www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall idolatry in the closet ?

Sure, no problem.

What I will say has to do with two distinct phenomena: one being sexual preference the other being sex/gender (for the purpose of what I'm going to say, I will not make a real distinction between sex & gender.

With regard to sexual preference, studies have shown that while there are people who have only heterosexual desires and people who have only homosexual desires, there are a great number of people who have both desires in different degrees. In fact, I believe that some studies have shown that most people have both desires in different degrees. Most people are basically heterosexual but will occasionally experience homosexual desires. There are some who experience both kinds of desire on a regular basis. Sexual preference is not quite so neatly divided up into just three categories (hetero, homo, bi). In fact, the late Father Munn, my former spiritual Father once told me in discussion that it makes more sense to talk about homosexualities, rather than homosexuality. I also think that this is why we should be careful not to treat sexual orientation as if it is strictly a fixed state. I think that treating it this way leads to problems; for example, identity politics where people identify themselves ontologically as being "gay" or "straight."

The same continuum exists with regard to sex. We know that there are hermaphrodites and ambiguously sexed people. All newly conceived human beings are female until the additional male hormones are added. There is every reason to think that some males retain a signficant amount of female hormonal influence. This could account for transexuality. There really are many people of one sex who feel that they are the other, and this could be (though not necessarily) due to biological influences. Nature is messy. Our desires, and really our entire self-understanding, is based on a confused jumble of biological influences, habituation, and willed choices. Though I am heterosexual and have no strong homosexual desires, I could habituate myself to enjoy homosexual desires if I chose to.

None of this answers the question of what is moral and what is not. That is a different question. The question of what kinds of desires and physiological characterists people have is an is question. The question of what kinds of sexual activities people should pursue is an
ought question.

The goal of Christian spiritual life, of course, is to integrate all of our desires into our will such that we always desire what is morally right. But this is the task of a lifetime and prayer, fasting, and almsgiving are the tools the fathers have specified for us. That being said, the distinction between desires and willed actions is essential to Catholic and Orthodox moral theology. Without such a clear distinction, we can end up with a view similar to those Baptists I've known that have thought that every homosexual tendency/desire is itself a sign of depravity.

Now it is true that the Sermon on the Mount extends the law to the heart, "you have heard it said...but I say if you look at another woman with lust..." However, Catholic and Orthodox moral theology rightly distinguishes between involuntary passions and willed passions. That is why we say that have a lustful desire is not in itself sinful. Consenting to such a desire and enjoying the desire in the will is what is sinful. The goal is to achieve a state in which we never desire anything that is against the moral law. But this is the goal, not the beginning.

Joe

With regard to John's original post, I don't keep track about statistics, but I would guess that the number of threads on "gays" corresponds roughly to the number of "gay activist events" pursued by the gay community out there in the real world, often especially those where they do try very pointedly to mock the Church, Christians, icons/images, etc.

I haven't seen threads here being gratuitously gay-bashing, but rather responding to the Christian-bashing these groups engage in.

I agree strongly with the posts of Alice and Dr. Eric, and I think when your religion is being attacked as the source of all the problems of any activist group, you are entitled to express you own view.

I think the activism regarding free sex, heterosexual or homosexual, has gotten decades ahead of the science regarding it, so that it is proper to retain a certain scepticism regarding activist claims. I personally met the then head of the Gay/Lesbian community in SF two decades ago (a former Catholic, according to him), and he confided that there were no accurate statistics about the frequency of homosexuality in the general population, but that the then frequent "estimate" one would see in the press of 10% was made up by him personally on the spot in the course of a press-conference. "They asked, and I just made up a number: 10%, and that's been repeated by the press ever since" (1983).

I personally have not mistreated anybody with "same-sex attraction", and I have a general desire toward them which is the same as my desires towards everybody: that they be at peace, and save their souls: me too!

Whatever the source, I believe very strongly that social engineering, if any, should only be based on wisdom guided by real science, not by slogans and activists, and I intend to stand my ground. I also don't care much whether that "offends" anybody unless they are willing to explain what about it is offensive. I am offended by much of what goes in American society today, but I don't expect that by saying "I'm offended" the world should come to a stop.

Best,
Michael

Joe,

While it may be shown by research that certain people have homosexual thoughts or tendencies a certain percentage of the time it does not and cannot show whether or not these are temptations by the evil spirits, which I believe they are. Now, having written that, any thoughts about being with a woman who is not my wife may be heterosexual but they are still temptations from the evil ones.


Just in case she reads this, it was just a hypothetical example.

Certainly, that is a real possibility, though it seems to me that almost all of the time, it is impossible to tell what is coming from evil spirits and what is simply coming from bio-socio (I'm coining this term) interaction with the world. To be aroused by the presence of any attractive woman is simply natural (in the sense of biological).

Joe

While it may be true that there are many beautiful women in the world that catch many a man's eye, lustful thoughts about those women, it would seem, come from the demons or the passions.

So I think that while some men can appreciate an attractive face (like mine ) and a chiseled body (unlike mine ) in another male, lustful thoughts about those men would also come from the demons or the passions.

I think that the Fathers are right on when they speak of the passions, as an amateurish "psychologist" (it goes with the job) I hear many different complaints of how a patient's psyche is being affected along with their physical health. And I think that most if not all problems are due to demonic influence or passions that have run a muck.

Self control is a virtue that's greatly needed today.

Perhaps mental illness has the same cause then as well. It seems as plausible.

I would not discount it. Many of the episodes from the Gospel sound like mental diseases.

I think self-control is the key, as Terry wisely stated. Some sexual orientation is most likely the result of biochemical disorders, but I also suspect that some of the sexual preference, other than that for the opposite sex, is learned. Some people desire sexual pleasure (powerful stuff as mentioned above)to such a degree that they're willing to break taboos to fulfill their desire and for those that are really controlled by this desire, the more perverted methods of gratification dvelop into strong preferences. It really is a form of slavery to a passion.

Of course, no one can justify violence (physical or mental)towards anyone, gay or not, but as Alice mentioned, it is troubling to see the attempts made to force mainstream America to accept homosexuality as a norm.The problem with this is that in some cases homosexuality is a response to or self-protective armor against abuse or dysfunctional parent-child relationships.In other words, they could probably be healed.

I don't hate homosexuals at all; if anything I have compassion for them. Whether it's a case of lack of control, biologically based sexual preference , or feeling trapped in the wrong body it is all a heavy, heavy cross to bear that in some cases can only be resolved by complete sexual abstinence, and that is can also be a cross because it isn't necessarily voluntary. I know few transgendered or homosexuals that would wish their challenge on even their worst enemies.Those that are genuinely happy with their state bear the cross of sterility. These are pretty heavy crosses to bear even for the devoutly religious, so it's understandable that secular driven homosexuals would have to find some way to deal with such a burden. Those full of rage and ,perhaps, envy would be led to present blasphemous spectacles. I guess the real concern is how to deal with these spectacles and inappropiateness firmly and compassionately.

Dear Indigo,

That was an excellent post.

Sincerely,
Alice

Terry:

Well said. The Church, both East and West, calls Christians to self control and chastity appropriate to one's state in life. Even for the married, Christians do not have a "blank check." The sexual expression reserved to marriage is a call to deep respect for one's spouse and that means that no activity that would cause the spouse to feel degraded or demeaned should be part of one's marriage relationship. St. Paul alludes to this in one of the Epistles when he says we should know how to "take" a spouse.

The whole approach is one of remembering the great dignity to which humanity has been raised as a result of the Incarnation of Christ--God took on this flesh of ours and from that moment, the moment of His conception in the womb of the Mother of God, flesh would NEVER AGAIN be dirty or the lesser of the two components we have as part of being human, i.e., composed of body and soul. The whole approach is also wrapped around the idea that we are to become like God, i.e., "other directed" as each member of the Trinity is.

That is why the Church calls us to a holy ascesis in the many practices that are meant to discipline the flesh and cause the uncontrolled passions to be controlled. It does not matter who we are attracted to, we are called to purity in our hearts toward each person we meet and that includes our spouses. Remember the Lord's instruction that we commit adultery when we desire another in our heart with lust. It's an equal opportunity sin.

I remember my own wedding vow to "forsake all others" and that means ALL others.

If we are to "put on Christ" as the Baptismal hymn says, we have to put on the whole of Christ--and that icncludes His passionless passion, His purity, His chastity.

In Christ,

BOB

I think that we can now end this thread with two incredibly wise and enlightened posts from a Christian perspective. Thank you, as always, BOB, for your example, and also I want to thank Indigo for her exceptional post.

I don't think that much else can be added to this wisdom spoken through our brother, Bob/Theophan and sister, Indigo, who speak from the spiritual perspective of the Church.

Alice, Moderator