Religion???????

[turkeyman]

Am I out of my mind or can I be CATHOLIC and a GAY man and still believe in my religion even though I am not out but understand I do not want to change who I LOVE. HELP?

 

[richym]

I think you most definately can. I believe we have read the Bible wrongly when it comes to homosexuality.

 

[clh_hilary]

A lot of people defined god their own way, so yes. But calling yourself 'catholic' is basically not true even though most catholics don't believe in the biblical god really.

 

[turkeyman]

I really want to thank you. You have given me to think about and hope this will help me in the future.

 

[clh_hilary]

Or you can read being a catholic as a cat-holic!

 

[richym]

If you need to chat about all of this, please message me turkeyman.

 

[tonka]

There are lots of gay Catholics. The most famous ( beside the many gay popes and bishops) is Andrew Sullivan. He's a writer/ blogger here in America.

The key is to find a supportive church community. In some places they are pretty open; in others, they are quiet. But they exist. And the new Pope seems to be in their corner, and yours.

 

[lonelyboi]

My advice: become an atheist, like I did. A man's morality is defined by his actions, not his beliefs.

 

[clh_hilary]

I think the biggest problem is that, ever if you're comfortable with yourself, you're giving your voice to the church who's hateful against you.

 

[DarkLeniox]

I think you can be both.

 

[timrath]

I think you most definately can. I believe we have read the Bible wrongly when it comes to homosexuality.

I'm afraid you're severely mistaken in that regard. The bible very clearly condemns homosexuality.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

As you can see, there's no room for interpretation. Nothing that could be "read wrong". If you want to call yourself a Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical, you must accept the entire bible as is, and not edit out any passages that are not to your fancy.
Either that, or throw the entire bible into the trashcan, where it belongs. You don't have to become an atheist if you're not convinced by the idea. Be an agnostic. Be a Buddhist. Be a Jainist, Wiccan, Neopagan, anything. Just give up that disgusting religion that is Christianity. For us gays, Christianity is the worst enemy, after Islam.

 

[clh_hilary]

I'm afraid you're severely mistaken in that regard. The bible very clearly condemns homosexuality.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

As you can see, there's no room for interpretation. Nothing that could be "read wrong". If you want to call yourself a Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical, you must accept the entire bible as is, and not edit out any passages that are not to your fancy.
Either that, or throw the entire bible into the trashcan, where it belongs. You don't have to become an atheist if you're not convinced by the idea. Be an agnostic. Be a Buddhist. Be a Jainist, Wiccan, Neopagan, anything. Just give up that disgusting religion that is Christianity. For us gays, Christianity is the worst enemy, after Islam.

I'm on your team. And btw christianity = islam. They are the same thing, different versions. Like literally, I'm not kidding.

But, I guess you can say this rule applies only to bisexuals. Being gay means one wouldn't lie with a female like he would lying with a male. It also means lesbianism is fine.

 

[roamer]

I'm afraid you're severely mistaken in that regard. The bible very clearly condemns homosexuality.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

As you can see, there's no room for interpretation. Nothing that could be "read wrong". If you want to call yourself a Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical, you must accept the entire bible as is, and not edit out any passages that are not to your fancy.
Either that, or throw the entire bible into the trashcan, where it belongs. You don't have to become an atheist if you're not convinced by the idea. Be an agnostic. Be a Buddhist. Be a Jainist, Wiccan, Neopagan, anything. Just give up that disgusting religion that is Christianity. For us gays, Christianity is the worst enemy, after Islam.

Levitt and the Bible were written by people for people 3000 years ago. There are many passages which today are unacceptable for all Christian denominations and nobody don't even think to punish or excommunicate those who do not observe them. So I think that you can be Catholic and gay. I'm an Orthodox gay and I see no problem with that.

P/S My English is not good and I probably wrote many mistakes. Please excuse me for that.

 

[richym]

I'm afraid you're severely mistaken in that regard. The bible very clearly condemns homosexuality.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

As you can see, there's no room for interpretation. Nothing that could be "read wrong". If you want to call yourself a Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical, you must accept the entire bible as is, and not edit out any passages that are not to your fancy.
Either that, or throw the entire bible into the trashcan, where it belongs. You don't have to become an atheist if you're not convinced by the idea. Be an agnostic. Be a Buddhist. Be a Jainist, Wiccan, Neopagan, anything. Just give up that disgusting religion that is Christianity. For us gays, Christianity is the worst enemy, after Islam.

Well actually yes there is lots that can be read wrong there. The Leviticus passages could be read "you shall not lie with a man, the liyings of men with a woman." When do men, multiple, lie with a woman, singular. When it is a prostitute. It is most likely that here is talking about male prostitution within the cult worship. So nothing to do with loving homosexual relationships.
The word translated as homosexuals in Corinthians is very uncertain, it is only used by Paul. Until a couple of hundred years ago it was interpreted as masturbation. It may of course refer to the Greek practice of older men taking a young man as their sexual play thing. Again not loving homosexual relationships.
Sure in English there is nothing to question, but of course the Bible wasn't written in English.

 

[clh_hilary]

I think the point is not about the theology, you can believe in a god or gods in whichever you want. That's your right.

The thing is, the church is actively against homosexuals, and by calling yourself a catholic, you're making governments and members of the public feel that 'oh we have to respect the view of the catholics and hate on gay people like they do' when in fact most catholics wouldn't even care if something like same-sex marriage got passed.

 

[Ainsey]

Procede back into history & look around. "King James" was gay. If you're ever going to truly Live, you need to do it your own way. You cannot truly be free, until you accept yourself AS you are.

 

[topdog]

First, regarding being Catholic - of course you can be Catholic and gay. (Or any other faith or non-faith you choose to follow.) No two Catholics are going to agree 100% on everything. As a matter of fact, Pope Francis seems to be going out of his way to tell the Church to stop hassling the gays and get back down to the business of caring for the poor and oppressed.

Now, regarding Leviticus and there being no room for interpretation: some may see this a being all spelled out and perfectly plain, but I see a whole lot of assuming going on. For example:

The argument assumes that the writer of Leviticus, and St. Paul are talking about the same thing. If you read those books you will see that they are addressing completely different cirstances and they making different points. Not to mention the fact that Leviticus is writing for ancient Jews and Paul is writing to 1st century Greek-speaking gentiles.

The second unspoken assumption is that Leviticus and St Paul are talking about sexual orientation. Neither writer has the slightest inkling of what sexual orientation is. This is a psychological framework that has only been around for about 130 years. The whole idea that two men could fall romantically in love with each other and want to partner together for life would be completely alien to them. Marriage for them was about children and property.

You have to read the books in the historical context in which they were written. You can't just cut a paste a verse here and a verse there and invent a theology based on what it means to you. Well, I mean you can do that, if you want. But if you don't use what the original writer was saying to the original reader as your foundation, then you might as well just make stuff up.

 

[Tulliani]

i'm an atheist

 

[clh_hilary]

First, regarding being Catholic - of course you can be Catholic and gay. (Or any other faith or non-faith you choose to follow.) No two Catholics are going to agree 100% on everything. As a matter of fact, Pope Francis seems to be going out of his way to tell the Church to stop hassling the gays and get back down to the business of caring for the poor and oppressed.

Now, regarding Leviticus and there being no room for interpretation: some may see this a being all spelled out and perfectly plain, but I see a whole lot of assuming going on. For example:

The argument assumes that the writer of Leviticus, and St. Paul are talking about the same thing. If you read those books you will see that they are addressing completely different cirstances and they making different points. Not to mention the fact that Leviticus is writing for ancient Jews and Paul is writing to 1st century Greek-speaking gentiles.

The second unspoken assumption is that Leviticus and St Paul are talking about sexual orientation. Neither writer has the slightest inkling of what sexual orientation is. This is a psychological framework that has only been around for about 130 years. The whole idea that two men could fall romantically in love with each other and want to partner together for life would be completely alien to them. Marriage for them was about children and property.

You have to read the books in the historical context in which they were written. You can't just cut a paste a verse here and a verse there and invent a theology based on what it means to you. Well, I mean you can do that, if you want. But if you don't use what the original writer was saying to the original reader as your foundation, then you might as well just make stuff up.

No actually. You may argue that you can have the faith, but being catholic means you follow all the teachings of the church.

 

[TA8121]

I'd rather allow people to choose what they believe and not condemn others based on someone else's beliefs and perspective.