Gay and Christian

[bigvindaloo]

I am recently gay and recently Christian, do you accept me?

 

[Sunstone]

Why not? Can you think of any legitimate reason I should not accept either your homosexuality or your Christianity?

 

[michel]

I am only sad that you should feel the need to ask.............

The answer is, of course, yes.

 

[bigvindaloo]

Why not? Can you think of any legitimate reason I should not accept either your homosexuality or your Christianity?

Thanks for you support Sunstone. However I doubt your "voice" is representative of general opinion given current debate about Gay marriage and Gay Bishops? There is no legitimate reason to exclude me from marriage and becoming a Bishop, or is there?

 

[bigvindaloo]

I am only sad that you should feel the need to ask.............

The answer is, of course, yes.

Thanks Michel for "accepting me". However this a controversial subject! Why "of course" would I be accepted by Christians?

 

[James the Persian]

Thanks for you support Sunstone. However I doubt your "voice" is representative of general opinion given current debate about Gay marriage and Gay Bishops? There is no legitimate reason to exclude me from marriage and becoming a Bishop, or is there?

Yes there is, but I've made my views known on this issue so many times in the forum (search if you wish) that I simply have no desire to go through the whole rigmarole again. You may or may not accept the reasons as legitimate (that is up to you) but the fact is that traditional Christian teaching is that engaging in homosexual acts, just like engaging in any other sexual acts outside of marriage, is sinful. There is no reason whatsoever why a celibate homosexual cannot be accepted and yes they can even be bishops, but an active homosexual sex life is incompatible with orthodox (small o deliberate) Christian teaching. Homosexual attraction is absolutely not a sin (and, in fact, there is a great example of a modern Orthodox monastic who was and is considered by many as a candidate for glorification) but homosexual acts are another thing entirely.

James

 

[michel]

Thanks Michel for "accepting me". However this a controversial subject! Why "of course" would I be accepted by Christians?

Because we are all the Children of God, and should only ever love each other.

 

[bigvindaloo]

Yes there is, but I've made my views known on this issue so many times in the forum (search if you wish) that I simply have no desire to go through the whole rigmarole again. You may or may not accept the reasons as legitimate (that is up to you) but the fact is that traditional Christian teaching is that engaging in homosexual acts, just like engaging in any other sexual acts outside of marriage, is sinful. There is no reason whatsoever why a celibate homosexual cannot be accepted and yes they can even be bishops, but an active homosexual sex life is incompatible with orthodox (small o deliberate) Christian teaching. Homosexual attraction is absolutely not a sin (and, in fact, there is a great example of a modern Orthodox monastic who was and is considered by many as a candidate for glorification) but homosexual acts are another thing entirely.

James

This amounts to an absolutely ludicrous "behavioural" definition of faith, pleading ignorance to desire. Surely there are Christians who might disagree with you.

 

[James the Persian]

This amounts to an absolutely ludicrous "behavioural" definition of faith, pleading ignorance to desire. Surely there are Christians who might disagree with you.

Please explain what you mean. Traditional Christian thought distinguishes between passions (which lead to sin) and sins themselves. There is nothing ludicrous about that. I'm sure that there are Christians that disagree with the Orthodox view, but disagreement by some does not necessarily make the view incorrect.

James

 

[Karl R]

I am recently gay and recently Christian, do you accept me?

I accept gays, and I accept them as christians, but I'm hardly representative of mainstream christianity.

My church accepts gays (and takes efforts to point that out), but it's hardly representative of mainstream christianity.

Houston had its gay pride parade last week. There was usually one church from each mainstream denomination participating in the parade. (Sometimes more than one church for a denomination, and there may have been unrepresented denominations.) Obviously, my church participated.

I don't know whether I'd accept you. I don't know you yet. If I did find something objectionable about you, it wouldn't be your orientation. (As a christian I believe that I'm supposed to accept everyone. As a human I fall far short of that ideal.)

I doubt your "voice" is representative of general opinion given current debate about Gay marriage and Gay Bishops? There is no legitimate reason to exclude me from marriage and becoming a Bishop, or is there?

I doubt my voice has been representative of general opinion on much of anything ever in my life. My voice represents my opinion.

However, you could join my church. You could get married at my church. (It wouldn't be legal, but my church supports changing the marriage laws.) I agree with my church on those matters. You couldn't become a bishop at my church, however. We don't have bishops.

This amounts to an absolutely ludicrous "behavioural" definition of faith, pleading ignorance to desire.

Which part of James' response seems ludicrous? That the orthodox (as a whole) accept homosexual attraction, or that they oppose extramarital sexual behavior?

James' belief is a fairly common belief among christians. It's the official belief of several mainstream denominations (including roman catholicism).

Surely there are Christians who might disagree with you.

There are over a billion christians in the world. I can find many that disagree with me on any topic. (I bet I can find several million who hate pizza.) Why is it so important to you that you can find some who disagree with me?

 

[bigvindaloo]

Please explain what you mean. Traditional Christian thought distinguishes between passions (which lead to sin) and sins themselves. There is nothing ludicrous about that. I'm sure that there are Christians that disagree with the Orthodox view, but disagreement by some does not necessarily make the view incorrect.

James

So is it permissible from a "sin" point of view for a Bishop to corrupt a choir boy through talk, stimulate his desire to the point of agreeing to anal sex, then desisting at the last minute because God thinks it is wrong? Hasn't a sin been committed here?

 

[James the Persian]

So is it permissible from a "sin" point of view for a Bishop to corrupt a choir boy through talk, stimulate his desire to the point of agreeing to anal sex, then desisting at the last minute because God thinks it is wrong? Hasn't a sin been committed here?

Where on earth did you get that from? It would be permissible for a Bishop to feel attraction toward a boy but impermissible to act on that in any way at all, including talk. Of course what you describe is sinful. Who ever suggested otherwise? Just because I said that homosexual acts are sinful (but attraction is not) does not in any way mean that other acts are not sinful also. You seem to be having somewhat of a difficulty adhering to logic here.

James

 

[Mike182]

I am recently gay and recently Christian, do you accept me?

i accept all people, regardless of age, race, gender, religion, sexuality, class etc

if, however, your question is "am i allowed to be gay and Christian" you will get mixed replies, but i don't think it's a 'problem'

 

[Sunstone]

Thanks for you support Sunstone. However I doubt your "voice" is representative of general opinion given current debate about Gay marriage and Gay Bishops? There is no legitimate reason to exclude me from marriage and becoming a Bishop, or is there?

I certainly cannot think of any legitimate reason to exclude you from marriage to someone of the same sex as you.

I don't know enough about any justifications for excluding you from becoming a bishop to comment on their legitimacy or lack thereof.

 

[Mystic-als]

The "mainstream christianity" will not accept you. However Christianity has become an entity on it own. Which is totally wrong. James has repeatidly said that in his belief it is wrong. I will repeatidly say that in my opinion it is fine. But neither I or James are an apointed representative for God or christianity. (esspecially not me) So our opinions are just that opinions.
I honestly don't think James will tell you he hates you and doesn't accept you as a person who God loves. So on the accepting YOU question. I think it'll be yes. We accept you.

However you went futher to state about being a Bishop etc. This is totally a different matter. This is a church issue. Not a christian one. As you must know by now there are so many beliefs divided underneath one banner, christianity.
The bible clearly tells us to work out our own salvation. Which implies that what works for anyone else will not nesisarily (spelling) work for you. Only you can do it.
The church is not some sort of gate keeper to heaven. They are not. If you don't like the church you fellowship at and their beliefs then move to one that does.

 

[bigvindaloo]

Where on earth did you get that from? It would be permissible for a Bishop to feel attraction toward a boy but impermissible to act on that in any way at all, including talk. Of course what you describe is sinful. Who ever suggested otherwise? Just because I said that homosexual acts are sinful (but attraction is not) does not in any way mean that other acts are not sinful also. You seem to be having somewhat of a difficulty adhering to logic here.

James

You cannot maintain your position. It is ludicrous from a human point of view. To suggest that there is some special moral position which society should accept as legal in this situation, based upon religous belief is bollocks. Your priest who desires boys is a pedophile, at least in his own mind. Ethically he has no right to continue as a priest.

 

[James the Persian]

You cannot maintain your position. It is ludicrous from a human point of view. To suggest that there is some special moral position which society should accept as legal in this situation, based upon religous belief is bollocks. Your priest who desires boys is a pedophile, at least in his own mind. Ethically he has no right to continue as a priest.

I can maintain my position perfectly well, thank you. It is not ludicrous at all. I, personally, find myself most afflicted by the passion of anger. I know it is harmful to me and that I must seek to master it. If I let it loose it will lead me into sin. It's not an easy thing to master at all (I've tried for years) but in and of itself it is not sinful. The same would be true of someone who is attracted to those of the same sex. If they do not try to make excuses for themselves, try to master their passion and, most importantly, pick themselves up and repent when they fall, then there is nothing to condemn.

I never suggested that society ought to view something as legal based on my religious faith. That is entirely in your own mind and, frankly, sounds like you are getting frustrated with me for calling you out on your lack of logic. You really ought not to read what you wish to see into others' arguments - it doesn't make for healthy debate.

The bishop that you hypothesised (not my priest at all) is committing no sin so long as he continues to deny his passions. Ethically, I would say, if anything he has more right to continue in his job precisely because he is succeeding in providing an example of Christian triumph over temptation. If you cannot see this then I'm not surprised that you seem to have so many misconceptions about Christianity. We are all sinners and all aflicted by temptation, it is how we respond to the chanllenges we face in life that determines whether we walk the narrow path or not. Nobody is perfect.

James

 

[Mystic-als]

Ethically he has no right to continue as a priest.

true.
Do you want to take his place?

 

[bigvindaloo]

I can maintain my position perfectly well, thank you. It is not ludicrous at all. I, personally, find myself most afflicted by the passion of anger. I know it is harmful to me and that I must seek to master it. If I let it loose it will lead me into sin. It's not an easy thing to master at all (I've tried for years) but in and of itself it is not sinful. The same would be true of someone who is attracted to those of the same sex. If they do not try to make excuses for themselves, try to master their passion and, most importantly, pick themselves up and repent when they fall, then there is nothing to condemn.

I never suggested that society ought to view something as legal based on my religious faith. That is entirely in your own mind and, frankly, sounds like you are getting frustrated with me for calling you out on your lack of logic. You really ought not to read what you wish to see into others' arguments - it doesn't make for healthy debate.

The bishop that you hypothesised (not my priest at all) is committing no sin so long as he continues to deny his passions. Ethically, I would say, if anything he has more right to continue in his job precisely because he is succeeding in providing an example of Christian triumph over temptation. If you cannot see this then I'm not surprised that you seem to have so many misconceptions about Christianity. We are all sinners and all aflicted by temptation, it is how we respond to the chanllenges we face in life that determines whether we walk the narrow path or not. Nobody is perfect.

James

Let us all trust the bishop that denies his passions (at your own peril). What a load of bollocks. We can have bishops that desire boys but do not act on it and its fine. OK. Am I justified in calling this position (James's) conservative? There is no concept of triumph in victimising helpless children. There is no excuse for pedophelia. Anyone saying so ought to be arrested and asked to explain.

 

[CaptainXeroid]

I am recently gay and recently Christian, do you accept me?

Whether you're gay or not gay or semi gay is none of my business. If you believe that Jesus Christ is Messiah and the Son of God, and that he died on the cross for our sins, then I extend to you the right hand of Christian fellowship. Heck, I'll even hold the hymnal open so we can sing along together.

As with any new Chrstian, I would recommend you read your Bible and pay special attention to Jesus' teachings from the Gospels. I think he spelled out pretty clearly what God expects of us..

As others have alluded, there are many Christian denominations and churches, and they may not agree on every issue. Our church does not turn anyone away from the door nor from the Communion table, and we encourage each other to live up to Christ's teachings. Ultimately, like one's orientation, how well you(or anyone else) lives as Christ would want us to live is between you and God.:162: