split to address different points
quote="VeryWell, post:1, topic:316670"
I am a faithful Catholic and have been for my entire life. I have never strayed from its teachings and I vigorously defend its doctrines, even--and especially--those concerning the Church's stance on homosexuality. If I were to classify myself, I would say that I am very traditional. However, I also suffer from Gender Identity Disorder. (To clarify, I have not begun hormones or undergone surgery, but I do crossdress, which, as I have gathered from scouring other threads, is not a sin, and thank goodness, because it is a small and much needed respite from my turmoil.)
Of course, knowing that I will never truly be the sex I wasn't born as, I contentedly resigned myself to a chaste and single life since a very young age, incapable of either marriage or of comfortably joining a holy order. I have never fornicated and I am stubborn enough to think that I never will--I hope I never will, anyway, by grace.
You seem to be dealing with it well.
[quote="VeryWell, post:1, topic:316670"]
However, I have since found someone that I have fallen irrevocably in love with. They are the same sex as my birth sex. They know that I have GID, and, while straight, they love me anyway. I love them, too, and our attraction is mutual, chaste and not lustful in the slightest. Of course, knowing how things go, we have discussed the issue of the marital act, and on account of my religion (they are not Catholic) and my condition we have come to the understanding that it can never happen between us. Naturally, I am acutely aware that a marriage will never be recognized by the Church.
Despite these discouragements, we want to stay together as a chaste couple. I think that we have the willpower and the strength to do it, and by God's grace I am sure that we can. It is a rare and powerful love that I do not think is possible for many people, to the point that we would both give up the sacred act. It is a great sacrifice on their part, especially, made more potent on account of the fact that they are the sort of person that could have anyone they desired, really--certainly someone who was not like me, someone who was whole enough to be a proper other half.
I suppose that this must seem a bit convoluted, but my primary question is this: would we be committing a sin anyway for staying together in this way, or does sin only come into play when sexual intimacy does?
Society currently manages to overhype sex and simultaneously undervalue it. People have a deep need for love, but not sex.
It is more weakness than them renouncing something almost indispensable. While it might seem they are forsaking something they may ultimately find they have something far more valuable in it's place, see David's lamentation at the passing of Jonathan or Newman's lamentation at the passing of Ambrose St. John, indeed I know of at least one case where the other died of a broken heart shortly after.
No, what you've described is not sinful, also if people try preaching that it's a near occasion of sin and near occasions of sin are sin then keep that there is a difference between proximate and remote occasions and that it seems to be the latter case for you.
[quote="VeritasLuxMea, post:11, topic:316670"]
It's one thing to bear this cross, that is painful enough.
But if this organization tries to tell him/her that he/she can "change," oh Lord have mercy. Life is painful enough.
Edit: it looks like they do not consider themselves an "ex-gay" organization, but then their testimonials sound like it. So make up your own mind, I suppose.
Quoting from Courage:
Dear Courage, could you possibly be any less sympathetic? Could you do a better job of making these people feel like crud?
Probably not. :shrug:
If you've read some of the posts that have been made here you'd realize the answer is not just "yes", but "massively", lets put it this way, it is enough make it look like Alan Turing got a happy ending
[quote="VeryWell, post:13, topic:316670"]
I did not see that bit. While harsh, I think there is actually a lot of truth to it when it comes to a number of cases. However, I'll admit that I didn't look very far into Courage, because its entire goal seems to revolve around fixing these matters through chastity, which, as has been reiterated several times, is something that I already practice and have done so to the best of my ability for as long as I've lived. I would like to note that, while it has done me much good in regards to avoiding the condemning homosexual act, it has done nothing to actually ease my disorder. While they are no doubt very similar, GID is not quite the same as SSA, because it deals with self as well as other people, and coping with it is not as simple as not having sex.
In any event, Courage's efforts are commendable but not really relevant to the chaste romance that I am trying to discuss here.
I do appreciate the time and the effort and every single post here so far, but I would also appreciate some more specific advice or input!
Yes, GID and homosexuality are different in essence although perhaps might have similar causes.