The Ontology of Daisy and the Priesthood

Over the last few days (or is it decades), my college friend Daisy and I have had an ongoing dispute about our relationship. IMHO, she likes living in our past and I want to live in our future. In the present, I am in suburban Maryland and she is in southern California. Regardless, this is not really about her at all. It is about reconsidering my sexuality.

As I began a long walk down Rock Creek Trail, I asked myself, what do I want out of my relationship with Daisy. Unrequited lust and our joint hatred of Donald Trump aside, I want to start each day looking at her smile. To quote Reese Witherspoon in Sweet Home Alabama, I want to kiss her whenever I feel like it. The thought followed, is that all I want? Maybe I am really asexual, and friendship is our best course, and the priesthood mine.

After my First Communion, I thought I might want to go that way. The four years of seminary was a concern, as I hadn't much cared for second grade. The joke is on me after four years of grad school so far, possibly more later. I dropped the idea of priesthood in high school when I realized that I loved politics and would spend more time running for bishop than being a priest. Not a good plan. Still, as a divorcee and a writer, could I be married to my work, not needing sex?

It deserved a look, especially since I have publically asked priests who think themselves heterosexuals making a sacrifice for the priesthood to consider that they may be naturally asexual. It might make them realize that their gay brothers don't choose their reality, they distinguish it, as they say in the Landmark Forum.

There are many ways to study being.  We distinguish reality. We decide between options and we chose the realty we want, regardless of our options and even when we have none.
Choice is an act of the Will, not the output of a decision. Commitment is a constant choice of the Will.

In philosophy 101, the Will is the irresistible desire for God when perfectly experienced in the next life. In this life, we do not experience God clearly. Instead, the Intellect informs the Will (offering options) and the Will choses as it will.  In making choices, we create reality. In making distinctions, reality choses us.

Nobody choses to be gay, asexual, hetero and all the rest (although it could be that many are more bisexual than they realize, at least toward individuals rather than sexualities).

The first thing the Church needs to distinguish is that epistemology works this way. Then it might have a chance of distinguishing that the LGBTQIA spectrum exists, that it is not bad and that almost all priests are on it.

Gay priests know this about themselves already. They distinguished their identity after noticing the signs. They did not decide or chose to be gay. Being gay chose them.

Many asexual priests have distinguished their identity. Chastity is not a burden for them. The problem is that some fail to see that it is not natural for the rest of us. We like sex as a good in itself, regardless of procreation. It is a feature, not a failing.

As I came upon a couple walking their dogs, I noticed the wife, not the husband. A gay guy would have noticed the husband. Not sure what an asexual would noticed. When they turned around, I was sure of my heterosexuality.

Upon honest reflection, noticed that when I have touched Daisy, aside from friendly hugs goodbye when one of us would go to another state or continent, that I did have a reaction that is more than just friendship.

The reality that I must chose for now is that cannot force her, or the priesthood, to distinguish, consider, choose or commit. Such things cannot be forced, not by me nor by the Church in dealing with people on the LGBTQIA. To be happy, we must chose others as they are, i.e., to love them. We suffer when we don't. Suffering is optional, but it is also contagious. Pope Francis, call your office.