Orthodox who support homosexual activity

[Dorothea]

Would it be okay if I ask a question? It is related to this subject & I don't want to derail the OP's thread.

I am not Orthodox & I am still seeking. I think homosexual acts are sinful, though I don't think the orientation is sinful. It seems a plain reading of Scripture indicates homosexual acts are wrong. The argument I hear in some of the pro-gay marriage in the church folks is that in Scripture, the homosexual acts are repercussions of or in the context of idolatry or pagan worship.

Now, I don't disagree that homosexual acts were part of some pagan religious worship back then, but what do you - as Orthodox - say to those Christians who believe that homosexual acts are okay if in a loving marriage context apart from pagan religion? Did "loving gay relationships" REALLY not exist in Moses or the Apostle Paul's generation? That seems to be the assumption, but any info about how Orthodoxy handles this would be helpful.

Well, homosexual unions are not and cannot be considered marriage in the way we understand marriage to have been revealed to us by God Himself.

Inicidentally, I just read an article on gays and lesbians who marry, that around 50% of them are not monogamous marriages and that is ok with them to have multiple partners. This is rarely reported, and it makes me think the homosexual agenda movement is more deceptive than I originally thought because of their wanting to be married and saying they are monogamous and just want the same benefits. I wish the government had nothing to do with marriage and was left to the churches where they belong. JMO. In reality, I see that homosexual marriage would make two statements that would be detrimental to our society: 1) showing it's ok for this union and its impact on the children raised in it, and 2) on that same line, the impact of their non monogamous marriage on the children raised by them. Not only would the children see marriage between same-sex people to be considered "normal" rather than abnormal, and that having multiple partners WITHIN a marriage is also "normal" or "ok." I think these examples of "marriage" would be and are very hurtful to the family unit, and I think the society has down played the major importance of a father and mother and children - the true family unit.

Here's the link from the NYT in case anybody is interested.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html?_r=0

 

[Lukaris]

It is not the orientation of an individual but any sexual activity must be within heterosexual marriage. Anything else adultery; I am only stating this in an absolute doctrinal sense not to judge my neighbor or interfere in the privacy others.

 

[graceandpeace]

Thanks for your answers.

Again it seems the assumption by Christians who support gay marriage is that the Apostle Paul & consequently Moses condemned homosexual acts because of pagan religion & thus it doesn't apply to loving marriages between gays today. So, do we really know for certain that Paul & Moses had no knowledge of loving gay relationships? Because that is the assumption but I question it & would love to know if there are any Christian writings or early history to show that not just the act is condemned, but the relationship as well.

Am I making sense? & again I hope me asking this stuff is okay with the OP.

 

[GregConstantine]

@graceandpeace, it is no problem that you are asking what is a very good question. So no worries. I'm at work now, later I'll write a more detailed response.

 

[Dorothea]

Thanks for your answers.

Again it seems the assumption by Christians who support gay marriage is that the Apostle Paul & consequently Moses condemned homosexual acts because of pagan religion & thus it doesn't apply to loving marriages between gays today. So, do we really know for certain that Paul & Moses had no knowledge of loving gay relationships? Because that is the assumption but I question it & would love to know if there are any Christian writings or early history to show that not just the act is condemned, but the relationship as well.

Am I making sense? & again I hope me asking this stuff is okay with the OP.

I'm sure there were loving gay relationships back in Moses and Paul's times. It's existed since people were on the earth as far as I know. And yes, one man can certainly love another, as well as women loving one another. It stops at sexual relations though because that is reserved specifically for man and woman in marriage. We also know in Leviticus that man lying with man and women lying with women was not permitted.

Christ Himself says a man leaves his family and cleaves to his wife (paraphrasing) in holy marriage.

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

 

[jckstraw72]

wait, how do we know the Church is against homosexuality? you cannot simply quote the fathers ad nauseaum, others with ideas very unOrthodox also quote the fathers.

 

[Lukaris]

Is it so difficult to comprehend a reading of Leviticus 18, Romans 1 tempered by the sermon on mount, the golden rule, & the 2 great commands that this is still sinful but not to be judged by us with severity.

 

[rusmeister]

LOVE

If I had my way, everyone who tries to use that word would be forced to speak Greek.

PHILIA (the love of friendship)

STORGE (the love of the affections)

EROS ( erotic, sexual love)

AGAPE (all-encompassing love to the undeserving)

So when you guys talk about "loving relationships", which kinds of love are you talking about???

Erotic love is forbidden to people of the same sex. The other forms of love are encouraged. Is that clear enough?

 

[GregConstantine]

Very mature Jesse. Good to know the OCA is producing mature seminarians...

 

[jckstraw72]

i asked an honest question. you don't have to dodge and insult.

 

[Kristos]

wait, how do we know the Church is against homosexuality? you cannot simply quote the fathers ad nauseaum, others with ideas very unOrthodox also quote the fathers.

What about dragooning? Is that really gay?

 

[jckstraw72]

well when i googled to find out what that word means the example sentence was "she had been dragooned into helping with the housework." that does sound fairly gay. i'm not a fan of housework.

 

[rusmeister]

Very mature Jesse. Good to know the OCA is producing mature seminarians...

Sometimes we have the capacity to surprise each other...

 

[jckstraw72]

oh, I forgot to mention - my statement was a direct quote from Greg in the evolution thread ... I guess it's only a valid point when he uses it .... whodda thunk it

 

[GregConstantine]

thank you for hijacking and derailing this tread about a very serious topic, Jesse. There has always been a consensus on homosexuality for thousands of years in the life of the Church. There has not been a consensus on evolution (not humanism!!!) because...

Evolution did not exist until the mid 19th century!!

 

[ArmyMatt]

well when i googled to find out what that word means the example sentence was "she had been dragooned into helping with the housework." that does sound fairly gay. i'm not a fan of housework.

dragoons were also cavalrymen who would dismount to fight back in the day when folks used horses, so it actually can be pretty hardcore.

 

[Lukaris]

Are there any people of the same sex, who love each other & only desire to live like siblings?

 

[Dorothea]

Are there any people of the same sex, who love each other & only desire to live like siblings?

Would they know how or think that was ok? In our society, things revolve around sex. They automatically assume if they are adults, unrelated, and "love" each other, sex is to follow. It would be nice if your example in your question, Lukaris, was encouraged in our society.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Are there any people of the same sex, who love each other & only desire to live like siblings?

yeah, they are called monastics

 

[jckstraw72]

thank you for hijacking and derailing this tread about a very serious topic, Jesse. There has always been a consensus on homosexuality for thousands of years in the life of the Church. There has not been a consensus on evolution (not humanism!!!) because...

Evolution did not exist until the mid 19th century!!

1. Orthodox interpretation of Genesis far predates the 19th century
2. the Fathers already refuted proto-evolutionary theories in their own day. Darwin was not so original.