OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 21, 2014, 04:56:00 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Gay marriage could signal return to ‘centuries of persecution’, say RCC priests  (Read 13320 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #405 on: January 24, 2013, 02:29:37 PM »

^That's a fresh perspective for sure. Will think about it.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #406 on: January 24, 2013, 02:30:52 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

You said fruit . . .

And I will probably never agree with Kerdy on anything, he might be correct occasionally but it is like the proverbial clock, for the wrong reasons.

To point out what I going on a little about in my post above, I would say you are correct, homosexuality is as much a function of sin as a heart murmur. They both are caused and conditioned by sin.

Being a sometime red head (depending on age and who you ask), I can assure you nothing else could be responsible for such a terrible condition save unadulterated sin itself.  
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,187



WWW
« Reply #407 on: January 24, 2013, 02:56:14 PM »


Christ the only sinless one became sin. In virtue of what did He become sin? Not why. How? People would do well to table why questions and think in terms of how.

Cognitive consent? Divine plan?


I hope you feel better soon, Orthonorm!

Question, though.  Could you explain how you understand the above statement, that "Christ became sin"?  I'd like to understand what you are trying to say, better.

Thanks.
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #408 on: January 24, 2013, 03:26:34 PM »


Christ the only sinless one became sin. In virtue of what did He become sin? Not why. How? People would do well to table why questions and think in terms of how.

Cognitive consent? Divine plan?


I hope you feel better soon, Orthonorm!

Question, though.  Could you explain how you understand the above statement, that "Christ became sin"?  I'd like to understand what you are trying to say, better.

Thanks.


I'll never feel better. I just seem to adjust to the new bad. Last year's sick is this year's healthy.

Anyway, I think that was my entire point, how does everyone understand Christ became sin? And I know I am drawing a thread into yet another Christological thread, but how else ought a Christian begin to understand something about man except for recourse to Christ?

And why not have another Christological thread rather than a homosexualogical one?

What would be awesome if people said that they believe rather than what they read some others write.

Maybe more to come later.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #409 on: January 24, 2013, 03:37:46 PM »

To Liza's point, I would rather discuss the nature of sin and how Christ instructed how one ought to relate to the world and whether it has much to do with how we understand and attempt to deal with sin.

There is always one verse (actually more than a few) that I think Christians simply don't take too seriously and think Christ is speaking hyperbolically rather than literally.

Does self-reflexive cognitive acts have much to do with sin?

Is pursuing "virtue" appropriate?

Is not that pursuit itself tangled within the structure of sin as many monastics who people revere so much warn about? How could it not be otherwise?

People around here seem to want to suggest to homosexuals that they "struggle" with their "passion" like another person might with wanting a milk shake. This sorta talk (for those who can't understand rhetorical, I am bordering on the absurd) is loaded with many prejudices about sin, agency, identity, etc. And I would argue is radically compelling evidence for a very, very modern (to use the bogeyman around here) way to couch the problem.

I think augustin's post (in this thread?) about the normative manner in which things play out in the OW and will likely play out among the hyperverts and overly pious is very instructive as way of engaging the phenomenon we are discussing here. Really it was quite a fine post.

In short, choose Christology or the nature of sin, cause I think both are sorta awry in all this talk.

« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 03:38:57 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #410 on: January 24, 2013, 04:11:26 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #411 on: January 24, 2013, 04:14:20 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".
since he became a monk, how would we know, and how would it matter?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,187



WWW
« Reply #412 on: January 24, 2013, 04:15:28 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

...and yet, one might construe from his statement that most can control themselves.

 
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #413 on: January 24, 2013, 04:17:38 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.
Wouldn't help your case, as he specifically speaks of a man touching a woman.

And no, he says he think it better that those who could vow celibacy do so, but does not deny that they are free to marry.  Someone of the opposite sex, of course.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #414 on: January 24, 2013, 04:18:32 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

...and yet, one might construe from his statement that most can control themselves.

 

Look at the unmarried woman going for the gold star!

Really though, most are getting married or having sexual relations or wishing they did.

In any case, I do mean that sincerely. It ain't easy being single in this world, hence the most, like nearly all doing otherwise.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #415 on: January 24, 2013, 04:19:53 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

Isa will spin this to mean nothing relevant or thoughtful.

EDIT: Sigh, he already posted while I was writing this. I lost my chance to predict behavior.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #416 on: January 24, 2013, 04:20:39 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.
That he shared the same cell with fr. Gleb Podmoshensky should raise a few red flags, if it's a really important issue to you.
The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".
since he became a monk, how would we know, and how would it matter?
That he shared the same cell with Fr. Gleb Podmoshensky for years should raise a red flag or two if the issue is really important to you.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 04:21:45 PM by augustin717 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #417 on: January 24, 2013, 04:24:13 PM »


All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

Your honor, the defense rests.

More seriously, though, lately it seems that my struggles are actually with many of the dogmas of the Church, and so if it seems I am overly antagonistic on here lately, please know that it isn't personal. As much as I love The Church and had yearned for Her for years before my Baptism, I think I just need to be honest with myself. My beliefs regarding homosexuality are just the tip of the iceberg. You're right that the Church is unwavering in many of its views. If one fundamentally disagrees with the Church on too many things, something has to give eventually. Believe it or not, I trust that it is my conscience I am listening to regarding the acceptance of homosexuals. I believe in a love that is unconditional; people - homosexuals included - cannot love others if they can't love and accept themselves. Religious condemnation of homosexuality does far more harm than good, in my opinion. The idea that God would roast in hell a kind and generous homosexual because he accepted himself and didn't war against himself for his entire earthly life seems cruel and backwards to my sensibilities.

Perhaps I cannot fit the Orthodox mold after all.  Undecided
Well, are you willing to put the pedophile, the polygamist, the bestialist in the same mold of "unconditional love"?

Your "generous homosexual" accepted sin, not himself.  Not a sensible thing to do.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #418 on: January 24, 2013, 04:25:16 PM »

I think I understand where orthonorm is coming from.

Quote
Are we any better off? No, not at all; for we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, as it is written:“There is no one who is righteous, not even one; there is no one who has understanding, there is no one who seeks God. All have turned aside, together they have become worthless; there is no one who shows kindness, there is not even one.

Their throats are opened graves; they use their tongues to deceive.
The venom of vipers is under their lips.
 Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.
 Their feet are swift to shed blood - (That would be us, 'the righteous', bashing homosexuals or throwing stones at gay parades, or the crowds that shouted "Crucify him");
ruin and misery are in their paths,
and the way of peace they have not known.
There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For “no human being will be justified in his sight” by deeds prescribed by the law ("pursuing virtue"), for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christd for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonemente by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.

Then what becomes of boasting? It is excluded. By what law? By that of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles (homosexuals) also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.


Romans 3:9-30

A homosexual may be closer to the Kingdom of God, that is to realizing the power of sin in his very being, its inextricable hold on all of us. So are all those marginalized by the majority as public sinners: tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers in 1st century Palestine - alcoholics, drug addicts, and so on today. They do not sin because they want to, but because sin dictates what they do ("the other law in my flesh", as St. Paul calls it). Since they are judged and condemned by the world (righteous conservatives, the clergy, the law) and they have to put up with stigma all their lives, they are no longer condemned by God, because God doesn't judge twice. They will have a far easier time at the Last Judgement, because their sins are not hidden like ours.       

Christ himself was the victim of righteous and conservative religious authorities and the blind zeal of the mobs they easily manipulated: he was hung on the wood like an accursed sinner. He was declared an apostate, a seducer, a heretic and he genuinely felt separated from God. Because he put up with all this, no sinner is excluded from identifying with him and his community.

Yet what I find intriguing is that, at the end, Saint Paul maintains that the Law is not changed by all of this:

Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)

 
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 04:57:59 PM by Romaios » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #419 on: January 24, 2013, 04:26:35 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.
That he shared the same cell with fr. Gleb Podmoshensky should raise a few red flags, if it's a really important issue to you.
The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".
since he became a monk, how would we know, and how would it matter?
That he shared the same cell with Fr. Gleb Podmoshensky for years should raise a red flag or two if the issue is really important to you.
any point you raise is rarely of any importance, to me or anyone else.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #420 on: January 24, 2013, 04:28:37 PM »

You can only talk for yourself, unless more people live up in your attic.
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #421 on: January 24, 2013, 04:41:00 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.

*I'm aware of asexualism.

Single people are hardly all "asexual", however, until marriage they seem to be able to control themselves.  No?

We are humans after all, not animals.  Our goal in life is greater than mere procreation.
 


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.
Wouldn't help your case, as he specifically speaks of a man touching a woman.

And no, he says he think it better that those who could vow celibacy do so, but does not deny that they are free to marry.  Someone of the opposite sex, of course.

"Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."

"7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."

From 1 Corinthians 7.

St. Paul is clearly saying "Marry if you are unable to not fornicate as a celibate person.  However, if you can control yourself, do not marry."
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #422 on: January 24, 2013, 04:53:24 PM »

"Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."

"7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."

From 1 Corinthians 7.

St. Paul is clearly saying "Marry if you are unable to not fornicate as a celibate person.  However, if you can control yourself, do not marry."
I notice you skip over verse 6: "I say this as a concession, not as a command."

and later on, in the same chapter:
25Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. 27Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this...36If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.

39A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #423 on: January 24, 2013, 04:54:56 PM »

You can only talk for yourself, unless more people live up in your attic.
Oh? Is that an official diktat, Kommissar?  It seems you never tire of prattling on in the name of the people...
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #424 on: January 24, 2013, 04:55:19 PM »

So we only need to pay attention to what the Saints said if they claimed to be speaking for God?
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #425 on: January 24, 2013, 05:07:58 PM »

So we only need to pay attention to what the Saints said if they claimed to be speaking for God?
pay attention to the distinctions the Saints say they make for God.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #426 on: January 26, 2013, 09:44:06 PM »

 
More seriously, though, lately it seems that my struggles are actually with many of the dogmas of the Church, and so if it seems I am overly antagonistic on here lately, please know that it isn't personal.
I know.  Frustration manifests itself in all sorts of ways, but I appreciate your making sure I understand.

As much as I love The Church and had yearned for Her for years before my Baptism, I think I just need to be honest with myself. My beliefs regarding homosexuality are just the tip of the iceberg.

This is only one topic, but understand none of us completely agree with EVERYTHING the Church teaches.  We are flawed and easily tempted/swayed.  The Church is steadfast, which is why we must give it the first option of explanation, and also the last.  I have personal feelings about certain things which are different ( or at least were different) from the Church, but I had to learn to give in to a Church created by Jesus, built by the Apostles and unwavering since its inception over my own limited understanding.

You're right that the Church is unwavering in many of its views. If one fundamentally disagrees with the Church on too many things, something has to give eventually.

I submit the thing which gives is the individual.  One of the problems I saw in Protestantism is the hundreds of denominations created based off of one’s personal feelings of how something should be rather than what it really was.


Believe it or not, I trust that it is my conscience I am listening to regarding the acceptance of homosexuals.

You wouldn’t be the first.  In most cases, this is not usually a bad thing.

I believe in a love that is unconditional; people - homosexuals included - cannot love others if they can't love and accept themselves.

This is where I believe most of the confusion is created.  Because we disagree with homosexuality in no way means we do not love the homosexual.  This is no different than a drug addict, drunk, or any other person dealing with sin which holds a powerful grip on their life.  The difference is, no one is attempting to say drug addiction is ok (except for the MJ legalization people), or being a drunkard is ok, or any other sin is ok.  Imagine your spouse has an affair.  Most people immediately say they would divorce, but in reality, they would still love this person and most people actually would not divorce.  You would NEVER attempt to reconcile their affair with normal and accepted behavior, you would absolutely explain how wrong they were and do whatever you could to help this person get their life on the right path…if they accepted  your help.  That is, to say, your spouse agrees their action was sinful and wrong, was sincerely apologetic to you and God, and wanted to live as they should.  It is an entirely different story if your spouse told you to pound sand, he or she was not going to change, it is who they were born to be and you either accept it or not, it was your problem.  This is basically what homsosexuals are telling the world.

Loving and accepting who you are has nothing to do with rationalizing sin away.  It is accepting your weaknesses, embracing your strengths and becoming a better person.

Religious condemnation of homosexuality does far more harm than good, in my opinion

What good does it serve to pave the path of someone directly to eternal damnation? 

The idea that God would roast in hell a kind and generous homosexual because he accepted himself and didn't war against himself for his entire earthly life seems cruel and backwards to my sensibilities.
 
The first thing I want you to realize is we ALL war against our human nature our entire lives.  This suffering isn’t reserved for homosexuals.

As I have said before, being a nice person never got anyone into heaven, regardless of who they were.  Remember the rich young ruler?  He did everything the law required, but he didn’t give up himself (riches) to follow Christ.  This was more important to him than Jesus.  If being a homosexual is more important that being a Christian, that is the choice a person must live with, but it won’t turn out in the way they expect.

Perhaps I cannot fit the Orthodox mold after all.  Undecided

Do any of us really “fit”, or do we accept what the Church teaches and live the best we can according to the Church’s teachings?  It takes a lifetime to be truly Orthodox.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #427 on: January 26, 2013, 09:45:17 PM »

I just think that if I acknowledge that The Church is indeed, the true Church of God, but I disagree with what she teaches, then I am the one with the problem, not her.

Absolutely correct!  If one is unable to live as the Church teaches, one must either change or leave.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #428 on: January 26, 2013, 09:46:01 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?

Are you saying that people are incapable of living celibate lives?


I'm saying that most* people are incapable of turning off their libido.


This is not entirely true, but even if it was, it has NOTHING to do with what we were talking about...nothing.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #429 on: January 26, 2013, 09:47:20 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".

Turned away? How did he manage to nullify his libido? Did he take bromine?
You'd have to ask monks how they deal with that.

I thought monks control their libido instead of magically nullifying them. There woudn't be any struggle in that.

You're absolutely right. Celibate homosexuals don't cease to be homosexual any more than celibate heterosexuals cease to be heterosexual. There's a definite difference between homosexuality - the attraction to the same sex - which the Church does not condemn, and taking part in homosexual acts, which is condemned. Not sure if the others genuinely misunderstood what you were saying or would likewise disagree with me on this.

James

"Sexual orientation" is a concept which does not fit into Orthodox psychology, AFAIK.

It doesn't fit into anything outside an ideology of secularism.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #430 on: January 26, 2013, 09:48:23 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.

The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

True. It is the acts (thoughts...) which are sins.
Or, to be more precise, it is the assenting to the thoughts that is the sin.

True. It's sort of complicated, so I didn't go into it. Also, I'm not all that sure how to put it. But yes, merely having a thought--it could be just a logismos, a suggestion. And there are stages in interacting with the suggestion which come before acting on it. Some of the latter stages are considered sins--that is, they sear the conscience. If you happen to just have a thought and reject it, there is no sin.

You guys have hit the proverbial nail on the head.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #431 on: January 26, 2013, 09:50:33 PM »


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

This was his opinion, and I actually agree...to a limited degree; however, this in no way suggests people are unable to control their desires, only they are unwilling to control them.
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #432 on: January 26, 2013, 09:51:37 PM »


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

This was his opinion, and I actually agree...to a limited degree; however, this in no way suggests people are unable to control their desires, only they are unwilling to control them.
So St. Paul only makes an opinion when it doesn't fit your ideology?

Got it.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2013, 09:52:24 PM by Achronos » Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #433 on: January 26, 2013, 09:52:25 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.
That he shared the same cell with fr. Gleb Podmoshensky should raise a few red flags, if it's a really important issue to you.
The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".
since he became a monk, how would we know, and how would it matter?
That he shared the same cell with Fr. Gleb Podmoshensky for years should raise a red flag or two if the issue is really important to you.

Why should it do this?  Please explain.  Are you suggesting every monk in history which has shared a living space with someone is suspect?  Is this REALLY what you are suggesting?
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #434 on: January 26, 2013, 09:54:03 PM »


9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."



James, you seem to have focused on the wrong part of this verse.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #435 on: January 26, 2013, 09:55:51 PM »


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

This was his opinion, and I actually agree...to a limited degree; however, this in no way suggests people are unable to control their desires, only they are unwilling to control them.
So St. Paul only makes an opinion when it doesn't fit your ideology?

Got it.

You seriously need to learn to read...that isn't at all what I said.  Read the post again, and again, and again, until you understand what I posted.
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #436 on: January 26, 2013, 10:01:22 PM »


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

This was his opinion, and I actually agree...to a limited degree; however, this in no way suggests people are unable to control their desires, only they are unwilling to control them.
So St. Paul only makes an opinion when it doesn't fit your ideology?

Got it.

You seriously need to learn to read...that isn't at all what I said.  Read the post again, and again, and again, until you understand what I posted.
So when is St. Paul not making an opinion?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #437 on: January 26, 2013, 10:10:27 PM »


According to St. Paul, the only people who should be married are those who are incapable of controlling themselves - consequently, the Bible says that some people ARE unable to control their sexual desires.

This was his opinion, and I actually agree...to a limited degree; however, this in no way suggests people are unable to control their desires, only they are unwilling to control them.
So St. Paul only makes an opinion when it doesn't fit your ideology?

Got it.

You seriously need to learn to read...that isn't at all what I said.  Read the post again, and again, and again, until you understand what I posted.
So when is St. Paul not making an opinion?

When will you learn to read?  Additionally, focus on the important part of what I posted, not what you want to focus on to distract from what was being talked about.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2013, 10:11:59 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #438 on: January 26, 2013, 10:35:10 PM »

All of this is in fact fruitless because I believe that both you and the Church are mistaken about homosexuality. As far as I'm concerned, it's as sinful as being red-headed or having a heart murmur.

So go ahead and respond if you wish, but since we appear to disagree at a very fundamental level, I doubt it will serve much of a purpose.
That he shared the same cell with fr. Gleb Podmoshensky should raise a few red flags, if it's a really important issue to you.
The Church does not say homosexuality is sinful.

I wouldn't be so fast to make this proclamation.  Look at Father Seraphim Rose, who once lived as a homosexual, but turned away from that life.

Did he become heterosexual? Really?
Dont really know, but he turned away from it. Im not sure if he "switched sides".
since he became a monk, how would we know, and how would it matter?
That he shared the same cell with Fr. Gleb Podmoshensky for years should raise a red flag or two if the issue is really important to you.

Why should it do this?  Please explain.  Are you suggesting every monk in history which has shared a living space with someone is suspect?  Is this REALLY what you are suggesting?

augustin,

I am still waiting for you to explain yourself in this post.  Rather than “drive by posting” with snips here and there which have no support, present a little support and perhaps people may take you more seriously.  We may not agree, but at least we would consider your POV.  Otherwise, you shouldn’t be surprised with the results you are getting.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #439 on: January 26, 2013, 10:37:34 PM »

I've got my fans Kerdy. Not terribly anxious you ain't one of them Wink
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #440 on: January 26, 2013, 10:39:46 PM »

But now  on a bit more serious mode: google Monk Gleb Podmoshenski.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 05:09:49 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #441 on: January 26, 2013, 10:54:15 PM »

But now  on a bit more serious mode: google Monk Gleb Podmoshenski.

I did and Google listed 4 of your posts on this forum.

It must be the spelling. I wouldn't trust the internet to be that slander-free when it comes to an Orthodox monk.  Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 05:11:57 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #442 on: January 26, 2013, 11:07:56 PM »

How Fr. Seraphim (Eugen) Rose and Monk Gleb met if you read the account sounds much like a little romance. Or should I say bromance lol

Correct titles inserted by moderator.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 05:19:32 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #443 on: January 26, 2013, 11:14:59 PM »

I've got my fans Kerdy. Not terribly anxious you ain't one of them Wink

I thought as much. 
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #444 on: January 26, 2013, 11:16:07 PM »

How eugen rose and Gleb met if you read the account sounds much like a little romance. Or should I say bromance lol

You can say anything you wish, but until you have some substance to back it up, it means nothing.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #445 on: January 26, 2013, 11:17:04 PM »

As I see it the right wingers fascination with fr.Seraphim Rose is only due to his ultra reactionary views, as if in an effort to somehow psychologically compensate for an identy that in any of those much fetishized traditional/conservative/organic communities/societies /ordos would have had no place  but would have been just scorned. Now I am pretty sure he wouldn't have the same following had he been somehow more attuned to the aspirations of his age that even if naive sometimes were still less intent in making life hell for marginal categories of people. His case is tragic IMO
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #446 on: January 26, 2013, 11:22:48 PM »

How Fr. Seraphim (Eugen) Rose and Monk met if you read the account sounds much like a little romance. Or should I say bromance lol
Are we into using first names for clergy now?  I suppose this is nothing compared to the utter disrespect you have paid for Fr. Seraphim Rose.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 05:14:48 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #447 on: January 26, 2013, 11:27:20 PM »

Those are their secular names so no problem there if you imply I broke the rules of this forum. As for disrespect that's more in the eye of the beholder.

You are put on warning status for 30 days for violating the rules on using titles for clergy and another 30 days for disrespecting the rules publicly. If you wish to contest this action, please PM me first before going up the chain. Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 05:21:20 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #448 on: January 26, 2013, 11:29:47 PM »

As I see it the right wingers
This is your first problem.  Your second problem is ignoring, after being advised several times, this is not a political forum.  I have asked nicely, now I am asking not so nicely.  Keep your political garbage in the political forum.
fascination with fr.Seraphim Rose is only due to his ultra reactionary views

I know of no one who is fascinated with him, and I know very little about him.  He is certainly interesting enough to study and learn more.  Perhaps you should do the same.

as if in an effort to somehow psychologically compensate for an identy that in any of those much fetishized traditional/conservative/organic communities/societies /ordos would have had no place  but would have been just scorned.

You have no idea what you are talking about.
Now I am pretty sure he wouldn't have the same following had he been somehow more attuned to the aspirations of his age that even if naive sometimes were still less intent in making life hell for marginal categories of people. His case is tragic IMO

How can you be so sure?  What aspirations of his age?  Attuned in what way?  Life isn’t hell, but hell is.  How is a man who turns his life over to God and lives as  monk, becoming an inspiration to a lot of people, tragic?

Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #449 on: January 26, 2013, 11:30:32 PM »

Those are their secular names so no problem there if you imply I broke the rules of this forum. As for disrespect that's more in the eye of the beholder.

I guess we will have to see what the moderator says.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.192 seconds with 73 queries.