Quick Thoughts on Romance
Dec 21, 2011
I was going to post this as a comment to the last post, but since this is MY BLOG and my thoughts are THE MOST IMPORTANT so I get CENTER STAGE and also I am THE SMARTEST, I am going to make a WHOLE POST out of it.
So.
A few have noted that it’s possible for a man with SSA to have deep relationships with other men without these being sinful. I definitely agree. I think such friendships are not only good but incredibly important, lest chastity become just plain loneliness.
A few have also compared this situation to a man (without SSA) having a chaste, but nevertheless deep, friendship with a woman. I think that’s a pretty good comparison — such friendships are certainly possible and certainly good.
The comparison isn’t perfect, though. It seems to me that as a friendship between a man and woman deepens, there is a natural tendency towards romance. I know this isn’t true in every case, but it still constitutes a tendency. On the other hand, in my experience, as friendship deepens between two men (even if one or both of them have SSA), the tendency isn’t towards romance, but just — deeper friendship.
I think we have a tendency to consider friendship and romance/eros as differing only in degree (that’s why people always say: “More than just a friend.” I don’t believe that’s the case. They differ in kind.
Speaking again from my own experience, when I initially make a solid connection with another man, there’s a period where romance rears its head, and where I’m tempted to think of him as THE ONE — that one perfect companion, soulmate, comforter, etc. that so many men with SSA long for. If the friendship survives this phase, the next phase isn’t romance at all; the romance part is usually due to me idolizing him, projecting onto him qualities he doesn’t have.
So, to sum up: I don’t look for romance with a man. The romance part is usually just what happens before I actually get to know and love him for real.
Thanks!
I’d hesitate to describe a romantic relationship of any kind as a betrayal of chastity, even if its consummation would be a sin. Emotions, after all, are involuntary, and you might find yourself in some other sort of relationship (old friends, let’s say) in which two parties each have romantic feelings for the other that are acknowledged but not necessarily pursued. This of course doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to do whatever feels right in that context; I’d just be inclined to nuance, to say that it is probably an occasion of sin, but that it doesn’t have to be. That might seem like it opens the door to possible laxity, and of course we humans are ingenious at finding moral loopholes; but I’ve usually found my own tendency to erect fences that keep me away from possible violations just as harmful as actual sins, if not more so.
Why does the moral life have to be so hard! (Please, no one answer that.)
Daniel, you said that homosexuals will never be masculine the way God intended. I don’t agree. If God didn’t want there to be gay people, we would not exist. So perhaps we are the way God intended. Gabriel, you made some good points, but uh oh, I never liked roughhousing when I was a kid.
Personally, I don’t think most people are too clear on what masculinity, or what femininity, actually is.
Chris, how is it a betraying of the calling of chastity if both men are being chaste?
What defines these sins if not sex? What can and can’t these men do. Spell it out for me. And why?
And Mark, I just meant in the obvious catholic way. Obviously, the reason why gay men are called to be chaste is because god made man to be with a woman. Its how our parts function. Its like the underlying assumption to the church’s teaching of homosexuality. I was just kinda saying the obvious but I know that god made me and I know that god made all homosexual men. But he also made sin. Like I said before, I know that doesn’t make any gay man any less of a man.
Daniel, I’ve been trying to spell it out, but I guess I’m just not very good at making myself understood. I had hopes that by making the comparison to adultery in my own situation it would help clarify things, i.e. it doesn’t take sex with another woman for me to betray my marriage vows. Granted, it’s not instantly a mortal sin to catch sight of a cheerleader during a pro football game, but I also can’t delude myself into thinking everything is venial as long as I don’t get her pregnant.
Since I used the “b” word, how about a different analogy? Read Matthew 26 and tell me where Judas first sins against Jesus in his plot to betray Him. Is it at verse 49 when he kisses Him? Or verse 47 when he arrives at Gethsemane with the temple guards? Verse 22 at the Last Supper, when he asks, “Surely you don’t mean me?” Was it in verse 16, when he started watching for his opportunity, or verse 15 when he made the agreement with the chief priests and took the money? Near as I can tell, it’s before verse 14, whenever he got the idea to approach the chief priests and make the deal in the first place.
So, now I’ll ask you your own question: when does a Catholic man with SSA, who knows his Faith, begin to sin against chastity? When he’s in bed with another man? When they’re making out during a date? When they’re holding hands walking down the street? When they’re planning the date? When they’re flirting with one another?
I honestly can’t tell you, because sin requires intent. (Also, the obvious fact that I’ve never been in that situation with another man, and I’m beginning to see that maybe I just can’t say with it’s like for you.) It could come before you start to flirt, or after if you were doing it unconsciously. It might never happen, if you’ve mastered your passions and it’s not really a date, you’re just hanging out with a friend. But if we’re using the language of dating and romance, it would seem it’s already been decided that you don’t just want to “just be friends.”
I can say this: for me, if I don’t avert my eyes when I see that NFL cheerleader, it only takes a few moments (or less!) before she’s undressed in my head. Game over, that’s at least a venial sin for me, because I know I haven’t mastered my passions enough to say otherwise. Can I push that aside, engage her in conversation, become her friend, go out to the movies or a ballgame with her, and never break my vows? Absolutely, I could. But I’m not going to try testing that theory on any NFL cheerleaders anytime soon without an annulment.
Great blog Steve! I just heard your recent interview on Catholic Answers Live and found your blog from there – good stuff here!
I like what you said Steve about getting past the infatuation phase to arrive at a friendship with another guy. I have ssa and am older, almost 50, but I have also experienced these stages in friendship, and have heard therapists such as Dr. Joseph Nicolosi emphasize that non-sexual friendships with men are key. Of course discernment and prudence are also key to keep the friendships on the right track and non-sexual.
Also, I agree with several commenters who said that ssa is not a uniform experience. I think it helps demystify the problem to know that while there are certain frequently observed similarities, each person’s experience will vary and some will vary quite a bit. That being said, the elements most commonly experienced – such as difficulty connecting with father or male peers and establishing a strong masculine identity – are very telling and can give many of us valuable clues with regard to how we might best heal and/or deal.
Networking is also so very helpful with this issue and has historically been difficult, so thank you so much for providing this forum. God bless and Merry Christmas!
Well, it’s opaque to me, but if you like women, whatever. I don’t judge.
But seriously. Obviously, actual gay sex is wrong. (Well, not “obviously” to some of us — myself included — but if we accept Catholic moral teaching, which I gather those of us conducting this discussion do.) And obviously, deliberately putting yourself in an occasion of sin, i.e. a situation in which your ability to remain chaste is in serious jeopardy, is tantamount to a direct violation of chastity too, in addition to being an act of hubris.
I’d say that technically anything else is innocent. But I’d hasten to add that such things as flirting, hand-holding, and kissing are all usually in the bad-idea, morally-sketchy, playing-with-fire territory. Whether they are in themselves occasions of sin probably depends very much on the person. And on the individual act. A kiss, even between lovers, need not be a lovers’ kiss (cf. C. S. Lewis in “The Four Loves”); many expressions of affection that our culture regards as gay are not even necessarily sexual, and plenty of other cultures are quite positive about intra-male affection without being very accepting of homosexuality — Arab culture is an outstanding example.
For myself, I doubt that I could kiss another gay man with — how shall I put it? — detachment. But there are one or two straight men that I know, friends of mine, with whom I believe I could exchange a kiss that was really brotherly. Admittedly that sounds pretty odd with our cultural background, but when you come to think of how most cultures, ranging throughout both geography and history, have expressed affection, it is our combination of Stoicism and squeamishness that is odd. The same goes for hand-holding — or for laying my head against a man’s chest, a la St. John and Jesus.
By the way — I want to thank you, Chris, for the efforts you are making at understanding us. One of the most dismal things about this struggle is how little those who do not experience same-sex attraction seem to care about it. That is, we often have straight friends who care about us, but not about the issue as such, and they come off as being cast in an I-care-about-you-but-not-your-problems mold. (Even Courage gives me that impression, though I’ve never been involved directly.) Your deliberate engagement with the matter is encouraging, and rather touching. Thank you very much, and merry Christmas!
I was reading a book about St Ignatius Loyola. The book said he’d told his priests not to kiss each other. The author said, us Northern Europeans (the author was English), the question might seem to be why would two men want to kiss each other in the first place-but to the men Loyola was writing to, quite different ’cause of different culture-and it might seem to them that Ignatius was trying to banish friendship.
I live in Europe, where two guys kissing each other on the cheeks is quite a common sight. And not just members of the same family. Just goes to show how different cultures view things. I can kiss a guy on the forehead or cheek and not feel like I am doing anything sexual or gay at all.
[...] this was a point of debate over at Steve Gershom, I wanted to note it for reference, but I don’t want to restart the conversation in that [...]