Comments on: Gay Sex and Vocation

By: Profoundly

Profoundly — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:11 +0000

Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation Anyway … nice blog to visit.

cheers, Profoundly.

By: Faith, Sexuality and Gender: Gay sex and vocation « Science Notes

Faith, Sexuality and Gender: Gay sex and vocation « Science Notes — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:00:59 +0000

[...] Sexuality and Gender is a blog with many thought-provoking articles. I stumbled across “Gay sex and vocation” by accident. The author says, “Hitherto, I’ve tended to the view that an active gay [...]

By: John

John — Sun, 11 May 2008 09:38:03 +0000

@Deb,

You’re right that I do see sexuality (including heterosexuality) and ‘gendered identity’ as part of our sinful condition in this life. But it’s not a black and white view: we’re sinners but we also love, and that love is divine even though expressed in an imperfect manner within us as sinners.

Two consequences that flow from this view are 1) that it’s not true that heterosexuality is somehow intrinsically ‘good’ while homosexuality is by definition therefore always ‘bad’ / ‘evil’; 2) that the individual- and flesh-bounded character of sexual love always brings some element of selfishness / self-centredness into the sexual relationship and act: we choose to be with the ones we love in practice as much because this is what we want and ‘need’ (emotionally, physically) as out of a pure, selfless response to a divine calling. But this does not mean that, once committed to a person or persons (spouse, partner, family), we do not then have a sacred calling to love them as does Christ.

This is true as much for gay as straight relationships of course – how could it be different? And just because traditional, straight Christian marriages are in theory open to conception and childbirth, this does not of itself make those relationships more holy or Christ-like. We’re all sinners; but the important thing is how we respond to Christ’s call to love one another. Christ alone knows whether, in conscience, we have responded as fully to his call as we might have done.

By: wep601

wep601 — Sat, 10 May 2008 15:20:26 +0000

Extremely thought provoking, but one I will have to read again to ensure I sort it all out. Sorting these types of issues out for oneself is hard work!

By: reallytruly

reallytruly — Sat, 10 May 2008 01:25:25 +0000

that is incredibly well thought out and helps me frame my own thoughts, thank you.

By: deb

deb — Fri, 09 May 2008 15:58:35 +0000

“…..This is in contrast to heterosexual sex – but, in the Catholic view, only one particular type of heterosexual sex; not heterosexual sex of any and every kind – which is an intrinsic part of the vocation to sacramental marriage. Nor is gayness in itself a gift of the Spirit in Christ. Homosexuality (and bisexuality, and transgendered-ness) is part of our old life, our fallen nature; but so is heterosexuality and, therefore, all sexuality and gendered life…”
I think you made your whole point in just this comment. You seem to dance around with your words, but it would seem your main point is that all gendered life needs grace as we are all fallen from grace and only know within our human concept those things of the flesh. It sounds to me your thinking is from the place of not seeing our flesh as gifts of the Spirit but rather part of the over all gift of life. And that, the GLBTQ person is no more ‘gifted’ then the heterosexual person in that regard, so that all our sex acts can’t be considered products of the gift anymore then a heterosexual person can consider all their sex acts a special endowment of the Holy Spirit. I think your whold piont boils down to morals more then all else.