Confronting parents and relatives

[Ioannes]

Yesterday I had dinner outside with my parents (we don't live together since last June), and at some point the discussion turned to the topic of religion and specifically of my current thought on homosexual couples.

The debate didn't heat up because of the public context and because I was kept especially calm by a sense of inner tranquility (unlike in the past I wasn't defending my own ideology but God's Word, so I couldn't feel insecure); however I feel my parents were somewhat astonished about my comments, especially on the issue of homosexual couples and of the upbringing of my children.

Let me specify I explained first that in Orthodoxy nobody judges or hates anyone, and that feeling homosexual desires is normal per se, what isn't normal is giving in to such lust. On children, I explained a parent has the obligation to instruct his children with love, raising them with the Truth the father and mother share. Being used to catholics here, they still pictured in their minds me forcing my crying kids into the Church and forcing them to pray and all. This is just to be clear I didn't do the mistake of misrepresenting the correct mentality on "soft issues".

My real questions are:

Does anyone relate to my aforementioned tranquility and peace when responding to criticism or provocations from unbelieving friends or relatives? As if your words were guided by the Holy Spirit, to a minor extent.

And what's in your experience the best attitude with people who you know won't take well your words no matter how well described they are? Avoid this type of conversation? Any advice is appreciated.

If anyone thinks a poll would be a fine implementation to the thread, let me know.

 

[frater_domus]

Does anyone relate to my aforementioned tranquility and peace when responding to criticism or provocations from unbelieving friends or relatives? As if your words were guided by the Holy Spirit, to a minor extent.

I can definitely relate. I used to search for words, become defensive and even aggressive. However, with time and spiritual maturity, I have learned to articulate myself much better. I have also gained more stability in my own faith and thus an increase in confidence. Part of it comes with the knowledge that it is not mine to judge the truth of the other person when talking to Christians that believe different things, or that the denial of an non-believer does not change the truth and that God will have His due without my meddling. The other part is the inner peace that a lot of Christians know, for it the peace that comes from God.

And what's in your experience the best attitude with people who you know won't take well your words no matter how well described they are? Avoid this type of conversation? Any advice is appreciated.

I rarely talk about Christianity, God and Jesus unless asked. A lot of it has to do with human psychology. If someone is open enough to ask, then they are likely to receive that knowledge. However, due to the unfortunate development of several branches of Christianity, many see the talk about it as intrusive and will shut down the moment you mention it. I think that Jonah and Nineveh make for a good example of how I talk. Nineveh was worshipping Dagon, some sort of water-related entity. Well, Jonah arrived from the belly of a big wish, most likely a sperm whale or great white, which are common sights in those areas since the antiquity. His hair, skin and clothes, according to scholars, were most likely bleached by the effect of the digestive acids of the fish. So you have a guy that looks like a ghost and came from the belly of a fish preaching to a nation that worships a water entity. You can definitely see God's idea and why it worked.
Similarly, when talking to scientist, I approach the topic from a scientific and rational side. When talking to an esoteric person, I talk about my spiritual experiences. When talking to a family person, I put a lot of emphasis on family values. A lot of time, especially when talking without someone asking, I never mentioned Jesus of God right of the bat, in order to prevent the mental shut-down. Only once I feel like I managed to bypass that or if they get curious and ask me, then I'll do it. This works much better that going for it right away. Why? Because a lot of people are blinded by their perception of Christianity that they gained from very savoury examples, like child abusing priests, JW knocking your door down, aggressive preachers shouting self-righteous damnation in the streets or televangelists. But often, once they hear wisdom or see great actions, then they have a different example. Then I say that it is because of God and Jesus. This establishes a completely different link in their heads and they generally become more open to discuss that topic.
Remember, Jesus told us to be as shrew as snakes. Sometimes, you need to use your God-given brain to achieve the most efficient result. It is often the case that people do not deny Jesus directly, but they are very opposed to the negative examples of Christianity and as such, never get into it. Play around it and and show them the opposite
Oh, and if the person is not receptive to examples and actions, I usually save my breath. Do not give your pearls to the swine, as it is written.

One final remark with regards to the topic. While the OP mentioned homosexuality in his post, this is not the topic. It is clearly established what the questions and the line of the discussion is. Please keep to that and do not make it another homosexuality thread. It will only harm the thread and bring along unwanted consequences. Thank you.

 

[Rescued One]

I don't even mention the Bible or topics related to it anymore because my living siblings don't like Christianity at all. As a matter of fact two of them don't keep in touch.

 

[Newtheran]

Does anyone relate to my aforementioned tranquility and peace when responding to criticism or provocations from unbelieving friends or relatives? As if your words were guided by the Holy Spirit, to a minor extent.

I don't believe that there's a single answer to your question. Different people are called to different missions in the church. Martin Luther is in heaven worshipping God alongside Dietrich Bonhoffer.

And what's in your experience the best attitude with people who you know won't take well your words no matter how well described they are? Avoid this type of conversation? Any advice is appreciated.

For me personally? Beat someone into intellectual submission until they agree or realize they're an idiot for disagreeing.

But I'm a Lutheran.

Just remember the 4th/5th commandment when it comes to your parents, and be aware of the larger unrealized spiritual error that your post contains.

 

[prodromos]

Heads up to those responding. This thread was posted in the Eastern Orthodox forum

 

[ArmyMatt]

to the OP.

your answer for question one, is I have (rarely) had a sense of peace afterwards, but not during before or during.

as for question two, I let them come to me and ask me what we believe. don't headhunt.

 

[Ioannes]

as for question two, I let them come to me and ask me what we believe. don't headhunt.

Sure I won't "attack" first. Especially because I am just a Catechumen it isn't proper for me to start a discussion on our Faith with non believers. I try to be humble as much as possible and risking getting angry isn't a way to achieve that. My parents intentionally started talking about my faith in certain terms and how it relates to certain sensitive topics.

 

[Ioannes]

Just remember the 4th/5th commandment when it comes to your parents, and be aware of the larger unrealized spiritual error

I'll try to avoid any discussion about my spiritual error, as you probably missed to spot this is TAW. We're Eastern Orthodox and I assume your Lutheran theology drives you into seeing this "error" in my post; if this is so this isn't the place for theological debates betweens Denominations.

As for the commandment, we should be cautious to remember what Jesus meant when he said he came to bring a sword rather than peace. There's little room for interpretation, he said that to warn people their families would be damaged and people would tear apart from one another when taking sides. I don't think our Lord ever meant us to conceal His Word or avoid defending our Faith in front of our parents just to "honour them".

 

[Newtheran]

There is a strong push in the western world to legitimize homosexuality. For the secular westerner, this is to legitimize homosexual thought, identity, and practice. In contrast to this is the historic Christian position that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered. In saying this, the church aligns itself with the historic understanding of a God that not only created us male and female, psychologically and physically compatible with each other exclusively, but annihilated Sodom and Gomorrah when they dared violate this aspect of the order of his creation. In this understanding, there can be no such thing as a "gay Christian" no more than there can be a Christian who continues to advocate for, identify with, and cherish other sins for which they are to repent to enter in to salvation. Churches in the west that have attempted to split the baby in a Solomon-like manner and excuse homosexual thought and identity while merely forbidding practice soon find that they have built on a philosophical foundation of sand and eventually accept or look the other way on matters of practice. Multiple examples of that exist.

I was under the impression that this was also the understanding of Orthodoxy. If it is not, I apologize for attempting to point out something that might have put you in conflict with an organization you are joining.

 

[ArmyMatt]

that is our understanding of homosexuality, it's sinful and only leads to death.

 

[Newtheran]

that is our understanding of homosexuality

Thanks. I have a great deal of respect for Orthodoxy based on what I've learned about it and would have been quite surprised to learn that they had surrendered on so fundamental an issue.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

that is our understanding of homosexuality, it's sinful and only leads to death.

Even within a Sola Scriptura context it should be pretty straight forward really. I mean scripture is not ambiguous about this topic at all.
The only reason protestants endorse homosexuality is because of their desire to legitimize their liberal ideology through theology and to do so they seek to read ideology into scripture and to extract anything that goes against their agenda by labeling said scripture as allegorical.
This combined with eisegesis and voila yesterdays sin is today's "optional" and "alternative" lifestyle.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Even within a Sola Scriptura context it should be pretty straight forward really. I mean scripture is not ambiguous about this topic at all.
The only reason protestants endorse homosexuality is because of their desire to legitimize their liberal ideology through theology and to do so they seek to read ideology into scripture and to extract anything that goes against their agenda by labeling said scripture as allegorical.
This combined with eisegesis and voila yesterdays sin is today's "optional" and "alternative" lifestyle.

since no text is self interpreting, it also becomes easier to read condemnations of homosexuality as simply condemnations of homosexual promiscuity.

 

[Ioannes]

Thanks. I have a great deal of respect for Orthodoxy based on what I've learned about it and would have been quite surprised to learn that they had surrendered on so fundamental an issue.

I probably expressed myself poorly in my thread. I am not supporting the idea that Homosexual behavior is justifiable, however, Orthodoxy stresses the importance of self judgement and loving others, hence why we put the love for other sinners first (gay included) than any possibly unloving comment against homosexuals per se.
I think the main difference between some western theological schools and Orthodox theology is that Homosexual perceptions aren't per se sinful. Gays who don't act aren't under judgement or seen as sinners. However with catholics I've often seen a heavily hateful attitude towards homosexuals.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

To have a passive attitude toward the LGBTIQLMNOPQRS community is dangerous. They are militant and willing to fight dirty, lie, manipulate, and propagandize to the nth degree. They are disordered, sinful, and very political. The pansexualists don’t want your pity, sympathy, or just prayers. They want you fully on board with their filth, your kids to be propagandized at a young age, and they want you actively opening your mind to their new world order. I can’t underscore how dangerous and evil that community is.

I probably expressed myself poorly in my thread. I am not supporting the idea that Homosexual behavior is justifiable, however, Orthodoxy stresses the importance of self judgement and loving others, hence why we put the love for other sinners first (gay included) than any possibly unloving comment against homosexuals per se.
I think the main difference between some western theological schools and Orthodox theology is that Homosexual perceptions aren't per se sinful. Gays who don't act aren't under judgement or seen as sinners. However with catholics I've often seen a heavily hateful attitude towards homosexuals.

 

[mothcorrupteth]

Does anyone relate to my aforementioned tranquility and peace when responding to criticism or provocations from unbelieving friends or relatives? As if your words were guided by the Holy Spirit, to a minor extent.

You said "unbelieving," but it's not entirely clear what you mean by that. These are actually the things that I thrive on with my Protestant friends, now. I have received "greater excommunication" from my former Presbyterian church, and the other day there was a big discussion in one of the Presby Facebook groups on what stance people should take on the articles that I've written formerly in favor of Reformed doctrine. A whole mess of people I don't even know are blabbing on like know-it-alls about how "idolatry was in my heart," how "I'm rebellious and sinful." (They seem to think I'm converting because of Icons!) And people I do know are divided on whether I actually am a (error-filled) Christian and greater excommunication was uncalled for, or whether I've got Satan in me and am beyond all hope. All it's accomplished is to make me feel more confident. People who have no skin in the game are criticizing me. So what? What mice have to say is of no account to lions. I have sacrificed friendships for my beliefs; where are their scars?

And what's in your experience the best attitude with people who you know won't take well your words no matter how well described they are? Avoid this type of conversation? Any advice is appreciated.

Don't argue. You'll only appear defensive. It's not about logic, anyway. It's about mammalian dominance displays. They don't know it because they're ideologues, but that's what they want: to be left standing--physically--while you back down. Let them charge and howl at you like the apes they are. You just say what you believe and don't apologize for it, and in the mean time put your money where your mouth is--don't virtue signal.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I would prefer to forget the fact that when I had newly discovered Orthodoxy, I was like so many others so full of excitement over it that I tried to say good things about it when it wasn't welcome - and the outcome was never good. This was to family and friends. If we ignore that time ... (please let's ignore it!)

I have often felt peace yes, when discussing things of God with people. I feel much MORE peace when they come to me and ask, which will happen if you just quietly live out your faith and it falls in opppsition to how other people live. I still remember a time at a friend's packed apartment - a couple of dozen people faced me - atheists, agnostics, pagans, those interested in witchcraft and Native American spirituality, and a few who would have claimed Christ but didn't really know what that meant beyond "I believe there is a god". They wanted ME to explain to them and answer all their questions and objections. And so ... surely with the help of God ... I did. It's the kind of situation that should have scared me silly. I don't like to be the focus of many people - especially many people already antagonistic to my belief. But for whatever reason (God knows) they wanted to ask me. And it was actually quite a "high point" experience for me. Everything just flowed in a good way. It's not like they all (or any) instantly wanted to convert, but I can hope maybe seeds were planted. That's God's business in any case.

As far as Orthodoxy specifically - it has gotten better. I'm very conscious to meet people where they are and validate their sincerely seeking God. I try to let my enthusiasm match theirs, and discuss real things we can both relate to, and slowly I think most of them realize I haven't left the faith for something else (a pagan, idolatrous perversion of Christianity - sadly that's often what they think at first). It takes time though. My degree of peace in such situations varies. If they are truly open and accepting of me as a person (even if not of Orthodoxy), I can usually have peace. If they approach me with the intent of attacking Orthodoxy, I rarely have peace.

 

[Ioannes]

If they are truly open and accepting of me as a person (even if not of Orthodoxy), I can usually have peace. If they approach me with the intent of attacking Orthodoxy, I rarely have peace.

Maybe it was just the experience of my very first religious debate, and at other times I'll feel bad about it just like with the political discussions I had in the past with parents and acquaintances alike.
I hope however to always feel such peace. I know that it wasn't an entirely mystical one because I rationally felt my self assurance came from defending not my own but God's truth. Even if others slander God, he will have the last word. So theoretically, I should never fret on these occasions.

 

[Ioannes]

I thank the others for their insights.