Where sin begins in same-sex physical intimacy

[Rau]

I am sorry I didn’t make myself more clear. I was implying that the girl you were with would be fully aware of Church teaching on sex and fully willing to abstain from it.

A boy and a girl courting typically have a physically intimate relationship, but not sex, which develops to a point. The two know the appropriate bounds. They may become engaged. They continue to know the appropriate bounds, and complying with those bounds is made easier in the knowledge of their forthcoming marriage. I suspect the absence of any such prospect may make the challenge for a homosexual couple more difficult, despite good intentions.

I note the high level of control you described for yourself. That attribute, of not feeling drawn to sex through physical intimacy, may not be something shared by all.

 

[SMGS127]

A boy and a girl courting typically have a physically intimate relationship, but not sex, which develops to a point. The two know the appropriate bounds. They may become engaged. They continue to know the appropriate bounds, and complying with those bounds is made easier in the knowledge of their forthcoming marriage. I suspect the absence of any such prospect may make the challenge for a homosexual couple more difficult, despite good intentions.

I note the high level of control you described for yourself. That attribute, of not feeling drawn to sex through physical intimacy, may not be something shared by all.

I am aware of the lack of step-by-step dating parameters that are set for heterosexual relationships (and homosexual ones, too, but only through a non-Catholic lens). For a Catholic homosexual relationship (which sounds bizarre, but work with me) to be licit, it would too have to be bound by certain parameters though, mainly no sex and no lusting. It is true that these parameters, unlike a heterosexual relationship, could never be lifted.

However, if two women who had the same level of control that I describe were to enter into a non-sexual romantic relationship that was intended towards helping stave off loneliness and working towards a mutual happiness and also towards avoiding any form of sexual sin, would not those two be in a licit same-sex relationship, as bizarre as that may sound in the context of Catholicism?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

If it was not a near occasion of sin (or, rather, if the couple were not at risk of having sex by doing these actions), would you think it was sinful, PS?

Cuddling, no. My wife and her friends do each other’s hair, massage each other, pet each other, etc. Now usually these actions involve only a partial attention to the other, in some sense, and I would worry if the primary intention were to give the other person pleasure – similarly, I don’t want my wife going to a professional masseuse who is trying to give her pleasure. But I’m fine with pleasure being part of the package, for sure.

As for making out, I gotta say, I just don’t understand that. I mean, my wife and I have periods when we’re being continent for the sake of NFP, and we make out quite passionately (whether or not we should), but it’s always quite clear to us that this making out has its natural fulfillment in sexual oneness – even if on given occasions we don’t “go there”. It seems to me that making out is intrinsically tied to erotic rapture. I felt that way as a teenager with my girlfriend too, that making out was always an introduction, even when I (with some level of innocence) didn’t quite know what came next.

So I don’t understand chaste making out. Massages, hair-carressings, and gentle petting seem to me completely different from making out.

I don’t know. Even with the deeply delineated understanding the Greeks had for love, I don’t know if they have a word for the love I am talking about that exists in lesbian relationships. It involves desire to some extent, so it can not fully be free from eros, but it does not need any form of sexual involvement to satisfy desire, so it cannot be fully eros.

Well, all love involves desire, in my book. Agape is an active disposition to passionately desire (and act toward) the good of the beloved. Storge is a desire for affection. Philia is a desire for one’s life to be caught up in another’s life. Eros is a desire for one’s self to be caught up in another self.

Notice, however, the complete absence of pleasure from all of the forms of love. The idea that love necessarily involves seeking or giving pleasure is a modern heresy. If I were you, S, I would consider whether the desire for *certain *types of intimacy falls under that heresy. This can be a fine line. For example, I think it would be really good for me if another man who loved me were to touch and caress my face – and I very much want it to happen. Such an action would communicate God’s fatherly/brotherly love for me in a very tangible way.

But I also want very much for a man who loves me to slowly caress my lips. This desire, I can recognize, is a desire for him to communicate that he is so taken with me that he is willing to scorn convention, that he is willing to do something genuinely erotic to make me feel loved. This is not a good desire. It’s a desire for pleasure – not pleasure as a happy consequence of an otherwise good thing, but pleasure itself, for its own sake.

The idea that husband and wife are given to “enjoy” each other gets at this. The enjoyment of husband and wife serve a role in God’s economy. If another man were to enjoy me in this way, it would not serve a role in God’s economy. The problem isn’t sex, as such – it’s the fundamental way that we relate to one another’s bodies. So I don’t think a friendship between two gay people can be compared to a healthy pre-marital relationship, in terms of acceptable intimacy.

Again, I could make out with a girl for an entire day and not put myself at any risk of losing control of my actions to go further. I don’t understand why men say they can’t, but then I don’t understand guys in general

Well, I don’t think it’s very common for anyone to literally lose control, when it comes to sex. In my case, I just stop wanting to hold onto control.

At any rate, I’m not dogmatic about any of this, but I also don’t want to set up a situation where – out of a desire to make people’s lives easier – we make their relationships less fully what God wants them to be. God bless you!

 

[SMGS127]

Cuddling, no. My wife and her friends do each other’s hair, massage each other, pet each other, etc. Now usually these actions involve only a partial attention to the other, in some sense, and I would worry if the primary intention were to give the other person pleasure – similarly, I don’t want my wife going to a professional masseuse who is trying to give her pleasure. But I’m fine with pleasure being part of the package, for sure.

Agreed.

As for making out, I gotta say, I just don’t understand that. I mean, my wife and I have periods when we’re being continent for the sake of NFP, and we make out quite passionately (whether or not we should), but it’s always quite clear to us that this making out has its natural fulfillment in sexual oneness – even if on given occasions we don’t “go there”. It seems to me that making out is intrinsically tied to erotic rapture. I felt that way as a teenager with my girlfriend too, that making out was always an introduction, even when I (with some level of innocence) didn’t quite know what came next.

So I don’t understand chaste making out. Massages, hair-carressings, and gentle petting seem to me completely different from making out.

Personally, I disagree. Maybe it’s a uniquity of myself, maybe a uniquity of lesbian relationships, I don’t know. But when I was in a relationship in the past, I made out with my girlfriend for the same reason as I would any of those other things. It made her smile, it brought us closer as people, she was happy, etc. etc. I had no intention to increase my desire by making out; my desire for her was already there; why would I need to increase it? And it doesn’t feel like a step either to me; it’s an activity in and of itself that brings happiness and helps improve an emotional bond. Even if society sees making out as ‘sexual,’ why should that affect the morality of making out if those partaking of it don’t see it as sexual? Making out, laying next to each other, cuddling in the same bed, talking for entire nights with each other, laying on each other as we watch movies–they all have the same purpose to me, to increase an emotional bond. Sex is sex and it’s a whole beast in and of itself that, while intensely pleasurable, is not necessary for a relationship, in my mind. And it is the sex and lustful objectification that is immoral, right? It may not make sense to you, but it is something I have directly experienced, and it is a real phenomenon. And wouldn’t such a situation still fall under a chaste relationship, even if other people can’t imagine it?

Well, all love involves desire, in my book. Agape is an active disposition to passionately desire (and act toward) the good of the beloved. Storge is a desire for affection. Philia is a desire for one’s life to be caught up in another’s life. Eros is a desire for one’s self to be caught up in another self.

Maybe I’m talking about agape then? Really everything I did (including sex!) in a relationship was to make my girlfriend happy, and I knew that she did the same for me. So if you cut out the intrinsically immoral acts that intentions can’t make licit (sex), then the relationship should be moral, right?

But I also want very much for a man who loves me to slowly caress my lips. This desire, I can recognize, is a desire for him to communicate that he is so taken with me that he is willing to scorn convention, that he is willing to do something genuinely erotic to make me feel loved. This is not a good desire. It’s a desire for pleasure – not pleasure as a happy consequence of an otherwise good thing, but pleasure itself, for its own sake.

I don’t know…I don’t think wanting to feel loved by someone is an obsession with pleasure. I can understand sex, but making out isn’t really pleasurable by itself. I do agree with you that it is done for some other purpose. For me, it was to increase an emotional bond and to make me and my girlfriend happy. I guess in some (most?) relationships it has a sexual component to it; I never experienced that though, nor did I ever feel my ex-girlfriends did. But making out for agape reasons, even if there is an eros desire that is present, should be moral in my opinion. I asked because I am genuinely interested if there has ever been any direction regarding this stuff. I don’t feel making out is inherently immoral – that is to say, I don’t think making out is evil regardless of the intentions behind it.

 

[SMGS127]

The idea that husband and wife are given to “enjoy” each other gets at this. The enjoyment of husband and wife serve a role in God’s economy. If another man were to enjoy me in this way, it would not serve a role in God’s economy. The problem isn’t sex, as such – it’s the fundamental way that we relate to one another’s bodies. So I don’t think a friendship between two gay people can be compared to a healthy pre-marital relationship, in terms of acceptable intimacy.

I disagree. A pre-marital relationship can always end before marriage, and thus its potential can always be the same as a same-sex relationship (as in, it could end without marriage ever occurring). In addition, this goes back to assuming that one’s behavior is done with some future attainment in mind, which I am not discussing. I made out with my girlfriends because my girlfriend and I wanted to make out. I had sex when we both wanted to have sex. We went to the mall (or movies or aquarium or whatever) when we wanted to go shopping (or to see a movie or to go to the aquarium or whatever). Each action had its own intentions and its own purpose; none were interconnected to each other, and again, I didn’t feel they were to my girlfriends either. Maybe it’s just that lesbian relationships evolve super-fast and so there really isn’t an “escalation” period that straight and/or gay male relationships have. But I am completely serious that I have never experienced a lesbian relationship where I felt that making out was some sort of precursor to anything more. Every action was its own action.

Well, I don’t think it’s very common for anyone to literally lose control, when it comes to sex. In my case, I just stop wanting to hold onto control.

I definitely know the feeling, but…if I could licitly have a girlfriend as long as I never had sex with her or lusted after her, I would be fine doing so. I only had sex before I was Catholic because I loved my girlfriend and wanted what was best for her, and I didn’t believe there was any immorality to sex at the time. So a relationship without sex that still involved all the other romantic areas of a relationship would be exactly that; I would still be able to love her and make her as happy as I could, while doing what was best for the both of us (e.g. not engaging in sex outside a marital construct).

At any rate, I’m not dogmatic about any of this, but I also don’t want to set up a situation where – out of a desire to make people’s lives easier – we make their relationships less fully what God wants them to be. God bless you!

I know; I have no intention of leading people into sin either. I just feel that, if it helps them get through life without depression and without leading to repression of their inner self (which can cause psychological problems), and it has no inherent immorality to it, that it could be an option through which people could feel like they weren’t trapped in a horrible situation. From how you’ve talked, maybe it wouldn’t be an option for gay men. But I firmly believe it could be for lesbians.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

And it doesn’t feel like a step either to me; it’s an activity in and of itself that brings happiness and helps improve an emotional bond.

I guess I see physical parts of relating (sexual or not) as working the other way round. I don’t think they improve emotional bonds; I think they **manifest **emotional bonds. This is why physicality with near-strangers is so damaging to the soul, in my opinion: because it disconnects the expression of love from love. I agree, of course, that touch brings happiness – or at the very least, pleasure. But I don’t think it improves relationships, not even married relationships. (Although the desire to desire one’s spouse – manifested in sensual advances – does very much improve marriages.)

Even if society sees making out as ‘sexual,’ why should that affect the morality of making out if those partaking of it don’t see it as sexual? Making out, laying next to each other, cuddling in the same bed, talking for entire nights with each other, laying on each other as we watch movies–they all have the same purpose to me, to increase an emotional bond. Sex is sex and it’s a whole beast in and of itself that, while intensely pleasurable, is not necessary for a relationship, in my mind. And it is the sex and lustful objectification that is immoral, right? It may not make sense to you, but it is something I have directly experienced, and it is a real phenomenon.

Oh, I’ve experienced sensual (non-sexual) intimacy, and I know how it doesn’t necessarily lead anywhere “else”. But I think it, in itself, can be problematic. I don’t understand exactly how, or exactly what the principles here are. I *want *to say that gay sensuality is unhelpful, if not wrong, but that loving and intimate touch between people of the same sex is good. But I have no idea how to demarcate sensuality from intimacy, in practice.

And wouldn’t such a situation still fall under a chaste relationship, even if other people can’t imagine it?

When you write that, I immediately think of the story of Socrates lying in bed naked next to the beautiful Alcibiades. Nothing “happened”. But I don’t, in my gut, feel like this could be a Christian model of chastity.

Maybe I’m talking about agape then? Really everything I did (including sex!) in a relationship was to make my girlfriend happy, and I knew that she did the same for me. So if you cut out the intrinsically immoral acts that intentions can’t make licit (sex), then the relationship should be moral, right?

Well, the question is “What *makes *gay sex wrong?” And once we have that answer, we can ask the question – “does this make gay sensuality wrong too?” And I can’t fully speak to this. You see, I know certain acts and certain desires, and they’re all on the gay male side of the spectrum. I see plenty loving in gay relationships, but nothing loving in these actions. And I cannot possibly dissociate kissing a man from bedding him. Why not? Because my intention, to focus all my heart and soul on giving and receiving pleasure from another man, is the same in both cases.

I don’t know…I don’t think wanting to feel loved by someone is an obsession with pleasure.

Wanting to know and be known isn’t an obsession with pleasure. And that’s what I think true love is.

I can understand sex, but making out isn’t really pleasurable by itself.

But making out for agape reasons, even if there is an eros desire that is present, should be moral in my opinion.

But I’m not sure anyone can ever say that the “reason I made out with my girlfriend” is because I thought it was good for her. I mean, that just sounds wrong, to me. Lovemaking, in all its forms, ought to be purely about desire to possess the other. In eros, all agape fades away; or rather, agape is fulfilled, because our ultimate good is in possessing and being possessed (by God!).

Maybe it’s just that lesbian relationships evolve super-fast and so there really isn’t an “escalation” period that straight and/or gay male relationships have. But I am completely serious that I have never experienced a lesbian relationship where I felt that making out was some sort of precursor to anything more. Every action was its own action.

I’m glad you put it this way, cause it helped me to see what you seem to be talking about. I think you’re talking about the experience of being in love. I’ve been in two long-term relationships in my life. In one of them, I was sort of being dragged along; I enjoyed the physical relationship, but every step of the relationships was labored and gradual. It was all rather mechanical. In that relationship, I could never stop and be in the moment; the moment was always pushing toward another moment, and (sadly) everything was always pushing toward orgasm.

But then there’s my relationship with my wife. I fell in love with her. And then “every action was its own action”, as you say. Nothing was discrete, everything ran together, but I could be happy where we were, without moving from that spot. This “being in love” doesn’t last forever, but you can revisit it. It’s quite wonderful.

Not sure what this adds to the conversation, but I thought I’d mention it. If I were celibate and had been in love before, this would surely be the hardest thing to give up.

 

[Bookcat]

Disinterested friendships -not relationships of a romantic nature (and avoiding near occasions of such…)

Friendships without “romantic” overtones.

Contact: Courage.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

Friends…not “couples”.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

There’s a couple threads on CAF that dance around this topic, but none that directly address it that I’ve seen. My apologies if I’ve missed one. I thought it to be something that should be explored from a moral standpoint as a potential help for those with SSA in the Church.

Thank you for this thread, it was very much needed.

That is to say, would a same-sex relationship with no sexual intimacy but with romantic intimacy (kissing, laying on each other watching movies, and all other emotionally intense stuff that still does not fall under a sexual activity) be immoral? For the sake of the moral argument, please do not bring up scandal: I realize that is a concern with any Catholic who does such a thing, but I am seeking only to understand the inherent moral licitness of the individual actions themselves.

[For the sake of avoiding scandal, I will, however, clarify that I have not had any same-sex physicality since becoming Catholic, nor do I endorse it].

Provided you aren’t doing that stuff in hopes of it leading to sex those actions aren’y sinful

Anyways, to give a broad, personal example from before I was Catholic, with ex-girlfriends, while sex was not a small part of the relationship, there were many nights where there was no sex involved, but there was still such a large degree of…emotional intimacy. This can be hard to explain to non-lesbians, but it’s like, even though there’s no sex involved, your whole world zones in around this one girl and hers on you, and it really is an unbelievable experience. Maybe this question only applies to women with SSA, as I don’t pretend to understand gay/bisexual men, but would a relationship that barred itself from sex and restricted itself to nights like those, and all the other emotionally intimate aspects of a relationship be immoral? Because if not, it would help individuals with SSAs avoid feeling sentenced or trapped. I know many lesbians (myself included) who feel more closeness and love from a single kiss with a girl than anything a guy could do, up to and including sex.

Throughout history women mostly met their needs for intimacy via relationships with other women.

I am seriously asking for opinions; do not think that I am pushing in any direction, even though I am a lesbian myself. I wish to follow Christ above all else. But if this was licit, it would certainly make life easier for individuals with SSA.

I’m honestly surprised at how long the thread has gone without someone insisting that you aren’t really lesbian, that you’re real identity is a child of God or that you need to stop reducing yourself to your sin and should instead identify as SSA.

 

[Rau]

Provided you aren’t doing that stuff in hopes of it leading to sex those actions aren’y sinful.

I have some sympathy for that view, however…there seems to be the possibility that these actions place one in the near occasion of sin. Now perhaps the person concerned has such self-awareness that they feel sure this is not the case. Can they feel equivalently certain in respect of the other person?

 

[SMGS127]

I have some sympathy for that view, however…there seems to be the possibility that these actions place one in the near occasion of sin. Now perhaps the person concerned has such self-awareness that they feel sure this is not the case. Can they feel equivalently certain in respect of the other person?

Obviously it would have to be clear from the beginning of the relationship that sex was off-limits. But after that, it really becomes an issue of trust, which should (hopefully) be present in ANY close relationship, romantic or not.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I have some sympathy for that view, however…there seems to be the possibility that these actions place one in the near occasion of sin. Now perhaps the person concerned has such self-awareness that they feel sure this is not the case. Can they feel equivalently certain in respect of the other person?

Can anyone really be sure how sure anyone else is? All we can do is trust them.

 

[50yroldTOBfan]

Which is why I am asking where sin starts, not mortal sin.

This might sound harsh to you, but sin can actually start in the thoughts, even before any homosexual romantic touch.

Judging when a person enters a state of sin is fraught with difficulty because sin depends on the state of your mind, which nobody but God can know with certainty. Still, you seem to be asking for opinions, so I believe it is safe to say that you are likely entering “venial sin territory” before you even touch suggestively somebody you are not married to.

Don’t be discouraged. God loves you. Chastity is difficult for all single people. But I just can’t see 2 women laying all over each other as being the answer, or something that is pleasing to God, given what we know of His intentions for sexuality.

 

[Gertabelle]

But what I can say is that, depending on the relationship, temptation would not necessarily be a problem. Again, I could make out with a girl for an entire day and not put myself at any risk of losing control of my actions to go further. I don’t understand why men say they can’t, but then I don’t understand guys in general . It is a very unique relationship type.

To everyone: I suppose what I am asking is hard for a non-lesbian to understand, but please at least take me at my word that lesbian relationships are fully capable of existing without sex, even though sex would obviously be preferable in a relationship for most lesbians. With that assumption in place that temptation/near occasion of sin is not an issue in the cases I am describing, would you still consider it sinful?

Please forgive me, but I was not able to read this entire thread – my eyes are so tired they feel like they’re about to fall out of my face

Anyway, I just wanted to jump in and say I have a fair idea of what it’s like to be in lesbian relationships, having lived as a lesbian for 10 years (left the lifestyle awhile back now). That being said, I disagree with your sweeping statement that “lesbian relationships are fully capable of existing without sex.” That was absolutely not my experience, nor the experience of my girlfriends, “wife,” and other lesbian friends. When sex died, the relationship died, and the partners moved on.

I find it interesting that you keep referring to making out as if that action is somehow not a sexual action Two women cannot become one flesh – Kissing may not lead to completion, as it were, but it certainly is part of sexual intimacy in the relationship. One of my girlfriends confessed to me that she had spent some time kissing another woman while we were dating. I was furious and deeply hurt. Why? Because making out is reserved for an intimate and exclusive relationship.

Super long story, but I am now a single mom of a 10yo boy, and I choose to remain single so his life doesn’t get more messed up than it is (the last thing he needs is a step-dad and a blended family!). Evenso, I am still a healthy, normal woman. There are days when I long for some physical intimacy in my life, but making out with a friend is not an option!

Well, that’s my two cents’ worth anyway.

I’ll keep you in my prayers. Just one more thing as someone who’s been there, done that, bought the t-shirt… This might be a really good time to back off from seeking satisfaction in physical intimacy. Get a dog or a cat to snuggle with. Spend some time reading about chastity and the incredible gift God has given us in chastity.

When my ex-husband and I divorced (yeah, it’s a super long story), I read The Thrill of the Chaste by Dawn Eden and was so amazed at how I had NO IDEA what chastity was really about. I started seeking out more information and really practicing chastity in heart as well as in body. Actually, most of chastity is in the head and heart. It transformed how I viewed every person I saw!

Anyway, that was two more cents. One more penny of thought and you’ll owe me a nickle

God bless you, dear one.

Gertie

 

[SMGS127]

Please forgive me, but I was not able to read this entire thread – my eyes are so tired they feel like they’re about to fall out of my face

Anyway, I just wanted to jump in and say I have a fair idea of what it’s like to be in lesbian relationships, having lived as a lesbian for 10 years (left the lifestyle awhile back now). That being said, I disagree with your sweeping statement that “lesbian relationships are fully capable of existing without sex.” That was absolutely not my experience, nor the experience of my girlfriends, “wife,” and other lesbian friends. When sex died, the relationship died, and the partners moved on.

I find it interesting that you keep referring to making out as if that action is somehow not a sexual action Two women cannot become one flesh – Kissing may not lead to completion, as it were, but it certainly is part of sexual intimacy in the relationship. One of my girlfriends confessed to me that she had spent some time kissing another woman while we were dating. I was furious and deeply hurt. Why? Because making out is reserved for an intimate and exclusive relationship.

Super long story, but I am now a single mom of a 10yo boy, and I choose to remain single so his life doesn’t get more messed up than it is (the last thing he needs is a step-dad and a blended family!). Evenso, I am still a healthy, normal woman. There are days when I long for some physical intimacy in my life, but making out with a friend is not an option!

Well, that’s my two cents’ worth anyway.

I’ll keep you in my prayers. Just one more thing as someone who’s been there, done that, bought the t-shirt… This might be a really good time to back off from seeking satisfaction in physical intimacy. Get a dog or a cat to snuggle with. Spend some time reading about chastity and the incredible gift God has given us in chastity.

When my ex-husband and I divorced (yeah, it’s a super long story), I read The Thrill of the Chaste by Dawn Eden and was so amazed at how I had NO IDEA what chastity was really about. I started seeking out more information and really practicing chastity in heart as well as in body. Actually, most of chastity is in the head and heart. It transformed how I viewed every person I saw!

Anyway, that was two more cents. One more penny of thought and you’ll owe me a nickle

God bless you, dear one.

Gertie

Thank you for your post, sincerely.

I am a bit surprised by your story, but I definitely believe you. So I don’t know; maybe it’s a case-by-case basis.

Personally, while I understand the point you make about making out, I would be mad if a partner of mine got significant emotional attention from another woman, and that clearly isn’t sexual. You don’t have to commit a sexual act to cheat on a partner. In this case, obviously there would be no partner I was cheating on; I am not talking about marrying a man and getting my “attention” somewhere else. That, to me, is so clearly immoral as to not even justify a thread on the issue.

I do agree that making out, as opposed to intense emotional attention, is specifically reserved for a relationship, and indeed, I don’t deny that I am talking about the possibility of allowing for a romantic same-sex relationship in Catholic teaching. However, I deny that making out is tied to sex. While making out occurs during sex, so does, for example, complimenting each other, and complimenting isn’t tied to sex either. I just see them as very separate, even though all 3 actions (complimenting, making out, sex in order of intensity) are born out of desire and love. In my mind, complimenting is a fairly unrestricted option, passionate kissing/making out is reserved for very intimate relationships, and sex is reserved only for valid marital unions.

Perhaps my statement WAS too sweeping, and I meant it more to come across that “some lesbian relationships are capable of existing without sex” than to be so broad as to say lesbian relationships, in general, are always so. But to me, while sex helped me to connect on a stronger level with my ex-girlfriends, it was not an integral key to the relationship itself, e.g. the relationship could exist even had the sex never occurred.

As Prodigal put it, I am looking for that love connection that I cannot have. No matter how hard I try, I can’t have it with men; I just can’t. I have tried, really. And it kills me inside every day knowing what I used to have, even though I have now vowed to follow Christ no matter what in sexual (and, well, all) matters. And that love existed even without the sex. 99% of that relationship was the cuddling, and the romance, and the movie marathon nights, and the hanging out with each other 20 out of the 48 hours on weekends.

Sex, to me, was just icing on the cake. And I don’t need that icing. But I do need that intimacy to live, and it really does kill me not having it. And I will follow Christ no matter what; if I can’t ever have that love again licitly, then I won’t. But if there’s some way, any way, that I could have a licit, chaste relationship with the member of the same sex that obviously avoided sex, lusting, etc., it would make my life significantly easier.

This is something that’s made me cry a lot over the last year, especially the last few days (I got triggered by seeing a lesbian relationship). I need to figure out something to help me here. Because I know from experience that I cannot, in any way, be attracted to guys in the same way. I can’t even feel the same love with them, no matter how much physicality or emotional involvement I put into it.

So please, if there’s any way I can have a chaste same-sex relationship, where both members work to keep the other chaste and in the grace of God, it would help me get through life.

 

[Rau]

…
So please, if there’s any way I can have a chaste same-sex relationship, where both members work to keep the other chaste and in the grace of God, it would help me get through life.

I wish I had an answer to your question, for I suspect the uncertainty you feel now must itself be a source of pain.

That the close and intimate physicality (that you desire) can be, for you, non-sexual (by which I mean, does not tend to lead to sexual desires), is outside my experience and perhaps the experience of many. Consequently, I imagine you will routinely get a response along the lines of “you’re asking for trouble”! Or if not that, the potential giving of scandal will be the objection.

Have you sought the opinion on this question from Priests or others better versed in the subject than we CAFers? Do they grasp the point about the relationship being non-sexual? Do they have a response regarding the significance (or not) of that?

Have your prior partner(s) shared your perspective that the relationship is not sexual and will not evolve in that direction?

 

[SMGS127]

I wish I had an answer to your question, for I suspect the uncertainty you feel now must itself be a source of pain.

I don’t want to do anything against God, but if this was an option, it would help me out immensely. But if it isn’t an option and I do it and I sin against Christ in doing it…I would be very saddened and disappointed in myself, even if unintentional .

That the close and intimate physicality (that you desire) can be, for you, non-sexual (by which I mean, does not tend to lead to sexual desires), is outside my experience and perhaps the experience of many. Consequently, I imagine you will routinely get a response along the lines of “you’re asking for trouble”! Or if not that, the potential giving of scandal will be the objection.

Yes, that’s honestly the problem I have with even asking it. People don’t understand what I’m talking about, and when they do, they’ve never experienced it and can’t imagine it. Scandal would be very, VERY tricky and I’d have to negotiate that point itself if the actions themselves aren’t intrinsically immoral. But that’s also why I asked people not to discuss it in this thread, because if the actions themselves are immoral, I don’t wish to do them, even if I could somehow avoid scandal.

Have you sought the opinion on this question from Priests or others better versed in the subject than we CAFers? Do they grasp the point about the relationship being non-sexual? Do they have a response regarding the significance (or not) of that?

I unfortunately live in a part of DC that’s fairly far from any parish. The place I go for worship is the Basilica, but as amazing as it is, it also does not allow for personal matters to really be discussed with a pastor. That’s why I asked here. I will be moving soon, and I plan on discussing it once I do.

Have your prior partner(s) shared your perspective that the relationship is not sexual and will not evolve in that direction?

I have no idea, to be honest. I never put any thought into a non-sexual relationship before I became Catholic, because sex to me meant fulfilling a relationship to its complete substance. Now, if I were to enter into a SS relationship, I would view a SS relationship that stopped short of sex as having reached its complete substance, as any further would be immoral. But what I can tell you is that our relationship did not change when sex was introduced; sex was just another facet of it that helped us bond as a couple. Relationships definitely get stronger with sex, but it never was an integral piece. Without it, the relationships I had were great. Yes, they were better with sex, but I’m not going to commit mortal sin [or, worse, directly lead my girlfriend into mortal sin!!!] just to have a stronger emotional bond when the relationship itself already creates a very strong one to begin with (or for any reason, really. I straight up never want to commit mortal sin for any reason).

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Hi S,

I wonder how you would approach an analogous situation where you didn’t have any “horse in the race”? So let me give you one. It’s not very fictional.

As a man attracted to other men, there are plenty of aspects to my attraction that don’t have much (directly) to do with sex. For example, I love looking at pictures of men kissing other men, or artwork with homoerotic sensibilities. Now, sure, there are pictures like that that immediately make me think of sex, but there are others that don’t. This, to me, is an engagement in a sort of “partial eros” of the sort you seem to be getting at.

Now I can say with confidence that being allowed to look at these things would (so far as I can tell) make my life much easier – all the moreso if I were a celibate. And I do think, if I was quite confident that these things were permissible, I could look at such imagery without it being the near occasion of (other) sin. But I don’t feel at all confident in saying that the actions themselves are not sinful for me.

Mind you, they might not be sinful for someone else, who didn’t have SSA. But, given the fact that I passionately want to do these things merely because of the pleasure they involve for me, I seriously question whether* I myself *should do them.

I don’t know if the analogy fits. I know that your example involves actual friendship, as opposed to imagery, and I know that you’ll say that the physical intimacy deepens the relationship. But as I’ve said, I don’t see how physical intimacy could (on its own) deepen a relationship. Moreover, I tell myself all sorts of stories about how my own appreciation of male beauty is an aspect of my “aestheticism” and how it refines my sensibilities and makes me spiritually attuned to the beauty of the world. But all the stories I tell myself about aestheticism are pure BS. I just want this thing so much I am willing to lie to myself.

 

[SMGS127]

Hi S,

I don’t know if the analogy fits. I know that your example involves actual friendship, as opposed to imagery, and I know that you’ll say that the physical intimacy deepens the relationship. But as I’ve said, I don’t see how physical intimacy could (on its own) deepen a relationship. Moreover, I tell myself all sorts of stories about how my own appreciation of male beauty is an aspect of my “aestheticism” and how it refines my sensibilities and makes me spiritually attuned to the beauty of the world. But all the stories I tell myself about aestheticism are pure BS. I just want this thing so much I am willing to lie to myself.

I realize this isn’t exactly coming from the most impartial view. I do recognize that I want this badly, which is also why I am asking for outside opinions on the issue.

However, I don’t think I’m lying to myself. I’ve had nights with ex-girlfriends where…I’m not going to go into detail but no sex was had but kissing was present and it was just hours upon hours of awesome-sauce that had nothing to do with sex whatsoever. Was it borne out of desire for my girlfriend? You bet it was! Did it tempt me to have sex with my girlfriend or lower my inhibitions in any way? Not at all.

When I’m in a relationship, my desire for my girlfriend is always present, but not in a lustful way. I desire her as a person, completely and wholly. So yes, sex fit into that in my mind before I was Catholic, now it doesn’t now that I am Catholic. And personally, I don’t think physical attraction held without objectification is immoral either.

So I have no problem admitting that there is a dual agape-eros attraction there, that all the physical wants (whether seen as more ‘mild’ by society, like cuddling, or more ‘relationshippy’ by society, like kissing) are borne out of desire for my girlfriend. But that is not necessarily sexual desire! Yes, it involves a physical attraction. Yes, it undoubtedly involves an estrogenal pheromonal influence. But the desire is more to be the girl who makes your girlfriend feel like every day is an awesome day, like every day is exciting and new, like life is an adventure waiting to happen. Making out, in conjunction with all sorts of other romantic, non-sexual, activities, contributes mightily to that. And none of the actions I mentioned involves sex! If it personally does not pose a risk of either of us having sex with each other, I fail to see how it’s immoral, in my opinion.

And maybe my bias does color my view on this issue; I acknowledge that possibility. But if there was a way for this to be licit, having exclusive SSAs would become less of an emotional dungeon. There’s so much repression for someone with exclusive SSAs that it’s unhealthy. I feel this would allow for someone to express their feelings without sinning, provided, of course, they have no other obligation, such as a priest to the Church or a person to their spouse.

Edit: I would like to add one more thing, PS. You mentioned doing something solely because of the pleasure or benefits it gives oneself. But that’s not entirely the reason why I want to do it. Sure, I get a benefit out of it, but I also get to help make another woman’s life awesome while helping her stay chaste as well, and that’s one of the greatest feelings in the world, to be honest. So I think that’s another area where the photo gallery wouldn’t directly analogize.

 

[Usige]

So please, if there’s any way I can have a chaste same-sex relationship, where both members work to keep the other chaste and in the grace of God, it would help me get through life.

I guess the part I struggle with is your concept of chaste making out. Not that I think you don’t have self control or that it’s geared towards bonding rather than sex per se. Chastity goes beyond just questions of engaging in sexual intercourse. Chastity involves tempering desires, not just actions. Ask yourself if you would “chastely make out” with someone that you were not sexually attracted to? Would you ever chastely make out with a gay man to strengthen an emotional bond (obviously sexual desire would be lacking both sides)? In other words if making out does not have a sexual component then why do it only with someone who you would have illicit contact with if not for the prohibitions against it?

Most of what you describe would be considered unchaste behavior for unmarried couples. What most couples do while dating now certainly isn’t chaste. In general if it’s stuff that you would not feel comfortable doing in front of your grandparents in public then you shouldn’t do it in private.

Homosexuality is disordered because it places sexual desire on an inappropriate object of desire. The desire is not the issue, but rather giving into that desire. It is a sin against chastity to act in a way that encourage rather than discourage inappropriate desires. Even if the goal is not to cross the line, the line has already been cross in the mind by saying yes rather than no.

Something else you mentioned earlier also stuck me. In essence you said that a priest or married person cuddling with someone else was inappropriate because they were already wed to the Church or their spouse, but that a homosexual person didn’t have that option. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I guess what I am reading into that is “I want the same physical and emotional bound that spouses share, but since I can’t engage in same sex intercourse I want to have as much of a physical relationship as I licitly can.” Would that be a decent summation?

If the above is correct then I worry that it starts venturing into the area of pseudo marriage. Basically simulating something like marriage, but as a distorted reflection of the marriage bond. Here I’m not talking about the sacramental bond, but rather the human effects of marriage. While there is nothing wrong with building strong emotional bonds or having nonsexual physical contact, it’s the tying the two together that I find problematic. When you talk about physical intimacy to strengthen the emotional bond it feels too much like what couples in marriage do. The difference is that they are doing so in according to Gods plan for marriage to bring them to holiness. I don’t know how a distorted reflection of marriage leads one to holiness.

 

[Bookcat]

Disinterested friendships -not relationships of a romantic nature (and avoiding near occasions of such…)

Friendships without “romantic” overtones.

Contact: Courage.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#IV

There can be Friendships…not “couples”.

Friendship is the way and key to life here - along with prayer, the Sacraments etc