The Strange Notion Of "gay Celibacy"

[Nihil Obstat]

My perspective is this:
Do gay Catholics, or whatever term you prefer, actually identify with homosexuality? In other words, do they believe homosexuality forms part of their identity as human beings?
Do they agree with the Church that homosexual attraction is, in and of itself, an inherent disorder. I.e. homosexual attraction cannot in itself be oriented to the good?
So, how does a Catholic reconcile treating an inherent disorder as a part of their deepest identity?
Do they then wish to treat homosexuality as a good to be celebrated? If so I wish to hear the rationale.

And if my line of questions misses the point, I would like to know precisely where, because this is a subject in which I will not tolerate a lack of clarity. The stakes are far too high.

So Fran, with all due respect, I am not going anywhere. I have a stake in this too, and I intend to be thorough.

[franciscanheart]

My perspective is this:
Do gay Catholics, or whatever term you prefer, actually identify with homosexuality? In other words, do they believe homosexuality forms part of their identity as human beings?
Do they agree with the Church that homosexual attraction is, in and of itself, an inherent disorder. I.e. homosexual attraction cannot in itself be oriented to the good?
So, how does a Catholic reconcile treating an inherent disorder as a part of their deepest identity?
Do they then wish to treat homosexuality as a good to be celebrated? If so I wish to hear the rationale.

And if my line of questions misses the point, I would like to know precisely where, because this is a subject in which I will not tolerate a lack of clarity. The stakes are far too high.

So Fran, with all due respect, I am not going anywhere. I have a stake in this too, and I intend to be thorough.

Before anyone attempts to answer the questions we have already answered in a number of other threads on phatmass preceding this one, let me ask you this:

Do heterosexual Catholics view sexuality as a piece of their identity? Is sexuality part of who we are as humans -- errrrr... part of who they are as heterosexual people?

[CrossCuT]

My perspective is this:
Do gay Catholics, or whatever term you prefer, actually identify with homosexuality? In other words, do they believe homosexuality forms part of their identity as human beings?
Do they agree with the Church that homosexual attraction is, in and of itself, an inherent disorder. I.e. homosexual attraction cannot in itself be oriented to the good?
So, how does a Catholic reconcile treating an inherent disorder as a part of their deepest identity?
Do they then wish to treat homosexuality as a good to be celebrated? If so I wish to hear the rationale.

And if my line of questions misses the point, I would like to know precisely where, because this is a subject in which I will not tolerate a lack of clarity. The stakes are far too high.

So Fran, with all due respect, I am not going anywhere. I have a stake in this too, and I intend to be thorough.

 

Honestly, I think there are a lot of homosexuals who do not identify as such because of the incredible amount of pressure and negativity from the church and certain parts of society (which are influenced by the church). They find a way to cope with that blatant bigotry by enveloping themselves in the churchs discrimination and turning into a coat of honor instead of a coat of shame. I think this author is a prime example. 

 

Most of society is cool beans with homosexuality, however the seed of discrimination is still planted through the church because they continually preach that it is inherently disordered, disgusting, and something homosexuals need to repress, deny, or ignore. If they dont do this, they have no place in the Catholic society; they are effectively shunned and looked upon with different eyes.

 

Honestly (and this might sound terrible) but I dont understand how any Catholic homosexual can feel  totally ok with giving up any sort life of love with a partner simply because their faith doesnt know what the eff to do with them anymore. Its so depressing for me to think that people willingly subject themselves to a partnerless future because the church has taught them they are damaged and twisted. But again, maybe I just dont get the religion thing...maybe they are fulfilled with their spiritual life and love for God so much that its not a struggle...or maybe it is a struggle and they are cool with it. I dunno. I try to put myself in that position as best as I can (for being a straight person who wont ever have to deal with the same struggles) and it still sucks.

 

But I think you raise a good question. How do you have both? How do you maintain your Catholic faith that calls for you to view the desire as evil, disorders, and sick but still treat the people lovingly? I think thats the key; it doesnt happen...or at least very rarely. You might have the best intentions, but your core belief is that this is wrong/bad/sick etc....and its hard to wade through those feelings to come out the other side unscathed as far as how you treat people. Its the ripple effect. 

[Nihil Obstat]

Before anyone attempts to answer the questions we have already answered in a number of other threads on phatmass preceding this one, let me ask you this:

Do heterosexual Catholics view sexuality as a piece of their identity? Is sexuality part of who we are as humans -- errrrr... part of who they are as heterosexual people?

I will not speak for anyone else, but I view heterosexuality as being explicitly ordained by God to be directed towards marriage, then ultimately for the purpose of 一 procreation, 二 mutual love, support, sanctification.

Inasmuch as homosexuality cannot be oriented towards the purpose of human sexuality I likewise cannot consider it oriented towards the ultimate good. Therefore I would consider it misguided to accept it as an inherent part of human identity.

 

Therefore, I would not consider heterosexuality as such to be part of my identity. Rather I consider it to be a manifestation of natural law and orientation towards God's intentions for man. Heterosexuality is prescriptively normative, and homosexuality is an unfortunate consequence of man's broken nature and an inclination which is to be overcome in a way that leads to sanctification.

 

Edit for further clarity: heterosexuality, then, is the proper ordering of human sexuality. Homosexuality is a disordered (not sinful, disordered) orientation of human sexuality.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Nihil Obstat

[franciscanheart]

I will not speak for anyone else, but I view heterosexuality as being explicitly ordained by God to be directed towards marriage, then ultimately for the purpose of 一 procreation, 二 mutual love, support, sanctification.
Inasmuch as homosexuality cannot be oriented towards the purpose of human sexuality I likewise cannot consider it oriented towards the ultimate good. Therefore I would consider it misguided to accept it as an inherent part of human identity.
 
Therefore, I would not consider heterosexuality as such to be part of my identity. Rather I consider it to be a manifestation of natural law and orientation towards God's intentions for man. Heterosexuality is prescriptively normative, and homosexuality is an unfortunate consequence of man's broken nature and an inclination which is to be overcome in a way that leads to sanctification.
 
Edit for further clarity: heterosexuality, then, is the proper ordering of human sexuality. Homosexuality is a disordered (not sinful, disordered) orientation of human sexuality.

Why then do you ask for any of us to speak for all others?

[Nihil Obstat]

Why then do you ask for any of us to speak for all others?

Speak for yourself, and if you feel inclined then attempt to speak for others.

 

While I said that I speak for myself, I should have added the caveat that I think what I said is true for everyone, but I do not think that many people have explicitly thought of it in such terms. Many 'average Catholics' do not always think in philosophical terms, which is fine, but for the sake of clarity I think it is necessary here.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Nihil Obstat

[PhuturePriest]

I see no reason why we can't or shouldn't talk about such matters, especially since they are more important than ever in this age. Many Catholics identify with being gay to the point that they disagree with Church doctrine. Obviously, we all agree that is wrong and is taking it too far. But is that the only way to take it too far? How do we know if we haven't spoken about it in length and discussed it philosophically and theologically?

[An Historian]

I will not speak for anyone else, but I view heterosexuality as being explicitly ordained by God to be directed towards marriage, then ultimately for the purpose of 一 procreation, 二 mutual love, support, sanctification.

Inasmuch as homosexuality cannot be oriented towards the purpose of human sexuality I likewise cannot consider it oriented towards the ultimate good. Therefore I would consider it misguided to accept it as an inherent part of human identity.

 

Therefore, I would not consider heterosexuality as such to be part of my identity. Rather I consider it to be a manifestation of natural law and orientation towards God's intentions for man. Heterosexuality is prescriptively normative, and homosexuality is an unfortunate consequence of man's broken nature and an inclination which is to be overcome in a way that leads to sanctification.

 

Edit for further clarity: heterosexuality, then, is the proper ordering of human sexuality. Homosexuality is a disordered (not sinful, disordered) orientation of human sexuality.

 

Fantastic post, Nihil.

[Nihil Obstat]

Fantastic post, Nihil.

Thank you. I am putting a lot of effort into this.

[An Historian]

Thank you. I am putting a lot of effort into this.

 

Reading your posts in this thread have been a great help.  As you said, most Catholics don't think in philosophical terms.  And while I lament the fact that I am more educated than most Catholics—it should not be so, as I am not even remotely theologically or philosophically trained—I still lack the aid of systematiic thought and expression on matters of the Catholic faith whch philosophy provides.

 

You've adequately expressed my own thoughts on human sexuality better than I have been able to myself up until now.

[beatitude]

I dont understand how any Catholic homosexual can feel  totally ok with giving up any sort life of love with a partner simply because their faith doesnt know what the eff to do with them anymore. Its so depressing for me to think that people willingly subject themselves to a partnerless future because the church has taught them they are damaged and twisted. But again, maybe I just dont get the religion thing...maybe they are fulfilled with their spiritual life and love for God so much that its not a struggle...or maybe it is a struggle and they are cool with it. I dunno. I try to put myself in that position as best as I can (for being a straight person who wont ever have to deal with the same struggles) and it still smells of elderberries.

 

But I think you raise a good question. How do you have both? How do you maintain your Catholic faith that calls for you to view the desire as evil, disorders, and sick but still treat the people lovingly? I think thats the key; it doesnt happen...or at least very rarely. You might have the best intentions, but your core belief is that this is wrong/bad/sick etc....and its hard to wade through those feelings to come out the other side unscathed as far as how you treat people. Its the ripple effect. 

 

I'm not gay, but I am celibate, and a celibate life can still be loving and enriching. I have had people assuming that I must be miserable and that there's something 'wrong' with me because I don't want to date (this is one reason why I rarely talk about it) but I and others are living proof that you don't need a romantic partner to be happy in life. That much is true.

 

It's also not required by Catholic teaching to view gay people as sick. I certainly don't. However, this doesn't change the fact that many people do treat them as sick, even going so far as to claim that by medicalising people's experiences they're being compassionate ("I love them, it's not their fault they have a disorder..."). And to be honest I don't know how gay Catholics cope with that either. It may not be integral to Catholicism, but the unfortunate fact is that this is what many gay people are experiencing, and a beautiful theory is poor comfort when you're surrounded by people whose practice puts you in pain. I just try to make sure my practice is different. It's the only thing I can do.

[PhuturePriest]

I don't understand why proponents of the gay movement are clearly incapable of speaking about the Church and its beliefs without falling into calling us names. It seems disingenuous, like they haven't really refined their argument beyond "This is morally good simply because I/others want it."

Edited January 27, 2015 by PhuturePriest

[Ice_nine]

Such articles mostly seem to be written for the benefit of straight people who find the word 'gay' to be icky and want to be able to wave around a piece of paper going, "See! This gay person agrees with me!" I don't see any benefit to anyone in doing that, so I will join you in sitting out and hope that you have brought some cake. :)

 

I kinda get that vibe too. Similar to when there are racial issues and a black guy comes out and says "come on black people we need to be responsible and stop blaming the cops,: that spreads like wild-fire with a certain segment of white folk because it confirms their own biases and such.

 

I don't have the energy to adequately address your post nihil. I will just say that you can be charitable and sanctimonious at the same time. By saying something along the lines of "calling myself gay is a rejection of God" then you are in a way saying everyone who calls themselves gay is rejecting God or God's design or whatever.

[Lil Red]

And to be honest I don't know how gay Catholics cope with that either. It may not be integral to Catholicism, but the unfortunate fact is that this is what many gay people are experiencing, and a beautiful theory is poor comfort when you're surrounded by people whose practice puts you in pain. I just try to make sure my practice is different. It's the only thing I can do.

 

[Nihil Obstat]

 

I don't have the energy to adequately address your post nihil. I will just say that you can be charitable and sanctimonious at the same time. By saying something along the lines of "calling myself gay is a rejection of God" then you are in a way saying everyone who calls themselves gay is rejecting God or God's design or whatever.

I hope that is not what you took away from my post. You would really seriously be missing the point of what I was saying.