I don't know where to start about this book review. I wanted to read it because I was curious. I kept reading it because I hate letting books half-read.
I would say there were two good things that I liked in this book and two bad things. Which makes me give it 2.5 Stars (well, 3, as you can't give it just 2.5).
Let's start with the good things. I really applaud the courage of the author to come out as "same-sex attracted" instead of "gay". Why? In the world of "you can be whatever you want to be", it seems to me that still there are many things that modern society doesn't allow you to be. The author said he cannot identify with the identity that the label "gay" gives him and he gave his reasons why and one big part of the book is about him explaining what he means by this label and why he feels he wants to reject it. I feel this is a very courageous step to take, but a necessary one. If we really want to be the open to all, accommodating society for every type of people than let's not reject those who are not okay with being gay. It is in their right. This is why I feel the step he did is a courageous one. It seems to me that at least in some circles of society this is an unaccepted feeling. Which is ironic, as not so long ago feeling attracted to the same sex was deemed an unaccepted feeling and according to the self definition of a progressive society is that we are trying to move *away* from deeming some feelings unacceptable.
The second good thing is that the author found a narrative that gives him meaning, a sense of purpose and a chance for a happy and fulfilled life, for which I am honestly happy.
Now to the parts of the book that I really found very problematic. First of all, the entire book is *very* catholic. I wouldn't recommend this book to any person who has had wounds inflicted by the Catholic Church, because I feel it would only make it worse. I am not such a person, thankfully, I only had positive interactions with the Catholic Church, even though I am not a catholic kind of Christian, they always treaded me as a sister (this actually has to do with my second point of critique, so I'll come back to this). So, the philosophy of this author is profoundly catholic and all his thoughts just seem unable to escape that way of seeing things.
I had to really keep myself reading mostly because of this aspect. I eventually came to turnes with it but hardly.
I particularly disagree with how he is ready to describe gayness as a spiritual disorder but not a psychological one. I feel that if it is a disorder, it is on all levels, and if it's not, than on none. I don't get where he takes the idea that spiritually is a problem, but emotionally and physically ....? I feel this part is not really coherent in itself. Moreover, it gives a counterargument to his arguments about what reality is (as described in the book). If reality is indeed what he says he is, the logical conclusion is that spiritual disorders translate into psychological disorders (and maybe the other way around, too). The gospel accounts also seem to think that there is a connection between physical illnesses and spiritual realities, which is why Jesus makes a point in healing and offering forgiveness of sins at the same time.
Now, the part that I personally found most hurtful of all was the implicit and explicit attitude towards the Protestant Church. I thought the times were long gone where the Catholic Church considered itself the sole Church, but apparently not. I could write further on why this is so wrong, but I wont, I think this is enough. I am sad that this is the view of the author. It is certainly not my view, as his views on being gay are also not my views. But I think it is always good to read a book you don't agree with :)