What You Don't Know Can Hurt You

[franciscanheart]

No problem on typing it all up, I agree this is important it's worth the time.

 

Side A and Side B are terms used in the homosexual Christian community to describe their theological understanding of homosexuality in short hand.

 

Side A are those Gay Christians who assert that homosexual marriage is legitimate because the scriptural evidence is about those who abuse sexuality in Pagan worship not the homosexuality itself. (Generalized with a broad brush for brevity)

 

Side B are those who believe that homosexuality (Gay, SSA) itself is not sinful but any action on it is. These people strive to live lives of celibacy. (Also in a broad brush for brevity)

 

Side A people (or at least those I have the honor of having talked with) think that Side B is hurtful, harmful, and leads to self loathing and repression. Leading to increased climates of not being welcome and suicide rates. They fail to see how freely chosen and understood celibacy is a fully integrated sexual person who is giving the gift of their love to the Church and those around them.

 

I clearly can see, you are on the "Side B" side. I was more curious if you had experienced this debate at all yet and how you have dealt with the issues involved especially if it was you actually defending celibacy. If I try to talk about celibacy I'm told that I'm hetero so my celibacy is chosen and different, that there is no way for me to understand the repression and harm of homosexual celibacy forced on them by religion...ugh...it's just so hard to communicate sometimes.

 

Ah! I was unfamiliar with the terms, but yes: been there, done that. More tomorrow. So, so sleepy.

 

 

I don't get this thread are you a homosexual or not? If it be proud of women you be Pride is as sin. Any sin is made worse by boasting in it. Sex before marriage is also sin in any way shape or form. All in need of confession,penance and a true desire to make amends.

 

St Paul " If one is to boast they should boast in the LORD!"

 

Dude. This wins Whackiest Table Post Ever award for me.

 

Yes, I am gay. I am not involved sexually with women -- not that it's any of your business. I am not, therefore, boasting about lesbian sex. Thank you for your admonition, though. Keep up the good work?

[Nihil Obstat]

A bit of free speculation, so that I can get my thought pattern out before I crash:

 

Society/culture in which "it is no longer necessary to come out":

 

EITHER, it is not necessary to 'come out' because there is 'no closet', i.e. one's sexuality is not particularly private or secret (Scenario 1),

OR, it is not necessary to 'come out' because one's sexuality is both private and highly respected, so nobody feels the need to ask or pry (Scenario 2).

 

I will assume, for the sake of simplicity, a society (or perhaps a micro-society) in which everyone is a practicing, and more-or-less faithful Catholic. Too many variables otherwise with regards to opponents of the Church and sexual morality.

 

Scenario 1: Sexuality is open, therefore children grow up feeling no pressure to conform to heterosexuality. Would it be easier or harder for the average Catholic to respect the Church's teaching on same-sex relations in this context? Perhaps that is a self-defeating question because of my assumption of a Catholic society. Perhaps this scenario is too optimistic with regards to the average Catholic's ability to put aside his own desires, and to happily resign himself to God's Will?

 

Scenario 2: Sexuality is intensely private, but this privacy is more or less universally respected. Everyone feels secure in not being judged based on whether or not they date, marry, are consecrated, etc.. Downside: potential alienation/loneliness? A sort of Cartesian theater scenario where many suffer, but do not realize they are not alone in their suffering? Ironically, this scenario also seems to assume, perhaps naively, that the average Catholic is able to happily resign himself to God's Will.

 

So two separate scenarios, both basically requiring that Catholics are faithful and emotionally healthy. One requires faith in that everyone is open about their desires, but not all may fulfill them, and the other requires faith in that everyone is serene in their suffering.

These scenarios come to an impasse in my mind.

 

So, I want to go back and perhaps rethink my scenarios. Maybe I am starting from the wrong perspective. Instead of asking why nobody feels the need to 'come out', maybe I will ask why this society is full of people who have the faith to accept their crosses, of which homosexuality is one.

 

To make a bit of a leap here, which makes perfect sense in my mind, but which I do not currently have the energy to describe, it occurs to me that this society is simply a Catholic society in which the Church's teachings are followed happily. It is nothing more, and nothing less than a society of good Catholics.

The faithful Catholic is able to accept suffering with serenity, because his faith consoles him, and because he can see how his suffering is redemptive, is a consequence of original sin, and is eventually defeated. These Catholics accept suffering gladly because they are happy to unite themselves with Christ.

 

 

 

That is about as far as I can get. Brain is in shutdown mode.

[Tony]

I wanted to ask you something in private but it wouldn't send so here it is.

 

 

Has figuring out you are gay  impacted your discernment with the Franciscans in any way?  I know it had been a while ,  but you really had your heart set on the Franciscans on one point, if I recall right.

 

oh my gosh, when I said "heart set on the Franciscans" no pun was intended. I just not caught that :D

[SilentJoy]

 

It became important pretty quickly after I realized I was gay to identify that way -- to me and to others. Firstly, it was a way of acknowledging that I was having a lot of big FEELINGS that I didn't know how to deal with. It defined some internal chaos for me -- gave me a name to use when identifying a big group of things going on. It also let the people I was talking to know exactly what was happening. In a strange sense (seemingly backwards), it allowed me to feel normal. I was not THE norm, but I wasn't some strange creature who had feelings no one else had ever had. It gave me other people to identify with, a community who understood, even if I sometimes disagree with their thoughts and feelings about how to live our lives.

 

I needed to say I was gay so that I could be okay with NOT saying I was gay. I needed to come to terms with what it meant to have the feelings I had and to experience the pain I did (growing up in a heterosexual world with homosexual inclination). They needed a reason. Something solid. Something I could hold on to, inspect, say out loud for myself and for other people.

 

You have mentioned a few times that you don't have the right words, but I feel as though you have expressed yourself very well, and I can identify (on a much smaller scale) with some of your confusion, as well as the combination of emotional upheaval and relief of having a name for the chaos. For me, when I was able to label elements of my childhood as "emotional abuse," there was a surge of both joy and anger involved because I realized that I wasn't just too sensitive or too bad; I had been a normal kid and bad stuff happened. I felt like I had to tell EVERYBODY (I actually only told a few close friends...annnnd a few thousand anonymous internet users... :rotfl2:).

 

[EmilyAnn]

Lent really has started early. :P

 

But I do have questions that I'd be interested to hear your take on.

 

Do you think that it is important for gay and bisexual Catholics to 'come out'?

Do you think doing so helps both Catholic and non-Catholic understanding of relevant issues?

 

 

(I have only skimmed this thread so I apologise if these have already been dealt with)

[Basilisa Marie]

Okay, I've come up with one:

 

Personally I find the term "SSA" annoying and unhelpful - I think it just serves to further stigmatize anyone who isn't heterosexual and encourages people to associate it with some kind of disability or mental illness, which implicitly seems to beg to be "cured." But I also understand that lots of Catholics are far more comfortable using that phrase to identify themselves and/or others than other terms, as a way to disassociate with any ties to "gay culture" or implications that they're sexually active. My question is do you have an opinion on the "gay" vs "SSA" terminology? I know you choose to identify yourself as gay, so would you be comfortable elaborating on why you decided to go with one over the other? 

 

[FutureCarmeliteClaire]

Despite some of the reactions and drama from people towards the beginning of this thread, I've found the thread really helpful. Thanks for sharing, Frannie. I really appreciate your openness.

[franciscanheart]

I actually have a question now... from a spiritual perspective, do you view SSA as a cross to bear?  Or as a certain type of vocation you have been called to live out (eg. single life)?  or perhaps something else?  or have you not thought about or arrived at a conclusion in this regard?

 

I'll start by saying I don't have a concrete answer for this. I imagine my view or opinion or understanding will continue to change as I learn and grow in all areas of my spiritual life -- in relationship with God. Currently this is how I see it:

 

Is it a cross to bear?
Spiritually, yes and no. It's tough. It's REALLY tough. Because when you connect in a certain way with people of the same sex, there is always a check-in process that's happening inside me to make sure I'm not setting myself (or anyone else, for that matter) up for pain. I've been in love before. It wasn't easy. There is potential for falling in love again. Resisting that has not been easy. I don't imagine it ever will be. That's tough. And it creates a lot of tension across the board. // Naturally when something like this happens or comes up for me, I am forced into spiritual growth. I have long, sometimes difficult talks with God. I cry a lot right now. I hurt a lot and I have a lot of questions. It's definitely something that weighs heavily on my soul. I do not understand and I'm not sure I ever will -- unless, God-willing, I see Him in Heaven and am allowed the full understanding.

 

That said, I don't always see it as a spiritual burden as much as a great spiritual gift. How blest am I to be in a position on earth so difficult as to have no other option but to turn to Him. It's like I've been given this great prize from God (which we all know never comes with ease and comfort). I haven't been given visions, stigmata, burden of wisdom. I -- for whatever reason -- came into this world with a natural disposition for something the Church teaches to be "disordered" (please, God, no one freak out over that word; I'm using it the way the Church defines it) and it allows me abundant opportunities to sacrifice a great deal out of Love for Him.

 

Hopefully that made some sense. Like I said, I'm sure all of this will continue to evolve and become clear for me as I continue to grow in all areas of my life. I'm newly out and have really only been facing this stuff head-on for about a year (or less).

 

 

As far as vocation is concerned, I do not yet know. I have spoken with several priests about this issue and all of them have urged me to remain open to whatever God asks of me. I discerned religious life for several years and was very intent on entering (because I believed that is where God intended for me to be). It has not yet happened, but I am not yet closed to the idea that it could be my call. Again, this is new information for me (within the last six months) and so I am still working through it. Do I think homosexuality is a call to live the single life? Not in and of itself, no. Not in my case anyway. (I do think there's room to say that in some cases the single life will be the only feasible life -- but then if that's the case, God had intended it to be so, no?)

 

Either way it goes, I know that God is with me and that as long as I am faithful to Him, He will reward me richly and bless my life -- no matter how it may appear on the outside.

[franciscanheart]

I wanted to ask you something in private but it wouldn't send so here it is.

 

 

Has figuring out you are gay  impacted your discernment with the Franciscans in any way?  I know it had been a while ,  but you really had your heart set on the Franciscans on one point, if I recall right.

 

I just spoke to this in my last response, but here's the answer to your specific question:

 

Yes. Though my discernment with that particular Franciscan order ended before I was starting to really face these issues.

 

I have been blest to have really amazing spiritual guidance lately (from some Franciscan priests, actually!) and I am open to religious life still. My heart is very Franciscan (I believe) and so I still am very much enamored with their way of life. Whether or not I will ever be a religious professed in a Franciscan community, I do not yet know. God does, though, and that's comforting.

[PhuturePriest]

I'll start by saying I don't have a concrete answer for this. I imagine my view or opinion or understanding will continue to change as I learn and grow in all areas of my spiritual life -- in relationship with God. Currently this is how I see it:

 

Is it a cross to bear?
Spiritually, yes and no. It's tough. It's REALLY tough. Because when you connect in a certain way with people of the same sex, there is always a check-in process that's happening inside me to make sure I'm not setting myself (or anyone else, for that matter) up for pain. I've been in love before. It wasn't easy. There is potential for falling in love again. Resisting that has not been easy. I don't imagine it ever will be. That's tough. And it creates a lot of tension across the board. // Naturally when something like this happens or comes up for me, I am forced into spiritual growth. I have long, sometimes difficult talks with God. I cry a lot right now. I hurt a lot and I have a lot of questions. It's definitely something that weighs heavily on my soul. I do not understand and I'm not sure I ever will -- unless, God-willing, I see Him in Heaven and am allowed the full understanding.

 

That said, I don't always see it as a spiritual burden as much as a great spiritual gift. How blest am I to be in a position on earth so difficult as to have no other option but to turn to Him. It's like I've been given this great prize from God (which we all know never comes with ease and comfort). I haven't been given visions, stigmata, burden of wisdom. I -- for whatever reason -- came into this world with a natural disposition for something the Church teaches to be "disordered" (please, God, no one freak out over that word; I'm using it the way the Church defines it) and it allows me abundant opportunities to sacrifice a great deal out of Love for Him.

 

Hopefully that made some sense. Like I said, I'm sure all of this will continue to evolve and become clear for me as I continue to grow in all areas of my life. I'm newly out and have really only been facing this stuff head-on for about a year (or less).

 

 

As far as vocation is concerned, I do not yet know. I have spoken with several priests about this issue and all of them have urged me to remain open to whatever God asks of me. I discerned religious life for several years and was very intent on entering (because I believed that is where God intended for me to be). It has not yet happened, but I am not yet closed to the idea that it could be my call. Again, this is new information for me (within the last six months) and so I am still working through it. Do I think homosexuality is a call to live the single life? Not in and of itself, no. Not in my case anyway. (I do think there's room to say that in some cases the single life will be the only feasible life -- but then if that's the case, God had intended it to be so, no?)

 

Either way it goes, I know that God is with me and that as long as I am faithful to Him, He will reward me richly and bless my life -- no matter how it may appear on the outside.

 

New question: How do you deal with being so ridiculously awesome on a daily basis?

[Aloysius]

I imagine it feels like a freshly shaven leg.

[franciscanheart]

Frannie, I will attempt an answer to your question regarding the Arizona Law, although because I have actually read (and thus more familiar) the Kansas House Bill from a couple weeks ago which I believe was similar in many regards. So this is more of a general civil political theory idea than necessarily the specific legislation, I hope that is fair to you and consistent with what you were seeking in asking the question. Also I hope you actually read this because this thread has just gotten a little bit wonky. Before I get started I am hesitant to put my ideas down into words because I fear I may not do the well formed ideas I have justice in writing them. I pissed off a good number of my gay friends this week by trying to explain my thoughts of Facebook...mea culpa, should have known that was a bad place to discuss this. Anywho...please know that I do not mean any offense and if you can take something I write as offensive or innocently ignorant but loving, I mean it the second way :) It is fully possible that somebody will disagree with me, and I am open to changing my position if somebody can show me how and where my logic is flawed, but I do ask you to remain charitable as I've been quite burned these last couple weeks with very hateful language and I am very torn down right now. now that the caveats are done.

 

The greatest problem I am seeing right now in regards to religion in society is how far religion can be expressed. The HHS mandates, adoption agencies loosing licenses for refusing to adopt to gay couple on religious principles, A Methodist Non-Profit loosing it's status in Mass. I think for not renting a gazebo to a Gay Wedding. It's becoming a mess. We as Catholics know that our faith is not simply limited to going to Mass on Sunday or saying a few prayers, our faith is supposed to be LIVED and our every action ought to be guided by those principles.

 

From here I take two roads. First I do not think that it is necessarily loving to refuse service to somebody on one characteristic of that person, gay, black, arab, Indian, chinese. woman,gay, straight,..whatever. There are although times when because of a certain ACTION or support of an action a Catholic might be morally obligated to refuse service. Assisted Suicide, Participating in a Gay Wedding, Adopting Children to Gay Couples, just for a few. These things are issues of morality, strengthening and protecting the family, and the dignity of life and marriage. The Second road is that if Catholics are to live their faith it is logical to assume that among the other 60,000 or so religions in the world there are other religions which sincerely believe their faith must be lived as well, and they might believe some things which we as Catholics flat out disagree with.

 

This leads to the question that in a society like the United States which professes the free exercise of religion is it correct to limit the religious expression of somebody if it does not infringe upon the natural rights of somebody? I submit it is not justifiable. If I think it is alright for society to dictate to another religion what their faith requires then how can I be upset when society is doing the same thing to my Church in regards to contraception and abortion. Should not the individual have the same rights of expression of their faith as the legally registered entity of the Church? I liken freedom of religious expression similar to freedom of speech. It boils my buns when I drive to my Church and see the Westboro Baptist Church calling My Church, My Priest, and even myself vile things. I do however support their right to spout such venomous hate, because sometimes we just have to let some people be **self censored**

 

Now that leads to what are natural rights and infringement on them. Rarely talked about in American debates and jurisprudence is the right to freedom of association. Just as we have the freedom to assemble we ought to have the general freedom to choose who we wish to associate ourselves with. Things which are necessary to life should not ever be allowed to be withheld from equal economic treatment, but when it comes to quality of life things like services and restaurants I do not see a clear imperative to equal treatment if motivated by a SINCERE religious belief. The problem with the laws being looked at currently I've heard most people rail against as being too broad, I submit that they are in fact too NARROW in scope. We discriminate in our lives all of the time as shoppers and what we choose to do. My money talks I choose who I support by where I choose to spend my money. The Government does not guarantee a business from failure, I am not told I must be a Patron equally to all store which present themselves to my needs, so why do we tell businesses that they must serve all people who present themselves? Why is the economic relationship a one way street?

 

I also wish to take some time to make clear that those thoughts refer to what I consider private businesses. As in not publically sold or traded on the Stock market, where an actual person owns the business and therefore that individual's (or group) can directly impact the values and principles of the business in a significant way. Applying these principles to Wal-Mart for example would be insane. Wal-Mart has no soul, nor human dignity it has no personhood to protect, because it is a publically traded company. If we were pre-stock market days of Wal-Mart and Sam Walton was still alive and in control, then the company as an expression of his work is tied to him. As well public servants by nature of taking on the role of public servants give up part of their rights in order to serve the general public. Therefore an individual's expression of their rights can become more limited by nature of that role.

 

Now usually at this point (actually long before) I've been shouted down about how discrimination is bad and these ideas would lead us all back to Jim Crow, how much of a hateful, spiteful, poor excuse for a Christian, bigot that I am. So I will address that next if you so allow. I definitely agree that Jim Crow era segregation was horrible, horrific and did horrible harm to the dignity of the human being. I submit however that private and individual freedom of association (personal discrimination if you will) was not the major harm of Jim Crow, but rather it was government policies and structures which prohibited people from fully recognizing the potential of their citizenship. It was unequal application of the law. It was Police Officers who would arrest a black guy for trespassing and ignore the white guy who just lynched a black guy the night before. When I look to the lunch Counter sit-ins of the 1960s that was a private market solution to a problem that was beginning to gain traction when the Mayor (government) got involved to enforce segregation. I think that if I as a Catholic Seminarian walked into a Muslim owned restaurant and for whatever SINCERE religious conviction that person held they absolutely have the right to refuse me service, be it I'm Catholic, wanting to a Priest or just being a general infidel. 

It is a horrible business model, but I think they should have that right. I also have the right to let everyone know that the restaurant refuses to serve Seminarians, Catholics, infidels whatever and I bet a good number of people who may have gone before and would have been served would decide not to support such a business.

 

I think it is shameful that a photographer can be sued in some parts of our country for refusing to photograph a gay wedding because they object to being present. I think it is shameful that any part of our society thinks they can DEMAND a free uniquely human individual to serve their whims, desires and choices.

 

I hope this makes sense, and if I jumped a part at all or you want more clarification I would be happy to provide it. Sorry about the length, but you asked a short but complicated question.

 

Thanks, Padre, for your thoughtful post. I am happy to have read it. My response is no simpler than my initial question, mostly because I have not sorted this all out for myself.

 

I understand the right of private businesses to refuse service to individuals based on some moral code or obligation. So yes, I understand when a Church refuses to host a gay wedding. I understand when a photographer is unwilling to take on gay clients because he or she cannot be present at the ceremony -- paid or not -- because it would be as if he or she was condoning something which he or she believes is contrary to God's will.

 

I get that.

 

But that doesn't make it any less hurtful to the people who don't get that. So we must always speak with love and respect and make it known -- first and foremost -- that we see and hear and care for the person behind the law. Because it may be easy for you or for I or for our priest to put aside the human emotion behind the whole thing, but for the person who is being denied something very simple, it is greatly troubling and painful.

 

I think it also complicates matters when people will not serve someone because they appear to be gay. What do gays look like? Well, mostly like people. But there are stereotypes. And people are bullied, turned away, murdered. All because they LOOK gay. And clearly if you're gay, you must be having gay sex. You are probably also into pornography, child molestation, and all sorts of sordid things. (The prejudice does not often go so far as the second sentence there, but it does more often than you'd believe.) When we can discriminate against people simply because they are, there is a problem.

 

I have a problem with that. A big one. Refuse me a wedding to a woman -- I wouldn't want your services anyway -- but do not refuse me shelter, food, clothing, etc. We are supposed to take in the wounded and broken and hurting, not turn them away. "Whatsoever you did for them..."

 

I think we are very much on the same page with this. Being rooted in the faith, it is not so hard for us to agree on this, I think. But I have friends who believe the Church is wrong, that She will one day see "the error of Her ways" and teach something different. They believe this IN THEIR GUT. I cannot change that belief, and I do not imagine it will ever go away. So with people like that, in those situations, the discussion needs to include other things. We cannot focus just on that someone is gay, because we know nothing else about them.

 

 

 

There is a meme flying around about homosexuality and divorce. I like it very much and I think it speaks a lot to this kind of argument in civil political theory. The top picture shows a great crowd of people gathered, supposedly to protest gay marriage. The bottom picture shows a tumbleweed on an empty dirt road. The caption reads something like, "People protesting divorce because Jesus said it was wrong."

 

When we treat ALL romantic / sexual / relationship sin with equal prejudice, maybe people will listen. But we do not. We serve divorced Catholics all the time. Ones who have divorced without Church blessing. Who have not had their marriages annulled. Who have married and had children with other people while still being recognized as married to their first partner. We have friends and family who have had (or are having) affairs. We might even see why they are justified. We might sweep that under the rug. But when I fall in love with a woman? Well, that's just going too far.

 

I'm not asking to marry a woman or have babies with her, so my opinions and stances are probably a bit different than you're used to. I could very easily play devil's advocate, but I won't right now. It's too dangerous a place for me to go today when my heart is heavy with sorrow.

 

 

 

Again, thank you for the time you took to share that. I appreciate you being willing to dialogue respectfully about these kinds of issues.

[Marie-Therese]

That said, I don't always see it as a spiritual burden as much as a great spiritual gift. How blest am I to be in a position on earth so difficult as to have no other option but to turn to Him. It's like I've been given this great prize from God (which we all know never comes with ease and comfort). I haven't been given visions, stigmata, burden of wisdom. I -- for whatever reason -- came into this world with a natural disposition for something the Church teaches to be "disordered" (please, God, no one freak out over that word; I'm using it the way the Church defines it) and it allows me abundant opportunities to sacrifice a great deal out of Love for Him.

 

 

Whatever the question is, folks, THIS is the correct answer.  Thanks, dear, for very beautifully wording the exact goal that every single one of us should be striving toward:  throwing our hurts and failures on the mercy of God and giving Him those as sacrifices of reparation.

 

You've got my prayers and my ear if you need it, Fran.  

[franciscanheart]

No problem on typing it all up, I agree this is important it's worth the time.

 

Side A and Side B are terms used in the homosexual Christian community to describe their theological understanding of homosexuality in short hand.

 

Side A are those Gay Christians who assert that homosexual marriage is legitimate because the scriptural evidence is about those who abuse sexuality in Pagan worship not the homosexuality itself. (Generalized with a broad brush for brevity)

 

Side B are those who believe that homosexuality (Gay, SSA) itself is not sinful but any action on it is. These people strive to live lives of celibacy. (Also in a broad brush for brevity)

 

Side A people (or at least those I have the honor of having talked with) think that Side B is hurtful, harmful, and leads to self loathing and repression. Leading to increased climates of not being welcome and suicide rates. They fail to see how freely chosen and understood celibacy is a fully integrated sexual person who is giving the gift of their love to the Church and those around them.

 

I clearly can see, you are on the "Side B" side. I was more curious if you had experienced this debate at all yet and how you have dealt with the issues involved especially if it was you actually defending celibacy. If I try to talk about celibacy I'm told that I'm hetero so my celibacy is chosen and different, that there is no way for me to understand the repression and harm of homosexual celibacy forced on them by religion...ugh...it's just so hard to communicate sometimes.

 

I've heard this argument about homosexuality not actually being condemned. Perhaps it isn't in the Bible. But that part doesn't much matter to me. I've never turned to the Bible for my answers on homosexuality, anyway, and none of my theological understanding or persuasion is based on Scripture alone. I am Catholic after all. [thumbs up, wink]

 

Through my personal reading and structured catechesis, I have come to understand (on some level) Natural Law. I understand that Natural Law states that man and woman were made for each other in a very specific way and for a very specific purpose. To have two men together or two women together in the same kinds of actions is contrary to that Law, to God's will. So my natural inclination isn't sinful -- though it is intrinsically disordered (Hello, again, Natural Law!) -- but any conscious, deliberate action born of that inclination does constitute sin.

 

In short, yes, it does sound like I'm a Camp B person.

 

That said, Side A has a point, and I do understand whence they come. The problem is that we are talking past each other instead of really hearing and empathizing, understanding and answering. Often times Side A has the same kind of experience I have -- and I consider myself lucky! We are often shut out, made to feel inferior, asked to repress and hide and hurt in silence. I understand why people like me lose hope and end their lives. I do. And I have been very fortunate in my interactions by comparison.

 

I have been told by both friends and family to keep this to myself. I've been told my family does not need the burden of me being gay, that they have enough to "deal" with. I've been told by friends that I do not need to seek attention by telling people my secret. One of those same people came on to me a few short weeks later, seeking to have sex with me in private. That's not okay. That will [i]never[/i] be okay.

 

If I have sized you up correctly, I am sure this makes you cringe. You probably want to say, "But that's not what I said! That's not how I feel! I would never do that!" I believe you. I know. I get it. But when we have these experiences over and over again, [i]despite what the Church says and actually teaches[/i], it becomes very difficult to trust and to be open and to hear Love when it is spoken.

 

Until we are willing to sit patiently and listen to all the things we don't want to hear and bear all the accusations we know are unfounded and untrue, we will not make progress. Not gay to gay or straight to gay or whatever. We will continue to talk past each other, run in circles, and be dissatisfied with the other party.

 

Churches do exist where suppression and denial are required. Encouraged. Expected. Whether or not the theology of the Church supports it. Until that changes, we will have the same exasperated arguments and people on both sides will continue to hurt.

 

It's my firm belief that if we slow down and really see and acknowledge and affirm the [i]person[/i] first, we will eventually be heard and understood. It's far too easy to brush past the need for love and acceptance and understanding to move to the theological points. But if you've not stood in our shoes, you cannot understand how necessary that first part is. How much more we need / want / crave that. If you see me and you love me and you give me the space and time I need to have feelings, share myself, get vulnerable and TRUST you, I am much more likely to hear whatever you have to say, in and through Love.

 

Get to know the person. Forget gay. Find out about talents, adventures, hurts, loves. When you are intimate with them as a person who is loved and is capable of love first, you will know how to approach the subject of celibacy as an [i]act[/i] of love.

 

We can debate theological points and intellectual ideas all day long. But nothing will be accomplished without connection, understanding, and true love.

[franciscanheart]

Lent really has started early. :P

 

But I do have questions that I'd be interested to hear your take on.

 

Do you think that it is important for gay and bisexual Catholics to 'come out'?

Do you think doing so helps both Catholic and non-Catholic understanding of relevant issues?

 

 

(I have only skimmed this thread so I apologise if these have already been dealt with)

 

Yes.

Yes.

 

I have answered both, I think, in previous answers to other questions but I'll try to put a brief review here for your sake and the sake of others who may be jumping in at the end of this thread. (There's a lot to read in the last nine pages! I would blame no one.)

 

I do feel it's important for us to come out and say, "I'm gay and it's okay!" I feel it's important for several reasons. I'll try to bullet point them below.

 

• Other people need to know they aren't alone. People have a very deep need to feel understood and connected. Coming out is the easiest way for other gay people to find you.
• Everyone needs the opportunity to know gay people in order to begin understanding the struggles facing our population -- Catholic or not. If you see us, we become human, hopefully, and it becomes more difficult to rely solely on intellectual argument or theological theory, concept, whatever.
• It is especially important, in my opinion, that faithful Catholics and other gay Christians come out -- if for no other reason than the world gets to see that it is possible, and that we aren't so different. I can't tell you how many friends have talked about gay people to and around me, with no idea whatsoever that I am gay. I have instructed them on Catholic teaching regarding homosexuality, helped them to love more fully, and encouraged them to be open-minded, all while staying closeted. Imagine what impact it will have for them to know all of that solid Catholic love came from a gay person!

 

Coming out has not always been an understandable option for me. It's only been in maybe the last year that I started to come to terms with how my silence harms things. If people are not forced to face the humanity behind the label, we will never see change. If my suffering helps to do that, I am game. Totally and completely. The gay Catholic that was born this morning does not deserve to experience the things I have experienced. So I will be out, proud, and loud until things start to change.

 

I may be repeating myself by saying this, but here it is anyway: I think being out as a faithful Catholic woman who happens to be gay is also helpful when it comes to discussing political policy, cultural influences, etc. I am both gay and Catholic, so I feel like I have a pretty unique view. The more of us there are, the better we understand. But if we all stay in the closet, how can we help? We can't.