Fr Josiah Trenham in Tbilisi: Homofascists not Welcome

Onesimus

Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
augustin717 said:
Onesimus said:
augustin717 said:
It does. Are you afraid to express your real opinions on homosexuality at work?
I work with people that throw around the word faggot all the time. Nôbody has  taken  action against them .
Yes.  And I'm increasingly afraid to share them here.
you prob get a fat check every two weeks for that sacrifice. I dont beignet do my openly homophobic coworkers . Every job has its drawbacks and advantages .
You are a real piece of work.  You know nothing about me.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
If you wanna job where homophobia doesn't need to cover itself in circumlocutions I can give you some tips.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I dunno , just saying I know jobs where saying it as you really feel is of no concern to the employer as long as you sand that hardwood floor well and know how to put up a drywall.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
If I didn't know first hand,  people 'affected' by others' homosexuality I wouldn't have said anything ; but I know what that sort of suffering usually amounts to: fear of loss of respectability in whatever social group they are part ( what are they gonna say that we brought up a [ insert slur] ?)  or  some genuine hysterics that you know this is the only sin sure to land someone directly in the inferno . Usually it's the first thing though.
On the other hand I know people who at least at some point of their lives were homeless because their families thought they brought shame to them.

Now tell me more how pain isn't quantifiable .
ialmisry said:
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
Onesimus said:
minasoliman said:
I thought Mor made it clear what it is about Fr. Josiah's methods he was criticizing.  And don't bring up him being a moderator.  He's talking to you as a fellow poster as well as an Orthodox Christian. 

Let's consider another Orthodox priest.  Fr. Thomas Hopko clearly agrees with Fr. Josiah on the essentials, including homosexuality, but I heard very little if not any criticism of his methods when dealing with the same exact subject.  It's not about ignoring the debate or having a "Pink Mafia" agenda.  It's about knowing how to approach the subject correctly and with compassion without compromising Orthodoxy.
"Correctly" according to who?    You?

Is it possible that Clemente needs some compassion shown for his POV? 

Or is compassion only compassion when it is shown for people struggling on one end of this issue?

There are people hurting on the other end too, and frankly no one thinks they need compassion. 

WheN on sees what they consider "melodrama" perhaps they might take a moment to consider what some of us have experienced with this tearing apart our families, tearing apart churches, etc.  compassion means thinking about the pain that is being felt by others as well, and perhaps recognizing that pain in their writing.
Too lazy to look it up now but this reminds me of a meme that went like this : on this doll, show me exactly where is homosexuality hurting YOU.
same place where ISIL throwing homosexuals off of buildings is hurting YOU.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
I dunno , just saying I know jobs where saying it as you really feel is of no concern to the employer as long as you sand that hardwood floor well and know how to put up a drywall.
you mean the lesbians at Home Depot?
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
I laughed at the juxtaposition of "no one's declaring they're not a sinner" with "I'm just obeying God". 
I still fail to see what your getting at. I never said I never once didn't obey God's Law, of course I sinnned, I sin all the time, but i'm not on here making excuses for my sins and I certainly don't confirm others in theirs. But, you and most other sodomite-encouragers on here always revert to the same old tired argument that anyone who points out the abomination of homosexuality and the Church's utter rejection of it are just throwing stones from glass houses. A complete false dichotomy on the issue of sodomy.

Sodomy is wrong , it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is a "sinner". We're all sinners.

If you're guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?
One way or another when you violate the Natural Law it has an adverse effect on the individual, nation or culture in one form or another. We are already beginning to reap what we have sowed by all the  sins of the flesh that we have been publicly  peddeling for the last 50 or so yrs. And now we are legitimizing sodomy, it's only a matter of time before we self destruct in this abhorrent "lifestyle". you might not want to admit it, but but we will be held accountable.

What does that look like?
http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention/2015/09/25/shocking-stats-stds-america
Moderator hat on:

I'm going to ask you Charles to substantiate your claim that Mor Ephrem encourages sodomy.  If you cannot substantiate this claim, then I will give you a 45% warning based on the fact that the last time you received an ad hominem warning was with 40%.

You have 24 hours to fulfill my request.

Mina
Are you asking me to substantiate on this thread or a pm?



 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mor Ephrem said:
Charles Martel said:
I laughed at the juxtaposition of "no one's declaring they're not a sinner" with "I'm just obeying God". 
I still fail to see what your getting at. I never said I never once didn't obey God's Law, of course I sinnned, I sin all the time, but i'm not on here making excuses for my sins...
Of course, for that you'd have to first admit to having committed specific sins, which is a luxury not afforded others, who, whether or not they have admitted to engaging in certain sins, or even in spite of denying it or admitting repentance, are assumed to just be totally lost in sin.

...and I certainly don't confirm others in theirs. But, you and most other sodomite-encouragers on here always revert to the same old tired argument that anyone who points out the abomination of homosexuality and the Church's utter rejection of it are just throwing stones from glass houses. A complete false dichotomy on the issue of sodomy.
You need not remind me of the Church's teaching on homosexuality, I'm well aware of it and accept it.  If you can point to any statements of mine here or in any other thread in which I have challenged or rejected the teaching and practice of the Church regarding homosexuality (NB: the Church, not your denomination), please do so. 

But I don't think you can.  I don't think Clemente can.  I don't think any of you can.

The real problem is that I look at "homosexuals" or "sodomites" or "LGBT people" or whatever you want to call them and I see people, whereas you see only incarnate sins, abominations, false dogmas, and corruption.  The instinct to reject those things, to say that there can be no good relationship with them, is good, but your equation is bad.  You have to see people.  People created in the image of God.  People for whom Christ died.  People like us, all of whom are called to much more and much better than we want.  If you only see the sin and not the person, your "religion" sucks, your "faith" is invalid, and "the measure you give will be the measure you get". 

Sodomy is wrong , it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is a "sinner". We're all sinners.
If "we're all sinners" is a sincere comment, then this realisation about yourself should make you feel some compassion or empathy for others.  Some sin less than you, others sin more than you, some sin less seriously than you, others sin more seriously than you, but "we're all sinners" means "I'm a sinner", which means if I want to be shown mercy, I have to show mercy. 

But that's not what you said.  You said "it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is (sic) a sinner".  That's true when it comes to "Sodomy is wrong" (or, for that matter, "[insert any sin's name] is wrong").  But it empties "we're all sinners" of any meaning.  It's just a throw-away, like "Some of my best friends are Roman Catholics" would seem to you if I went on to describe all the ways your denomination is a false religion.

If you're guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?
One way or another when you violate the Natural Law it has an adverse effect on the individual, nation or culture in one form or another. We are already beginning to reap what we have sowed by all the  sins of the flesh that we have been publicly  peddeling for the last 50 or so yrs. And now we are legitimizing sodomy, it's only a matter of time before we self destruct in this abhorrent "lifestyle". you might not want to admit it, but but we will be held accountable.

What does that look like?
http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention/2015/09/25/shocking-stats-stds-america
I'm sorry, I should've been more clear that my question was specifically addressed to you.  I'll try again:

If you, Charles Martel, are guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?  What does that look like?
I will answer you point for point on this post, but I just worked a double shift and am dog tired  and I had to witness a terrible incident late in the day, so right now, I'm really not in the mood, but I'll tell you something, you're about getting on my last nerve referring to my "denomination" and I never go out of my way labelling the Eastern Church with such nonsense.

So you and your disrespect can beat it.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,164
Reaction score
36
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Charles Martel said:
I will answer you point for point on this post, but I just worked a double shift and am dog tired  and I had to witness a terrible incident late in the day, so right now, I'm really not in the mood, but I'll tell you something, you're about getting on my last nerve referring to my "denomination" and I never go out of my way labelling the Eastern Church with such nonsense.

So you and your disrespect can beat it.
Take all the time you need to take care of yourself, Charles.  If I'm not dead, I'll be around. 
 

Alveus Lacuna

Taxiarches
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,416
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Missouri, USA
FatherGiryus said:
These days, having unprotected sex ten times in ~15 years is nothing to brag about.
Are you seriously backhandedly mocking this priest's sex life? Your poorly veiled allusions to difficulties with him in the past were obvious enough, but this is beneath you.
 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
Charles Martel said:
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
I laughed at the juxtaposition of "no one's declaring they're not a sinner" with "I'm just obeying God". 
I still fail to see what your getting at. I never said I never once didn't obey God's Law, of course I sinnned, I sin all the time, but i'm not on here making excuses for my sins and I certainly don't confirm others in theirs. But, you and most other sodomite-encouragers on here always revert to the same old tired argument that anyone who points out the abomination of homosexuality and the Church's utter rejection of it are just throwing stones from glass houses. A complete false dichotomy on the issue of sodomy.

Sodomy is wrong , it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is a "sinner". We're all sinners.

If you're guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?
One way or another when you violate the Natural Law it has an adverse effect on the individual, nation or culture in one form or another. We are already beginning to reap what we have sowed by all the  sins of the flesh that we have been publicly  peddeling for the last 50 or so yrs. And now we are legitimizing sodomy, it's only a matter of time before we self destruct in this abhorrent "lifestyle". you might not want to admit it, but but we will be held accountable.

What does that look like?
http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention/2015/09/25/shocking-stats-stds-america
Moderator hat on:

I'm going to ask you Charles to substantiate your claim that Mor Ephrem encourages sodomy.  If you cannot substantiate this claim, then I will give you a 45% warning based on the fact that the last time you received an ad hominem warning was with 40%.

You have 24 hours to fulfill my request.

Mina
Are you asking me to substantiate on this thread or a pm?
on the thread
 
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
2,347
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Okay so as Orthodox Christians, without falling into error, or heterodoxy, how are we suppose to address the issue of homosexuality, and the LGBT movement as it pertains to Holy Tradition, and Scripture of the Church?

P.S. - Can we keep civil on here anymore?
 

FinnJames

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Age
73
Location
Finland
Onesimus said:
My family is being torn apart by this at the moment in probably the most disturbing way I can imagine.  If I could point to the rift in my soul, I would.  There are children being effected by it in a way that is beyond imagination.

I guess that's part of that "compassion."  Assuming that it has no effect on others.
About a page and a half of posts came in while I was sleeping, so my reply is a bit late.

The quoted message seems to me to be a substantive issue that needs its own thread--and level-headed discussion.
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
seekeroftruth777 said:
Okay so as Orthodox Christians, without falling into error, or heterodoxy, how are we suppose to address the issue of homosexuality, and the LGBT movement as it pertains to Holy Tradition, and Scripture of the Church?
I think Iconodule made a long post with what you want.
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mor Ephrem said:
[quote author=Clemente link

Does your knowing him personally give you more credibility to critique him than someone who has listened to hours of his sermons?
More credibility?  No, not necessarily.  My point was not that I have more credibility to criticise him, but rather that for me he is a real person first, not some ideological hero or enemy that I'm reacting to.
What a ridiculous argument! Who here doesn't think he is a "real" person? Me? Who has made him out to be a hero? I haven't ever heard hours of lectures from a non-real person. I have already said in this thread that I disagree with him on certain matters, such as legalised SSM, but that I appreciate his perspective.

What about knowing him in real life now gives you more credibility to criticise him? Is there some personal foible? Are you peddling in innuendo?

It is easy to say you know him, but then you criticise him, "heart" prurient jokes about him (made by a priest, no less), and then hide behind your anonymous moniker. That is cowardice.
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
I laughed at the juxtaposition of "no one's declaring they're not a sinner" with "I'm just obeying God". 
I still fail to see what your getting at. I never said I never once didn't obey God's Law, of course I sinnned, I sin all the time, but i'm not on here making excuses for my sins and I certainly don't confirm others in theirs. But, you and most other sodomite-encouragers on here always revert to the same old tired argument that anyone who points out the abomination of homosexuality and the Church's utter rejection of it are just throwing stones from glass houses. A complete false dichotomy on the issue of sodomy.

Sodomy is wrong , it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is a "sinner". We're all sinners.

If you're guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?
One way or another when you violate the Natural Law it has an adverse effect on the individual, nation or culture in one form or another. We are already beginning to reap what we have sowed by all the  sins of the flesh that we have been publicly  peddeling for the last 50 or so yrs. And now we are legitimizing sodomy, it's only a matter of time before we self destruct in this abhorrent "lifestyle". you might not want to admit it, but but we will be held accountable.

What does that look like?
http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention/2015/09/25/shocking-stats-stds-america
Moderator hat on:

I'm going to ask you Charles to substantiate your claim that Mor Ephrem encourages sodomy.  If you cannot substantiate this claim, then I will give you a 45% warning based on the fact that the last time you received an ad hominem warning was with 40%.

You have 24 hours to fulfill my request.

Mina
Are you asking me to substantiate on this thread or a pm?
on the thread
Well, first of all, I didn't say he "encourages" sodomy, so you can retract your false accusation.

What I said was that he  and some others who post on here are encouraging sodomites who are hell bent in their rejection of official Church doctrine of it's rejection of the sin of sodomy when Mor and those I mentioned seem to go on the attack on those like myself who take a hard line backing Tradition and ORTHODOXY when it comes to the sin of Sodom and any other sins of the flesh.Maybe he doesn't see it that way, but from my vantage point, he always seems to want to out me as a hypocrite who has no right accusing others engaging, even trying to justify their obstinacy in the completely immoral act of sodomy.

At any rate, what I percieve here in your threat in moderation is a retaliation by you and mor against me for my refusal to go along with the program of "tolerance" of this sinful act or any of it's protagonists all in the name of "charity" and trying to evangelize them, when the both of you could care less how many of those you chase away from the Church and even Christianity who might view your soft stance and attack on traditionalists as typical of weak Christians who can't even back up something as simple as telling the unrepentant homosexual he is wrong and Christianity is incompatible with sodomy in any form.

But you go ahead and make special exceptions for the advocates of sodomy while you bring the hammer down on those who vehemently oppose it, just like in the secular world. Silence all oppostion. This is typical of all that is wrong with the Church today, there really is no difference in many instances between the world and it's political correctness or the approach and policies of many christians and clergy out there who actually attack people like Fr. Josiah or myself making a stand against sodomy.

I would like to elaborate more on this and my response to your request of substansiation, but due to time constraints in my work schedule, time is a luxury I do not have right now.So you go ahead and and moderate me for "ad hominem" when that is clearly not my intent. But my position on sodomy and Mor's intent remains the same.
 

FinnJames

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Age
73
Location
Finland
Charles Martel said:
But you go ahead and make special exceptions for the advocates of sodomy while you bring the hammer down on those who vehemently oppose it, just like in the secular world. Silence all oppostion.
Silence all opposition? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Look in the mirror.

By the way, I've had a fairly lengthy exchange of private posts with Mor Ephram about homosexuality. At no time did he deviate from Orthodox teaching on the subject. So if you want to fault him for pandering to sodomites, you're barking up the wrong tree.
 

Daedelus1138

High Elder
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orlando
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights. 


 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
Charles Martel said:
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
minasoliman said:
Charles Martel said:
I laughed at the juxtaposition of "no one's declaring they're not a sinner" with "I'm just obeying God". 
I still fail to see what your getting at. I never said I never once didn't obey God's Law, of course I sinnned, I sin all the time, but i'm not on here making excuses for my sins and I certainly don't confirm others in theirs. But, you and most other sodomite-encouragers on here always revert to the same old tired argument that anyone who points out the abomination of homosexuality and the Church's utter rejection of it are just throwing stones from glass houses. A complete false dichotomy on the issue of sodomy.

Sodomy is wrong , it matters not whether or not me or anyone is is a "sinner". We're all sinners.

If you're guilty of breaking God's law, how are you held accountable?
One way or another when you violate the Natural Law it has an adverse effect on the individual, nation or culture in one form or another. We are already beginning to reap what we have sowed by all the  sins of the flesh that we have been publicly  peddeling for the last 50 or so yrs. And now we are legitimizing sodomy, it's only a matter of time before we self destruct in this abhorrent "lifestyle". you might not want to admit it, but but we will be held accountable.

What does that look like?
http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention/2015/09/25/shocking-stats-stds-america
Moderator hat on:

I'm going to ask you Charles to substantiate your claim that Mor Ephrem encourages sodomy.  If you cannot substantiate this claim, then I will give you a 45% warning based on the fact that the last time you received an ad hominem warning was with 40%.

You have 24 hours to fulfill my request.

Mina
Are you asking me to substantiate on this thread or a pm?
on the thread
Well, first of all, I didn't say he "encourages" sodomy, so you can retract your false accusation.

What I said was that he  and some others who post on here are encouraging sodomites who are hell bent in their rejection of official Church doctrine of it's rejection of the sin of sodomy when Mor and those I mentioned seem to go on the attack on those like myself who take a hard line backing Tradition and ORTHODOXY when it comes to the sin of Sodom and any other sins of the flesh.Maybe he doesn't see it that way, but from my vantage point, he always seems to want to out me as a hypocrite who has no right accusing others engaging, even trying to justify their obstinacy in the completely immoral act of sodomy.

At any rate, what I percieve here in your threat in moderation is a retaliation by you and mor against me for my refusal to go along with the program of "tolerance" of this sinful act or any of it's protagonists all in the name of "charity" and trying to evangelize them, when the both of you could care less how many of those you chase away from the Church and even Christianity who might view your soft stance and attack on traditionalists as typical of weak Christians who can't even back up something as simple as telling the unrepentant homosexual he is wrong and Christianity is incompatible with sodomy in any form.

But you go ahead and make special exceptions for the advocates of sodomy while you bring the hammer down on those who vehemently oppose it, just like in the secular world. Silence all oppostion. This is typical of all that is wrong with the Church today, there really is no difference in many instances between the world and it's political correctness or the approach and policies of many christians and clergy out there who actually attack people like Fr. Josiah or myself making a stand against sodomy.

I would like to elaborate more on this and my response to your request of substansiation, but due to time constraints in my work schedule, time is a luxury I do not have right now.So you go ahead and and moderate me for "ad hominem" when that is clearly not my intent. But my position on sodomy and Mor's intent remains the same.
Charles,

This is what you are telling me:

1.  I called Mor a sodomite-encourager in that he encourages sodomites to further their cause in this thread.
2.  You, Mina, don't really like me and try to trap me anyway.
3.  I really have no time to clarify calling Mor this.
4.  Go ahead and moderate me, I don't care.

My answer:

Charles, you are an excellent example of a manner in which your belligerent posting will cause you to slip.  Words matter.  If you can't back it up, and you are giving me this attitude that I am out to get you, what choice do I have?  In my dealings with you when I moderated you, and you appealed to me, did I deal with you unfairly?

I'm giving you another chance.  If you really don't have enough time, then I can give you another 24 hours.  You even have the chance to take back what you said.  But don't you again give me that adolescent complaint that I am out to get you or pick on you.  It is your problem, not mine that you skirt around the rules like this.

God bless.

Mina
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
Nothing cures idealism better than living it.
 

RaphaCam

Patriarch of Trashposting
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
8,591
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Age
23
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Website
em-espirito-e-em-verdade.blogspot.com
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
Probably a look for intellectual coherence as a Christian. I was pro-abortion before becoming Orthodox and on the beginning I had to "force" myself to oppose it on all cases. Nowadays I am well resolved on this issue and enjoy debating it and defending life.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
Do residents of Wrigleyville usually become anti-heterosexual militants after witnessing the straight lifestyle on Clark?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
ialmisry said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
Do residents of Wrigleyville usually become anti-heterosexual militants after witnessing the straight lifestyle on Clark?
a lot move into Wrigleyville that way. Btw, Clark isn't known for its straight lifestyle.
 

Onesimus

Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
Daedelus1138 said:
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights. 
Who said anything about enmity? 

You see how this works.  One cannot even have a principled or moral stance on this without it being labeled "enmity."

 

Daedelus1138

High Elder
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orlando
ialmisry said:
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
I know exactly what happens in gay bars.  I'm not quite sure how that's relevant. 
 

Daedelus1138

High Elder
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orlando
Onesimus said:
Who said anything about enmity? 

You see how this works.  One cannot even have a principled or moral stance on this without it being labeled "enmity."
I'm not necessarily implying a hatred of gays.  I'm implying opposition to the generally recognized concept of "gay rights".  Opposition is enmity in the technical sense, isn't it?  Why mince words on this?

 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Daedelus1138 said:
ialmisry said:
For two ueber-liberals I knew all it took was living next to a gay bar for a year and seeing what went on.
I know exactly what happens in gay bars.  I'm not quite sure how that's relevant.
If you deny reality, I'm sure you aren't.
 

Ilyin

Jr. Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Points
0
primuspilus said:
I guess my big hang-up concerning this issue isn't the sin at all. Afterall, being a "practicing" homosexual is no different a feeding of the passions than lust, or theft, or anything else.

For me, its this idea that somehow, its completely normal and trying to pigeonhole the Fathers and Christ himself into somehow actually accepting it and that somehow, those who are against it are out of the historical and Christian mainstream.

It just aint so.

pink mafia
I thought it was the "lavender mafia"?

Although I dont really prescribe to some hidden conspiracy (at least in the OCA, where I believe that term got its legs) I do think there are those who lean far to the political left that allow their political beliefs influence their faith, and are more apt to look the other way concerning homosexuality than others, even in the same jurisdiction.

PP

I'm not at all sure about this - surely homosexual acts are particularly sinful because they are such a revolution against  the Natural Law - or are you saying that "all sins are the same", so theft, adultery, pedophilia etc are all the same?


 

hecma925

Stratopedarches
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
19,755
Reaction score
134
Points
63
Age
159
Location
The South
Ilyin said:
primuspilus said:
I guess my big hang-up concerning this issue isn't the sin at all. Afterall, being a "practicing" homosexual is no different a feeding of the passions than lust, or theft, or anything else.

For me, its this idea that somehow, its completely normal and trying to pigeonhole the Fathers and Christ himself into somehow actually accepting it and that somehow, those who are against it are out of the historical and Christian mainstream.

It just aint so.

pink mafia
I thought it was the "lavender mafia"?

Although I dont really prescribe to some hidden conspiracy (at least in the OCA, where I believe that term got its legs) I do think there are those who lean far to the political left that allow their political beliefs influence their faith, and are more apt to look the other way concerning homosexuality than others, even in the same jurisdiction.

PP

I'm not at all sure about this - surely homosexual acts are particularly sinful because they are such a revolution against  the Natural Law - or are you saying that "all sins are the same", so theft, adultery, pedophilia etc are all the same?
Sinners will burn in the presence of God.
 

Onesimus

Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
Who said anything about enmity? 

You see how this works.  One cannot even have a principled or moral stance on this without it being labeled "enmity."
I'm not necessarily implying a hatred of gays.  I'm implying opposition to the generally recognized concept of "gay rights".  Opposition is enmity in the technical sense, isn't it?  Why mince words on this?
That is exactly what you are implying.   

I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction. I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights. 
Words mean things.  How you string your words together means things.  You've used the word "hate" - "self-absorbed" in contradiction to "sympathetic" and followed that up with an aspersion of enmity.  Then you make some ludicrous attempt to redefine enmity.

Enmity in the technical sense?  Enmity means much more than opposition and you either know that, are being intentionally disingenuous....or...the only other option is a dyslexic disorder, which I'm not ruling out, and if you do indeed  suffer from such a thing, I feel for you and offer you my sympathy.  Having seen how you interpret Scriptural passages - it is indeed likely that you are suffering from some sort of significant impairment in this regard, only potentiated by your involvement in the ELCA.

I have no hate for homosexual individuals in the least.  I have no enmity for them.  Do I "oppose" homosexuality?  Only as it applies to intentional and active participation without regard to struggle and repentance within the Churchand the imposition of secular "rights issues" into matters of ecclesiastical practice.  Outside of that -- I have no say and no desire to have a say in the lives of those who do not wish to unite themselves to Christ in repentance.  I do not involve myself any longer with the worldly political processes.  I'm not even inclined to be involved in Church politics which are being actively seized upon by those who wish to transform the Church into the world, and to bring the spirit of the age into active place within the Church so as to eviscerate, divide and scatter the faithful.

My desire as a healthcare chaplain in CPE residence is to minister to all people at all times without reference whatsoever to my faith imposed upon them.  This means I "come to serve, not to be served."  This is what I do with any faith, any lifestyle, any person in a secular context in which I am going to them.  So I love people of all faiths and backgrounds, sexual orientations, experiences with abortion, etc. and in that role get them access to spiritual care in times of trauma and crisis in the manner they need at that moment within the parameters of a pluralistic ministry setting.  I do not impose my religious faith on them in that endeavor.  My job in this respect is allowing a person with whom I am ministering to be served through their process.  Even if it is an active Satanist (yes, that has happened.)  There are ways to do this in that context without any need for me to diminish my Orthodoxy....I either refer them to a chaplain more qualified and prescient to their needs, or I simply serve the person in front of me and crucify my flesh and act in the role of a social worker.  Only if I am invited to engage further on a particular faith issue will I do so.  Living in San Francisco makes this is constant and active reality.

And in this I am actively intent upon always "squaring the circle" of "supporting" and "loving" homosexual individuals and couples while simultaneously believing that their lifestyle is both damaging to themselves and to others.  The belief that you can only do one or the other is false.  It is not my place to impose the Orthodox faith upon them, (in my secular context) but to minister to them in their context.  If we discuss it in any manner, it is always in deference to them unless they are in some way seeking to escape the lifestyle.  This is a function of my ministry in a secular and worldly environment.   

But here I am...speaking about Homosexuality in reference to a free association of repentant individuals approaching God through the Church, where we are to seek to become "slaves" of Christ.  Ostensibly, I am freely able to express my own beliefs on the issue as IT DOES pertain to my life, my family, my Church, my children, etc. and the teachings of my faith - in Scripture, Tradition and the whole of Church praxis. 

In reference to what our attitudes within the fellowship of repentant sinners should be in regards to homosexuality depends 100% upon the attitude of the repentant or unrepentant, even in its imperfection.  This is the role of a priest, bishop, monk, deacon, chaplain, etc.  It is not particularly the role of the laity en masse.    There is no difference in this regard between the sin of homosexuality and any other sin.    An unrepentant pornographer is to be excluded from communion.  An unrepentant womanizer is to be excluded from communion.  An unrepentant adulterer is to be excluded from communion.  An unrepentant abortion doctor is to be excluded from communion.  An unrepentant homosexual is to be excluded from communion.  Any repentant - of any kind -  is to be given the sacraments of confession, penance where applicable, and communion.

Struggle and failure and temptation and falling into the sin of sodomy out of human weakness is not a grounds for exclusion, if one is struggling and fighting the fight.  But active intent (overt, covert or subvert) to participate in a lifestyle and to encourage the Church to embrace active homosexuality is. 

This entire discussion between two opposing sides is often unable to distinguish between working and dealing with persons and loving them in their particular circumstances, and labeling and opposing a whole set of agendas and desires to change the faith and neuter it of its content because there is no experience with active ministry to homosexuals as people - or contrawise - no critical interactions with the LGBTQ movement and its objectives on the other.  The unipolar approach to this issue on either side is manifested here and serves little purpose but to inflame passions without regard to truth.

Only by dealing with people face to face can we know their heart and intent and individuals struggles.  At the same time, this openness to love and healing with individuals, couples and families does not negate the absolute truth that there is an organized, persistent and intentional polity intent upon "normalizing" promoting and teaching homosexuality and ostracizing those who hold a stance against it's promulgation, advancement and ultimate victory in every aspect of life.  The later is completely opposed to Orthodox Christianity.  THe former is not.  Parcing this out is a difficult task which can only be done in and through relationship.  One can love a person even as they embrace the larger agenda.  Sometimes LOVE and compassion involves clear and open communication, including the open communication of defining sin as sin and proposing that repentance is necessary for communion.

No one is coming into the Churches demanding recognition and blessing of their sins on a political level.  There is no group seeking recognition of the rights of adulterers.  There is no group expressing the need to have pornographers and pornography smiled and and blessed within the Orthodox faith.  This cannot be said about homosexuality.  As a movement it has been successful across the board - and is becoming successful in the Orthodox Church, rendering wooden discussions without content, un-nuanced pronouncements, redefinition of language, and enough division within the body that the movement expressly hopes and plans that the faithful become disenchanted, divided and or so sick of conflict that they acquiesce to anything for a semblance of peace - a peace without real content  - in the ranks. 

The entire Protestant Reformation was made a reality through this very process of division and internal warfare that it finally sought the semblance of peace and the normalization of division and doctrinal and practical incoherence that is a faith without FULLNESS and content.    It became and is a placebo, and people are saved in spite of it, not because of it.  A shadow is accepted for reality.  Depth is sacrificed for triviality.  Life is exchanged for death.    Its fruit becomes obvious...and its fruit is a continued acquiescence to active division and the scattering of the flock to be picked off by wolves who wish for both soul and body to be destroyed. 

And now, it fruits are rendered ripe in our culture at large along with its other manifestations.  Those fruits are being imbibed by us in the name of charity....but so many are incapable or willfully resistant to being able to discern one thing from another, good fruit from bad fruit.  All I see is the false dichotomy being expressed on both sides that it is inconsistent to be able to love a fellow sinner AND as part of that love PREACH AND EXPECT REPENTANCE (as a form of mutual edification) rather than simply drink in the lie that you cannot oppose a sinful lifestyle and also love a person.  Sometimes this will require soft words, sometimes harsh ones, tailored to the person, the situation and the relationship.  But the flattening out of this subject here belies it seriousness and is a testament to the lowest common denominator that evil seeks to have imposed upon us in our dialogues.



 

Onesimus

Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
RaphaCam said:
Daedelus1138 said:
Onesimus said:
I've spent my life as an advocate of homosexual rights until I became Orthodox.  I lived with homosexuals, voted for homosexual marriage, and all number of things I no longer believe to be beneficial to people, churches, culture, faith, etc.  but that doe. Not mean I still don't love them and minister to them. 
I'd be curious how that happened.  I actually moved in the opposite direction.  I never hated gays, I just didn't understand them- I was more self-absorbed.  The more I understood, the more sympathetic I became.  So I'm curious how someone could come to embrace an emnity to gay rights after supporting gay rights.
Probably a look for intellectual coherence as a Christian. I was pro-abortion before becoming Orthodox and on the beginning I had to "force" myself to oppose it on all cases. Nowadays I am well resolved on this issue and enjoy debating it and defending life.
Yes....I used to be "pro-choice" as well.  But now I guess I hate women and babies.    ::)
 

Daedelus1138

High Elder
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orlando
Onesimus said:
Words mean things.  How you string your words together means things.  You've used the word "hate" - "self-absorbed" in contradiction to "sympathetic" and followed that up with an aspersion of enmity. 
You're psychoanalyzing and projecting.

Perhaps enmity is a poor choice of words.  It sure seems like you have many misgivings of the LGBT movement and choose to see the movement in somewhat adversarial terms.

Having seen how you interpret Scriptural passages - it is indeed likely that you are suffering from some sort of significant impairment in this regard, only potentiated by your involvement in the ELCA. 
I reached my own resolution a long time ago. The ELCA has nothing to do with it.  I was just looking for a sacramental, liturgical church.  Despite all that has happened in my life, I still think Jesus matters.  Which is a miracle in its own right.

Struggle and failure and temptation and falling into the sin of sodomy out of human weakness is not a grounds for exclusion, if one is struggling and fighting the fight.  But active intent (overt, covert or subvert) to participate in a lifestyle and to encourage the Church to embrace active homosexuality is. 
You seem to be focused on what people do an awful lot, rather than focusing on what they are

This entire discussion between two opposing sides is often unable to distinguish between working and dealing with persons and loving them in their particular circumstances
Exactly... being gay is part of some peoples "particular circumstances".  I will be frank, some of the Fathers, when they are speaking of acts interpreted as "homosexuality" do not seem to be speaking of an awareness of issues that affect the 21st century context of this discussion, the "particular circumstances" of actual gay people. 

  intent upon "normalizing" promoting and teaching homosexuality 
Are most gay rights advocates actually doing this?  I think they are saying being gay is normal for gay people, not that being gay should be "promoted" to those who are not gay.  That's frankly a talking point of the culture wars that doesn't stand up to serious scrutiny.

  Sometimes LOVE and compassion involves clear and open communication, including the open communication of defining sin as sin and proposing that repentance is necessary for communion. 
To which I can only think of the stern warning that Jesus gave in Matthew 18:6.  We are not talking about axe murderers here, and I find the comparison with heterosexual adultery incredible.  Especially in a Church that permits contraception and remarriage with economia.  What exactly is so hideous about gays that they don't deserve the same economia?
Why impose this austere monastic ideal on people least able to carry it?

The entire Protestant Reformation was made a reality through this very process of division and internal warfare that it finally sought the semblance of peace and the normalization of division and doctrinal and practical incoherence that is a faith without FULLNESS and content. 
Does anybody really have a perfect understanding of the Faith?

Its fruit becomes obvious...and its fruit is a continued acquiescence to active division and the scattering of the flock to be picked off by wolves who wish for both soul and body to be destroyed. 
I don't see unwavering traditionalism and triumphalism as a good response to western modernity.  We are all Protestants now, at least in the western world.  Nobody holds a gun to our head and tells us what to believe.  And we all have to give an account to God for our actions in this world.  "My pastor/priest said it was good" is not going to be a very good response.  God gave us individual minds and hearts for a reason.

AND as part of that love PREACH AND EXPECT REPENTANCE (as a form of mutual edification) rather than simply drink in the lie that you cannot oppose a sinful lifestyle and also love a person. 
"Hey friend, let me help you remove that speck from your own eye", indeed.

In the west we had centuries of hellfire preachers and mendicant orders of all sorts doing the exact same thing you advise- preaching repentance in a legalistic fashion.  (And I really see the Orthodox "therapeutic" approach as potentially even more insidious if misused, for the worst things could be justified in the name of "doing this for your own good.  For many centuries serfs were also told that economic slavery was "for their own good" and that such a state of affairs was the "natural order").  This approach hasn't seen to make a dent in stemming the long-term tide of secularization.  Quite the opposite.  Now you think maybe the western experience might actually have some insight on this matter? 

Preaching repentance as a condition of grace is a heavy burden upon those who are wounded.  And many gay people are especially wounded (I don't live in San Francisco, I live in the Bible Belt where people are still kicked out on the street and bullied for being gay or transgender).  I think it is rather a matter of many people that need to first approach gays and ask the gay brother to remove the speck from their eyes.  Pope Francis is at least starting to do the right thing in this matter by apologizing to the gay community.
 

Cognomen

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
2,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Archdiocese of Baghdad, Kuwait and Dependencies
Daedelus1138 said:
Preaching repentance as a condition of grace is a heavy burden upon those who are wounded.
Yet repentance is still a fundamental teaching of Xtianity, its scripture, traditions, etc. I guess Christ and St. John the Baptist just didn't realize how heavy our burdens can be.

My sarcasm aside, are you suggesting that we abandon the concept of teaching repentance in this situation, or suggesting that homosexual behavior is not really sinful, or both?

Daedelus1138 said:
AND as part of that love PREACH AND EXPECT REPENTANCE (as a form of mutual edification) rather than simply drink in the lie that you cannot oppose a sinful lifestyle and also love a person. 
"Hey friend, let me help you remove that speck from your own eye", indeed.
How does preaching and expecting repentance--once again, a thoroughly established Christian teaching--warrant that kind of response?


In the west we had centuries of hellfire preachers and mendicant orders of all sorts doing the exact same thing you advise- preaching repentance in a legalistic fashion.  (And I really see the Orthodox "therapeutic" approach as potentially even more insidious if misused, for the worst things could be justified in the name of "doing this for your own good.  For many centuries serfs were also told that economic slavery was "for their own good" and that such a state of affairs was the "natural order").  This approach hasn't seen to make a dent in stemming the long-term tide of secularization.  Quite the opposite. 
I'm not saying that we do a good or even an acceptable job of dealing with the issue, but repentance is, as I mentioned before, a strong element of what is called for in Christianity. What is the distinction between legalistic repentance and another form of repentance?

And despite our strongest inclinations, stemming the long-term tide of secularization is not really the primary mission; it is teaching and trying to live the truth, which includes repentance. Or is this no longer appropriate and/or effective, as your statement implied? If not, what are your recommendations? And despite however well-intentioned they are, do they have any basis in established Christian teaching? I'm genuinely interested.

 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mina, I really don't choose to get into an open debate against you on this thread or challenge your authority as a moderator, since I do believe that you are probably the most reasonable and fair out of the bunch. However, since you have  openly taken me to task on my comments about Mor's motivations behind some of his posts directed at my integrity, I will oblige accordingly.

1.  I called Mor a sodomite-encourager in that he encourages sodomites to further their cause in this thread.
Yes, I did and I qualified above why I made this statement. Maybe this is not a general statement, but when it comes to myself or anyone that takes a hard line with sodomy. he will go on some type of passive-agressive attack on your character or about your own "sinfulness" or about your "denomination", even if it's in line with his own brand of "orthodoxy". So, when he engages in these kind of tactics in his attempt, IMO, to demoralize your vantage point, he either enables or encourages the unrepentant, open sodomites on here to further spew their posion, not only against the good name of principled men like Fr. Josiah, but the doctrines and teaching of the Church herself. And I for one will not stand for it and will call him out on it, at the risk of moderation or even worse. Because the cause is that important to me. I stand firm in what the Church teaches, I'm not some fickle, meely-mouthed  hipster doofus "christian" that wants to be like the Jesus "dude" and go along with the system because I want to get along everybody and be "kewl" and not judge anyone, regardless of their defiance on certain sins of commandments that they don't agree with. Maybe you're Ok with this modernist crap in order to be the "nice" guy, but I come from the school where I'm not going to be told what I want to hear, but what I need to hear. And I'm the better man for it.

At any rate, I'm not going to keep on expalining on why I said what I said. I called it the way I seen it and I'm prepared to take part in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in good concscience today without hesitation. So you go ahead and push that button and silence me as you see fit and I will stand like a man in my principles and belief in the Faith of my fathers. But I will not apologize or retract one iota of what I believe is the truth. Unlike many christians, I will not stand down in the face of this unseemingly political correctness. and I'm prepared to take the consequences.

This is the last I'm going to say about this.

You, Mina, don't really like me and try to trap me anyway.
I just call it the way I see it. After about a dozen pages of knocking an Orthodox priest or trying to legitimize sodomy, it's time to put the moderators hat on and put a stop to evil ol Charles and his firebrand style of traditionalism. I get it.

I really have no time to clarify calling Mor this.
No, I don't. But I did.

Go ahead and moderate me, I don't care.
The former is true. The latter isn't. But it is what it is and I'll deal with it.

Charles, you are an excellent example of a manner in which your belligerent posting will cause you to slip.  Words matter. 
It's been my expierence they only matter when someone's offended by something they don't want to hear.

Then they matter.


BTW, as for "words", you never addressed my statement that I never stated that Mor "encouraged" sodomy.  His actions, might have encouraged or enabled sodomites to blather on, but he never formally comes out speaking heresy on Church doctrine.So, I would like that stricken from the record counselor. Much appreciated.

If you can't back it up, and you are giving me this attitude that I am out to get you, what choice do I have?
I answered as truthfuuly and accurately as I could, you might not agree with it, but at least i'm being genuine and not beating around the bush or "skirting" the issue as you accused me of doing. As for if you're out to get me, well, only you can answer that. I can't do nothing about it either way.

In my dealings with you when I moderated you, and you appealed to me, did I deal with you unfairly?
IMO, never. But it seems i'm moderated quite often for the most trivial nonsense about how someone percieves my "belligerence" and goes whining to you for one reason or another. That's why I say, they want to shut down any debate and silence all opposition. I never suggest anything of the sort, I'm willing for healthy debate on any issue, they want a room full of "ditto-heads" when it comes to the sin of sodom. Any form of opposition is seen as "persecution" or "ad hominem".

I'm giving you another chance.  If you really don't have enough time, then I can give you another 24 hours.
thank you.

You even have the chance to take back what you said.
Why would I? I'm not a politician or criminal. If I said something , nine out of ten, i meant it. No, I'm from the belief that you can't take back what you said, either you believe it or whatever else comes out of your mouth is a bunch of nonsense and your not to be taken seriously at all. and would really respect me if I did? you know I'm more principled than that.

But don't you again give me that adolescent complaint that I am out to get you or pick on you.  It is your problem, not mine that you skirt around the rules like this.
I believe this direct response eliminates any "end-around" on the rules you might accuse me of in this situation. Whether you moderate me or not at this point because I'm a target is really irrelevant.

I believe this is it on  our issues with each other in this thread.

Thanks for your time.
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
0
Points
0
minasoliman said:
mike said:
minasoliman said:
I would argue that Fr. Josiah did not discern properly in his speech when he was in Georgia, as that form of rhetoric could encourage more violence.
Maybe he did and that's exactly what he wanted.
That's a scary thought.  It would be very sad if true.
I don't want to enter into a debate with the Moderators here. However, upon re-reading this thread, I observe a few things:

1. Father Josiah does not often get the benefit of the doubt, even from the Moderators. In the quote above, the Moderator ruminates about how perhaps Father Josiah wanted to incite violence. Um, no, Orthodox priests don't generally want to incite violence. Is it too much just to assume that?

2. Pro-gay posters get lots of support, even from the Moderators. Even when a poster admits that he no longer finds the traditional Orthodox teaching on homosexuality "tenable" (#229), the Moderator chooses to overlook his heterodoxy (#313), instead imputing traditional Orthodox motives to him.

Why do traditional Orthodox priests get treated here at OC.net with blind suspicion, whilst pro-gay posters get treated with blind charity? Sorry, but doesn't that seem odd on a site called OC.net?

One poster noted that whilst OC.net ostensibly affirms traditional Orthodox teaching on homosexuality, Lord help the poster who actually expresses traditional Orthodox teaching on sexuality here. I think I can understand that comment after reviewing this thread.

Even the affirmations of Orthodox teaching on homosexuality, such as this one by Mor, are rather tepid and leave some opening for debate:
Scripture seems to uphold a positive view of childbearing and childrearing. It doesn't seem to hold a similar view about homosexuality.
Would we say the Scripture "doesn't seem to hold a positive view about blasphemy" or some other grave sin?

I guess my epiphany in this debate has been that OC.net exists not to affirm Orthodoxy, but to affirm those who would debate Orthodoxy. That is my interpretation, not any official statement. But that is why it is entirely correct to say that OC.net is the most queer-friendly Orthodox site around. Not that homosexuality is affirmed; officially it is not. But debate about it-absolutely!

Which is fine, as long as people don't come here looking for clear affirmations of the Orthodox faith. Yes, there are many fine Orthodox posters here in this thread (whose sandals I am unfit to untie), but their views are juxtaposed against the heterodox, who are given the benefit of the doubt as they defame an Orthodox priest in good standing. That debate is entertaining drama. It generates great traffic and views for OC.net--just look at this thread.

But I question whether threads such as this actually benefit the faithful or the Church.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,164
Reaction score
36
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Clemente said:
minasoliman said:
mike said:
minasoliman said:
I would argue that Fr. Josiah did not discern properly in his speech when he was in Georgia, as that form of rhetoric could encourage more violence.
Maybe he did and that's exactly what he wanted.
That's a scary thought.  It would be very sad if true.
I don't want to enter into a debate with the Moderators here. However, upon re-reading this thread, I observe a few things:

1. Father Josiah does not often get the benefit of the doubt, even from the Moderators. In the quote above, the Moderator ruminates about how perhaps Father Josiah wanted to incite violence. Um, no, Orthodox priests don't generally want to incite violence. Is it too much just to assume that?
That's not what Mina said.  He basically said "I would suggest that Fr Josiah may not have realised how his words might be understood and applied in a context like Georgia, where there have been problems with violence in response to homosexuality".  There's nothing in Mina's statement that, in English, would suggest that he believes Fr Josiah may have intended to incite violence. 

2. Pro-gay posters get lots of support, even from the Moderators. Even when a poster admits that he no longer finds the traditional Orthodox teaching on homosexuality "tenable" (#229), the Moderator chooses to overlook his heterodoxy (#313), instead imputing traditional Orthodox motives to him.
I think your choice of words--in this case, "imputing...motives"--is telling.  There is no way to read no. 313 and conclude what you did without imputing a motive that's not there. 

Even the affirmations of Orthodox teaching on homosexuality, such as this one by Mor, are rather tepid and leave some opening for debate:
Scripture seems to uphold a positive view of childbearing and childrearing. It doesn't seem to hold a similar view about homosexuality.
Who was I speaking to when I said that?  Would you quote it in context or at least link to it or give the reply no.? 
 

Onesimus

Elder
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
C'mon Mor.    Really?    I really like you and Mina, but you are becoming increasingly transparent in your biases and half of what you've just written seems to be intentionally disingenuous. 

Entertaining speculation that Fr. Josiah might have wanted to insight violence and not nipping that speculation in the bud, is not innocuous.
 
Top