This Web Accessibility icon serves as a link to download eSSENTIAL Accessibility assistive technology software for individuals with physical disabilities.

FEATURES











Be notified when we post new Diversity & Religion articles on our website!
We will not sell or share your email address, ever! Please read our Privacy Policy.
Gay & Catholic: Confessions of My (Former) Guilt
By Kevin Canessa Jr. - Apr 14, 2009
Photo

Also read: LGBT, religion, religion in the workplace


I was sitting at my desk last week when I got an e-mail news alert: Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, made a harsh comment about the University of Notre Dame for inviting President Barack Obama to be this year's commencement speaker. (Click here to read the full story in the Chicago Sun-Times.)


"It is clear that Notre Dame didn't understand what it means to be Catholic when they issued this invitation," said George.

Despite this and Obama's stance on certain social issues, Notre Dame President Rev. John Jenkins said that he had no plans to rescind the offer to the president to speak.


Click here to read "Religion in the Workplace: The Four Questions."

Click here to read "Religion at Work: Former EEOC Chair Discusses Legal Issues."

Click here to read "Who Represents the Christian Viewpoint?"


Once again, we've got a Catholic cardinal making a controversial statement surrounding President Obama. And once again, the cardinal has it all wrong.


Why? This is not a debate about Obama's stance on any social issue. It's more about the Catholic Church, which, by sheer definition, should be welcoming to everyone. Check the definition of "catholic." What you'll find is that it means a place where everyone--all people, great and small--are welcome.


George's outcry about Obama's scheduled appearance at Notre Dame doesn't exactly strike me as all-welcoming. It doesn't strike me as embracing. It doesn't strike me as anything remotely close to being the way I once remembered my church.

This brings me to why I'm writing.


Several months ago, when Cardinal James Stafford made remarks about the Roman Catholic Church and Obama, I wrote a column about my faith journey, my battles with the church and how difficult I found it to be Catholic these days. You can read that story by clicking here.


This piece, however, is more than just about my battles with the church or my disdain with George's decision to publicly chide Notre Dame for inviting our president to be a speaker. Instead, this is all about how this church continues to damage the lives of so many people it comes in contact with. It's about its repressive nature. It's about its uncanny ability to make so many good people feel so badly about themselves--without real merit.


Anyone who's Catholic will probably know this, but there's so much guilt associated with the faith. Whether it was in the brutality experienced at the hands of some nuns who were outright mean or the guilt many of us felt when we did something wrong without going to confession, the church has done a number on the lives of countless people. Myself included.


For close to 30 years, I loved the Catholic Church more than I did myself. I worked for many years in the Archdiocese of Newark, N.J., as a teacher, campus minister and youth minister at schools and in parishes. I loved my work because it wasn't really work in the truest sense. It was, instead, a way of life--a life I loved. It's a life I miss sometimes.


But that same church that I loved so much kept slamming its doors in my face. Every time there was a story about gay marriage in the news, anytime it came up in a presidential debate, anytime one of my students asked me what I felt about same-sex marriage, there I was, myself gay, having to lie through my teeth because if I was truthful, I'd be fired. It was sickening.


For all those years, whenever a priest would take to the pulpit to tell us how sinful and sickening and disgusting it was that two women or two men could love each other, there I was again, myself gay, taking it all in--feeling sick to my stomach most of the time.


Whenever the wonderful nuns who taught me in grammar school would read the part in Leviticus that says it's sinful for two men to lie with each other, I'd want to cry.


Because all along, whether it was in grammar school, high school, college or after, the Roman Catholic Church spit at me. It told me I was no good. It told me I was not worthy of the Kingdom of God. It told me--and all the rest of the people who are LGBT--that we were buying ourselves a one-way ticket to hell.


I bottled that up inside me. I allowed the church to dictate how I lived my life. I dated women because if there was to be a school function and I needed a date, it would have to be with a woman. I tricked myself into believing I wanted to marry a woman, settle down and have a family. I tricked myself into loathing myself beyond what words can say.


No More. Not Anymore.


After years of oppression, I finally decided enough was enough. Truth be told, being gay was just one part of me. If the church was willing to reject all my talents because of my sexual orientation--and folks, the church did exactly that without even realizing it--why would I ever want to be part of such an organization?


Yes, the Catholic Church told me I was not worthy of it because of one part of my life. I have no doubt there are millions more like me who are still scared out of their minds to be who they really are because of what they've been told by the church. I know, with certainty, that a good chunk of the priests are in the same boat I was in for three decades of my life.


This all goes back to Cardinal George. Because of a few disagreements the church has with Obama, the cardinal says the people at Notre Dame have "embarrassed" the church for inviting the president of the United States of America to speak. Do you see that guilt? George's comments were clearly designed to make the university president feel guilty.


This illustrates the microcosm that is the Catholic Church--the church that does a fantastic job of making those who are LGBT feel worthless. While I felt sad when I first read about Cardinal George's comment, I later chalked it up to the church being its usual self: making the innocent feel guilty.


Then I felt a lot better. I reminded myself that the guilt the cardinal was trying to impose was mindless. And that's just how it was with all that guilt I allowed myself to be consumed by for all those years.


I finally saw the light.


Readers' Comments

Your opinions and thoughts...
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I do not want to comment on this article in concern with Notre Dame and President Obama.

I instead want to comment about the underlying theme of being gay and the Catholic church (and Christianity as a whole). The author may focus on the Catholic church and its "repression." I myself grew up Catholic and have since changed to Southern Baptist as a personal belief choice. However, the author blaming the Catholic church for causing guilt for his being gay is misplaced. God in His word denounces and condemns those who choose to be gay, as the author of this article himself points out. If the author wants to ignore God's word and commandments and instead place the blame for his shame and guilt on the church, that is his own attempt at making himself feel better. But no true Bible-following religious sect believes that same-sex couples are ok in the sight of God.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Kudos to Mr. Canessa for voicing what so many of us have felt for years. The Catholic church is completely out of touch with reality and continues to live in its own self perpetuated world of hate and deceit.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I'd call a criminal conspiracy to cover up rampant child molestation a failure of both morals and faith.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

The church has never condemed anyone about being gay. Rather its the gay acts it is againts. And as the word catholic means whole and universal inviting obama to speak at our catholic university is emerassing the the church as a whole. The church takes a pro-life stand and as a church we should strive to follow it. Understandable becasue we are just human the church has made a few mistakes but never in the maters of faith and morals. But in this case I'm going to tkae the churches side.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Wow!

What an awesome article! Starting out as a Baptist and being changed over to Catholicism in grade school. The kids in my neighborhood called me a "Batholic" (Black, Baptist Catholic).

I am here to tell you that there were very few Black Catholics in my neighborhood in Michigan and even fewer in the Catholic School I attended; where the total Black population did not even measure up to 1% of the school population.

Nonetheless, the lessons that I learned on integrity, honesty, forgiveness, TOLERANCE and INCLUSION are firmly instilled in me.

The new outspoken, clearly racist voice of many of our cardinals offends me. Yet, I cannot help but see the hope, caring and vision of a new generation of Catholics as we had mass Baptisms the Saturday before Easter.

My suggestion, send them all back to grade school and have them start all over again with the Golden Rule. Then make sure that they all get an "A" in the 10 Commandments.

Perspective is everything! Thanks so much for this great article and the previous one as well.

Continue to KEEP US HONEST! GOD IS WATCHING!!

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

While reading Kevin's article, I could feel my blood boil. I was also raised Catholic. I am multi-racial and experienced racism at the hands of the nuns and priests while growing up. Not unlike the same treatment as Kevin experienced. I knew African American and Hispanic boys who wanted to be priests only to be rejected by the seminary. The guilt the Church lays on us was at sometimes unbearable; however, the church should assume much guilt for the pedophile priests it released on the unsuspecting public. Instead of addressing the problem at hand, it was swept under the rug and priests were transferred to other parishes to continue their pedophilia. That rug became too saturated and eventually the misdeeds of some priests were exposed.

Those priests who are against President Obama for his views on abortion need to examine their own views and stances on ethical and moral issues. There are many hypocrites within the walls of the Catholic Church.

"Judge not lest we be judged"

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I applaud Kevin for having the courage to write about his personal life inside of his faith, and how he felt conflicted about what the scriptures teach regarding homosexuality.

It is common for folks to blame members of a church, or to turn away from God, just because the scriptures, or those who teach them, do not support a specific sin.

I do beleive it is possible to love the sinner but hate the sin. I support Kevin as a person, and as a child of God, but I do beleive that homosexuality is a sin. Just as I beleive that viewing pornography, alcohol/drug us, taking the Lord's name in vain, etc., are sins as well.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Cardinal George did exactly that, he attempted to make the President feel guilty. I am assuming that the reason the president of Notre Dame did not recind the invite is because he does not feel guilty.

The term "catholic" does mean universal. Along with the welcoming all, come the people who express views that are contrary to the Catholic Churches beliefs. Even cardinal's are human and say incorrect things based on their own misunderstood faith. Too accuse anyone of being guilty of a sin is in essence err. God is the judge. Pope John Paul II, stated that we were to welcome homosexuals and love them regardless of their sexual orientation.

Being Catholic, I am sure God is extremely disappointed by the cardinal's comments. In additon, God is probably disappointed at the way we treat our fellow human beings in general.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

The Catholic church is the root of so much evil in this world.

Doesn't the bible warn us of organizations such as this?

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

What many people seem to miss in this debate is that the various churches of the world have their standards and doctrines. It is no surprise that homosexuality or abortion are counter to the state doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. They have a right (and some would argue, a duty) to hold to these standards.

On the other hand, I don't believe that God has the same rules as many of the world's churches. Your faith and homosexulaity are between you and God. It may not allow you to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church, but it doesn't mean that you are not Christian. All of us have our challenges and differences and we have to take them before God and work it out with him.

My advice is to stop trying to change the Roman Catholic Church and find a Church which accpets you and welcomes you. There is a place for all in God's family. But the Roman Catholic Church in its current form is very important to millions of people around the world. I don't believe there is any glory in taking that away from people who find comfort there.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Absolutely dead on. I still can't believe people continue to give money to this church.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I, like Kevin, have experienced the same thing in the Baptist church. Even as a young girl, I knew that I was a lesbian. Yet, I tortured myself for years from embracing that part of me because of constantly being told that I was going to hell for this "choice". I can't wait to see the day when the Bible, and religion in general, is not used to oppress a given group of people whether its because of your sex, race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Thank God for churches like Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) where all people can go and hear about God's love for ALL people! Because of this church, I have been freed from all of my past guilt and anger, and have really just begun to live.

Thank you for your article, Kevin!

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

to the wider world of self! The Catholic Church, along with its Protestant Sister Churches, have caused countless harm to the people that make up the minority sexual community. Many of us have faught the fight you did, some of us even have battled through to full self-awareness about our sexuality. It is people that have won and asserted wholeness, like yourself, that will aid in healing the harm.

Congratulations!

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Cardinal Geroge says Nortre Dame has embarrassed the church by having the President of the United States speak! As a Catholic, I,too, am embarrassed - embarrassed by the Cardinal's ignorance and littleness. These guys never get it. The regular folks are so far out ahead of these Catholic leaders. Few are listening to them anymore. They have become the embarrassment!

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Although I am neither, I found this article very well-written and it made very good points. 'Nuff said.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

The term catholic means "universal." When Catholics proclaim in their creed, "One holy, catholic, apostolic church...", they are referring to their universal beliefs, ethical standards, moral convictions, and most of all their faith! The universality of the church is what binds as a people of one faith. When you become a Catholic, it is not cafeteria line where you can pick and choose!

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I am not gay, but as a Catholic I totally agree with you. I am a Black American in the Catholic Church and as a Black Catholic I have seen and experience many predejucies in the church.

When George Bush spoke at Notre Dame, there was no comment regarding him and his stance on the death penalty. Isn't the Catholic Church against the death penalty? President Bush and his state of Texas was the biggest user and enforcer of the death penalty in the world. What about that? I think Cardinal George needs to stick to making the church a better place for all to worship.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

It seems that in every discussion about religious affiliation, most stories begin with "I was raised Catholic, but" ....strayed, renounced, or dismissed the teachings we had so painfully forced to adopt.

My friend says "I was never mad at God, I was mad at the Catholic church."

How horrific that the church shuns gay people, alcoholics, and the use of condoms to this day. We're not talking about preventing birth, but instead protecting life.

The old teachings are harmful. The church must change its teaching. They might as well be separating chocolate & peanut butter as a moral issue.

President Obama has earned more of my respect every day - and I would trust his wisdom far above that of any "divine" human.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Interesting point of view - I can't argue for or against this writers' position. I will say that his perspective is his reality. My concern is that many critics of the Catholic Church use a singular issue that directly effects them to cast widespread criticism such as nuns were mean and I had to take a date to an event. Seems to me that these kinds of broad sweeping statements support nothing and show that the author is having difficulties in supporting his position without resorting to the old stand by saying of "everyone is going" like my 15 year old uses on me.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

I appreciate your honesty. I believe that many out there standing in the shadows of the church will find the compassionate acceptance and love you have found through the words of your experience. I too experience much the same growing up in the protestant church. I almost loathed myself for something I had no control over. I found my acceptance by God through years of prayer and fasting. I learned that even I was worthy of his love. That he had no desire to change what he created. I was OK. Thanks again for your encouragement.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

Kevin Canessa's article is so perfect.

I too was raised Catholic and the church really does make you feel guilty. About everything.

I am very happy that he won't live his life as a guilty Catholic anymore.

God loves us as we are. Just as we are. I am working, at 50, to get over my own guilt issues.

Thank you Kevin for this article and your insight. I really appreciated and enjoyed your words.

Ute

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

The only people who live without guilt or shame are labeled sociopaths by our society. And truly they are the scariest people on the planet. To claim that guilt and shame are inherently bad is to ignore the natural human predilection to trust those who you know would feel bad about hurting you and to distrust those who you know would not. No organization would work or be able to convince people to do anything without the tool of guilt. You yourself are attempting to shame your readers into embracing your viewpoint by showcasing how horrible you say the Catholic Church has acted toward yourself in the past. The reader, if they disagree with your viewpoint, should feel guilty for agreeing with an organization that has done so much wrong to you. Way to try and shame us into disagreeing with a organization that uses shame.

.
Posted Thursday Apr 16, 2009 by Guest;

The Church is a big institution and moves slowly like all big institutions do.

The Church, however, is changing if not, one parish at a time (the Church I attend in SoHo has an openly gay music director). Your story is compelling, but consider it somewhat of an equal and opposite reaction to your statement "[f]or close to 30 years, I loved the Catholic Church more than I did myself."

Keep the open mind (about the Church) that you are requesting from the Church. Write on and I'll read on and let us all grow through exposure.

.
Posted Wednesday Apr 22, 2009 by Guest;

to write that

"Because of a few disagreements the church has with Obama"

is to be fundamentally ignorant of the Catholic faith. Abortion is not a trivial matter. The sanctity of marraige is not a trivial matter. The role that God plays in our daily lives and the Christian foundations of our country are not trivial matters. The Catholic Church does not "adapt" as you would like it to do on these matters because they are maintaining the teachings of Jesus, the founder of the Catholic Church. Other religions were founded by humans, not God, as the Catholic Church was founded.

All of these responses alluding to "God loves you just the way you are" miss the point. God calls us - challenges us - to live a certain way. To not live this way is a sin; it is a turning away from God. It is our duty to fight temptation and turn towards God. That is the challenge that we must face. If we fail and are sorry, yes God still loves us, but he does expect us to try. To simply embrace sinful ways and brush it off as simply "who you are" is not tantamount to being loved and forgiven for failing. You have to try.

This message will fall on many deaf ears. That is a shame

.
Posted Friday May 1, 2009 by Guest;
I read all the comments. God's Word is true and infalliable. He spoke on homosexuality in Levitius, Deut, and in Romans. Unnatural relations are an abomination. We can't take away our guilt; we can't confess our guilt to a "priest" but we can confess our hope in Jesus Christ. Read how homosexuality was dealt with during Sodom and Gommorah. No, I don't not hate a person because of homosexuality, but I hate the sin that has control of that person. A woman receives the pleasure of a man that satifies and can bring forth life...yet two of the same sex bring forth confusion--because you are still trying to counterfeit--one trying to appear and act the opposite..
Posted Friday May 1, 2009 by Guest;
Since you're using the Bible to justify the denial of basic human rights, allow me to share something else God said in Deuteronomy: "Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you buy them from among the neighboring nations. You may also buy them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slaves you may own as chattels, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, making them perpetual slaves. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen. "When one of your countrymen is reduced to such poverty that he sells himself to a wealthy alien who has a permanent or a temporary residence among you, or to one of the descendants of an immigrant family, even after he has thus sold his services he still has the right of redemption; he may be redeemed by one of his own brothers, or by his uncle or cousin, or by some other relative or fellow clansman; or, if he acquires the means, he may redeem himself. With his purchaser he shall compute the years from the sale to the jubilee, distributing the sale price over these years as though he had been hired as a day laborer. The more such years there are, the more of the sale price he shall pay back as ransom; the fewer years there are left before the jubilee year, the more he has to his credit; in proportion to his years of service shall he pay his ransom. The alien shall treat him as a servant hired on an annual basis, and he shall not lord it over him harshly under your very eyes."If you're going to literally translate what the Bible says, you can't be selective about what and what not to take at face value. I presume you don't support slavery. So why the discrepancy? .
Posted Friday May 1, 2009 by Guest;
What does it mean to be a member of a church or a religious group? When the Catholic Church started calling itself "catholic," was it being inclusive, or was it claiming that those who disagreed were not really Christians? Is a Christian a member of a particular organization, a believer that every word of the Bible is literally true, or a follower of Christ's teaching? When I stop believing the same way as my fellow church members, am I still a member of that church? To what extent am I responsible for the public statements of the leaders of the church I attend? All these questions are offered as food for thought when it comes to belief and morality. Such soul-searching is probably a better use of time than public argument. .
Posted Friday May 1, 2009 by Guest;
I think the way that Canada solves this issue should be followed here in the states.Like the US clergy their Canadian brothers/sisters have to have a valid license to perform marriages by the state or in Canada's case province. Therefore because of this they are no longer acting as clergy but as a representative of the government. This means that the Canadian government can force them to perform same-sex marriage because of the legal aspect of the right. But at the same time Canadian gave the clergy an out. All they have to do is give up their license to perform legal marriages. From the time they renounced their license they are under no obligation to perform the same-sex marriages. This just means the couple in question has to be married by the legal government representative before or after the clergy ceremony to be considered a legal marriage in Canada.The Canadian government split marriage view into two parts the first is the religious view and the second is the legal side. This is something that Americans have trouble wrapping their minds around. Marriage is both a legal and religious state they DO NOT HAVE TO BE THE SAME.The Canadian way of doing things can be directly apply here in the states. If the clergy does not want to perform a same-sex marriages then have them give up the license and only perform religious ceremonies. This will insure that they don't have to go against their religious believes but at the same time does not prevent same-sex couples from getting married.It should be noted that many European nations view legal marriage and religious marriages as two different views as well. Only marriages performed by a license government appointee like a Justice of the Peace are recognized by the government. Marriages performed by clergy are not.Why not separate religion ceremony from a legal right? .
Posted Friday May 15, 2009 by Guest;
M'Kay, for the guy who spoke about it being an abomination, to be such a devout catholic, you mispelled leviticus. Also, most knowledgable christians know that most of the old testament was nullified by the new one. I'll explain. The old testament consisted mostly of the mosaic law which was clearly dismissed as hogwash. My point? Being gay is not an abomination and the bible never speaks directly about it anyway. It speaks of sodom and gomora and it said that men cannot be kept for unnatural purposes ( that can be interpretted many different ways). Men. Not women. So if you're still living by that portion, we lesbians are free to be. Woo-Hoo!!!.
Posted Thursday May 28, 2009 by Guest;
The word "catholic" comes from the Latin word for "universal," not "welcome," or any other feel-good term..
Posted Monday Aug 17, 2009 by Guest;
what very interesting comments here. Can someone guide me or just talk with me. AGAIN, this morning my mother asked me if I went to church this weekend, and again I said no. She got so mad and hung up on me. I AM 46 YEARS OLD AND GAY FROM THE DAY I WAS BORN! How do I deal with this wonderful woman that raised and took care of me thru many sicknesses as a child, and now try to get her to understand I am still the same son she raised; I just happened to 'come out' at 40. Thanks for letting me write here..

Comment on this article   
Name:
E-mail Address:
Comments:*


Be notified when we post new Diversity & Religion articles on our website!
We will not sell or share your email address, ever! Please read our Privacy Policy.
Subscribe to the print edition of our magazine: Click Here To Subscribe

Career Search


Quick Search Advanced Search