The Qutn Is Not "Was Cardal John Henry Newman Gay?" But "Was He Straight?" - New Ways Mistry

Contents:

• WHY JOHN HENRY NEWMAN IS NO ‘GAY’ SAT
• ST. JOHN HENRY NEWMAN: THE FIRST OPENLY GAY CATHOLIC SAT?
• THE QUTN IS NOT “WAS CARDAL JOHN HENRY NEWMAN GAY?” BUT “WAS HE STRAIGHT?”
• GAY SAT JOHN HENRY NEWMAN AND HIS “EARTHLY LIGHT” AMBROSE ST. JOHN SHARED ROMANTIC IENDSHIP
• JAGUARS ACH KEV MAXEN OUT AS GAY HISTORIC ANNOUNCEMENT

WHY JOHN HENRY NEWMAN IS NO ‘GAY’ SAT

Believ that John Henry Newman may nstute a mol of hols for those wh homosexual clatns.

ST. JOHN HENRY NEWMAN: THE FIRST OPENLY GAY CATHOLIC SAT?

While he draws back om ncludg that Newman was certaly “gay, ” he wants to proclaim the msage that “a gay person (someone wh a homosexual orientatn, if you prefer) n be holy, even a sat. As many have poted out, the evince that Newman experienced homoerotic sir for his close iend Fr. Mart is rrect his assertn that someone experiencg homosexual orientatn n live a life of hols.

THE QUTN IS NOT “WAS CARDAL JOHN HENRY NEWMAN GAY?” BUT “WAS HE STRAIGHT?”

It relat to the married as much as to the unmarried, to the heterosexually cled as much as to those experiencg homosexual clatns. In the imaged scenar where Newman experienced homoerotic sir for Fr. Mart believ that Newman might have been “gay” but never broke his promise of celibacy.

GAY SAT JOHN HENRY NEWMAN AND HIS “EARTHLY LIGHT” AMBROSE ST. JOHN SHARED ROMANTIC IENDSHIP

John Henry Newman uld not have been a “gay” sat and have lived wh Fr. Had he been a sat and “gay, ” Newman would have, at the first klgs of homoerotic sire, promptly removed himself om temptatn’s way. Those wh homosexual clatns n ed lead liv of profound and exemplary hols.

JAGUARS ACH KEV MAXEN OUT AS GAY HISTORIC ANNOUNCEMENT

Is he the Catholic Church’s first openly gay sat? The answer to that qutn pends on your fns of “openly, ” “gay, ” and “first. Many tradnalist Newman scholars refute the ia that this was a gay relatnship.

Ian Ker, one of the foremost Newman scholars, says that the relatnship was not homosexual bee, by all acunts, the two were celibate.

Other scholars believe that to ll the uple gay is readg our own 21st century ias to 19th century phenomena. I agree that is not right to terpret a past relatnship terms of today’s morn awarens of homosexualy. But that’s where we need to qutn what we might mean by “gay” and “openly.