The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
KARIM LEY, Arizona Byzantine, Irenaeus23, Al Masihi, Seavila777
5565 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 63 guests, and 364 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Portable Icon Screen
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,608
Posts411,058
Members5,565
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 11 of 11 1 2 9 10 11
Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159274
04/23/05 08:01 PM
04/23/05 08:01 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
wild goose Offline
Junior Member
wild goose  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
Hi Joe,

Quote
The same can be applied to anyone.
I truly appreciate the kind and gracious words in your post and I hear the muted rebuke to a 'false' teacher as well.

In the quote above, what is it you are referring to when you say "the same." The same what?


You are right to ascertain that I disagree with you and others here. You may be right when you assert that I disagree with Tradition. As I have stated time and time again, you and others cannot be right when you say I disagree with Scripture.

What I have placed before you all here is extensive exegesis of Scripture. It is important to recognise that some Tradition(al things are) is not in line with Scripture.

The Canon is the Canon. Tradition, capital 'T,' comes after the Canon and looks back at it. The Fathers are the recipients of the Canon and Tradition and they have added their teaching, age on age.

I have peeled back the layers of Tradition and shown that the Pastorals, Romans, Corinthians, (huge gap!!!) Leviticus and Genesis are dealing with two contrasting elements of the spiritual life of the early Christians and the Jews/Hebrews of many ages: holiness and idolatry, or stated slightly differently, righteousness and wickedness.

In every instance, in every Biblical book listed, the author/authors, compilers, editors are explicit in their language, language that shows that the God of Israel and later the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is the winnowing fork between holiness and idolatry, righteousness and wickedness.

On either side of that winnowing fork are God's Chosen (Abrahamic covenant and New Covenant in Christ) and the heathen, pagan, ungodly, etc.


According to Catholic Doctrine on Baptism... all those who have had the waters of Baptism poured over them are God's Own. All those confirmed in the Faith, those who've received The Eucharist in Mass (from age 6, 7, 8, 9 or older) are God's Own.

Those who are God's Own continue to grow in Faith... some of them come to understand, in developmental, biological, psychological growth that God, contra nearly (I'm very careful and purposeful here!) everything the Church says, throughout the ages (some of you say but can't produce the evidence) and more recently (in '75 and '86, but those two documents aren't interpreted in the same fashion!) is their Father, Christ is their Saviour, the Holy Spirit is their Counselor and Consumer of dross... even though they are homosexual.

They have seen the error of the way of the so-called homosexual so-called lifestyle... from reading about it in history books-- not from dipping into it to 'taste and see.' They have "tasted and seen that the LORD is good!" Psalms 34.8 They know the other is a counterfeit... they can see the winnowing fork of the Lord God.

AND they know that it is natural for them to love another of the same sex, not of the opposite sex. They know that they know that they know this. And they know that they remain God's Own.

Joe, you needn't waste time praying for my soul; your motives for doing so are not pure. Pray for Mother Church. Pray for Health and Healing and Wholeness within and without Her.

The Church does not have the power to take away what God has given through Her, namely Salvation, Redemption, Sanctification. A gift given but then reclaimed ceases to be The Gift. Mother Church cannot take back the Gift God gives through Her as an instrument. The Church is not in control of the Generosity of God. Only the Lord God is. She is God's humble servant, or so She should be.

Faithful Gay and Lesbian Christian Catholics know this, too. They know the Truth and the Truth has already set them free... many of them desire to see Mother Church free as well.

Oh that the Instrument of the LORD might....


a fool for Christ, like St Xenia
Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159275
04/23/05 08:25 PM
04/23/05 08:25 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
J
Joe T Offline
Member
Joe T  Offline
Member
J

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
Wild Goose,

Be careful about peeling back too much. Like the onion, you might discover that the flavor that made it was throughout.

All Scripture is interpretation. But also be careful about denying the Church's right to interpret its own publication.

Many of the Church Fathers, my friend, were looking back before all the books in the New Testament were accepted. They were also looking forward.

It is a false dichotomy to suggest that Scripture and Tradition are two separate entities. That is a false Western sense of dualism or thesis and antithesis, whereas one is better than the other simply because one is earlier (Scripture).

But what came before the first New Testament letter from Paul? What did the church have to go on between the Pentecost event and the first collection of New Testament writings? The teachings of the Church, including Tradition, include much more than written Scripture.

You read and interpret Scripture only because the Church teaches what Scripture IS to be read. It was the Church, not the Bible, that gave us the Table of Contents (TOC) of the New Testament.

I pray for you like I pray for all people. It is not a means of expressing pity. It is what Christians do.

Joe Thur

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159276
04/23/05 08:33 PM
04/23/05 08:33 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
J
Joe T Offline
Member
Joe T  Offline
Member
J

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
Quote
Originally posted by wild goose:
AND they know that it is natural for them to love another of the same sex, not of the opposite sex.
Sorry, it is not natural. We all have to rely on heterosexual love, otherwise we would not be.

To put if bluntly, it is both heterosexual love/sex and friction that continues the human race. THAT is natural.

Joe

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159277
04/23/05 10:12 PM
04/23/05 10:12 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,341
Las Vegas, NV
Yuhannon Offline
Member
Yuhannon  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,341
Las Vegas, NV
Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,

Again we need to see what the Church is saying: "Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin..." We must therefore always separate the act from the person. If the Church teaches that having homosexual feels are not a sin, then we must accept that as Truth.

Poosh BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159278
04/24/05 07:44 AM
04/24/05 07:44 AM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Ohio, USA
harmon3110 Offline
Grateful
harmon3110  Offline
Grateful
Member

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Ohio, USA
Dear Wild Goose,

I think JThur was right in his post about Tradition and the Church.

Quote
"Be careful about peeling back too much. Like the onion, you might discover that the flavor that made it was throughout."
Tradition came before Scripture; and Tradition gave rise to the New Testament Scriptures.

But, it is the Church that was given Tradition and the Scriptures. It was the Church that was given the right to interpret the Tradition and the Scriptures. That right is especially vested in the bishops.

Furthermore, Catholics believe that the ability to interpret Tradition and Scripture are even more vested in the Bishop of Rome and the bishops who are in communion with him.

Now, the interpretation and teaching of the Church on the issue of homosexual behavior has been consistent: it's a sin.

Indeed, the Church's teaching on *any* sexual behavior outside of a heterosexual monogamous marriage has been consistent: it's a sin.

The reasons for this in Scripture have been amply demonstrated.

Thus, you (like all the rest of us) have a choice: accept the teachings of the Church or reject them.

I know that keeping the Church's sexual teachings can be very hard: both because of the sex drive and because of this selfish, pornographic age we live in.

Yet, keeping the Church's teachings, all of them, even the difficult ones, is what we are called to do. It is the symbolic (but real) martyrdom of Christians in this era.

Jesus Christ offers to everyone the grace that is necessary to keep His commandments. He told St. Paul --and all of us through him-- that "My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Corinthians 12:9) That is true. It is often painful, because it is usually a share in the Cross. But through it and thereby, there lies the Resurrection. And during it all, Jesus Christ offers us the strength of His Precious Blood --His grace-- to overcome our weaknesses and to keep His commandments.

And His commandments are just that: commandments, not suggestions. He commanded chastity, which means celibacy for everyone except heterosexual, monogamous couples. So, although we struggle and sometimes fall, we have the free choice to keep His commandments and we have His grace --His Precious Blood which He spilled for our sakes and because of our sins-- to overcome our weaknesses and to keep His commandments.

May God bless you.

--John

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159279
04/24/05 09:31 AM
04/24/05 09:31 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,672
Scottsdale, AZ
Deacon John Montalvo Offline
Moderator
Deacon John Montalvo  Offline
Moderator
Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,672
Scottsdale, AZ
I think it may be important for those who claim that a homosexual lifestyle is to be embraced or that Sacred Scripture does not speak on the subject of homosexuality to read ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS .

As the then Prefect of the Congregation For the Doctrine of the Faith, the Holy Father, Benedict, wrote:

Quote
3. Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation's "Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics" of December 29, 1975. That document stressed the duty of trying to understand the homosexual condition and noted that culpability for homosexual acts should only be judged with prudence. At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being "intrinsically disordered", and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not.

4. An essential dimension of authentic pastoral care is the identification of causes of confusion regarding the Church's teaching. One is a new exegesis of Sacred Scripture which claims variously that Scripture has nothing to say on the subject of homosexuality, or that it somehow tacitly approves of it, or that all of its moral injunctions are so culture-bound that they are no longer applicable to contemporary life. These views are gravely erroneous and call for particular attention here.

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159280
04/24/05 10:19 AM
04/24/05 10:19 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
wild goose Offline
Junior Member
wild goose  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
Joe and John H,

Quote
It was the Church, not the Bible, that gave us the Table of Contents (TOC) of the New Testament.
It wasn't the Holy Roman (Empire) church that gave us (The Church) the Scriptures... and you both know that, honestly.

Yes I know that tradition preceded the New Testament documents-- oral (first and latter some written) tradition. The same is true of the Hebrew Bible as well (e.g. Psalm 1 is a preface to the whole of the Psalter; the editorial comment at Genesis 2.24 "Therefore..."-- both are examples of 'tradition' added to what was already written)

I have no argument with pre-Canonical tradition.

After the Apostles and others wrote what they wrote, we had/have the nascent Canon, the Canon before the fixing of the Canon: Rome- 382; Hippo- 393; Carthage- 397. These councils, and others, accepted the wisdom of the earlier periods of Church tradition before the Western church was Constantine's mater et magistra, as was said earlier, and you both know that, honestly. We have a Canon nearly 250 years before Carthage (and I know that up until Trent, there were still wranglings about The Canon).

The fact remains that, to my knowledge, though several have said that Tradition (what, equal to Scripture?!?) states a homosexual bias, no one has actually printed the long shrift, yet(?).

Christian T/tradition is not unlike Jewish Talmud and Mishnah-- it's not nearly as authoritative as Scripture (Torah/Gospel, etc.).

As I have pointed out again and again, the church authorities have got it wrong about a Biblical foundation for saying homosexuality is an intrinsic moral evil.

I have even reminded those of you here who really ought to know better that the Bible is not a morality compendium; The Bible is a Holiness/contra idolatry Book. God's separated/set apart/holy/righteous/godly/other-than people are not to delve into idolatry... like their foreign neighbours had done (Genesis and Leviticus) and were doing (Corinthians, Romans and Pastorals). Otherwise, we wouldn't have the constant call of the prophets (and St Paul) to the people, God's own, to not be wicked and adulterous (syncretistic with their religion/faith). The call of the prophets was to remain pure and holy, holy to the LORD.

And as I have said again and again, the Church is not an authority on Biology or Psychology; She is not an authority on how homosexuals understand themselves. She is too afraid to get close enough to understand them. She does not bother to quote from scientific studies when she publishes Her CDF documents. Mother Church knows that doing either of these two will bring walls crashing down upon the sandy foundations She has built, specifically regarding any teaching on homosexuality (which didn't exist as a word nor was understood as a human phenomenon until very recent history; accept that in some primitive societies, those who do not mate and do not produce babies are afforded honour...). I think and believe you both know this as well, honestly.

Whether one believes that homosexuals make up 2-3% or 10% of the population, the human family nor the Church family is threatened by this. The human race will not go into decline because Mother Church recognises the full humanity (including sexual expression) of homosexual persons. The human race has always produced those whom we know and understand today to be homosexual... and we've not disappeared from the universe. The Earth still spins on its axis. Faithful Homosexual Christians sing/proclaim "... World without end. Amen. Amen." just like the rest of us! biggrin

I don't see why the Church couldn't think if Faithful Christian Catholic Homosexuals as... human birth control. With a certain amount of Mother Church-blessed-and-valued-and honoured homosexuals on the planet... we wouldn't be so worried about heterosexuals using contraception.... We might even save a few more lives in sub-Saharan Africa (and wherever AIDS is ravaging populations) if She did. ... We might even keep human population at levels we can sustain economically and agriculturally.

Mother Church, if She could change Her fixation upon homosexuality, could see the world turned upside down... so that the glory of the Lord would be manifest: For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea. Habakkuk 2.14 and 2 Cor 3.12-4.6 [with ref. to 2 Cor 4.1-6, some of the Church's teaching on homosexuality is darkness, darkness (St Matt 6.23 and St John 12.35)]

Blessing to you both, wg

p.s. a newcomer to this topic wondered out loud if I wasn't pushing an homosexual agenda from within that minority population. I'm not going to rise to that question. The references to my God-given sexuality are posted here; the newcomer can do the search or someone else can inform them. Thanks

p.p.s. Yuhannon, thanks for your points of clarification smile


a fool for Christ, like St Xenia
Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159281
04/24/05 10:36 AM
04/24/05 10:36 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
wild goose Offline
Junior Member
wild goose  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
Quote
... and because of this selfish, pornographic age we live in.
I couldn't help but chuckle at this comment, John. How much of human, homo sapien sapien, history has passed under the bridge of the planet Earth... before the onset of this pornographic age?!!? wink

Be careful, you'll be adding to my side of the argument with many more comments like that-- recent understanding of the human phenomenon of homosexuality is not addressed by Scripture or Church Tradition. Those two address idolatry.

Homosexuality in and of itself is not intrinsically idolatrous. Faithful Christian Catholic Homosexuals in and of themselves are not intrinsically idolatrous.

morality and evil don't even come into play on the above statements.


Joe,

Quote
We all have to rely on heterosexual love, otherwise we would not be.
Homosexuals get here by human love, human love often blessed by Mother Church. Homosexual couples who choose to have children produce heterosexuals, too. smile


a fool for Christ, like St Xenia
Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159282
04/24/05 02:21 PM
04/24/05 02:21 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Ohio, USA
harmon3110 Offline
Grateful
harmon3110  Offline
Grateful
Member

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Ohio, USA
Dear Wild Goose,

Ultimately, idolatry is worshipping the false god of the self. Ultimately, idolatry is the sin of pride. Whether idols are made of stone or of our own ideas, it is idolatry if we prefer our own will to God's will.

God's will includes morality. The Bible, the Gospel and all of God's revelation includes morality. Morality is how we show reverence and love for God by how we treat ourselves and the neighbor. To deny that morality is part of God's will is itself an idolatry.

In terms of homosexuality: It is not being gay that is a sin. It is engaging in homosexual conduct that is a sin. That is because God created human sexual intercourse to be used only by a man and a woman who are married to each other. That is God's will. We know it is God's will because God has revealed Himself and His will: in the Bible (from Genesis through Revelations) and in the Tradition (since the beginning of the Church).

By the way, it is the same Church today that was founded by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ founded the Church by choosing the Apostles, and then by His death on the Cross (and the flow of Blood and Water from His chest), and then by breathing on the Holy Spirit on the Apostles after He rose from the dead, and then by sending the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. All of that was the founding of the Church. That Church is the same Church that exists today.

And that same Church has taught --and still teaches-- that sex outside of a heterosexual, monogamous marriage is wrong. This teaching is clear, and it has not changed since God created Adam and Eve (yes, even *before* the Church began). Sexual intercourse is only allowed for people who are in heterosexual, monogamous marriage. That is the teaching of God and His Church.

Hence, it is up to you and to each of us to keep that teaching, which is God's will, by God's grace and by humble, filial, loving obedience.

Be well.

--John

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159283
04/24/05 04:08 PM
04/24/05 04:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
wild goose Offline
Junior Member
wild goose  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 217
Britain
Hi John H

I appreciate the wellness you wish me, truly.

It is obvious to any who live on this planet that most people are heterosexual. This goes without saying-- it goes without teaching-- it goes without Mother Church reinforcing it. It is a fact of mammalian life on this planet. Evolutionary life would not have been possible if males and females had not mated.

When the Church takes the additional step and says that the majority position is the only one, She steps into the land of Idolatry. The worthship of only one sexuality is idolatry.

When the Church takes the additional step and says that the majority position is the only one, She steps into the land of Immorality. The valuing of one sexuality to the exclusion of the other is immoral.

God creates all. God shows God's Love through the Life and Ministry of Jesus and by the Death and Resurrection of Jesus. To say that some of God's Own people cannot/may not love in every way that is available to others of God's Own is sinful.

In this regard the Church is culpable; She is guilty of idolatry, immorality and sin. Through the ages the Church has confessed Her sin; She will confess in this regard as well.

You, or anyone else, cannot say that it's alright for some to love and a small minority not to love. The Church is not God. The Church, at Her best, is the Bride of Christ. The Love and Communion She shares with Christ is meant to be very 'sweet.'

But when the Bride makes the kinds of statements you all keep saying She has made, bitterness is spread. The 'sweetness' the Lord desires is not present.


The Church is one (rather large{?}) part of the Kingdom of God/God's Realm/God's Rule/God's Reign, but She is not the only part... and She knows that.

God Realm and Rule and Reign is not made up only of heterosexuals, as one has to confess. No one under God's Rule is deemed unworthy of loving and being loved, as fully as love may be experienced, including physical genital expressions thereof. The Church's teaching in this regard falls outside the Rule and Reign and Realm of God.

God makes His rain to fall on the just and the unjust. This part of the Church is not sheltered by the Umbrella of God's Kingdom/Realm/Rule/Reign. It's wet. It's unjust. That is a pity. blessing, wg

p.s. making babies in not the only way to grow the Church, but it was very important at crucial stages in the life of Israel... that is why we hear the editor in Genesis talk about 'cleaving.' biggrin Those who are husband and wife will enjoy doing so. The homosexual is not made to 'cleave' with the opposite sex, but s/he must not be disallowed love in a sexual relationship.


a fool for Christ, like St Xenia
Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159284
04/24/05 04:14 PM
04/24/05 04:14 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
J
Joe T Offline
Member
Joe T  Offline
Member
J

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Ohio
Quote
Originally posted by wild goose:
It wasn't the Holy Roman (Empire) church that gave us (The Church) the Scriptures... and you both know that, honestly.
WG,

"Holy Roman Empire Church" versus "The Church?" Not this again. Dan Brown already tried dredging up that argument again, how the bishops voted Jesus into divinity at Nicaea ... yada, yada, yada ...

I see where you are coming from.

Joe

Re: Is gay clergy Ok? #159285
04/24/05 04:36 PM
04/24/05 04:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,363
Virginia!
Administrator Offline

John
Administrator  Offline

John
Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,363
Virginia!
Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
Hi John/Admin, I think there was an inference in one of your posts in response to me that indicated that I had misquoted the CDF document of 1 Oct 1986.

Ö.

In short: homosexual inclination is a strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil. This is a fair summarisation, one that a Canon lawyer would not disagree with.
Your earlier post suggested that Church was teaching that it was sinful to have homosexual tendencies. There is a difference between having a tendency ordered towards an intrinsic moral evil and being evil. The two can never be confused. The tendency towards committing sin is inherited from Adam and Eve. As already stated numerous times in this discussion, this tendency towards sin is not sin. Sin occurs only when we act out on such a tendency, doing something that is immoral.

Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
I'm not one of those and neither are most Catholics, or others who are able to download this document and make some sense of it. To leave too many in our violent society with the summarisation I'm able to make... is to leave open the probability of hate, harm, hospitalisation and death to homosexuals, mostly men and some women. We do not need more than one to die to prompt us to be more careful in our language.
To state that some people have greater tendencies towards a behavior that is morally wrong than others do is a good thing. It allows people with such tendencies to understand the reality of their situation. Those with a tendency ordered towards an intrinsic moral evil need to know and understand that their cross is heavier than the cross that others bear. They need to be able to seek prayerful support in following Christ and striving to live a moral live, and to avoid doing what God has said is evil. Acknowledging what is true in no way opens the door to hate, harm or anything else.

A person with a tendency towards homosexual sexual activity is obviously at a higher risk of engaging in homosexual sexual activity. Homosexual activity is an intrinsic moral evil.

The Church and her Scriptures are quite clear that all sexual activity outside of marriage between one man and one woman is immoral. Your desire to re-interpret the Scriptures to mean whatever you want them to mean does not change them.

Quote
LatinTrad wrote:
.... it is possible to have the orientation and not to act upon it. Or do you deny this?
Quote
Wild Goose replied:
Then what's good for your homosexuals is also good for all heterosexuals, too, by that logic.
WG, you are correct here. Since God prohibits all sexual activity outside of marriage unmarried heterosexuals are required to abstain from all sexual activity.

Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
Venture a guess as to the % of heterosexuals who have the orientation and do not act upon it....
It really does not matter what percentage of people do not follow Godís teachings on any subject. His teachings do not change because people ignore them and commit sin. Yet He waits patiently for us to repent of our sins and to return to Him.

Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
It is plain that Scripture does not teach a thing about homosexuality. Impossible
As I have already noted numerous times, the Scriptures are quite clear about the immorality of homosexual sexual activity. Your decision not to believe them and pretend that they say something else does not change them.

Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
"... the law is not laid down for the just..." 1 Timothy 1.9

Faithful homosexual Christians aren't being referenced by the author of the Pastorals.
The Law is good because God gave it. (Romans 7:16)

Faithful Christians who are unmarried are called to live a celibate lifestyle because that is what God asks of them. A person who is engaging in homosexual sexual activity is not being a faithful Christian. Likewise, a person who is engaging in heterosexual sexual activity outside of marriage is not being a faithful Christian. Scripture makes no exceptions for people with tendencies towards particular sins.

Quote
Wild Goose wrote:
The homosexual is not made to 'cleave' with the opposite sex, but s/he must not be disallowed love in a sexual relationship.
Sexuality is not something that an individual owns. Sexuality is something that God owns within each human person and must always be used according to His purpose. Because of Adam and Eve we live with disorders. Each of us has his or her own sinful tendencies which we must unite to the Cross. The fact that we must live with these disorders in no way makes it acceptable for us to overturn Godís teachings and pretend that what He said is immoral is now moral. No one has a right to sex. Sexual relations must be entered only within the single situation that God has blessed for it, that is, in marriage.

Quote
At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. (Matthew 24:10-13)
Wild Goose, it is clear that you have come here to deceive. Not to deceive us, but to deceive yourself. You are here trying to convince yourself that activity that God has said is immoral is now moral. Itís not going to work. The seeds of right and wrong are planted deep in the heart of man. No matter how hard you try to cover them up with your false testimony they cannot be covered up.

We have gone in circles and each time you have invented another new false statement designed to deceive. I am, therefore, closing this thread (11 pages of almost 140 posts is enough).

In closing this thread I commend to you an excellent article on the Catholic Answers website titled: ďOut of the Closet and into ChastityĒ by David C. Morrison. Mr. Morrison is an individual with the homosexual disorder who rejected the homosexual sexual lifestyle and embraced a Christian lifestyle. [He mostly addresses how the Church should address this issue and help those with this disorder.] All of us can learn much from the way he has chosen to carry his cross.

Prayers and best wishes in all things.

Admin

Page 11 of 11 1 2 9 10 11

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2018. All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2
(Release build 20180918)
Page Time: 0.022s Queries: 14 (0.010s) Memory: 2.0607 MB (Peak: 2.2614 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-12-14 05:23:53 UTC