Frederica: Why Oppose Gay Marriage?

Frederica - Here and NowFrederica discusses a controversy that erupted online over her comment on gay marriage, and concludes that it is time for Christians to stand together on this issue.

Listen here:

Source: Ancient Faith Radio

Comments

  1. Just live yur Orthodox Life and stop apologizin or what other people r emotionaly feeling. What othes tthink or feel is there business. Our businessis to love them but not the sin. Let us pray as sinners not lifting our eyes to heaven but weeping for our lack of holiness.
    Gerasimos Psychiatrist

    • Christopher :

      Gerasimos,

      You advice would be spot on if this was simply a reaction/disagreement between equals. However, it is not, and the party with power, real political power, is now using the legal code to force traditional Christians (and soon Jews and Muslims and anyone else that does not agree with them) to directly participate in their homosexualist liturgies.

      We are now going to have to make a choice – to bow to the idol (of the sexual revolution and the New Moralism it demands) or be punished (i.e. have our livelihood destroyed – this is what happened to the photographer in my state) and perhaps in the future, martyred. This is why the witness and example of the Holy Martyrs are now to be our guide.

      Are you in Greece? If not, are you in America? If so, I would suggest you inform yourself a little as to what your municipality/state “non-discrimination” laws are and how they apply to your business/corporate environment…

  2. John L.O'Neill :

    We are going to do the same things we are now doing…so are you saying that we need to add the final coup to the bowling ball ‘s progress?
    We can not be seen as standing tall if we cave on this…we well never recover !. I am sorry you are wrong on this.
    I am not angry but time will tell. It will be significantly more difficult and it will be this time, our fault.

  3. Christopher :

    Welcome to those outside the gate Frederica! I have always kept you a bit at arms length, mostly due to your sympathies with the Orthodox pacifist movement (OPF, etc.), and other views (e.g. women’s ordination, etc.) that seem so ingrained with those who are popular on the Orthodox lecture circuit. In the end, I think (I hope) it is a certain generational experience (coming of age in the 60-70’s) that leads to these sorts of opinions. I think this past weeks events are a wake up call for many. For others, it will be when they are persecuted for their beliefs at work (not promoted, not hired, even fired) for we saw this week just how much the New Intolerance is now the official policy in Corporate America. Unfortunately, for many it will not be until they are protesting/criminalizing your churches…

  4. Michael Bauman :

    Christopher, I came of age in the 60’s and 70’s and neither pacifism nor women’s ordination are part of my world. No, she was and perhaps still is in some ways a feminist (note the hyphenation). I have hope however as it takes time for the Holy Spirit to work and sometimes a pressure cooker. She will soon not be a recognized public voice among the powers that be if she sticks to her support of the Church’s teaching on homosexual unions.

  5. The tradition of the Orthodox Church for the last 2,000 years has been unequivocal about the fact that same-sex sexual attraction is a sinful passion & same-sex sexual activity is a sin; Thus, as an Orthodox Christian, I have not qualms accepting that.

    However, setting religious arguments aside, one could make a very respectable case for why homosexuality is unnatural & as such immoral on the basis of natural law philosophy alone, which is, after all, the philosophical bedrock of the U.S.A. not the Christian Scriptures or the Christian Faith as the religious right constantly trumpets. This is evidenced by the fact that our foundational documents make explicit references to Natural Law as the premise for all their arguments rather than scriptural references, in addition the the fact that the most influential Founding Fathers were rationalist Deists rather than “good Christian men”.

    What I find extremely disappointing about the current social & political discourse on this issue, if it can even be referred to as “discourse” given that the proponents of gay marriage basically refuse to dialogue, is the lack of any effort to present a compelling logical argument in defense of gay marriage. It seems as if the assumption is that gay marriage is inherently & obviously moral, and anyone who respectfully disagrees with that assumption is a Neanderthal hater automatically rendered senseless & intolerant. This thinking is on par with the anti-intellectual / emotional defense for why kids thought Apple Jacks cereal was so good back in the 1990’s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-fQGocwd44

    If one does not accept gay marriage asserting that the supporting arguments are lack-luster at best, then the gay marriage proponent launches into an ad hominem attack on the objector rather than attempting to refine the supporting argument & convince the other party, which is never a satisfactory means of moving a discussion forward toward the goal of common ground. It merely degrades & estranges the two parties.

    Of course, this is nothing more than left-wing fundamentalist bigotry, which is equally as appalling as right-wing fundamentalist bigotry. They’re opposite sides of the same wooden nickel.

    What happened to dignified intellectual dialogue? What happened to classical liberalism & its resultant tolerance?

    It seems as though we have reduced ourselves to a nation of Apple Jacks adolescents: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nJSMEuyimU

    • Michael Bauman :

      Timmy, logic and philosophy have no place in the current game. It is about two things: 1. Power; and 2. What people feel and therefore have a ‘right’ to.

      We are responding as if our opponents are reasonable people subject to rational explanations. They are not. They have a a priori commitment to an ideology that shares none of the foundational assumptions of Orthodoxy or even most of western philosophy and faith.

      No matter what they say, they do not believe in God or natural law. They are nihilists, hedonists and materialists with a hatred of anything traditional because the traditional always demands change on their part. Many, such as James Bradshaw have a victim mentality that nurses all wrongs and lays such wrongs at the feet of Christianity. That such wrongs are the fruit of a poisonous theology that is the foundation of the modern ideology to which they are committed and not a part of traditional Christianity at all, they will not hear.

      The philosophy of natural rights was developed by people explicitly and profoundly opposed to traditional Christianity. It is and always will be a weapon against the type of discipline and community to which God calls us for our salvation. It is inherently revolutionary and destructive. It feeds the nihilist vision of the will to power and is a perfect tool for establishing a tyrannical secular state. A state in which many will have the carefully cultivate illusion of freedom and choice but which on any real level is absent.

      Sergianism will rule: “The joys of the State are the joys of the Church, the sorrows of the State are the sorrows of the Church.” We already see this in many who proclaim the ‘social gospel’ and had messianic hopes for Obama for instance and otherwise embrace the progressive eschatology.

      • James Bradshaw :

        “Many, such as James Bradshaw have a victim mentality that nurses all wrongs and lays such wrongs at the feet of Christianity”

        Hardly. I’d be the last person to sue someone over a trivial issue like a cake, and Christians are hardly the sole problem (sincere there’s little unanimity amongst Christians about much of anything, anyhow). The gay community has their own issues they need to deal with. I’m also not a “hedonist”. I don’t do drugs or engage in an excess of anything. I’ve had the same partner for years. Frankly, my life is an endless parade of responsibilities and duties.

        But you’re probably going to believe what you want, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

        • Michael Bauman :

          Mr. Bradshaw, I have no doubt that the facts of your life are as you say. BUT: Hedonism is not just indulging in obvious self-destructive excess, however. The homosexual life as “normal” is essentially nihilist and hedonist:: a child of the larger culture that has turned away from God and gives carte blanche to us all to indulge our fantasies, feelings and desires.

          Fantasy sports is hedonistic at its core for instance. As is much of the content of social media. The ruling principal of hedonism is that pain is bad and pleasure is good therefore we should seek pleasure and avoid pain at all costs. A secondary principal is that communities are simply mental constructs with out substantial foundation. The rules of such communities are merely for convenience’s sake because we have to interact with one another. If such rules give you pain, they must be broken.

          Both of these principals are opposite to the revealed truth in the Orthodox Church and traditional Christianity in which we only reach our true humanity by denying our passions and seeking union together with our Lord, God and Savior. The Cross is the ultimate symbol and icon of the Christian life in the world. The empty tomb is the Gospel to which the Cross leads.

          Of course, we all suffer from hedonism to a great degree. That is why repentance is so needed, for all of us. Any way of thought or living that denies the reality of sin and excuses specific sin is hedonist. Sin is seductive precisely because it seems pleasurable and often masks our pain, our shame and our brokenness. All sexual sins are obvious in this. Greed, gluttony, avarice, envy pride and anger are no less so.

          I have no doubt there is a deep emotional and psychological bond between the two of you. Such a bond does not make your partnership a marriage however. Still, I have no doubt that it would be quite painful for you and your partner to split. While I empathize with that pain that does not mean staying together is either a social or spiritual good.

          If you expect the state to protect you any better than it ever has, you are going to be sadly disappointed. Maybe not in the short run, but sooner than you think, they will go looking for another scapegoat. Tyrannies always have to have them you know.

          If you think that I am out to get you, oppress you, or cause you grief, you are wrong. Homesexualism has to be fought because it is such a profound lie about the nature of man, God and our interrelationship. You, unfortunately, are caught in that lie. That grieves me. While I am a poor example of the truth, I cannot remain silent due to my own sinfulness.

          • James Bradshaw :

            “[T]hat does not mean staying together is either a social or spiritual good.”

            Even if that were true, Michael, it’s not really anyone’s business but that of ourselves and our extended family and parents. I can assure you that we are doing just fine, though, but thank you for your concern.

            I appreciate your passion for your faith. Clearly, it’s an all-consuming and self-defining part of your life. I get it.

            Perhaps my question is what you think your faith requires of you in terms of how it impacts those around you who may not subscribe to your beliefs. If it’s simply a matter of being allowed to express your faith in private, in forums such as this and publicly on the street, if necessary, I don’t see us having any disagreement here, and I’m going to vigorously defend these rights of yours. As I’ve said, I also wouldn’t try to force you to act against your conscience if you happened to be a small business owner providing a non-critical service.

            At the same time, your faith (a non-immutable, non-genetic characteristic, I might note) is afforded certain legal protections: non-discrimination in employment and housing being two very important ones. I think gay men and women are entitled to these basic protections as well. Not for me personally, since I’m in the fortunate position of working for a relatively liberal and wealthy corporation in a liberal town, but for others who are not so fortunate. Now, if you find all of these legal protections onerous to begin with and think we should throw them all out, well … that’s another discussion altogether.

            • Michael Bauman :

              “It is not really anyone’s business…” The homosexualists are not content with that. They want to FORCE everyone to CELEBRATE their way of life. I suspect, Mr. Bradshaw if you were really content with that way of acting, you would not post so often or at all.

              And it is the business of the Church of everybody within the Church because we are not private individuals, but persons in communion with our Lord and with each other. That means first and foremost not condemning any who sin simply because they sin. We are all sinners and we all are in deep need of healing. However, it does mean holding each other to the same standard of belief, doctrine and practice (the Apostolic truth) that the Church has always proclaimed even in our weakness. We have our own wolves in sheep’s clothing after all. It means letting others know of the healing and the need for healing as well.

              Beyond that there really is no such thing as a private faith or private non-faith. We are all connected to each other and influence each other for good or for ill. (My parents of blessed memory who were not Christian and certainly not Orthodox taught me that). That connection has its genesis in the fact that we are all created by God and bear His image and likeness. A reality that is beyond genetic–it is ontological. That ontological reality draws all of us to the truth, i.e., the person of Jesus Christ. That is so whether we realize it or not, whether we like it or not. That is immutable. It is a fact of our being deeper than anything else. God awaits our return to Him within the deepest regions of our soul. He awaits us patiently and longs for us to come to the bridal chamber which He has prepared for us. Union with Jesus Christ is the direction of all human beings. It is not something we can choose. We can enter into the process consciously and cooperate with it, but even the most evil are still part of it and cannot opt out. The male-female union in marriage is both a product and an icon of our Creator’s union with us. Homosexual unions simply cannot be.

              The polymorphous perversity that pervades our culture cannot be accepted as normal because that is simply not normal. It is not even truly human. It destroys and blackens us all. The normalization, acceptance and celebration of homosexuality is the battlefield on which we are being tested although it is but one piece of that perversity.

              People have already been fired and their livelihoods threatened simply for not getting in line with homosexualist agenda: the CEO of the company that publishes Mosaic for instance. The head of Chick-fil-a subject to much opprobrium for simply saying he favors traditional Christian marriage. These folks want to destroy us and all we believe.

              The legal protections for Christians have been eroding for decades with many an assist from what I would call heretical Christians who posit a faith that bears little resemblance to traditional Christianity. I don’t have any trust that such legal protections will afford us anything positive.

              There is a big difference between proclaiming the truth in forums such as these or in other public venues and pastoral application of that faith when talking with others. Jesus has been quite patient with me even as He has allowed a few 2X4’s to get my attention along the way.

              BTW: I did not choose to be a Christian let alone an Orthodox one. In fact, I fought it for a long time. I sought two things: healing and the truth. Jesus Christ led me to Himself in the Church so that I might experience both. It was a journey that took almost 20 years with me kicking and screaming most of the way…a journey that has continued within the Church for almost an additional 30. I am far from healed completely and I still damage myself often. However, I still refuse to accept lies: either the lies I tell to myself or the lies our culture tells about who we are as human beings, who God is and how He acts.

              Truth vs. lies is not a private matter.

        • sincere there’s little unanimity amongst Christians about much of anything, anyhow

          This is easy to say, and has too much truth in it, in the NA context because of our sectarian protestant history. However, as C.S. Lewis noted, gosh, 70 or so years ago, things have changed radically in just the last few generations. The main divide in something called “Christianity” is now along the “modernist” and “traditional” divide. This divide runs through the middle of some churches (such as the Roman Catholics in NA) and some churches are largely one or the others (e.g., the Episcopalian church is “modernist” and the Southern Baptist and Orthodox are mostly “traditional”).

          Now, the term “christianity” is actually very very elastic, almost to the point of meaninglessness. For example, it really does not make allot of sense to say that a modern Episcopalian is in any real sense “christian”, since they don’t really hold to any christian beliefs – they simply use the terms and language of Christianity to dress up their modernism, deism, etc.

          Again, as C.S. Lewis noted all those years ago, the traditional Christians in each communion (even across the protestant/Roman Catholic/Orthodox divide) are in fact much closer in belief to each other than they are to their “modernist” (sometimes called “liberal”) coreligionists.

          In my opinion, it is time for Christians to stop calling any and all “christians”, Christian – it is time to reign in the term a bit…

          • Michael Bauman :

            (sarcasm on) There you go again Christopher, just being a bigot (sarcasm off). You are correct of course since everybody and anybody can call themselves a Christian these days, even if they hate Jesus Christ and/or whooped up their faith out of bits and pieces here and there. Mormans are demonstrably not Christian in any meaningful sense, yet they are thought so by most. Episcopalians are even worse not to mention the hodge-podge of Protestant sects, “Real, genuine authentic guaranteed really Orthodox” , etc, etc.

            Of course none of that means a thing unless we start really calling ourselves and each other to what it means to be Christian, in word and deed.

            Obviously, if you support the new anthropology you have denied most of the foundational beliefs of the Christian Church because it is so wrong about what it means to be a human being. Since the Incarnation what one says about human nature one also says about Jesus Christ and you have Christological heresy in the making.

            • James Bradshaw :

              Ah, the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

              You know, I’ve read the books of men like John of the Cross, St Ignatius and others. Do you really suppose any of the early Church Fathers would find American Christianity recognizable? Most of us are wealthy beyond comprehension (at least compared to much of the world).

              Not that I question the sincerity of most religious believers here, but given the communal-style and ascetic life demanded by Paul, I think the only ones who are really close to the early Christian community in lifestyle would be the Amish. Of course, they’re too liberal theologically, so …

              • Not that I question the sincerity of most religious believers here, but given the communal-style and ascetic life demanded by Paul, I think the only ones who are really close to the early Christian community in lifestyle would be the Amish.

                James, actually this is a very protestant understanding of Paul, the NT, and history (modern people are quite ahistorical if you think about it – this is of course because the protestant revolution itself depended on a forgetting of the Church and her life and history). Rest assured, if St. Paul were to suddenly appear, he would recognize current indigenous near east Christians and their way of life (mostly Orthodox and “Oriental” Orthodox, such as the Copts or the Ethiopians) and perhaps could even talk to some of them. An Amish person or community, on the other hand, would be quite foreign to him…

      • Gregory Manning :

        That’s it Michael! The new Sergianism! Will the state become the new church? The communists called theirs “The Living Church” right? What will the new one be called I wonder? Will Arida become the new patriarch of this church?

        • Michael Bauman :

          Gregory, the state is already the de facto “church”. It just becomes a question of who joins and how long they permit opposition.

          Fr. Arida, will never be in any position of even false power. He is simply one of the useful idiots who will be discarded along the way.

          God forgive him. May he have at least one core belief that grafts him to God when his time of trouble comes.

Care to Comment?

*

Top