www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Unions Between Homosexuals

Dear Esteemed Administrator,

I don't know if I am being particularly sensitive, but I do feel as if I have been picked on ALOT by certain posters here, and I am very hurt. Last time I looked this was a good, loving, Christian Catholic forum, and not a political one.

I have not said anything my good priests and church have not said. I have not preached hatred or intolerance. I apologize to any gay (?) posters here that I adhere to the truths of the Church universal. That is not to say that I (or any other committed Christian, man or woman, married or unmarried), do not fight one's own sins and temptations daily. That is why we have the sacrament of confession...not to *defend* our sin, but to *accept* it, and TRY, with God's help and the best of our own ability to fight it...and when and if we fall, to get up, to acknowledge the sin in confession, and try once again to fight it. Fighting one's sins and trying to achieve heaven is the most difficult thing any one of us can do.

I will now sadly exit, acknowledging that Christianity, even on a Christian forum, is the last and ONLY acceptable prejudice. I don't expect to hear an apology from Brian who attacked my person, or from Axios' patronizing.

Very sadly and humbly,
Alice

I wrote:
Christian Tradition is quite clear that we can never approve of immoral behavior nor closely associate with people who engage in it.

Axios wrote:
Interesting proposition.

There are numerous Scriptural directives teaching us not to closely associate with people who have rejected God by their choices to engage in sinful activity. Scripture generally tells us to treat a believer who has rejected the Commandments and will not reform his or her life as either a pagan or an unbeliever. For the Christian this means one must always respect the person as an individual, never do anything to indicate approval of the sinful choices they have made, and to always let them know that God loves them and wants them to reform their lives. In practical terms, parents and families of individuals who spit in God�s face by rejecting His commandments and live unchristian lifestyles are to let these individuals know that God loves them, that they love them, and that they cannot continue a close relationship with these individuals while they are involved in a sinful relationship. It is not the parents and family who cut these individuals off. It is the individual who freely chooses remove himself or herself from the family. It is very sad that people love sin more then they love their families.

If you would like specific Scriptural references, one of the best places to start is Matthew 18, especially verses 15-17. "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.� If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. There are more, and certainly the Church Fathers have commented greatly upon this. 2 Cor 6:14 is also another passage worth studying.

Any comments on the article I first posted?

Alice,

Your posts in this thread have been excellent. Never apologize for speaking the truth. We must pray for our brothers and sisters who have a faulty understanding of Christian Teaching.

I do agree that you have been picked on. Those who adhere to God�s teachings will always be attacked by those who reject God�s teachings.

Admin

Yes, the news article was poorly written. The document "Considerations on the Plans for the Legal Recognition of Unions Between Homosexual Persons" is scheduled for release today by the Vatican. If there is interest in the topic I think a new thread should be started once the document is published online.

Alice,

Please do not leave! I have greatly enjoyed your posts! Your posts exhibit great wisdom!

"Axios" wrote:

I think this is the closest we can expect "Axios" to come to stating that he believes that homosexal acts are permissable for Christians. Such, of course, is contrary to the teachings of Orthodoxy (as cited in the OCA document referred to above).

The position of the OCA is this:

I feel sure that "Axios" is aware of all this. I seriously doubt that a mainline Orthodox discussion board would tolerate his use of his chosen screen name (borrowed from the liturgical services) to promote his chosen agenda which is contrary to the teachings of the Church or the link on his profile page further promoting such agenda. I personally object to his use of the screen name and the link on his profile which only advertises his position.

To the poster using the screen name "Axios," I want to say this: There are many opportunities for help that are available in your Church (I myself used to belong to the OCA). Take advantage of these. Find a good spiritual father. In short, the message is: repent!

David Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Dear Alice,

I hope you stay as well. I always enjoy reading your posts and would miss them. God bless you.

In Christ,
Anthony

Dear Administrator,DT Brown, and Anthony,

Thankyou! I needed some support!

May God bless us all with His love and enlightenment,

Alice

Alice,

I do not want you to leave either. Your posts on other subjects have been filled with love and with concern for the unity of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches.

I just wanted you to try to see gay people not in generalities but as individuals who like all individuals have good and bad sides. Please forgive me if the tone has been harsh. I might disagree with your statements in this area but that does not mean we can't like each other or post on the same forum. PLEASE stay!!!

In OUr Lord,

Brian

From my reading, Alice has written nothing to warrant any discourteous reply. To the contrary, she has stated her position peacefully and clearly, making distinctions in several ways. Everyone should keep in mind that the subject is difficult, involving much hurt from many people, and that if a discussion is to produce light rather than heat, there is a need to take everyone's sensitivities into account. So I hope and ask that Alice will not withdraw but will continue to contribute her thoughts and observations. Incognitus

Axios, what is your point? Surely you're not doubting the authenticity of Alice's story. She never said that gays in general were ill-behaved, she was simply bemoaning the fact that this particular gay couple would wear such sacriligeous clothes in such a religious place, especially when asked not to. I cringed when I read of Alice's story, because I have also personally been distracted from the Lord in churches and cathedrals because of obscene people. It is a frustrating and saddening experience.

Logos Teen

Dear Alice,

I swore that I was gonna stay out of this one except from a social justice stand point. So, let me say a couple of things to you?

I agree with the administrator that no Christian should apologize for standing up for his or her beliefs. There is no need. We have that right!

You have pointed out and the administrator has reinforced that care for the ill and love for all of God's children is what we, as Christians, are charged to do. You said that the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches teach love for sinners. Of course you are right.


So stay and share your wisdom with us.

Steve

"While some folks despair of the government ever getting things 'right', including perspectives on abortion or domestic partnerships, the overall principles of "No Government Interference" or perhaps "Less Government Interference" should be the hallmark. So, the same principle that doesn't interfere with a parent's right to educate the kids at home, also doesn't interfere with the availability of an abortion. Or a person's right to co-habit with whomever they choose. Or a person's right to stand on the street corner and proclaim the President and the Congress to be idiots. (Happens a LOT in Washington!)"

Dear Dr. John,

Is an intelligent man like yourself really making the above statement? How on earth could the murdering of an innocent human being (abortion) be seen as a legitimate expresson of "less government"? I hope I have misunderstood you here. If so, please forgive me and explain.

Trusting In Christ's Light,
Wm. DerGhazarian

JThur: I like what you wrote about the down side of government paid medical. I think a lot of people naively believe this is the answer when in reality it will probably only make things worse.

Axios: Besides your unOrthodox web-site and views on homosexuality (which you are already getting some heat about) I would take issue with you regarding your following comment:

"Hopefully, rather than contraception being an issue of which each communion expects the other to conform to its own postition, I would hope we could agree that Christians simply have different views on this matter, and even if we think the other is mistaken, we can still give them respect, fraternity and concord."

I would reply by asking: What position does "Orthodoxy" have on contraception? Answer: NONE. When you speak of "the Orthodox Position" I have to wonder who is it who speaks for all of Orthodoxy to offer such a unified position? Surely its not the Ecumenical Patriarch who at the time approved of Humane Vitae and said it was the Orthodox position as well. Could it be???

Sure you have many modern day theologians affirming contraception's legitimacy but this is by no means the end of the story (unless your popular theologians are THE authoritative interpreters of Orthodoxy, which I know they are not). Unfortunately for them, there's the matter of 19 centuries of consistent opposition to this evil that they have yet to have dealt with adequately.

Not only this, but do a search on "contraception and Orthodoxy" on the web and you might see a growing grass-roots movement of opposition to contraception coming from (of all places) the laity! Infact, here's a site by an Orthodox priest who did his dissertation for his Master's of Divinity (which I am reading) on the issue of Contraception and Orthodoxy and had it approved by Fr. Thomas Hopko, former dean of St. Vladimir Seminary. He came to the same conclusion as many of us have: Orthodox Tradition is diametrically opposed to contraception.

see: The Stephanos Project
http://www.paratheke.net/stephanos/

You'd be surprised by the Orthodox who follow in their Orthodox Father's footsteps in opposing contraception as well as its sister (or child): abortion (and, ofcourse, homosexuality, adultery, fornication and every other immorality).

Trusting In Christ's Light,
Wm. DerGhazarian
Looys Kreesdosee
www.geocities.com/derghazar [geocities.com]

p.s. I would like to submit my own research on the subject in the following document "Is Contraception Orthodox?"

http://www.geocities.com/wmwolfe_48044/apologetics.html

Dear Administrator,

I swore I was gonna stay out of this this time round. And I am. I'm not making a comment.

But, I have some questions. The issue of discrimination continues to puzzle me.

What is legitimate discrimination? How is it different from discrimination that is not legitimate?

Is it a religious practice. Is it a practice on the part of the civil authorities?

If its a religious practice, what makes one sin warrant legitmate discrimination and not another?

Is the fact that something is made criminal by the civil authorities reason for discrimination in religious terms?

If its a civil practice, is the fact that something is identified as sin by religious authorities reason for discrimination in civil terms.

Are you referring to the practice among some religions of "shunning" those who are sinners? Are you referring to some other form of religious setting apart? Should a good Catholic family shun a son or daughter who is divorced and remarried, for example.

What sins make what sinners eligible for legitimate discrimination in the public forum religious or civil?

I'm asking because it seems to me that some sins are more equal than others. Committing them gets one a form of legitimate discrimination while committing others of a like nature do not.

Knowing myself as a sinner, I find that it's easier to deal with sinners whose sins are more like mine. Sins that are different make it easier to turn from my brother or sister.

What's the objective standard that makes one form of discrimination legitimate and another not legtimate?

Thanks for entertaining my questions.

Steve