All These People Would Rather Talk About Gay Marriage Than Stay On Topic

[GiC]

This thread was split from the following discussion:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,24201.0.html

-YtterbiumAnalyst

Protestant denominations will die out within the next 100 years.  I'm sure that Dr. Williams said this to create necessary fear that the constant obliteration of the tenets of basic Christianity within worldwide Anglicanism, especially in the states and also in England, as well as within the other mainline Protestant denomiations will leave Christianity without a Protestant factor, which I won't complain about.  However I doubt he'll do anything within his own church to stop this decay.

He can't stop this 'decay' without betraying his (or any civilized human being's) ethical standards...some may suggest it may be appropriate to reintroduce misoginy and homophobia to increase the numbers of his denomination, but, unlike at least a few on this forum, at least he has the moral character to understand that this would simply be wrong and immoral. There are things worse in this world than the fall of your philosophical ideology, such as the ACTUAL oppression and denegration of real people. Some fundamentalists here may claim to be Americans, but His Grace seems to have a FAR better understanding of the most fundamental principal of humanity: 'live free or die'.

[Vlad]

My two cents is that mainline protestants will continue to wither but that the more liberal ones like the Anglican Church may stick it out for a couple more centuries as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy will go to them but I think that eventualy they will just disapear for lack of a strong biblical faith they adapt to the world and that is the problem. Of course the RC did this during Vatican II also by whipping up a protestant style Mass and getting rid of all of its traditions. IF the RC wants to survive they need more Popes like Benedict XVI. I've also noticed that the more heterodox the Church the older the congregation is usually all 65+ whereas when I went to a traditional Mass it was full of younger couples with big families.(thats when I was an RC'er anyway.)

[Vlad]

Protestant denominations will die out within the next 100 years.  I'm sure that Dr. Williams said this to create necessary fear that the constant obliteration of the tenets of basic Christianity within worldwide Anglicanism, especially in the states and also in England, as well as within the other mainline Protestant denomiations will leave Christianity without a Protestant factor, which I won't complain about.  However I doubt he'll do anything within his own church to stop this decay.

He can't stop this 'decay' without betraying his (or any civilized human being's) ethical standards...some may suggest it may be appropriate to reintroduce misoginy and homophobia to increase the numbers of his denomination,

What do you mean by misoginy and homophobia?

[deusveritasest]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

[Vlad]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

[ytterbiumanalyst]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

[Vlad]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I can understand where you're coming from. I could be wrong, but the way I read it, the sigh is because it seems most of the conversations on this forum about the Anglican communion focus on these two issues, which are far from the sum total of Anglicanism.

[Alveus Lacuna]

The way I took it, deusveritasest was frustrated with Vlad because Vlad was confused by GiC's accusations concerning misogyny and homophobia, when Vlad had obviously made misogynistic and homophobic comments.  Also, deusveritasest supports exclusive homosexual unions.

[deusveritasest]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I think they're mostly neither here nor there. I personally approve of monogamous homosexual unions and see no reason women should not be priests. I know that the Church has no likewise official position; but as far as I know it has no official contrary position either. Therefore I would say it's up in the air as to whether it is orthodox or heterodox.

[deusveritasest]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I can understand where you're coming from. I could be wrong, but the way I read it, the sigh is because it seems most of the conversations on this forum about the Anglican communion focus on these two issues, which are far from the sum total of Anglicanism.

As noble as your interpretation may be, what I was actually sighing about was how quick some people are to jump to shout heterodoxy and heresy on these two issues.

[Riddikulus]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I'm not saying whether or not I support women in the priesthood, but I do wonder if the situation in the Anglican church has come about because of Western women having to resort to militant meaures to obtain equal rights in the first place. If women had had the vote and equal rights, and not had to strive so hard to get them in a male dominated society, perhaps the Anglican Church would not have been such a target for militant feminists who, rather than accepting that the call into the church was by the traditional activity within the church, merely saw it as the last bastion of male dominance to be overcome. Just a thought.

[Liz]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I'm not saying whether or not I support women in the priesthood, but I do wonder if the situation in the Anglican church has come about because of Western women having to resort to militant meaures to obtain equal rights in the first place. If women had had the vote and equal rights, and not had to strive so hard to get them in a male dominated society, perhaps the Anglican Church would not have been such a target for militant feminists who, rather than accepting that the call into the church was by the traditional activity within the church, merely saw it as the last bastion of male dominance to be overcome. Just a thought.

Good point. I approve of women within the priesthood, but not 'for the sake of it', and certainly not as a feminist gesture. If it happens, it should be the result of a sense of being called by God, not because you want to stick two fingers up to some imagined 'sexist Church'.

This thread is sad for me - I hope my Church has longer than 100 or so years to go! But Rowan Williams is ... well, pretty useless. I'm so disappointed about him, so many people thought he would do wonders but he doesn't seem to understand that the world is not a theology college, and that elegant academic opinion papers do not constitute leadership or decision-making. If he would only go strongly for what he believes is right, we would all have a better chance of following him.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I can understand where you're coming from. I could be wrong, but the way I read it, the sigh is because it seems most of the conversations on this forum about the Anglican communion focus on these two issues, which are far from the sum total of Anglicanism.

As noble as your interpretation may be, what I was actually sighing about was how quick some people are to jump to shout heterodoxy and heresy on these two issues.

I see. Well, like it or not they are both condemned by our Church, and therefore are heretical. But I do dislike the stereotype that the Anglican communion mainly exists to ordain gays and women.

[Jetavan]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I'm not saying whether or not I support women in the priesthood, but I do wonder if the situation in the Anglican church has come about because of Western women having to resort to militant meaures to obtain equal rights in the first place. If women had had the vote and equal rights, and not had to strive so hard to get them in a male dominated society, perhaps the Anglican Church would not have been such a target for militant feminists who, rather than accepting that the call into the church was by the traditional activity within the church, merely saw it as the last bastion of male dominance to be overcome. Just a thought.

....If he would only go strongly for what he believes is right....

Perhaps that is exactly what he is doing?

[Liz]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I'm not saying whether or not I support women in the priesthood, but I do wonder if the situation in the Anglican church has come about because of Western women having to resort to militant meaures to obtain equal rights in the first place. If women had had the vote and equal rights, and not had to strive so hard to get them in a male dominated society, perhaps the Anglican Church would not have been such a target for militant feminists who, rather than accepting that the call into the church was by the traditional activity within the church, merely saw it as the last bastion of male dominance to be overcome. Just a thought.

....If he would only go strongly for what he believes is right....

Perhaps that is exactly what he is doing?

True, it could be. I have certainly heard someone say that Williams is a man whose heart tells him one thing while his head tells him another, which would explain a lot. But it is hard to feel that he is a strong leader - if he truly believes that compromise is the best thing at all costs, then that is I suppose a valid position to take...

[GabrieltheCelt]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I don't read that into the statement. Why do you?

Because it sounds like he/she is advocating for these things. If thats not the case I apologize I come from the RC where we have all sorts of dissenters nagging after womens ordination and all the things that are tearing the Anglican communion apart.

I can understand where you're coming from. I could be wrong, but the way I read it, the sigh is because it seems most of the conversations on this forum about the Anglican communion focus on these two issues, which are far from the sum total of Anglicanism.

As noble as your interpretation may be, what I was actually sighing about was how quick some people are to jump to shout heterodoxy and heresy on these two issues.

I see. Well, like it or not they are both condemned by our Church,

Who's Church?

[LBK]

I personally approve of monogamous homosexual unions and see no reason women should not be priests. I know that the Church has no likewise official position; but as far as I know it has no official contrary position either. Therefore I would say it's up in the air as to whether it is orthodox or heterodox.

deusveritasest, please note the bolded sections. You are completely wrong on your assessment of these positions as far as the Orthodox Church is concerned.

[Vlad]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I think they're mostly neither here nor there. I personally approve of monogamous homosexual unions and see no reason women should not be priests. I know that the Church has no likewise official position; but as far as I know it has no official contrary position either. Therefore I would say it's up in the air as to whether it is orthodox or heterodox.

According to my Priest women will never be Priests. I just am following what my Priest says. Didnt mean to ruffle any feathers.

[Vlad]

The way I took it, deusveritasest was frustrated with Vlad because Vlad was confused by GiC's accusations concerning misogyny and homophobia, when Vlad had obviously made misogynistic and homophobic comments.  Also, deusveritasest supports exclusive homosexual unions.

What did I say that was misogynistic that women cant be Priests I was taught that that was the Churches position by my spiritual father. What was homophobic that gay marriage is wrong. Thats an opinion just because it may not be someone elses does not make it homophobic or is free speech limited by political correctness?

[Alveus Lacuna]

I think it's hilarious how long this thread has gotten even though nobody has substantiated this quote.  I also think it's hilarious that all people can talk about these days is women's ordination and the morality of homosexuality.

I'm pining for the good ol' days where all people talked about were pews and beards.  Ah...simpler times those were.

[Asteriktos]

Oh, I don't know about that. After all, this forum did have to create a thread and sticky it because at one point about 2 1/2 years ago there were just too many homosexuality threads. And the first thread concerning homosexuality was apparently started a mere five days after the launch of this forum. It seems that the denizens of this forum have always liked that topic. I can remember women's ordination threads from back in the day when this forum first started as well. I think you just want more threads on pews and beards!

[Ortho_cat]

I think it's hilarious how long this thread has gotten even though nobody has substantiated this quote.  I also think it's hilarious that all people can talk about these days is women's ordination and the morality of homosexuality.

I'm pining for the good ol' days where all people talked about were pews and beards.  Ah...simpler times those were.

Yep. Orthodox like beards and don't like pews...pretty cut and dry

[Ortho_cat]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

[Liz]

I think it's hilarious how long this thread has gotten even though nobody has substantiated this quote.  I also think it's hilarious that all people can talk about these days is women's ordination and the morality of homosexuality.

I'm pining for the good ol' days where all people talked about were pews and beards.  Ah...simpler times those were.

Yep. Orthodox like beards and don't like pews...pretty cut and dry

Ah, my friends, I see the light: it's not the ordaining of women, it's the ordaining of (the heresy!) beardless persons!

 

[Ortho_cat]

I think it's hilarious how long this thread has gotten even though nobody has substantiated this quote.  I also think it's hilarious that all people can talk about these days is women's ordination and the morality of homosexuality.

I'm pining for the good ol' days where all people talked about were pews and beards.  Ah...simpler times those were.

Yep. Orthodox like beards and don't like pews...pretty cut and dry

Ah, my friends, I see the light: it's not the ordaining of women, it's the ordaining of (the heresy!) beardless persons!

 

Noooo! And mine was just starting to come in nicely too... 

[deusveritasest]

I personally approve of monogamous homosexual unions and see no reason women should not be priests. I know that the Church has no likewise official position; but as far as I know it has no official contrary position either. Therefore I would say it's up in the air as to whether it is orthodox or heterodox.

deusveritasest, please note the bolded sections. You are completely wrong on your assessment of these positions as far as the Orthodox Church is concerned.

I don't agree.

[deusveritasest]

as people who approve of gay unions women Priests and other forms of heterodoxy

*sigh*

So you would consider these things Orthodox?

I think they're mostly neither here nor there. I personally approve of monogamous homosexual unions and see no reason women should not be priests. I know that the Church has no likewise official position;

Which 'Church'?  And who is and isn't 'Orthodox'?  What does that even mean?

The most academic accurate explanation of the term "orthodoxy" I have so far run across is "right glory". This indicates the Patristic concern with the ability to properly glorify God on the basis of a proper understanding of God and forms of worship that reflect this understanding. So, it indicates the deposit of right faith and right worship which the Church has received through the Apostles and their successors.

I'm at the point in my understanding of orthodoxy where I am inclined to consider the Oriental Orthodox churches (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.) to be the Orthodox Church. However, when I made the post you responded to, I was taking the Eastern Orthodox churches into consideration as well.

[deusveritasest]

According to my Priest women will never be Priests.

Whether by that he means that no seemingly canonical EO church will ever ordain a women to the presbyterate or that means that he would consider any such church that would to so to not actually be Apostolic, I don't know.

I just am following what my Priest says. Didnt mean to ruffle any feathers.

That's fine. There's usually nothing wrong with that. It wasn't your opinion that I found frustrating, so much as what I perceived as a polemical tone.

[deusveritasest]

The way I took it, deusveritasest was frustrated with Vlad because Vlad was confused by GiC's accusations concerning misogyny and homophobia, when Vlad had obviously made misogynistic and homophobic comments.  Also, deusveritasest supports exclusive homosexual unions.

What did I say that was misogynistic that women cant be Priests I was taught that that was the Churches position by my spiritual father. What was homophobic that gay marriage is wrong. Thats an opinion just because it may not be someone elses does not make it homophobic or is free speech limited by political correctness?

The line of thinking that GiC was labeling your opinions as misogynistic and homophobic I am finding doesn't even make sense given that your first post in the thread occurred several minutes after GiC made the mention of misogyny and homophobia. 

[deusveritasest]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

On the subject of ordination of women, I kind of doubt it. It seems to me that EO and OO generally are more open to women in Holy Orders than traditional RC's.

[deusveritasest]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

[NorthernPines]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Indeed!

I also must say I really disagree with the feeling that "Protestantism" is going to die out in 200-400 years. I have a feeling Protestantism is likely still the fastest growing form of Christianity in the world, though I don't have the stats handy. IMO it's much more likely that in 200 years Orthodoxy will have died out in North America, than worldwide Protestantism will cease to exist in 200 years. The truth is, Protestantism does bring a lot more people to Christ than we do, and probably even more than the Catholics do. (though that might be debatable, I've got a feeling it might be true)
And no matter what we personally think about Protestantism, in particular American Fundamentalists, I find it hard to believe that something that preaches Christ, brings people to Christ, and in fact even helps Orthodox Christians become better Orthodox, will simply "die out". But hey, that's just my opinion.

[Liz]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Indeed!

I also must say I really disagree with the feeling that "Protestantism" is going to die out in 200-400 years. I have a feeling Protestantism is likely still the fastest growing form of Christianity in the world, though I don't have the stats handy. IMO it's much more likely that in 200 years Orthodoxy will have died out in North America, than worldwide Protestantism will cease to exist in 200 years. The truth is, Protestantism does bring a lot more people to Christ than we do, and probably even more than the Catholics do. (though that might be debatable, I've got a feeling it might be true)
And no matter what we personally think about Protestantism, in particular American Fundamentalists, I find it hard to believe that something that preaches Christ, brings people to Christ, and in fact even helps Orthodox Christians become better Orthodox, will simply "die out". But hey, that's just my opinion.

Hey, I wouldn't want Orthodoxy to die out either! I can't see it happening myself, but I guess I'm not an insider so I see the united front more 

[GiC]

The way I took it, deusveritasest was frustrated with Vlad because Vlad was confused by GiC's accusations concerning misogyny and homophobia, when Vlad had obviously made misogynistic and homophobic comments.  Also, deusveritasest supports exclusive homosexual unions.

What did I say that was misogynistic that women cant be Priests I was taught that that was the Churches position by my spiritual father. What was homophobic that gay marriage is wrong. Thats an opinion just because it may not be someone elses does not make it homophobic or is free speech limited by political correctness?

Please don't confuse people disagreeing with your opinion and people trying to suppress your right to express it. I may be the first person to attack your position as bigoted and immoral...but I'll also be the first person to defend your right to express it.

[Papist]

The way I took it, deusveritasest was frustrated with Vlad because Vlad was confused by GiC's accusations concerning misogyny and homophobia, when Vlad had obviously made misogynistic and homophobic comments.  Also, deusveritasest supports exclusive homosexual unions.

What did I say that was misogynistic that women cant be Priests I was taught that that was the Churches position by my spiritual father. What was homophobic that gay marriage is wrong. Thats an opinion just because it may not be someone elses does not make it homophobic or is free speech limited by political correctness?

I am still lost as to how a materialist can call something "moral" or "immoral".

Please don't confuse people disagreeing with your opinion and people trying to suppress your right to express it. I may be the first person to attack your position as bigoted and immoral...but I'll also be the first person to defend your right to express it.

[Ortho_cat]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

[Papist]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

Do you then believe that a person who struggles with homosexual attractions can be re-oriented to only having heterosexual attractions?

[deusveritasest]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

For one thing, I have seen nothing to indicate that there is anything inherently immoral about a homosexual orientation, which you seem to insinuate. To simply be sexually attracted to members of the same sex does not necessarily mean that one will act on these attractions or even that these attractions are lustful in quality.

Secondly, there is absolutely no indication, from what I can see, that anyone with deep-seated homosexual attractions throughout their life is ever capable of getting over them. The commonly suggested path for homosexuals is that they struggle with their attractions to accomplish a celibate lifestyle, not suggesting that there is any chance for or even desirability of getting rid of their orientation. As such, I strongly disagree with what you have said.

[Liz]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

For one thing, I have seen nothing to indicate that there is anything inherently immoral about a homosexual orientation, which you seem to insinuate. To simply be sexually attracted to members of the same sex does not necessarily mean that one will act on these attractions or even that these attractions are lustful in quality.

Secondly, there is absolutely no indication, from what I can see, that anyone with deep-seated homosexual attractions throughout their life is ever capable of getting over them. The commonly suggested path for homosexuals is that they struggle with their attractions to accomplish a celibate lifestyle, not suggesting that there is any chance for or even desirability of getting rid of their orientation. As such, I strongly disagree with what you have said.

Now that seems to me to be a crucial point.

[Ortho_cat]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

Do you then believe that a person who struggles with homosexual attractions can be re-oriented to only having heterosexual attractions?

By the grace of God, yes. I don't think there's anything beyond his healing powers.

[deusveritasest]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

Do you then believe that a person who struggles with homosexual attractions can be re-oriented to only having heterosexual attractions?

By the grace of God, yes. I don't think there's anything beyond his healing powers.

No one will deny that. Whether or not this is God's intent is the more pertinent question.

[Liz]

If Orthodoxy were to ever to ordain women or allow gay unions (or priests), RC's would probably pave the way first.

Homosexuals are already allowed to be priests (given the requisite that they are celibate). I just thought it important to point out that it is erroneous to suggest that there is no such thing as gay priests of any form.

Of course this goes back to whether one considers homosexuality as a permanent affliction (from which there is no cure), or simply another sinful tendency which Christ is able to heal.

The Church views homosexuality as the latter, and therefore considers the priest with homosexual passions no different from anyone else that struggles in various forms of sin.

Do you then believe that a person who struggles with homosexual attractions can be re-oriented to only having heterosexual attractions?

By the grace of God, yes. I don't think there's anything beyond his healing powers.

No one will deny that. Whether or not this is God's intent is the more pertinent question.

Is it not ultimately part of God's intent, even if not immediately? I'm asking this in ignorance, not rhetorically. My fuzzy theology would be that nothing happens without God, but that may be bad theology too.

[Ortho_cat]

It seems pretty cut and dry to me. From what i've read, the Bible clearly attributes such activity (homosexual activity) to a deviant lifetyle, foreign to that which we were originally designed by God to partake in. I was told in catechesis that homosexuality is a sin just like any other, and should be repented of. Some have a certain tendency/weakness towards such, just like some have a natural tendency towards addictive substances. There is no indication, from the Church fathers, nor from the biblical canon, that would suggest otherwise about the subject. Culture and society, on the other hand, suggests sympathy towards such a lifestyle, but that is not to be our guide on this earth, lest we stray away from narrow path.

[Liz]

Oh - no, I was actually thinking in terms of the 'big things' in the universe. I don't mean, 'did God secretly create homosexuality', but rather, 'can we be certain what God meant to happen'. My cousin, who is dead now but who was a lovely person and a good Christian, suggested to me that perhaps we're not perfect in our ability to tell what are the blessings God gives us, and what are the crosses to bear - let alone what is in between these two categories.

I was thinking that, when we talk of God's 'healing powers' in the context of 'homosexuality', we might be getting into something more complex than we can really understand?

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics (Moderator: Schultz) > Topic: All These People Would Rather Talk About Gay Marriage Than Stay On Topic