people with SSA,” since many of them deny they’re gay, even encounter prejudice.

I don’t know how much clearer I could be in expressing my confusion. If, as you say, it doesn’t make sense, that’s because the rationale behind the whole “SSA” thing doesn’t make much sense, either.

I am glad you explained further. I didn’t know there was such a battle:shrug: I remember my aunt bemoaning the use of gay for it had a different meaning to her. Yes the definition has changed. Myself I always use homosexual. I don’t use the term gay as I consider it a term used to promote the homosexual life style. I have never used that term. The battle you claim is really between using a slang word versus not using slang:shrug:

 

[randomuser]

I am glad you explained further. I didn’t know there was such a battle:shrug: I remember my aunt bemoaning the use of gay for it had a different meaning to her. Yes the definition has changed. Myself I always use homosexual. I don’t use the term gay as I consider it a term used to promote the homosexual life style. I have never used that term. The battle you claim is really between using a slang word versus not using slang:shrug:

Yes, but the primary definition and usage of “gay” is not slang:

adjective, gayer, gayest.

1. of, relating to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual: a gay couple.

It is in this standard English vernacular that Pope Francis has used the word “gay.”

While it is correct that the word “gay” has not been used (yet) in official WRITTEN Catholic teaching, it has been used VERBALLY in non-official comment. It’s only a matter of time before the word “gay” will be used in written word in official Church teaching.

 

[cjforJesus]

Yes, but the primary definition and usage of “gay” is not slang:

adjective, gayer, gayest.

1. of, relating to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual: a gay couple.

It is in this standard English vernacular that Pope Francis has used the word “gay.”

While it is correct that the word “gay” has not been used (yet) in official WRITTEN Catholic teaching, it has been used VERBALLY in non-official comment. It’s only a matter of time before the word “gay” will be used in written word in official Church teaching.

So I guess SSA should be SSSA according to the definition. Same sex SEXUAL attraction,that is being sexually aroused by individuals of the same sex. Desire for genital contact with someone who is the same sex.

 

[adrift]

Yes, but the primary definition and usage of “gay” is not slang:

adjective, gayer, gayest.

1. of, relating to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual: a gay couple.

It is in this standard English vernacular that Pope Francis has used the word “gay.”

While it is correct that the word “gay” has not been used (yet) in official WRITTEN Catholic teaching, it has been used VERBALLY in non-official comment. It’s only a matter of time before the word “gay” will be used in written word in official Church teaching.

It started out as slang. Words do change meanings The first definition which is always the primary usage of a word
Full Definition of gay
1
1
a : happily excited : merry

b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits <a bird’s gay spring song>

2
2
a : bright, lively

b : brilliant in color

3
3
: given to social pleasures; also : licentious

4
4
a : homosexual

b : of, relating to, or used by homosexuals

 

[SWolf]

Beforewe go on to the difference between personhood and marriage, can you address the first first?
Let me repost the question.
(I can only deal with one thing at a time.)

The assertion I am amazed at is, in a nutshell:

that you cannot determine by common sense observation that a human person is a human person, according to the operation of natural reason, or however else you would like to characterize the observation.

Honestly, I do not see how you can believe this, given what I have seen of your postings.

It’s called muddying the waters.

 

[SWolf]

The reason there is a debate is not because it isn’t obvious but because they want to kill without impunity.

Bingo. I have been to many a meeting where there was only one solution, an obvious solution. There are always some members who still do not like it, and try their hardest to sabotage the proceedings.

 

[bobballen_18]

Since when has there been prejudice against “people with SSA”? I thought the whole point of “SSA” was it doesn’t mean you’re gay and you don’t have deep-seated homosexual tendencies; therefore, on what possible basis would anyone be prejudice against you? Now, I’m REALLY confused.

I’m not the one saying that there’s a “prejudice”, in terms of actual Church teaching, against those with SSA. I quite clearly said, “Let’s not act as if it’s all just a prejudice against people with SSA”

 

[bobballen_18]

I don’t know how much clearer I could be in expressing my confusion. If, as you say, it doesn’t make sense, that’s because the rationale behind the whole “SSA” thing doesn’t make much sense, either.

…same-sex attraction - I think you know perfectly well what same-sex attraction means. Lol. I don’t see what’s so confusing.

Yes, but the primary definition and usage of “gay” is not slang:

adjective, gayer, gayest.

1. of, relating to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex; homosexual: a gay couple.

It is in this standard English vernacular that Pope Francis has used the word “gay.”

While it is correct that the word “gay” has not been used (yet) in official WRITTEN Catholic teaching, it has been used VERBALLY in non-official comment. It’s only a matter of time before the word “gay” will be used in written word in official Church teaching.

Well, I guess time will tell with regards to this claim of yours. I really doubt it will happen but I guess we will see.

I don’t necessarily have a problem with that definition above. However, I still think there’s an obvious difference between saying “I am gay” and "I experience same-sex attraction. One uses an identifier, i.e., identifies (“I am”) and the other simply describes an experience.

Regarding Pope Francis using the word gay - you can use that all you want. I understand this view isn’t so popular, but I’m sorry, one can’t just assume that every single little word a Pope says is 100% accurate, 100% expresses Catholic theology in a 100% orthodox way. I’m not saying Pope Francis said anything heterodox by using the word gay, I’m only suggesting the possibility that using it reflects a sort of language that doesn’t express the fullness of the human person and the person’s sexuality.

 

[at9009]

**Once again I apologize for the long ramble **(I tend to be a little scattered )
This thread seems to be very jumpy and hard to follow. Plus I think it’s kind of lost its focus.

For the debate of labels. We are having the same argument over and over again. It is the same argument that many devout people following church teaching are having. It is not an unimportant debate and one can learn from each side’s perspective. In a way, it mirrors the how Courage ministry favors the use of SSA while a person like Joseph Prever (the person interviewed who inspired the thread) sometimes uses ‘gay’. My personal view is that I dislike when any person puts a moral imperative on identifying one way or the other. I’d rather let the person with this cross describe their experience, ask them what and how they mean the label, and then go from there. That would provide a much more fruitful discussion, and I’m willing to bet that each side would see far more in common than not. However, this wasn’t the topic of the thread (just a slight detour).

**For the debate over morality, church teaching, natural law etc. **That is also an important discussion to have and to explain Church teaching. However, the thread comes from the position of SSA/gay Catholics who agree with the Church’s teaching on sexuality. For them, the debate over the morality is over, they have decided to follow the church’s teaching. Discussion over the Church’s teaching isn’t a bad thing, but once again it’s a detour from the original topic of this thread.

The goal of this thread (I think, though I could be completely and totally wrong. Just tell me if I am) is discuss how SSA/gay Catholics can determine their personal vocation and purse a holy life while dealing with this particular cross that has particular challenges (especially in our current culture that idolizes romantic relationships). There are thousands of voices on the other side telling Catholics with this cross it is okay to act on their attractions. On the side of the Church, most of the discussion is stymied at the morality debate and the proper use of labels without any further discussion on how best to live out a Catholic life with this struggle or best support someone with this cross. Simply saying to not act on the attractions isn’t enough.

I’m not trying to stop discussion over the other topics, maybe the mods can figure out how to open new threads for each of those topics. However the discussion of how for SSA/gay (whatever label people prefer) live out a their lives with this cross is also an important discussion. Once a person accepts the Church’s teaching (the WHY), then need to figure out to best live in accordance with that teaching (the HOW).

For an idea of some questions an SSA/gay individual may have see post #49 (I didn’t list all the question one would have but some different people with this cross might have)
Kudos for cjforJesus in post #106 for providing his insight in this particular topic.

Or alternatively, there could be a focus on the first two topics. Just figure I see if there is an interest in redirecting the topic back

 

[bobballen_18]

At9009,

I can see how the thread has not solely focused on how specifically one with SSA lives his life. Part of me wants to agree with the general idea of what you are saying. The other part of me would answer the question asked in the title of the thread like this:

What does it look like? No different than any other Catholic. On the face of it, I reallythink that answer is completely legitimate. Make friends. Go to Church, take advantage of the sacraments. Be involved in the life of the Church. Support all Church teachings and grow in knowledge and virtue. Overall, grow closer to our Lord and always strive to do His will and conform ourselves to Him. All of those things are what every single Catholic should do, including those with SSA.

I don’t think there is really any difference at all, strictly speaking, in how a “gay” Catholic lives life compared to a non “gay” Catholic.

To me, the question really does revolve around how we cope with the fact that we have the attractions. It’s not that we are called to live any differently. Many with SSA tend to remain single - and sure, being single has its challenges in that most Catholics are looking to marry and/or enter religious life. But, I say again, that changes nothinf about how we are to live our lives! Having SSA does not change things in that regard!

One of the reasons, it seems to me, that Catholics with SSA struggle, is not because they don’t know how to be a Catholic, per se, any more than especially the average Catholic these days. It is that they steuggle to relate to others, more or less, or at least to the average Catholic. Part of it is a mindset thing on the part of the individual with SSA. He tends to be isolated. He tends to think a lot of people, Catholic or otherwise, are against him or at least don’t understand him. He tends to need to be affirmed as good and/or loveable.

This is why personally, I always focus on the things which I believe most affect the mindset of someone with SSA. So isn’t the question more not one of “what does the life look like” - because generally, practically it ought to look the same in terms of the basic things I listed above - but instead, “how do I deal with these internal feelings I have that have resulted from my attractions?” or something along that line? And doesn’t so much of the Catholic faith revolve around her understanding of the human person? His nature, how he relates to God and others?

I don’t know, I guess you are wondering specifically how to do each one of those things I listed? Is that what the real question for you is? Is that what you think the Church specifically needs to answer for individuals with SSA? I don’t know man. I think it is all there for us. The problem is not with the Church itself. I think the “solution,” whatever it is, is already available.

No, I don’t think Courage is the solution - but you know what, what if every single Catholic who struggled with SSA actually attended Courage? Instead of just writing it off as “only for those who were in the gay lifestyle”? Don’t you think it is possible Courage wouldn’t be geared so specifically toward those “types” of people if, you know, there were a greater variety of people attending?

I don’t know. I am starting to just ramble right now. I am just not convinced there is such a big problem on the part of the Church; the Church herself has all the tools one needs to grow in sanctity. It is more of a problem of particular individuals within the Church; it is more a problem of people with SSA getting the message from both individuals inside the Church but especially from without, that they are somehow less of a person or unloveable, or that they are going to Hell. The Church teaches none of those things.

The solution, very generally, is to grow in our understanding of ourselves as a full human person, body and soul, and to develop friendships which will aid in this endeavor. The Church really cannot get much more in depth than that - as many people like to point out, you can’t put people with SSA in a box and say there is the same solution for everyone. There is so much variety that all she can do is reiterate her teachings on the value of the human person! Admittedly that itself can be a tough task given our world’s terribly skewed notion of the human person but I strongly believe it is all there for us in some way or another.

Ok sorry, I am done rambling, carry on.

 

[randomuser]

No, I don’t think Courage is the solution - but you know what, what if every single Catholic who struggled with SSA actually attended Courage? Instead of just writing it off as “only for those who were in the gay lifestyle”?

Celibate gay Catholics, by virtue of being chaste, aren’t in the “gay lifestyle.” Furthermore, because “SSA” predicates you don’t have to be gay to have “SSA,” and many people with “SSA” deny they’re homosexual, it’s going to be a near-impossible task getting heterosexuals to attend Courage meetings - that’s why they’ll write it off - not because they presume it’s only for those in the “gay lifestyle,” but because they’re not gay and will feel they have nothing in common with, and no shared experience, with those who are. In short, the “SSA” model would require one “SSA-heterosexual” meeting for those who are straight, and one “SSA-homosexual” meeting for those who are, or could be, gay.

One feasible solution to the issue at hand, which would bypass the “SSA” confusion, would be participation in fellowship groups the Newman Center at many college campuses and universities – these groups have rosaries, game nights, etc. Unlike at regular diocesan parishes (which are predominantly families and seniors) and because they’re on college campuses, Catholic Newman Centers are statistically more likely to have a greater demographic of celibate “gay” Catholics - here’s one such ministry that showed up right away on a Google search:
csufnewman.com/setting-table

 

[at9009]

I’ll try to respond to all of your response, but we both ramble

At9009,
What does it look like? No different than any other Catholic. On the face of it, I reallythink that answer is completely legitimate. Make friends. Go to Church, take advantage of the sacraments. Be involved in the life of the Church. Support all Church teachings and grow in knowledge and virtue. Overall, grow closer to our Lord and always strive to do His will and conform ourselves to Him. All of those things are what every single Catholic should do, including those with SSA.

I don’t think there is really any difference at all, strictly speaking, in how a “gay” Catholic lives life compared to a non “gay” Catholic.

Okay I agree with that statement (). We all have crosses that differ in many ways, but we are all called to strive to do God’s Will.

To me, the question really does revolve around how we cope with the fact that we have the attractions. It’s not that we are called to live any differently. Many with SSA tend to remain single - and sure, being single has its challenges in that most Catholics are looking to marry and/or enter religious life. But, I say again, that changes nothinf about how we are to live our lives! Having SSA does not change things in that regard!

I guess the end vocations are the same. What I meant to reflect is that SSA present unique challenges in the various possible vocations.

Like a person who is discerning marriage, explaining to a potential spouse about this cross and determining how best to handle it together is a unique challenge.

Likewise religious life is also a challenge, since the language is kind of unclear about what deep-seated tendencies are and the actual policy of seminaries and monasteries. The best solution would be to speak directly with a vocational director, but I think the ambiguity leads many away from considering religious life.

Finally, a person who is in a celibate non-religious vocation also has unique challenges (not just SSA Catholics but also other permanent singles). We live in a society that totally devalues the importance of friendship and non-sexual physical intimacy. People in this vocation, can end up feeling very lonely and isolated making living out this type of life more difficult than it should be.

Maybe a more focused discussion on these type of topics so that Christians with this cross realize that there particular vocation is way more than “Don’t act on those attractions.”

One of the reasons, it seems to me, that Catholics with SSA struggle, is not because they don’t know how to be a Catholic, per se, any more than especially the average Catholic these days. It is that they steuggle to relate to others, more or less, or at least to the average Catholic. Part of it is a mindset thing on the part of the individual with SSA. He tends to be isolated. He tends to think a lot of people, Catholic or otherwise, are against him or at least don’t understand him. He tends to need to be affirmed as good and/or loveable.

That’s true. Part of the struggle for me is hiding this particular cross from family members because I know it will irreparably damage the relationship. The secrecy of this cross that I feel is kind of discouraging and isolating. Now, I’m not saying that the first thing I tell everyone I meet is my particular cross, but I to able to just acknowledge it and move on rather than deflect would be nice.

I don’t know, I guess you are wondering specifically how to do each one of those things I listed? Is that what the real question for you is? Is that what you think the Church specifically needs to answer for individuals with SSA? I don’t know man. I think it is all there for us. The problem is not with the Church itself. I think the “solution,” whatever it is, is already available.

Not exactly, but those are still great questions for people to ponder over.

No, I don’t think Courage is the solution - but you know what, what if every single Catholic who struggled with SSA actually attended Courage? Instead of just writing it off as “only for those who were in the gay lifestyle”? Don’t you think it is possible Courage wouldn’t be geared so specifically toward those “types” of people if, you know, there were a greater variety of people attending?

I am not against people attending Courage meeting as it can be a great place for support and help with dealing with this cross. I do think knowing others in the same situation and how they manage is pivotal for anyone. I didn’t write courage off, I was an online chapter (couldn’t get to a physical chapter during undergrad) and found that for me it wasn’t as helpful (NOT THAT is bad just I needed something different I guess which has been working for me).

 

[at9009]

At9009,
I don’t know. I am starting to just ramble right now. I am just not convinced there is such a big problem on the part of the Church; the Church herself has all the tools one needs to grow in sanctity. It is more of a problem of particular individuals within the Church; it is more a problem of people with SSA getting the message from both individuals inside the Church but especially from without, that they are somehow less of a person or unloveable, or that they are going to Hell. The Church teaches none of those things. .

I totally agree The sacraments themselves are pretty powerful graces

Just going from my experience growing up, I initially wasn’t aware the Church even distinguished between the inclination and the actions. I had heard all of the other belief systems that basically equate the two and assumed it to be what everyone of the traditional mindset believed. I don’t remember it ever being talked about in Church, CCD, or anything expect for the teaching about marriage. I ended up internalizing “gay people are bad and need to repent (i.e. become straight)” mentality from some of the more vocal Christian groups (which never clarified their statements and often said it was vitriol). So, as a scared teenager around 15ish noticing these attractions who was too afraid to even go looking for help, I buried everything and put up thick defensive walls that weakened my faith, encouraged a kind of self-loathing I wasn’t really aware of it, and kept me feeling lonely that I also didn’t really grasp (I put on a ‘happy mask’ and was so good at almost fooled myself sometimes). I couldn’t talk to anyone about this topic because it was so taboo and whenever it came up due to something in our culture, it only furthered my fear that my family and even Christian circles weren’t a safe group to discuss it with. Even now, I don’t know how to bring it up to my extended family without fear of being disowned by some of them.

So, we do need as members of this Church to be more vocal about this particular topic when it comes up. Instead of just stopping at gay marriage can’t happen because marriage is between a man and women, go on further to say the Church also distinguishes between the acts an the inclination. One thing that would help too, I guess is to give models of SSA/gay Catholics which is why I think it’s great to hear Joseph’s story, the Third Way movie, etc.

For example, I know people have problems with the pope using the term gay when he said who was he to judge. But for me, that’s kind of a big deal because it reinforced his accordance with the Church’s teaching (that makes the distinction). Courage is a good step for many but it’s poorly advertised (unless you go looking). Something as simple as a place in the Church’s bulletin mentioning the group, the parish contact, and even the website would probably go a long way.

The solution, very generally, is to grow in our understanding of ourselves as a full human person, body and soul, and to develop friendships which will aid in this endeavor. The Church really cannot get much more in depth than that - as many people like to point out, you can’t put people with SSA in a box and say there is the same solution for everyone. There is so much variety that all she can do is reiterate her teachings on the value of the human person! Admittedly that itself can be a tough task given our world’s terribly skewed notion of the human person but I strongly believe it is all there for us in some way or another.

Ok sorry, I am done rambling, carry on.

I agree with that. There is still plenty I need to figure out myself. Although, I do wish though that the Church (and Christian culture at large) could help reemphasize the importance of genuine friendship and countering some of the idolization of romance and romantic relationships. I feel that would help not only people in a single life vocation but everyone including those in the marriage vocation.

So end to rambly story time and on to more good conversations

 

[SylviaD]

I have a son who is gay and married to a wonderful man, whom our entire family adores. Together they are raising two children they adopted (a brother and sister) who were in desperate need of someone to care for them. They were born with birth defects and some other medical issues and were considered “unadoptable” in their country of origin. Those needs have since been addressed and they are thriving. My son and son-in-law are raising their children in the Catholic Church, attend Mass weekly, and are very involved and much loved and accepted members of their Catholic Community. I could not be more proud of my son or more in love with my beautiful grandchildren.