Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine

I have heard a lot about how mean the Church is, and how bigoted, because she opposes gay marriage. How badly she misunderstands gay people, and how hostile she is towards us. My gut reaction to such things is: Are you freaking kidding me? Are we even talking about the same Church?

Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine - LifeTeen.com for Catholic Youth

I thought that many of you would enjoy this article, especially those of you who struggle with temptations toward the same sex. I am one of those persons who struggle with temptations toward the same sex. Modern culture would call me bisexual. However, I am chaste and I am so happy that I am chaste. I am also celibate and intend to be celibate for the rest of my life. I could marry a man if I wanted to but I really do not want to because I don’t feel like I could handle raising children with my disabilities.

So to sum it up, I posted this article to show that it is clearly possible to be gay, bisexual, lesbian and an orthodox practicing Catholic. May God bless all of you.

Great article thank you. Love this logic…right on point.

***Is it hard to be gay and Catholic? Yes, because like everybody, I sometimes want things that are not good for me. ***The Church doesn’t let me have those things, not because she’s mean, but because she’s a good mother

So, yes, it’s hard to be gay and Catholic — it’s hard to be anything and Catholic — because I don’t always get to do what I want. Show me a religion where you always get to do what you want and I’ll show you a pretty shabby, lazy religion. Something not worth living or dying for, or even getting up in the morning for. That might be the kind of world John Lennon wanted, but John Lennon was kind of an idiot.

Thanks for sharing
Lisa

I have a question. Many people use the word “gay” to refer to homosexual or “same sex attracted” persons who are living that lifestyle and engaging in sexual relations with those of the same sex. They insist that this is the meaning of the word.

They would not use this term to describe a same-sex attracted person who was morally opposed to acting on the attraction.

I think this has caused many misunderstandings in discussions.

My question : Is there really an accepted definition of the term?

I’m assuming that you do not hold with that defintion, and it is in that sense that I will read your article. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I don’t think you have a disability. In our fallen world we all struggle with feelings toward the same sex. It’s part of a hyper-sexualized culture. You are not damaged goods. Keep praying you have many people in the same boat (whether they admit it or not) and the world needs more holy parents.

Its not my article but in my opinion, words like gay, bisexual, and lesbian can and should be used both by people who are morally opposed to the lifestyle and by people who aren’t morally opposed. The reason is because they are widely accepted terms. I may very well be wrong on this issue though. I think that the Courage Apostolate encourages people to simply say they struggle with temptations toward the same sex.

I won’t presume to speak for the OP, but I didn’t take her comment about disabilities to have any connection at all to sexual orientation.

Yeah, it was not connected.

Okay. This is what I thought, but in discussions with a colleague of mine, who is very much into LGBQT (did I include all of the letters?) leadership and the whole huge homosexual lobbying machine, I was told that “gay” and “homosexual” are terms for those who not only have same-sex attraction but who also engage in that lifestyle. I was trying to decribe the Church’s view (about the difference between the attractions / temptations and actually engaging in them) and he told me that the terms refer to those who engage in them, or at least are not opposed to engaging in them.

I think this is why the Church now uses the term same-sex attraction. Personally, I think it is a mistake for the young man who wrote the article to refer to himself as “gay”. When he grows older he may regret that very much.

Holly - just wanted to thank you for your thread. I applaud your decision to live a celibate
life to honor the Lord. Remaining chaste is a challenge for all of us in this day and age, and sadly a challenge many don’t meet, whether heterosexual or attracted to the same sex. Those who strive to please God this way are to be commended and encouraged, not only for their own obedience to God’s word, but also for the example they are to all of us!
May the Lord bless you with His love and joy. And thank you for putting the Lord first in your life, and for your example. :slight_smile:

The Church does not use that term. Look in your Catechism; it is not to be found there. It is in no Church documents. The only place I see it, in fact, is among the laypeople of Catholic Answers. I prefer not to use it because it is just another euphemism for homosexual tendencies. If you mean “homosexual tendencies” then just say “homosexual tendencies”.

Good for you, it could be worse, males in the US for example have their worth as a human being defined in relation to women, indeed almost all advertising directed at men exploits that to sell product.

Whats LGBQT?

'Tis the acronym for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Questioning, and Transgender.” It’s usually organized with the letter “Q” being at the end, rather than penultimate, though.

Anyway, it’s commonly used as an adjective to relate to people who fit one or more of these descriptions

eg:

There will be a demonstration by an LGBTQ group in the city square, tomorrow.

But, I just use the word “queer.” This acronym, “LGBTQ,” is always changing, adding and dropping letters, every time I hear of it. It’s much easier to refer to people within this share of society as “queer people,” than “LGBTQAISA,” or whatever the updated acronym is. The term “queer” has become an objective title that fits this whole group into it.

First, thank you for being honest. Not so many are.

You are blessed and called upon a life in celibacy, and that is what God want you to.

**Not so-called “gay” or so-called “bi” but over quite a while, I’ve concluded not cut out for marriage so happily, very happily, living what for me is an uncomplicated, blissfully so, life without the complication of sex. So, for me, easier than for many others AT LEAST IN THIS AREA.

I even don’t get too disturbed by the church’s seeming lack of a label. Had I been properly formed, I might be in a convent, but when I grew up, things were very topsy turvey, and I was just at the beginning of my journey to Catholicism. There were certain signs all along though, from a young age. It’s interesting to see the consistency.

What I “object to” is the greatly increased sheer NUMBER of people claiming “bi,” so-called “gay,” etc. etc. because I know it is an important part of an agenda to disingegrate our country (in my case the United States). The agenda is EFFECTIVELY PROMOTED through GMO (huge sums are spent preventing labeling - understand the truth about the referendum in California), and feminizing chemicals in food and water. UNDERSTAND, anyone who reads this! That MONSANTO’s CAFETERIAS DO NOT SERVE GMO because NO ONE WORKING THERE would open their mouths to any of it.

They know…how many others do in the US is the question. Why would GMO be so important to wealthy controllers? Because: feminizing the culture and encouraging ambiguity in every possible way SERVES THE AGENDA OF CONTROL.

It is ALL ABOUT CONTROL. The world is much much much more demoniac than the vast majority of Americans even suspect. Europe is more sage; they have no illusions and have known for a long time what naive Americans don’t.

As George Soros said, “The biggest obstacle to a just and stable world order is the United States.” Google it - even though google is public enemy number one - keeping up to date virtual yous on each of us up to the last time we do a search there, again for purposes of control. Soros, and others, are intent on destruction, in particular of the United States.

To accomplish this, anyone unconscious serves a purpose if they are not aware of the role they are playing as they communicate in various ways with others. I am not implying you are, but I see the greatly increased NUMBER and culturally promoted acceptance as a disintegrating force. I fully FULLY understand it is anything but BENIGN, and the amount of intelligence both to create the situation in which we are living, and to carry it out so powerfully.**

You’re right. The Catechism says “homosexual tendencies”.

But it’s important to point out how the Catechism defines the word “homosexuality” alone:

“Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.”

In our society, the terms “gay” and “homosexual” are synonymous. The young man in the blog should not be referring to himself as “gay” , but rather as someone who has “homosexual tendencies” or “same-sex attraction”. Personally, I think the latter is more specific. The first term could be misunderstood in the sense that the person “tends” to actually have homosexual sex rather than just the temptation, or rather than heterosexual relations…

In the world, there will be much misunderstanding if terms are not defined well and used consistently.

Good article. I have a sort of sexual perversion (not same-sex attraction) that I try not to act on, and it’s difficult but ultimately more rewarding. I do not know how it will play into the rest of my life - but I’ll see where God takes me.

One more thing: Sometimes these articles that are written by self-identified “gay” Catholics are not exactly representing the entire truth about this sin.

The misunderstanding seems to be with the idea that homosexuality is just another sin among many - that a fall in this category is no worse than opposite-sex sexual sin. Granted, they can both be mortal. But our faith teaches that homosexual sin is an abomination. It is one of the “4 sins that cry out to God for vengeance”, along with homicide and others: catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=29

This is also found in the Catechism, # 1867 (which lists 5).

It would be good not to identify oneself with that - it is not the same thing as same-sex attraction or simply not being terribly attracted to the opposite sex. It is an action, and can become a lifestyle.

A SSA Catholic who follows the Church on this matter is not “gay”. There is pretty much a consensus on the meaning of this term, and especially outside of the Church it really does mean homosexual activity, or at least an openness to it or the condoning of it.

So is abortion and yet people who’ve had abortions get less personal abuse.

That may be. Or not. Anyway, it’s beside the point.

In my area, homosexuality is pretty much condoned, even celebrated. Basically, in many instances, the red carpet is rolled out for them. They have their own graduation ceremonies (besides the regular ones) called “Lavender Graduations” which are completely sponsored by the local universities, they also have their own awards, clubs, bars, concerts. No one says anything about it because they are afraid to. No one abuses them (and that is a good thing), but sometimes this is because they are afraid to.

I’ve yet to see abortion celebrated like this.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.