The Gospel of Tolerance

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Of course we should argue against whatever sins, and I thought we all were doing that who are actual practicing Christians. I suppose maybe with masturbation and pre-marital sex, there was never a huge movement to push for acceptance for "equal rights," etc. Does that mean I think that they are lesser sins? No. In a way, you could say, it's nearly worse because it came in and absorbed and meshed into society in a somewhat sublime way, if that's the right term. I was just reading something kinda pertaining to this in the book on the life and works of Fr. Seraphim Rose (I'm on page 619...I'm making some progress in this 1500+-page book lol).

Here's the excerpt about Fr. Seraphim teaching a course in Orthodox self-defense (survival course, it says):

"This course will concentrate on the most important movements and most important writers who helped form the mentality which we have today. If one is not aware of this, one can still be Orthodox, of course, but one is running a great danger, because the movements of thought around one, which have been formed over the last eight or nine centuries, affect one directly, and one cannot know how to answer them without knowing where they are right, where they are wrong, and how they arisen. One can be in a very precarious position, even in the position of an 'Orthodox fundamentalist' who simply sits in his corner and says, 'Oh, I believe this and everything else is evil.' This, of course, is very unrealistic because you have to have contact with the world: your children are going to school, you read newspapers, you have contact with people who believe different things and even with Orthodox people who don't know what they believe. If you are not aware of what's going on, your Orthodoxy will be infected, without your even knowing it, by all kinds of modern ideas. You will be going to church on Sunday, and the rest of the week living by some kind of different standard, which can be disastrous... In order to avoid this we must follow the advice of St. Basil [the Great] and begin to learn to take from the world around us wisdom where there is wisdom, and where there is foolishness to know why it is foolishness."


The bolded happens to me at times. This is why I think this OP and this whole discussion is important for us.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,009
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟431,571.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Of course we should argue against whatever sins, and I thought we all were doing that who are actual practicing Christians. I suppose maybe with masturbation and pre-marital sex, there was never a huge movement to push for acceptance for "equal rights," etc. Does that mean I think that they are lesser sins? No. In a way, you could say, it's nearly worse because it came in and absorbed and meshed into society in a somewhat sublime way, if that's the right term. I was just reading something kinda pertaining to this in the book on the life and works of Fr. Seraphim Rose (I'm on page 619...I'm making some progress in this 1500+-page book lol).

Here's the excerpt about Fr. Seraphim teaching a course in Orthodox self-defense (survival course, it says):

"This course will concentrate on the most important movements and most important writers who helped form the mentality which we have today. If one is not aware of this, one can still be Orthodox, of course, but one is running a great danger, because the movements of thought around one, which have been formed over the last eight or nine centuries, affect one directly, and one cannot know how to answer them without knowing where they are right, where they are wrong, and how they arisen. One can be in a very precarious position, even in the position of an 'Orthodox fundamentalist' who simply sits in his corner and says, 'Oh, I believe this and everything else is evil.' This, of course, is very unrealistic because you have to have contact with the world: your children are going to school, you read newspapers, you have contact with people who believe different things and even with Orthodox people who don't know what they believe. If you are not aware of what's going on, your Orthodoxy will be infected, without your even knowing it, by all kinds of modern ideas. You will be going to church on Sunday, and the rest of the
week living by some kind of different standard, which can be disastrous... In order to avoid this we must follow the advice of St. Basil [the Great] and begin to learn to take from the world around us wisdom where there is wisdom, and where there is foolishness to know why it is foolishness."


The bolded happens to me at times. This is why I think this OP and this whole discussion is important for us.

I agree. My thread on evil euphemisms attempts to deal with exactly that on the level of language. (not that I think myself perfect or immune, but at least I consciously think about it). Language is a primary way in which we are infected by un-Orthodoxy, and most of us have little to no clue about this.

On pre-marital sex, et al (also modern language that softens and masks what it really is - fornication), those are battles that, in our society, have already been fought and lost, in terms of social approval/disapproval. The great battle around homosexuality (also modern language) is being fought and lost as we speak, and the one over polygamy is coming. But the end is not yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0

truthseeker32

Lost in the Cosmos
Nov 30, 2010
1,066
52
✟16,510.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,009
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟431,571.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I find it interesting that some are claiming that the fight against homosexuality is the primary focus because it hasn't yet been solidified as "normal" in society. It makes it sound like the way to get religious conservatives off your back is to gain acceptance, even if you are wrong. Shouldn't Christians fight sin as sin regardless of its level of acceptance in society?

Would those of you who are opposed to legally recognizing same sex marriage also support legislation to make homosexual relationships illegal?

I'm not sure what you and Ignatius are arguing against. We agree that all sin is sin. No one is suggesting different, or that we are somehow better than the sodomite.

But as to what we can fight and how, we need to consider that first, we need to fight sin in our own life. To do that, we need to learn the mind of the Church, which will sometimes contradict our own opinions. Only then can we, in what little ways we can, try to raise consciousness in others, that sin is sin. Sin spreads most rapidly when people think that it is not sin; when there is no shame and people even boast of it.

I do not claim that the sin of Sodom should be our primary focus in life, but do note that society is currently in a state of disagreement about it, and that we, as Orthodox Christians, should act to affirm the truth of the Church - that it IS sin and ought not to be approved, publicly tolerated, or spread. We also think that about inappropriate contentography, infidelity, etc, but here in society we have the opportunity to act on the civil level as voters by retarding the progress of this particular disease, whereas we do not have this opportunity regarding other sins that have already achieved acceptance by the unbelieving society around us. That's not a "claim"; it is a demonstrable fact - there is no vote on the table to condemn fornication or other sins that have already achieved acceptance. Outside of voting and taking a public stand when the issue is raised, we need to keep our focus on Christ.

And again, when we use language like "heterosexual", "gender", "have sex" etc, we are already infected by the thinking of the world in opposition to the Church, even as we strive to acquire the Holy Spirit - our very language is subtly working against the teachings of the Church. The test is simple - how did our ancestors speak a mere two or three generations ago? When did people begin using this language? Who advocated it and spread it so that we picked it up without realizing it? (Example: "have sex" was coined in 1929 by that enemy of Christian morality, D. H. Lawrence, and it had the effect of separating the sex act from the idea of marriage) And so on. And WE talk like that. And we need to stop it wherever we realize this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I agree. My thread on evil euphemisms attempts to deal with exactly that on the level of language. (not that I think myself perfect or immune, but at least I consciously think about it). Language is a primary way in which we are infected by un-Orthodoxy, and most of us have little to no clue about this.

On pre-marital sex, et al (also modern language that softens and masks what it really is - fornication), those are battles that, in our society, have already been fought and lost, in terms of social approval/disapproval. The great battle around homosexuality (also modern language) is being fought and lost as we speak, and the one over polygamy is coming. But the end is not yet.
Yes, and so is incest - as you said (I think it was you)....just lowering the age is all. Nambla is out there still, too. Lord, have mercy.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I am curious to hear thoughts on these two articles. Both are from devout Eastern Orthodox Christians.

Frank Schaeffer: Frank Schaeffer: Perspectives on Marriage: Score 1 For Gay America -- 0 To The Mormons

David J. Dunn: David J. Dunn, PhD: Civil Unions by Another Name: An Eastern Orthodox Defense of Gay Marriage

Also, in light of this do you think someone could morally be against gay marriage, but oppose the government's involvement in the issue?
My personal view is that I do not take to heart much of what Frank Schaeffer says, and haven't for many years. He's a bit OTT for my taste. He has gone a bit over the edge from a far right-winged, staunch, angry man to a more liberalized, kinda strange outlook on things, still angry man. He makes some good points at times, but he's not able to do so in a civilized or charitable manner, imo.

I actually have read the Dunn article and have linked it to I don't know if it was here or on FB. I don't think Dunn is totally advocating gay marriage. If I remember what I read in his article, he is saying that gays marrying has no bearing on us Orthodox because we view marriage differently. But that's just going by a not-too-good memory from months back when I originally saw and read that.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,553
3,534
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟240,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I'm not sure what you and Ignatius are arguing against. We agree that all sin is sin. No one is suggesting different, or that we are somehow better than the sodomite.

But as to what we can fight and how, we need to consider that first, we need to fight sin in our own life. To do that, we need to learn the mind of the Church, which will sometimes contradict our own opinions. Only then can we, in what little ways we can, try to raise consciousness in others, that sin is sin. Sin spreads most rapidly when people think that it is not sin; when there is no shame and people even boast of it.

I do not claim that the sin of Sodom should be our primary focus in life, but do note that society is currently in a state of disagreement about it, and that we, as Orthodox Christians, should act to affirm the truth of the Church - that it IS sin and ought not to be approved, publicly tolerated, or spread. We also think that about inappropriate contentography, infidelity, etc, but here in society we have the opportunity to act on the civil level as voters by retarding the progress of this particular disease, whereas we do not have this opportunity regarding other sins that have already achieved acceptance by the unbelieving society around us. That's not a "claim"; it is a demonstrable fact - there is no vote on the table to condemn fornication or other sins that have already achieved acceptance. Outside of voting and taking a public stand when the issue is raised, we need to keep our focus on Christ.

And again, when we use language like "heterosexual", "gender", "have sex" etc, we are already infected by the thinking of the world in opposition to the Church, even as we strive to acquire the Holy Spirit - our very language is subtly working against the teachings of the Church. The test is simple - how did our ancestors speak a mere two or three generations ago? When did people begin using this language? Who advocated it and spread it so that we picked it up without realizing it? (Example: "have sex" was coined in 1929 by that enemy of Christian morality, D. H. Lawrence, and it had the effect of separating the sex act from the idea of marriage) And so on. And WE talk like that. And we need to stop it wherever we realize this.
:thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
B

brightmorningstar

Guest
Hope you don't mind me commenting as a visitor, I am really encourged by the debate. Bless you all.

My view is this, as far as I can see there are no NT rebukes to those who were non-believers, the rebukes were to believers or religious leaders or those who called themselves believers.

It is true that as God so loved the world that He gave His only Son that one cant say God hates anyone without denying and rejecting the gospel. God will judge but He has shown His love for all.
And it is also obvious that with the same testimony of God's love is God's warning against same sex relationships.
What we as believers are facing however is the deception (noted in the Bible) where people have a love for themselves, where people reason their feeling make things right.

It is very difficult however to show the scriptures that God so loved us and that same sex relations are error because even though its in black and white in the Biblical testimony some are so blind they cant even see it, and other are so offended they blatently deny it. One cant reason with people who cant see reality.

In the UK even a'gay' historian spotted the nazi style liberal thought police at work against anyone who doesnt support liberal thinking.
This is not primarily about people who have same sex attraction, homosexuals, this is about an attack on God's truth by an influence of the world, tjhe flesh and Satan.
And the danger is another gospel and another Jesus (2 Cor 11) with people claiming God's word says what they want it to say and accusing others of wanting God's word to say what they want it to say.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,009
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟431,571.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Hope you don't mind me commenting as a visitor, I am really encourged by the debate. Bless you all.

My view is this, as far as I can see there are no NT rebukes to those who were non-believers, the rebukes were to believers or religious leaders or those who called themselves believers.

It is true that as God so loved the world that He gave His only Son that one cant say God hates anyone without denying and rejecting the gospel. God will judge but He has shown His love for all.
And it is also obvious that with the same testimony of God's love is God's warning against same sex relationships.
What we as believers are facing however is the deception (noted in the Bible) where people have a love for themselves, where people reason their feeling make things right.

It is very difficult however to show the scriptures that God so loved us and that same sex relations are error because even though its in black and white in the Biblical testimony some are so blind they cant even see it, and other are so offended they blatently deny it. One cant reason with people who cant see reality.

In the UK even a'gay' historian spotted the nazi style liberal thought police at work against anyone who doesnt support liberal thinking.
This is not primarily about people who have same sex attraction, homosexuals, this is about an attack on God's truth by an influence of the world, tjhe flesh and Satan.
And the danger is another gospel and another Jesus (2 Cor 11) with people
claiming God's word says what they want it to say and accusing others of wanting God's word to say what they want it to say.

This is where authority is essential - a living authority that can tell us what the Scriptures mean (as in Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch, who already HAD Scripture, but it wasn't enough for him to understand on his own). We need, as GK Chesterton put it, not a faith that is merely right where we are right (ie, that happens to agree with us), but a faith that is right where we are wrong (ie, with the power to correct us).
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,009
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟431,571.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
So perhaps it would be helpful to distinguish between what the militant wing of the gay rights movement wants and the rights they actually deserve on a moral/ ethical basis.
Rights are a civil concept, not a religious one. In terms of our faith, as CS Lewis put it in "The Great Divorce", we do not want our rights, our just deserts- for what we deserve is hell. We want "the bleeding Mercy".

So rights are merely what society grants. Do we have a natural right to sin? Well, yes, in the sense that God gave us free will. Are we right in exercising such a "right"? No. So there is no sense at all in speaking of natural rights, for in that sense, I have the "right" to do anything I should desire to do; kill my neighbor, for example. As to civil rights - they are arbitrary; decided by human will and arbitration. It is merely a question of social agreement. If society is not in agreement on something, then we do not have a civil right to it. People may obtain all sorts of "rights" that they would be very wrong to exercise.

But speaking of rights as something natural and to be taken for granted is not actually Christian. It is a concept thoroughly rooted in this world.
 
Upvote 0

truthseeker32

Lost in the Cosmos
Nov 30, 2010
1,066
52
✟16,510.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Rights are a civil concept, not a religious one.

So rights are merely what society grants.
Forgive me, I should have been more specific.

I believe there are objective "rights" and "wrongs" at play in the universe. When I say rights that are given based on a moral grounds, I am referring to those rights which are correct to give to an individual.

I doubt you would disagree that an individual has a right to be protected from unprovoked violence.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,009
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟431,571.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Forgive me, I should have been more specific.

I believe there are objective "rights" and "wrongs" at play in the universe. When I say rights that are given based on a moral grounds, I am referring to those rights which are correct to give to an individual.

I doubt you would disagree that an individual has a right to be protected from unprovoked violence.

I wouldn't express it as a "right", though, but as rather our duty, our responsibility of we see someone in need, cf the good Samaritan.

CS Lewis said, "We have no right to happiness", and he was right. Excellent essay, too.

The person who sees good things as rights is the person who does not see them as gifts. They expect, demand, and take for granted things that we should be ever grateful for. A focus on rights is opposed to the Orthodox understanding of our place in the world.

We speak of "a right to life" only because there are people who would, by force, take that life away. But if a baby is threatened by or dies of accident, miscarriage, or whatever there can be no talk of rights, but only of the duty of those of us who can to do what we can to preserve what God has created as far as we are able. But we have no "right" to live to old age, even though we would say that on the whole, it is a good thing to live long and prosper.
 
Upvote 0