Creeping Liberalism

[LivingWordUnity]

That, and look what they did to the CEO/one of the founders of Mozilla because he supported proposition 8 - they forced him out of his job. Because if you're a conservative Christian you can't have high profile jobs like that even if it's a company that you helped found. Now, there's a Christian dentist being sued for playing Christian music in her own office.

My mom has long believed that acceptance of homosexuality was going to become to mark of the beast of revelation that you'll need in order to buy or sell, and from everything I've seen in recent history, I believe she is right.

I've been keeping a list of those things, and it's long. I'll be adding that to it. I believe that these are signs of the fulfillment of what it says about the Beast in the book of the Apocalypse.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I will have to read later too.

Fortunately, I am somewhat insulated against such things. I know they happen, but I don't see them much. I unfriended a bishop on FB who was really advocating such things. I unfollow laypeople who keep it up. I read mostly from a select group of friends. They don't agree 100% on things, but the biggest controversy is likely to be calendar issues or something on that level.

I'm not sure I'm sufficiently established to have my "bubble burst" as it were. But if involved just writing letters to bishops, I would be willing, if that were at any point what I should do. But as such a neophyte, I'm not sure it's my place nor do I think my SF would approve. Not at this point.

I do hear of such unorthodox leanings "in the winds" though. And if it has long been the responsibility of the faithful as well as monastics, in addition to clergy to keep the ship on its path, then so be it. Whatever we should be doing, we should be doing.

I'm just following along and absorbing a bit of info though.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Oh, Lord, I just had a thought. What if it's really the influx of converts that is the problem? I don't want to be "part of the problem" and I hope I'm not but ... insufficient preparation before reception? I'm not sure ...

 

[gzt]

With the dentist: the issue was likely with the employees? I would just say that, you know, an employer, even a private employer, shouldn't subject their employees to an environment that they aren't comfortable with under certain protected parameters. There are Muslim dentists, and I'm sure most Christians would not have a problem working with a Muslim dentist, but working for a Muslim dentist who constantly plays religious music is probably not something any of us would want to deal with, and it's probably the case that it's something that the employee should be able to push back against without having to find a new job.

 

[gzt]

"Such things". We've quickly moved on from clear statements to innuendo and then to witch hunts. It seems we want somebody to be punished by the bishop and forbidden to have a role in a parish for thinking that it's a shame that it seemed Moscow was going to tank a statement about human rights that was written in preconciliar meetings 30 years ago. We're spinning out of control here.

 

[gzt]

It would be amusing to me if it weren't so horrifying that a bunch of people who all believe the Creed unequivocally and all assent that sexual intercourse outside of a marriage between a man and a woman is a sin can get so internally critical, to the point of suggesting that others ought to be disciplined by their bishops for not being sufficiently rigorist beyond that.

 

[dzheremi]

Now, there's a Christian dentist being sued for playing Christian music in her own office..

Was it KLOVE? As someone who very clearly remembers the late 80s/early 90s onslaught of Michael W. Smith, Amy Grant, Phil Keggy, et al., I'm not sure this lawsuit is entirely baseless. Having to listen to that stuff all day just to keep a job? Talk about a hostile work environment...

 

[~Anastasia~]

"Such things". We've quickly moved on from clear statements to innuendo and then to witch hunts. It seems we want somebody to be punished by the bishop and forbidden to have a role in a parish for thinking that it's a shame that it seemed Moscow was going to tank a statement about human rights that was written in preconciliar meetings 30 years ago. We're spinning out of control here.

I was asking questions, not trying to instigate a witch hunt. I probably should have been more specific, especially when I read different forum areas and I might not recall everything discussed in this thread, so "such things" might include more than I mean to include.

I'm not looking to hunt everyone down and see them punished. I'm sorry that you took my post that way. But if we the faithful have a responsibility to the Church (and from all I've been told, we do) then I don't think we should refuse to take it up either.

I'm interested in exploring what that means. I'm not calling for a witch hunt.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I always had you pegged as a witch-hunter, Anastasia. You give off that witch-slaughtering vibe!

I was asking questions, not trying to instigate a witch hunt. I probably should have been more specific, especially when I read different forum areas and I might not recall everything discussed in this thread, so "such things" might include more than I mean to include.

I'm not looking to hunt everyone down and see them punished. I'm sorry that you took my post that way. But if we the faithful have a responsibility to the Church (and from all I've been told, we do) then I don't think we should refuse to take it up either.

I'm interested in exploring what that means. I'm not calling for a witch hunt.

 

[gzt]

Well, it's not so much you, but the confluence of posts - there was this one guy saying to write to people's bishops about their thought crimes related to... not liking something Moscow is doing which frankly a lot of people supporting Greek bishops would not like, if we're just going on the level of base politicking within the Church. We're rapidly careering downhill here.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

This really, really, doesn't understand what I am saying.
No, I am NOT saying that morality is dependent on law. I AM saying that is IS immoral to support legalization of immorality. So your subsequent logic doesn't follow at all. It is ALWAYS immoral to support legalized homosexuality, to encourage it in society (and legalization DOES encourage and protect it).

We should seek a godly society. If we can influence law and national morality, we should. If we cannot, we suffer persecution. I don't care about "status quo"; I care about what OUGHT to be, and if we can influence our laws, they ought to reflect Christian morality.

Right. I suspect we would probably agree on all things that an Orthodox should consider immoral, including gay marriage. But our disagreement lies it what immoral actions the State must be relied upon to proscribe.

Your logic seems confused. You say:
1. It is un Orthodox to seek to legalise things that are immoral. "I AM saying that is IS immoral to support legalization of immorality".However;
2. When challenged, you suggest you don't want to make immoral things illegal. "But you seem to think I am trying to PASS laws against immorality". And yet, now you say;
3. "If we can influence law and national morality, we should".

So, if it is always sinful to support legalised gay marriage, what other immoral activity's legality is it also always sinful to support? Is it always sinful to support legalised fornication or adultery? If not, what makes gay marriage different?

It seems rather easy for us to simply oppose legalisation of actions, but I think we need to establish a justification for when the State should intervene to buttress Christian morality. Why is the State needed to prohibit gay marriage but not gay sex or fornication or greed?

The State is a two edged sword: a State that is sufficiently intrusive to prevent legalised gay marriage may also be sufficiently intrusive to prevent legalised Christian teaching and practice.

 

[Orthodoxjay1]

I always had you pegged as a witch-hunter, Anastasia. You give off that witch-slaughtering vibe!

LOL Gurney thinks gay marriage = gas chambers, Anatasia is a witch hunter, and the earth is 4.54 million+0.07 million years old. some people here are amazing , ohh Anatasia I always pegged you as a sweetheart, and Gurney I thought you were just your average Orthodox Christian dad/School teacher. Watch out folks according to some people, some of us are kooks

 

[gzt]

I am indeed pretty awesome.

 

[Orthodoxjay1]

I am indeed pretty awesome.

Amazing at saying there are witch hunts when there isn't any at all, all hail

 

[All4Christ]

Well, it's not so much you, but the confluence of posts - there was this one guy saying to write to people's bishops about their thought crimes related to... not liking something Moscow is doing which frankly a lot of people supporting Greek bishops would not like, if we're just going on the level of base politicking within the Church. We're rapidly careering downhill here.

I'm a bit lost as to the "not liking something Moscow is doing which frankly a lot of people supporting Greek bishops would not like, if we're just going on the level of base politicking within the Church."...perhaps I missed some posts here? Or if it's politics, I probably missed something as I tend to avoid that.

I saw the posts about contacting the bishop, but assumed it was regarding the Fr Arida issues with the articles he wrote in past suggesting a change in Orthodox morality. Is that what you are referring to?


And everyone - let's step back a minute and think about what we write before we write it. Please!

 

[gzt]

Here are some quotes from some "Orthodox" people on FB in response to an article about the possible upcoming Great Council. This is evidence of some of the "creeping liberalism".

"Where would the Orthodox Church be without discrimination? Is outrage!. An assault on 1700 years of TRADITION! The primates are defending it with their bodies!"

"An excellent analysis. I do agree with (name omitted)'s comment above. I was a little surprised by the omission of the most significant rifts in the pre-conciliar proceedings, namely the refusal by Moscow to sign the statement on human rights and non-discrimination."

"Good analysis. However, it is not only the more fundamentalist voices who do not want this council...They feel that any statements out of the council might be ill considered (i.e. reactionary). Skewed to placate the more fundamentalist strain of Orthodoxy that now holds sway in some quarters and/or represent the least common denominator on any single issue without allowing for the work of the Holy Spirit..."

This is the post I was referring to - these utterly innocuous comments are the sort that are to be reported to the bishop for discipline.

 

[All4Christ]

Ah ok - I haven't read the article related to those comments so it was hard to follow exactly what the comments were referencing. Thanks for the clarification

I admit I haven't been paying a great deal of attention to what is happening with the council preparations. Perhaps if I check that out it will make more sense.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

I'm sorry, but what if I'm a Christian who objects to hard rock and that is what my boss pipes into the office - do I get to sue? My boss used to keep the radio "tuned" to the classical station - which I considered a form of noise torture. Especially since half the time the radio station would fade and it would just be static. Can I go back and sue her for emotional distress?
When my grandfather worked for a Japanese company he was compelled to attend Buddhist - I don't know what they call them - prayer meetings to keep his job. Why is it any different for Christians?

 

[gzt]

You didn't answer my Muslim hypothetical.

I don't think people should be forced to attend Buddhist prayer meetings to keep a job. I think he would have a valid complaint.

You know, you can either have religion as a protected category or not. If not, then you cannot complain about accommodating gay marriage. If it is, you cannot complain about not being able to impose your religious music on your employees. This isn't hard. Which do you want? I suppose you could argue that whatever the situation is, whatever is best for Christianity should hold. Well, that's a cute notion, but that's not how civilization works.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

I think if the Muslim owns the office he should be able to play whatever kind of music he wants in the office as it is HIS office.