www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Bush Wants Homosexuals Out of Marriage

Dear Latin Trad:
I agree with you that all homosexual activity is morally wrong.

But, I think Dr John is calling for some compassion towards homosexuals. If you have read Dr John on other issues, you should know he always calls for compassion before all else.

Several posts back I asked for ideas on how to begin a conversation with an openly gay person as to the morality of their "union". So far only TheistGal has responded. Yet, many folks here have stated we, as Christians, need to correct our brothers or sisters. Since no one else than TheistGal responded, I assume that means we all realize how difficult it is to correct someone on this issue. The particular gentelman I know that I have not figured out how to "correct", in all other areas is the most Christian of the folks I work with. I work in a hospital. I also know he had a horrible childhood, an alcoholic father who spent all his money on drink rather than food for 10 children. You don't even want to know how the kids managed to feed themselves. In addition to not knowing how to properly "correct" him regarding his "union", I also don't have the heart to tell this person with numerous other issues he needs "correcting". So far, I just feel compassion for him and will be a friend, not a judge.
denise

Dear byzinroswell:

Whether to "correct" someone's personal behavior in a business/professional setting is a very thorny issue. Business etiquette of the current day suggests that one does not promote one's own theology or theology-based morality at work. Period.

Now before y'all go jumping down my throat about such things as professional ethics - that's different and you know it, so don't even go there.

Example - not too long ago a member of my firm's support staff sent a general e-mail about how we should have all prayed for our country as it was going into an immoral war in Iraq. She was quickly reprimanded.

On the other hand, your relationship with this person seems to be on a more personal level. Stil, if you truly feel called to cousnel him on the morality of his lifestyle, I would humbly suggest that you do it outside of work.

Yours,

kl

AMDG
Dear Denise,

I think you are quite correct, and I deserve a reprimand for my lack of compassion here.

I do realize that we must have the utmost compassion and empathy for people who are afflicted with homosexual orientation. I myself have tried to counsel gays, when I was a college student. I learned a lot (and still have a lot to learn!)

Nevertheless, I just wanted to warn our brother Dr. John that he was on dangerous ground when he was wondering if maybe Christian theology on these issues was outdated (not his words). He seemed to be searching for a justification by which we could rationalize homosexual relationships. Maybe I am wrong in my assessment of his posts.

I welcome further fraternal correction from my wise fellow-posters.

LatinTrad

I am not sure as to the intent of Dr. John�s posts. Some have been rather unclear. At times he seems to suggest that homosexual activity is not always wrong. Such a suggestion, of course, would not be in keeping with the Commandments and would do a disservice to the entire community. Compassion certainly does come first. We must remember at all times that it is not compassionate to allow someone to think that something immoral is moral (whether it is also sinful is another matter).

Every situation is different. Generally, one must earn the right to speak to people by first earning their respect and trust. I have found it best to simply be friendly with all people and attempt to treat them as we would treat Christ. There are times when one can be direct. There are also times when directness cuts off communication. In the workplace one can usually speak honestly about what is right and what is wrong in a non-judgmental way as the opportunity arises. One must always be careful never to pronounce judgment upon an individual. If an individual flaunts his immorality in your face or begins to demand acceptance for immoral behavior, then it is fair to respond in a gracious and loving way by stating that such behavior is unacceptable for a Christian. For the most part, a good witness need not use too many words to communicate.

On a practical level one could begin to include this person in parish religious and social activities (the ones you are involved with). If this person sees the Christian peacefulness and contentment in your life and the lives of those you pray and socialize with, you may be planting a few seeds for the future as well as serving as a role model of the Christian life.

I am astonished to picture someone who is prompted to "correct" an acquaintance living in a presumably monogamous loving relationship of numerous years with a person of the same sex. I think a totally suitable response on the part of the recipient of such "correction" would be a polite "MYOB". Denise, I know your intentions are the best, but to any other person proposing such a thing I'd have to caution them with the Gospel verses about the beam and the speck in the eyes.

What do you expect him to do, really? Break up what's presumably a happy home (dear God, what if they have children??!!) and become a chaste celibate? Do you realize how much spiritual anguish that causes to two people in love who believe that God has brought them together?

And to speak of homosexual orientation as an "affliction" is going beyond the way the typical homosexual person today experiences it. At one time left-handedness was considered such an "affliction" in need of correction, and even had diabolical overtones ascribed to it; fortunately, our society has progressed to the point where we better understand that left-handedness is part of the human mosaic and not something to be feared, stigmatized, or "corrected."

Well, sorry, Lemko, but "affliction" seems to be a fairly charitable way of describing this condition. Would you prefer "sin"?

The Gospel verse about the beam and the speck is clear in stating that we must first attend to our own sinfulness and be on the correct path so that we may help others also find the straight path. It does not mean that someone who has ever sinned can never help another. The fact is that a person in monogamous homosexual relationship (of any duration) is living an immoral lifestyle. As I noted above, the proper way to witness to such individuals is usually without using words. A parent, sibling or close friend of such an individual is, of course, obliged to use words to communicate the wrongness of such a lifestyle choice (this is the same obligation one has toward an individual living in immoral heterosexual relationship).

God does not bring people together for the purpose of immoral activity. Anyone who believes this has accepted a lie. Individuals with a homosexual inclination who are living sexually active homosexual lifestyles should stop living such a lifestyle and change their domestic arrangements so that they do not live with anyone who is a temptation to sexual sin.

An affliction is a condition of pain, suffering, or distress. Most individuals with homosexual inclination suffer greatly. As has been made clear here numerous times, the homosexual inclination itself is not morally wrong. What is morally wrong is to act out on such tendencies. Homosexual individuals � like unmarried heterosexual individuals � are called to life a celibate lifestyle.

I am curious as to what you think we should do when we know of a friend who is sinning.

Are we not called to point this out to them, in a loving way.

Especially if this person is a Catholic/Orthodox christian. Even more so if they are living in sin and still recieving the Eurcharist.

I believe that if we over look their sin and do nothing while they recieve the Eurcharist, that in the end, we will have something to answer for.

I expect of him, what I expect of every one, especially those who claim to be Catholic/Orthodox christians.

To live what the Church teaches and what the Gospel proclaims.

What the typical person experiences has nothing to do with what the Church teaches. Just look at what is happening to the ECUSA, this is what occurs when you go with the majority.

The majority does not rule in the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Church has never taught that left-handedness was wrong, nor does the Bible.

To compare left-handedness to homosexual acts is, IMHO, sick.


David

AMDG
Lemko. Lemko. I am afraid, brother, that we must gently correct you on this forum, for you are very seriously confused.

To accept that homosexual acts are wrong (based on the Faith), you must grant the premise that God revealed the true path to his children, first in the Old, and then in the New Testaments. I am sure that you would admit this, based in your membership in the Church. Then, admit that God's power is STRONGER than anyone's inclination to sin--as the Admin pointed out a couple days ago. Then, surrender to God's power. He will help you to see the truth about homosexual actions.

Brother, your salvation is at stake. Yes. Yes, I said that, because it is my duty as your Christian brother. "You shall come to know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." The truth is not someTHING, it is someONE--Christ.

In Jesus and Mary,
LatinTrad

If that's what the Church taught about the "condition", then that is indeed what I would prefer, instead of the Church dancing around the issue. A person afflicted with something should seek out whatever cure is possible, especially if it is putting them (and others with whom they have contact) on the road to Hell. Even though I respect the Church's teaching authority yet intellectually and emotionally disagree with the Church's current teaching on this, if they would adopt the "homosexuality is a sinful choice and needs to be cured" position, it would cease this confusion that comes from trying to nuance a distinction between the storybook "afflicted eunuch" saintly homosexual and the "impious gay" sinning homosexual.

Attractions, emotions, relationships and love are at the core of a person's humanity and identity and cannot be compared to discrete acts like lying, stealing and the like.

If a homosexual orientation wrecks a person so badly that any non-celibate response to it is "flaunting their immorality", then that condition needs to be cured, pure and simple. Why is the Church afraid to say that?

I am editing this post, at the Administrator's request, for clarity.

I am NOT making any assumptions or judgments about anybody.

Lemko, homosexual acts ARE discrete acts. Emotions do NOT have to be acted upon.
Homosexuals have to trust that God will give them the grace not to succumb to temptation.

LatinTrad

My salvation is at stake because I disagree with a moral teaching of the Church? Or because you believe that I am committing homosexual acts? Wow, this forum gets more bizarre every day.

AMDG
Dear Lemko,

I have no idea if you are committing homosexual acts. I have NO idea if you are even inclined to commit homosexual acts.

However, to embrace error is to put one's salvation at stake. This is especially true when you know that you are at odds with the Church, but refuse to recant.

In Jesus' love,
LatinTrad

???

(cough)

um . . .

(wolf howling in distance)

uh ... well, yeah, possibly . . .

Why would you think that disagreeing with a moral teaching of the Church (founded by Christ Jesus, upheld by the Holy Spirit) would NOT have some effect on your salvation?

Dear L-T,Theist Gal et al:

Time out! Where does it say that doubting the validity of a particular teaching of the Church means one is not worthy of salvation?

We would not be human if we did not doubt our faith on some level - from the Resurrection on down.

Also, where in Matthew's account of the Last Judgment does Christ put people to "His left" for acting upon "immoral" sexual impulses (of whatever kind)?

Yours,

kl