The New Divide

Thekla · Jul 11, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Hi Thekla!!!!

Is that you?

yes, Anastasia, it is

It's grand to see you're still posting here !

gzt · Jul 11, 2017

Jesus4Madrid said:
Her statement is incomplete and disappointing.

Her saying homosexuality is sin doesn't give her license to suggest that homosexuality is a less serious sexual sin or to present as a viable option to look for a more liberal parish that may commune an active homosexual. Those suggestions find no support in Orthodoxy.

Three things, she's not presenting it as a viable option, she suggests the other option. Second, she's talking to a Catholic. Third, I find this amusing because in many of these kinds of conversations I sometimes find conservatives or traditionalists wondering, gosh, why don't these people just leave and become Episcopalians already (which is what taking this option seems to entail).

gzt · Jul 11, 2017

I mean, I saw a discussion with a priest where he essentially started the following conversation:

1. People who agree with Sr Vassa are dissenting from Church teaching.
2. If they dissent from Church teaching, why are they still in the Church instead of leaving?
3. They should either change their beliefs or leave for some other place where they aren't in dissent. (Q: and how is Sr Vassa dissenting? A: By suggesting as an option the kid could leave and find a place that affirms him, I guess?)

Seems a bit of a Catch-22.

Thekla · Jul 11, 2017

I found her response rather odd on several counts. A child feeling they can be open about such a matter does in no way guarantee that the same child will be open about every matter - to think otherwise is frankly an idealization of the parent/child relationship. Further, such confidences to the parent can arise from numerous motivations: to challenge the parent (and this includes rebellion), to search out the limits a parent will give (and can indeed be a "pushing boundaries" action), to seek limits from the parents that peer-group pressure make hard to impose on oneself - to describe a few. There was no real discussion of social contagion and cultural norms and sometimes forceful peer pressure to conform to something new (and yes, in present parlance 'queer' is the new "in" as post-modernism has left the corridors of academia and is present everywhere in a simplistic popularized version). The science on this matter is far from settled (and science reporting in the US is one whisper away from shoddy in general), and as funding is increasingly scarce is typically given to conditions deemed abnormal or treatable, the science on the matter will likely not be settled; why mention it then ? In matters of sexual morality re: Christianity, would the suggestion be to allow dating in other new popular patterns - cheating on one's girlfriend, three-partner arrangements, etc. ? I don't think her response was well thought out, or possibly just naive. It brought to mind how thankful I am that many of us have spiritual fathers who are married and have raised children; I do think it might be less likely that a parent would commit the same oversights.

Thekla · Jul 11, 2017

and a matter I forgot -- children can often be almost otherworldly in their ability to ascertain a parent's less-than-honesty on an issue. Because of this, I have a policy of always being honest with our children (no easy compliments to build confidence, honest about my disappointment in their behavior, honest about my own failings, honest assessment when they do well,etc.) -- if we are not truthful, fully truthful and open with our children, how can they trust us when we tell them we love them ? If the parents are not fully supportive of this aspect of their child's disclosure and acting on it, how can the child actually trust the parents ? To have not considered this is tantamount to promoting the erosion of one of THE foundational relationships upon which all subsequent relationships are based. dangerous territory, imo.

jckstraw72 · Jul 11, 2017

I found it rather strange/disappointing that she didn't even offer Orthodoxy as an option. Where was the talk of grace and healing from Christ in her response?

gzt · Jul 11, 2017

Thekla said:
In matters of sexual morality re: Christianity, would the suggestion be to allow dating in other new popular patterns - cheating on one's girlfriend, three-partner arrangements, etc. ?

A popular idea in a bygone era (pre-sexual revolution) was for young people seeing each other to, simply put, not commit, not be serious, not go steady - I've heard one person relay that they were told not to go out with the same person twice in a row. It prevented people from "playing house" and having a quasi-marital relationship while only 16 with the drama (and sinful entanglements) that entails. It goes without saying that this lack of seriousness is intended to be accompanied by a lack of physical involvement, as it were. Frankly, I find it disturbing that a 16-yr-old could be in a relationship serious enough that seeing somebody else would be considered "cheating".

I would just note that, statistically, the current generation is having sex later and with fewer partners than their parents' generation (and possibly the one before, depending on how old they are) and getting pregnant as a teen far less. Rumors of the demise of civilization are greatly exaggerated.

gzt · Jul 11, 2017

jckstraw72 said:
I found it rather strange/disappointing that she didn't even offer Orthodoxy as an option. Where was the talk of grace and healing from Christ in her response?

What, you mean in her response, she should have said, "By the way, have you considered converting from Byzantine Catholicism to Orthodoxy? That would solve a major problem you've got going on."

jckstraw72 · Jul 11, 2017

Yes.

She gave the option of gay dating at home, but not of embracing the truth of Christ. Yes, that's odd.

gzt · Jul 11, 2017

The premise of her discussion seemed to be, "Dear mother of child: here are some thoughts if your child does not want to follow the Law of God unerringly, though it is certainly better if he embraces th truth of Christ for the entirety of his life without fail." Well, I guess that's not the letter you would have written.

jckstraw72 · Jul 11, 2017

[Staff edit]. She gave the options of being penanced, which will make him a shining example like the repentant St. Mary of Egypt, or finding a church that will indulge his passion. She assumed this child would indulge his passion, and therefore she said nothing about healing through the true Church of Christ.

E.C. · Jul 12, 2017

ArmyMatt said:
I think we just gotta trust the Holy Spirit when it comes to this, knowing that He will maintain the balance between the two extremes and He will have the final say.

Amen.

So, I'll confess that I've not read Sr Vassa's letter in question, but I've heard the gist of the issue here. I think that homosexuality is a sin that the Orthodox Church will have to address more and more especially with Western Liberalism dictating the world as it is (or at least trying to).

The simple answer is that those who bear the cross off homosexual temptations may indeed receive Communion provided they are not acting on it. Like any other sin, if they do act on it than they should confess, carry out whatever penance they may be given and go about their day that much closer to the Lord. In a way we ask the same as heterosexuals. The Church says no sex before marriage and if we do have sex before marriage than, just like homosexuals who act on their temptations, we go to confession, carry out whatever penance we've been given if one at all, and we live on that much closer to the Lord. If a homosexual is celibate, than they can still receive Communion (or so that's been my understanding)

No matter what though the Church asks for, teaches, and, encourages sexual purity from homosexuals and heterosexuals. The difference is that only heterosexuals, in the eyes of the Church, can have sex in the context of marriage. Homosexuals can not. I don't know what the answer is to this beyond praying, trusting the Holy Spirit to guide us, and, having a good relationship with one's spiritual father. The first two will conquer any sin. The last one will tell you how to do it.

Now, I don't have kids, but if I did than I would hope that one of them trusted me enough to let me know that they decided to start playing for the other team instead of keeping it all in and allowing it to manifest into something destructive or life-threatening like taking hard drugs or running away. At the end of the day, it's still my kid. I'll still love them, pray for them and encourage them to stay in the Church and love God and so forth. I sat this because a lot of homeless kids are homeless because they were kicked out of their parents' house for being gay. I think that is deplorable. Kick your kids out for commiting murder or embezzlement, not for this, because they'll only join the larger ranks of anti-Church people and add to the increased negativity in the world. If your kid thinks he's gay than have him take to a good priest, let him tell your kid what the Church says about what would allow them to receive or not receive Communion, and at the end of the day remember that your kid will make their own decision. If they want to stay in the Church as a celibate homosexual than support them. If they think they are confused about who they are attracted to then support them in getting un-confused. If they decide to stay in the Church and they fall into temptation and engage in homosexual activity than help to bring them back up when they fall. If they decide to leave the Church than don't cut them out of your life and do continue to pray for them.

Thekla · Jul 12, 2017

gzt said:
A popular idea in a bygone era (pre-sexual revolution) was for young people seeing each other to, simply put, not commit, not be serious, not go steady - I've heard one person relay that they were told not to go out with the same person twice in a row. It prevented people from "playing house" and having a quasi-marital relationship while only 16 with the drama (and sinful entanglements) that entails. It goes without saying that this lack of seriousness is intended to be accompanied by a lack of physical involvement, as it were. Frankly, I find it disturbing that a 16-yr-old could be in a relationship serious enough that seeing somebody else would be considered "cheating".

I would just note that, statistically, the current generation is having sex later and with fewer partners than their parents' generation (and possibly the one before, depending on how old they are) and getting pregnant as a teen far less. Rumors of the demise of civilization are greatly exaggerated.

Thekla · Jul 12, 2017

gzt said:
A popular idea in a bygone era (pre-sexual revolution) was for young people seeing each other to, simply put, not commit, not be serious, not go steady - I've heard one person relay that they were told not to go out with the same person twice in a row. It prevented people from "playing house" and having a quasi-marital relationship while only 16 with the drama (and sinful entanglements) that entails. It goes without saying that this lack of seriousness is intended to be accompanied by a lack of physical involvement, as it were. Frankly, I find it disturbing that a 16-yr-old could be in a relationship serious enough that seeing somebody else would be considered "cheating".

I would just note that, statistically, the current generation is having sex later and with fewer partners than their parents' generation (and possibly the one before, depending on how old they are) and getting pregnant as a teen far less. Rumors of the demise of civilization are greatly exaggerated.

I agree re: a 16 year old, and really don't think a 14 year old should be dating. I'm aware also of the statistics you cited. Otoh, my post-adolescent children have, among their social group via work, couples (unmarried) who have taken on a third partner. Just one example of the alternatives now considered "hip" and acceptable. Whether or not one considers these things to happen, it rather skips the illustration I made and its purpose. Should parents, in order to think their child is being open with them, accept every sort of arrangement now considered acceptable ?

rusmeister · Jul 12, 2017

gzt said:
But if your child is fornicating, would you want to at least meet the person they're fornicating with? Would you want them to be up-front about how it's what they're doing? Or would you rather they hide it and never tell you? That's what she's saying to do. You tell them what's right and wrong, but if they choose to do wrong, you at least let them tell you.

No. I want them to feel they should hide it. I want them to feel the shame they should rightly feel. Because I love them. (I would want them to be honest with me, but under no circumstances would I want them imagining that I would allow or tolerate its practice.)
But you don't have kids, certainly not teens. You think this kind of permissiveness loving; I say it is unloving.

It is good and right to feel shame when you do evil. Shame is a powerful motivator to repentance; without it, such motivation is absent. I am amazed that you don't understand that. Stigma is essential to restrain evil. I am a little surprised you don't understand that. But it's not very surprising if one holds a conception that looks more like John Lennon's than like Christ's.

Lotar · Jul 12, 2017

She never said to find a church that would "indulge his passions." She said finding a more accepting church is an option. Which can mean anything from a church that deny communion but does not stigmatize him, to a church who a church that tells him it's not sin, with plenty of variation between. Given that she calls it sin, it's pretty obvious she means something close to the former. A point I disagreed with her was her recommendation to stay. A 14 year old doesn't need to wear a scarlet letter or be a St Mary of Egypt.
She's assuming he will date and engage the lifestyle because that is almost certainly what will happen. She's offering real world advice to a parent, not to the child.
This only shows how toxic the culture warriors have become, that a nun can say homosexual acts are sin, and be condemned because she was too understanding of the situation and offered advice that reflects the reality of the situation.

gzt · Jul 12, 2017

Lotar said:
She never said to find a church that would "indulge his passions." She said finding a more accepting church is an option. Which can mean anything from a church that deny communion but does not stigmatize him, to a church who a church that tells him it's not sin, with plenty of variation between. Given that she calls it sin, it's pretty obvious she means something close to the former. A point I disagreed with her was her recommendation to stay. A 14 year old doesn't need to wear a scarlet letter or be a St Mary of Egypt.

She's assuming he will date and engage the lifestyle because that is almost certainly what will happen. She's offering real world advice to a parent, not to the child.

This only shows how toxic the culture warriors have become, that a nun can say homosexual acts are sin, and be condemned because she was too understanding of the situation and offered advice that reflects the reality of the situation.

Amen.

All4Christ · Jul 12, 2017

@Lotar Welcome back to TAW!

Thekla · Jul 12, 2017

Lotar said:
She never said to find a church that would "indulge his passions." She said finding a more accepting church is an option. Which can mean anything from a church that deny communion but does not stigmatize him, to a church who a church that tells him it's not sin, with plenty of variation between. Given that she calls it sin, it's pretty obvious she means something close to the former. A point I disagreed with her was her recommendation to stay. A 14 year old doesn't need to wear a scarlet letter or be a St Mary of Egypt.

She's assuming he will date and engage the lifestyle because that is almost certainly what will happen. She's offering real world advice to a parent, not to the child.

This only shows how toxic the culture warriors have become, that a nun can say homosexual acts are sin, and be condemned because she was too understanding of the situation and offered advice that reflects the reality of the situation.

without a more complete consideration of the matter (see my previous posts), it seems to me (as a parent to 6) that she has not considered the reality of the situation; she has simplified the relationship between parent and child, and missed crucial factors affecting the child. That's not an issue of "culture warriors"; that's a concern with a simplistic treatment of the issue.

Lotar · Jul 12, 2017

Thekla said:
without a more complete consideration of the matter (see my previous posts), it seems to me (as a parent to 6) that she has not considered the reality of the situation; she has simplified the relationship between parent and child, and missed crucial factors affecting the child. That's not an issue of "culture warriors"; that's a concern with a simplistic treatment of the issue.

IE, you want her to suggest that maybe her son is in fact not gay, but risked possible rejection and condemnation by his religious parents because he wanted to be in the "in crowd." How absurd is that?

Maybe I'm strange, but I tend to trust my kids.

The New Divide

Active Member

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

Active Member

Active Member

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian

Swift Eagle Justice

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙

Active Member

Swift Eagle Justice

Similar threads