www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Greece holds first Gay Weddings

The cancer of all sorts of moral confusion and moral relativism, including this one, is spreading, and, unfortunately I do not believe that anything will stop it:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080603/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_greece_gay_wedding

One would have thought that the isle of Lesbos would have been their preferred location.

Up here, Catholic politicians with relatives who teach in Catholic schools rush to promote this sort of thing.

Alex

Actually some people on the island of Lesbos are fighting to keep there name from being used for something that they believe subjects them to disgrace throughout the World http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7376919.stm

OOPS, sorry--this was news, but not 'Church News'...

Alice, the sometimes confused!

Seems to me that there are one or more Saints connected with Mitylene.

Fr. Serge

Yeah, I'm pretty sure she isn't the first "Greek Lesbian" to get married.

Haven't actual Lesbians (i.e., inhabitants of Lesbos) been getting married for quite some time?

I mean, I'm not tryin' to steal her thunder and all, but come on...

Alexis

With the understanding that news reports should not be taken as an accurate source of theology, and even less so when they are reporting remarks originally made in another language, I would ask the theologically learned among us to consider the statement attributed to Father Stylianos Karpathiou, who is said to have told state NET TV in Greece:

"Homosexuality is a curse, a deadly sin, it goes against psychological and biological normality."

Does Orthodoxy hold that every homosexual is responsible for being in an abnormal "psychological and biological" state? Does Orthodoxy consider that the condition of being homosexual, in and of itself and apart from any homosexual act, is "a curse" and "a deadly sin"? What does Orthodoxy teach is the spiritual consequence of being homosexual? How does Orthodoxy consider that a homosexual can avoid what would otherwise be the necessary spiritual consequences of this curse? Can a "non-practicing" homosexual be an Orthodox Christian? Is the teaching of Orthodoxy (if accurately reflected in the Reuters report of Fr. Stylianos' statement) compatible with the pronouncements of various Catholic bodies (including the NCCB, I believe)?

Tim,

I do see your point, and I think from a Catholic perspective, Father's comments would be technically theologically inaccurate, insofar as homosexuality itself is not a sin, but homosexual acts are.

Alexis

Does Orthodoxy hold that every homosexual is responsible for being in an abnormal "psychological and biological" state? Does Orthodoxy consider that the condition of being homosexual, in and of itself and apart from any homosexual act, is "a curse" and "a deadly sin"? What does Orthodoxy teach is the spiritual consequence of being homosexual? How does Orthodoxy consider that a homosexual can avoid what would otherwise be the necessary spiritual consequences of this curse? Can a "non-practicing" homosexual be an Orthodox Christian? Is the teaching of Orthodoxy (if accurately reflected in the Reuters report of Fr. Stylianos' statement) compatible with the pronouncements of various Catholic bodies (including the NCCB, I believe)?


I think that part of the issue and opportunity here is that there really is not a clearly articulated theology of sexuality. There certainly is /are plenty of ethics but no articulation of the theology of sexuality. It is an opportunity to witness to Christian anthropology rooted in the Trinity that I think is passing by with some grave consequences.
[/quote]

Well, I'll admit right off the bat that it is difficult to answer your questions definitively (Does Orthodoxy teach...? What does Orthodoxy teach? How does Orthodoxy consider? etc.) because the Orthodox Church lacks a 'Magisterium' and questions must be answered from ancient tradition and related to current conditions and modes of thought, but here goes:

Does Orthodoxy hold that every homosexual is responsible for being in an abnormal "psychological and biological" state?

No.

Does Orthodoxy consider that the condition of being homosexual, in and of itself and apart from any homosexual act, is "a curse" and "a deadly sin"?

No.

What does Orthodoxy teach is the spiritual consequence of being homosexual?

It is a Cross to be borne with courage and total reliance upon the grace of God to assist one to live in complete chastity, i.e. it is no different from the struggle God calls all unmarried persons to.

How does Orthodoxy consider that a homosexual can avoid what would otherwise be the necessary spiritual consequences of this curse?

First, I would not call it a curse per se. But we avoid the spiritual consequences of our fallen human nature by cooperating with the grace of God through prayer, Scripture and other spiritual reading, frequent reception of the Mysteries of Confession and Holy Communion, and availing ourselves of the help of others (Spiritual Father, brothers and sisters in the Faith, S.A. or other 12 Step Groups, etc.)

Can a "non-practicing" homosexual be an Orthodox Christian?

Yes. But you will find that any human being can be an Orthodox Christian, even those who practice various sins. You probably mean a practicing Orthodox Christian or a communicant. The answer to that is, of course, yes.

Is the teaching of Orthodoxy [....] compatible with the pronouncements of various Catholic bodies (including the NCCB, I believe)?

Yes.

Fr David Straut

Many thanks for Fr. David's sensitive and comprehensive responses, which are most helpful.

This leaves us to ponder: Was the Greek Orthodox priest mis- quoted? Mis-translated? Mistaken in his pronouncement?

Does anyone know of a more authoritative pronouncement from the Church of Greece on this subject?

Here's a not entirely related anecdote:

In the Tsar's time, divorce in the Russian Empire was possible only if the Tsar himself granted the divorce in the specific case. That, naturally, made divorce completely unobtainable for the bulk of the population.

Well, I knew a priest who is dead these ten years but who was ordained around 1930 and was serving in Eastern Poland. He was happily attending a patronal feast in another parish. The festivities were going nicely when all of a sudden a man whom my friend did not know but who was "feeling no pain" loudly accosted the host pastor with the demand that the host priest should marry a horse to a cow. The host priest tried to brush this off, but the loud-mouth wasn't having any; he began shouting even louder, successfully attracting the attention of everyone at the feast.

The priest-victim made the mistake of asking just how the loud-mouth thought that a priest could marry a horse to a cow.

The triumphant response from the loud-mouth was: IF YOU COULD MARRY MY WIFE TO THAT MAN OVER THERE, YOU CAN MARRY A HORSE TO A COW!

The Inter-war Polish government was secularist, and had legalized divorce, but most people still did not believe that divorce was possible.

Fr. Serge

I can understand how a priest would say that. Many people don't consider the "inclination" to be homosexuality. When the term "homosexuality" is used, many people take that to mean that homosexual acts have been committed. Perhaps the reporter should have followed up by asking about 'same-sex attraction not acted upon'.

Fr. Serge,

That's interesting. If divorce is allowed within Orthodoxy (which it is), then should secular, governmental powers like the Tsar be allowed to control what seems to my poor little mind to be the Church's rightful arena? I know that that's nothing new...but does that mean it's OK? An honest inquiry.

Alexis

Alexis,

The Czar was not, and will not be, a secular government power. He was, and will be again, the anointed of God, the Orthodox Emperor, the heir Of King David and Solomon, the Divinely appointed Protector of God's Holy Church. Czardom is a microcosm on Earth of Heaven above.

Alexandr

Michael Thoma is right. When one is upset, one is not going to start qualifying his remark by being politically correct and sensitive...

I understand such comments to be about homosexuals practicing the immoral acts of homosexuality. (As such, I see nothing incorrect about his comments...Abnormal sexual acts, whether practiced by homo *or* heterosexuals are considered 'deadly/grave/mortal' sins in the Orthodox canons).

After all, it is the *practicing* homosexuals who are the ones who are getting married and who are vocal, is it not?...

I would assume that those who are quietly battling it as a cross are not pushing the so called 'homosexual agenda', and that therefore, they are not in the context of the Priest's comments.

The so called 'homosexual agenda' which makes such behaviour acceptable and even desirable can therefore be considered a 'curse' upon the moral codes of Judeo/Christian, and even Islamic based society.

Orthodox clerics in Russia and in Greece are outraged by the 'in your face' homosexual trend of the times, and they do not care to be 'careful and politically correct'.

I am sure that the outspoken and outraged St. John the Baptist, who had his head put on a platter due to his brave outbursts against sexual immorality, would have concurred and given such priests his blessing.

Alice

Perhaps.. but, His Imperial Majesty, Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah, King of Kings of Ethiopia and Elect of God Haile Selassie I, was the last to truly fit the bill.. although some claim His Majesty's record on human rights was far from divine.

Then again, some of the czars (or popes, just to give equal billing) weren't all that heavenly either.

Strictly speaking, Orthodoxy does not "allow" divorce (and yes, I know that there are some jurisdictions that purport to 'grant divorces'); rather she responds to such a grievous situation with both economia and synkatavasis. This is, at most, toleration, not permission.

Should the Tsar have been involved in "granting divorces"? Of course not, particularly since he was in some sense "head" of the Russian Orthodox Church. However, that brings us up against the same anomaly in another form: we have come to assume (or take for granted) that the State can do what the Church cannot - such as "grant divorces", and defenders of the idea that in a Christian State Christian marriage should at least be normative has become utterly Politically Incorrect.

Divorce is only the thin end of the wedge. The sort of phenomenon that began this thread is a logical consequence; so is polygamy. Next comes . . . well, I don't know, but perhaps "animal husbandry". And we're back to the horse and the cow.

Fr. Serge

[Linked Image]

Organization for Christian Polygamy

Polygamy is in the Bible. Polygamy is found throughout history. These facts prove that marriage's definition includes plural marriage. Polygyny is a far older traditional marriage than anti-polygamy.

Christian Polygamy
This is NOT about polyandry or polyamory.
This is NOT about fornication or adultery.
This is NOT about group marriage or wife swapping.
This is NOT about dishonest bigamy or infidelity.
This is NOT about underaged or arranged marriage.
This is NOT about any form of mormonism.
This is NOT about re-defining marriage.
Organized gateway to the polygamy movement.
Polygamy Movement

True activists organize and communicate here. Tools and other resources are made available. All polygamy questions and Bible doctrine are addressed. Women are protected with love-not-force. Pastors and Christians in various denominations find support. The MEDIA obtain proven, appealing, informative, expert interviews.

As Fr Serge said: "Divorce is only the thin end of the wedge. The sort of phenomenon that began this thread is a logical consequence; so is polygamy."

Fr David Straut

[Linked Image]

What is it that many single Christian men fear so greatly?
They fear falling into temptation because they do not have a mate who can fulfill their desires.
They fear being alone in the world because there is none who shares all the things that they hold most dear.

What is it some married Christian men fear so greatly?
They fear falling into temptation because they do not have a mate who can fulfill their desires.
They fear being alone in the world because there is none who shares all the things that they hold most dear.

Both these men fear the same thing.
- Loneliness and unsatisfied desires.

Both these men have the same lacking.
- A woman who can satisfy their desires and need for companionship.

Both these men are at risk of falling into temptation.
- The temptation of extramarital relations.

What is the solution? For both men the solution is to take sufficient wives to prevent loneliness and unsatisfied desires from leading them into temptation. Paul stated, "It is better to marry than to burn." Paul did not qualify this statement by saying that it applied only to single men.

Brought to you by the Makers of Sola Scriptura.

Fr David Straut

Hello from Greece, where we were sitting outdoors at a cafe in the center of Athens today, when we were suddenly surprised by a 'gay parade'. Fortunately, there was not much that was offensive in this particular one, and it was relatively small, but I was not particularly amused by it.

The *only* thing I did enjoy about it was that a pack of stray dogs from the area (they have all been neutered and collared, but animal rights activists did not allow the government to round them up to euthanize when it was proposed before the 2004 Olympics) playfully got infront of the parade when they saw all the people coming, and seemed to be the parades's 'Grand Marshalls'...LOL!

Alice

Hello, sister Alice, and may God bless you and your family. Have a fine and fruitful stay in Greece!

I know someone who believes in this. He actually says that only Bishops have to have one wife, but other Christian men can have many ("the bishop must be the husband of one wife"- St. Paul).

As Fr. David suggests, this is what you get when you use the Bible alone, apart from Holy Tradition.

But it is also points to the simple fact that in our era, no one denies their passions any more. To fight one's passions is considered neurotic. This is also one of the reasons why homosexual behavior is no longer censured in our culture. The person with homosexual tendencies is not in sin for having them, but he or she must wage spiritual warfare against the passions, just like all of us must do.

Amen, Sister!

Not everyone has studied linguistics, and even then, when one is tired, honest mistakes are made. None of us are perfect.

One is Holy, One is the Lord Jesus Christ.

And it's actually a very short step.

Years ago, confronted with a new legal search engine, I wanted a simple search that would only give a handful of results--so I entered polygamy, expecting to find the rare prosecution being appealed.

What I found was law review articles (scholarly legal articles) from journals at BYU suggesting the restoration of polygamy as the solution to the work-family dilemma. All were written by women!

A few years ago, I did it again, getting ready for a class. Now it was coming up with appellate briefs. One of the current legal arguments against gay marriage is that for the same reasons, polygamy would have to be allowed. I laughed at first--but they're right: the argument that gay marriage must be committed is that the state cannot mandate that the parties be those it selects. There is no fundamental difference between mandating the gender of the parties and mandating the number.



hawk, esq.