Sorry to post this on Christmas Eve, but I thought it would serve later to clarify what exchanges are going on in the Catholic church about the topic:


http://www.cwnews.com/news/dossier/view.cfm?id=23


And an intelligent review of various authors that is perhaps a good sampling of the Church's identity struggle and how entangled homosexuality seems to be with other issues:

http://www.touchstonemag.com/d....7docs/15-7pg51.html

Well, if it's gotten that bad, then God has a wonderful opportunity, as he did back in 1981 and 1982 when I was working in a restaurant overrun with
gays and lesbians and drugs and sex. He sent a dozen
Christians to work there and the culture changed.

Why did Francis of Assisi run off to form an order apart from the pleasures and temptations of the world? Why did Bernard of Clairvaux depart for the swamp with his band of brothers? Why did La Trappe
and Theresa of Avila and John of the Cross reform their orders? Why did Luther and Calvin, et all, stir up so much trouble?

The Church is self-cleansing and self regenerating
and the work continues in every generation. Don't let the Devil get you down. I read the end of the book and I know how it ends and who wins.

http://www.jeremiahproject.com...re/hestonspeech.html

Here's an update on research attempting to decipher the influence of nature/nurture on sexual orientation. I'll look for the abstract of the study itself, as journalists sometimes report science poorly.

If the reporting here is correct, then several things occur to me:

1) The single gene theory has taken yet another blow re: the importance of genes in influencing behavior, i.e, they are always context dependent within the cell, and turn off and on (methylation/demethylation) in response to environment signalling;

2) This environmental signalling includes turning off and on of large gene networks along chromosomes;

3) Gay mothers tend to present with a pattern of chromosome methylation that strongly suggests a genetic influence in the sexual orientation of their gay sons;

4) A small but significant percentage of mothers with heterosexual sons have this same pattern of methylation that would have one expect their sons to be gay if genes were the predominate influence in shaping this characteristic;

5) What environmental influences might give rise to these genetic patterns in mothers of gay and straight sons?

6) What is the role, if any, of the mother's psychology, diet, etc . . . during gestation that might be involved, as environment is known to be a factor, but not specified;

7) What differentiates the mothers with straight sons and the mother's with gay sons, even though all these mothers share the same chromosomal patterns?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185989,00.html

Here's some current research, although I've yet to find the study referenced above. I'm including non-human studies here, since when environmental influence is found in animal models, it is expected to be higher in human beings who are relatively more malleable; this, of course, would suggest environmental influence for heterosexuality as well:

http://tinyurl.com/qx9ys

http://tinyurl.com/s8jct

http://tinyurl.com/q4cf7

http://tinyurl.com/z49lc

http://tinyurl.com/h83pb

http://tinyurl.com/g4l5z

http://tinyurl.com/gj7k2

Wow, that's a lot of research. Did you read all these, w.c.? And could you maybe use tinyurl.com to keep these long urls from stretching the page?

What do you hear the research saying?

It looks like the epigenetic model is the lense through which most of this research is being conducted, i.e, genes and environment are being studied together for their inter-relatedness. Sometimes that seems to happen because the sophistication of the research designs is such that the often hidden or subtle environmental influences are now showing up, whereas in the past there was more of a nature-nurture dichotomy.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church, Swedish Church, on 27 October, 2005 has decided to let homosexual partners be blessed in a special church ceremony but not in a traditional wedding. The Swedish Church is the largest protestant church in Sweden; it holds the status of state religion. Since then many priests have been protested the church decision. For instance, more than 800 Swedish Lutheran priests have posted an Internet message distancing themselves from an official Church decision to guarantee same-sex partners the right to religious blessings of their civil unions. They said "We believe this decision is not in accordance with the order of communal life and marriage as revealed in the Word of God defining it as a relationship between man and woman,". The church doesn�t force these priests against their will but they are obliged to arrange the ceremony.

Yesterday, one vicar protested to be involved in this act and decided to convert to Catholicism. He has been priest in Swedish church for the last 30 years.

In another case pastor �ke Green, belonging to the Pentecostal movement of Sweden, has been charged with committing a "hate crime" for preaching a sermon on homosexuality. When his case opened for the first time in 2003 he was found guilty of having offended homosexuals in a sermon, and sentenced to one month in prison. Pastor Green appealed the Lower Court decision to the Supreme Court. On November 25, 2005 the Swedish Supreme Court acquitted Pastor �ke Green on all counts of the charges brought against him. You find more details on �ke Green on the following link http://www.akegreen.com/news.htm.

What I really want to know, here, is how to make �. I can only do it through copy/pasting.

Seriously, now . . . I think we'll see more and more of this, and it's all the more complicated for the Swedish pastors because, as you noted, Grace, there's a state religion involved.

I've been re-reading Romans lately and I just can't shake the notion that, for Paul, homosexuality was a shameful disorder. Here are a few quotes from chapter 1.

quote:

19 For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.

20 Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse;

21 for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.

22 While claiming to be wise, they became fools

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.

24 Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts 15 for the mutual degradation of their bodies.

25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

29 They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips

30 and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.

31 They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

32 Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

- http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/romans/romans1.htm

So these Lutheran pastors objecting to homosexuality aren't just winging it when it comes to their use of Scripture to justify their position.

As you noted Phil, Paul is explicit in this issue. Pastor �ke Green as he said and as I read from his spirit he was guided by Holy Spirit when he did this unusual sermon. He was aware of the consequences and suffered a lot together with his family. �ke Green is really a servant of God.

These priests who belong to the Swedish church and who oppose the Church's decision on homosexuality have difficulty to compromise their postion. It seems they have only one choice:leave it or accept it.

�,�,� are swedish alphabets and you have to have swedish keyboard to write these alphabet or check if your computer has swedish language inbuilt.

Sorry, the above link has an error. The correct link is http://www.akegreen.com/news.htm

Grace, it is so wonderful to have you with us and for you to post on a regular basis again.

Thank you for sharing the valiant efforts of Ake Green. May the Lord bless him.

What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality
by Daniel Helminiak

One can read a couple chapters of it here.

I�ve read a bit of one of the chapters. But I have no idea if he is able to, via scripture, to carve out a legitimate space for homosexuality. He certainly thinks he has, that�s for sure.

My personal opinion is that gayness is a-ok with me. But the problem these days is that we�re typically being asked to swallow a lot more than just acceptance of gayness at the overall table of sexuality. We�re being asked, among other things (including the really BAD and CARELESS behavior that has led to the AIDS epidemic) to overlook typical and normal sexual development stages of people, which apparently always pass through a stage where one�s sexuality is rather undefined and open. The Gay Movement would ask us to freeze our development if any homosexual urges come upon someone. The idea is that if one finds gayness that one has found what is true and thus shouldn�t ever go beyond it. To do so is to be a traitor to one�s self, I guess. So in reality, the Gay Movement tends to smother as much as it sets free because, unlike you or me who might say "Oh, I didn�t know that Ronald was gay. Well. He�s still a nice chap all the same and we have fun playing golf together." No, if one is to be loyal to the gay movement and one�s sexual orientation, one�s sexuality is not just one of many attributes that one has. It is THE attribute.

So this whole issue gets complicated when the very movement that purports to be making homosexuality accepted as normal also assists people in become unbalanced and dysfunctional.

Surely we can see by now that homosexuality is both normal and a dysfunction. Heck, the way some people play out heterosexuality is quite dysfunctional. But this has gone far past a sexual or psychological issue and has become in many ways just another leftist movement with all the nuances and ambiguity wrung out of it to the detriment of truth, of course. There are people living gay lifestyles who are sick and for whom healthy would be to receive treatment and to resume a heterosexual lifestyle. And there are people for whom gayness is as normal as being left or right-handed. But unfortunately the radicalism of the gay movement (along with reactions by many Christian fundamentalist as well) have turned this issue into a "cause" and the people struggling sincerely with -- not only whether or not they are gay, but how to live in this world if they are � have becomes puppets in the ideological ravings of those surely have more to their agenda than just the espousing of truths and the overturning of prejudice.

In another case pastor �ke Green, belonging to the Pentecostal movement of Sweden, has been charged with committing a "hate crime" for preaching a sermon on homosexuality. When his case opened for the first time in 2003 he was found guilty of having offended homosexuals in a sermon, and sentenced to one month in prison.

The loony left strikes again.

I love gay men and women just the same as I love my heterosexual brothers and sisters. It would not bother me having gay neighbors. What would upset me is if the would engage in their sexual practices in front of me, but than again I would also feel this way about my heterosexual friends would they flaunt their sexual activity in front of me.

What concerns me is closet bisexuality. These individuals who keep secrets from their sexual partners, males and females, are like a bomb ready to explode. These individuals are not true to anyone, not even themselves. They are true predators within our society.

The average homosexuals just want to lead their lives like the rest of us. The other coin of homosexuality deals a lot with sado-masochism, child exploitation, and in this area of children's abuse I take a stand and do not hesitate to report them. Otherwise what an adult male does with his of age consenting partner is between them and God.

I do not judge them, but know it is not an act God looks favorable upon and as Phil has pointed out much is written in the Bible concerning God's instructions on this merger between homosexuals.

The radical homosexuals want us to accept their sexual practices as quote "normal", which of course, I reject. Do as thou wilt, but don't force me to accept your ways.

I do not believe that anyone is born as a homosexual. It is a learned behavior that starts early upon the birth of a child and the interactions between his mother and father graduating onwards. The Bible tells us of God's graces that are given to a Eunuch, who is born that way by the desires of God, not homosexuals.

Homosexuals experience life's problems like the rest of us. Some have been able to embrace a heterosexual life through the love and graces of God and their ardent desires. Hopefully more men and women will find the joys of embracing a heterosexual life. I pray for all of them.

What concerns me is closet bisexuality. These individuals who keep secrets from their sexual partners, males and females, are like a bomb ready to explode. These individuals are not true to anyone, not even themselves. They are true predators within our society.

If I understand sexuality correctly, Freebird, we�re all bisexuals�.or potential bisexuals to some extent. Sexuality, I believe, is much more of a continuum than a black and white thing. But under the Christian model, shouldn�t those who repress such urges be considered to be doing what they should be doing instead of being considered the true predators within our society?

I think for social and biological realities, promoting monogamous heterosexuality is a good thing. That�s not to say that I�m a fundamentalist about such things and preclude concepts such as sowing one�s wild oats or enjoying sex as no more than calisthenics for those who truly can handle such a thing, for I know that life can be hard and pleasures can be few and far between. I don�t begrudge those who find a way to turn sexuality into a pleasure�even if it doesn�t conform to monogamous heterosexuality. But to do so is to give up hope for anything better or more meaningful. We can have sexuality and we can develop deeper, more spiritual connections with other people. We can move beyond, but not without.

I do not believe that anyone is born as a homosexual.

Well, I certainly think it�s been shown rather convincingly that overbearing mothers/and or fathers can affect one�s sexuality. But I think it�s equally evident that homosexuals are also born, not just made. But the thing is, they can be made too, and if one believes that a person is better off in a monogamous heterosexual relationship (and by and large, I do), then the Gay Movement can be seen as trying not just to set free those who are gay, but to gain converts, to make gay those who otherwise wouldn�t normally turn out that way. And it is that motivation (which I�m pretty sure exists) with which I have a moral problem.

Anyway, it�s fun disagreeing with you, Freebird, I think between the several people here we�re going to cover almost all sides of this issue. And I think that�s a pretty good and healthy thing.

Brad, you may have misunderstood my statement re closet bisexuality. I will address our being bisexual and what it means for me, later. To be a secret closet bisexual is not being true to yourself and others and can be a death sentence in todays age. I am speaking of Aids. I am not against nor judge bisexuality between consenting adults who are truthful about their bisexuality. I am speaking of the role players and liars who are not truthful as to their sexual orientation. If as a man you desire to couple with a woman, tell her the truth that you are also involved with men. Do not pretend to be a heterosexual when you are not. Truth in relationships is of utmost importance.

Bisexuality for myself means that within I have the masculine and feminine energies, yet I have in my life no need to express my sexuality with another woman, nor ever found myself sexually attracted to a woman. That does not mean this is true of everyone else, and I can accept this without any judgment.

In my new birth and kundalini transformation and integration I am also merging the feminine and masculine sides within myself. This is the true marriage of heaven and earth and something I pray and desire for all of us. Our dance of love with others is always this desire to merge with the other half of ourselves, yet we do not know it. This dance is repeated over and over again until by the graces of God, a true union does take place within ourselves. I hung up my dancing shoes and celebrate the lover and the beloved within myself. How in the world did this happen? I have no clue whatsoever. The consuming fire of the Lord appeared and I entered into the flames to be totally consumed, and now like a phoenix rising from the ashes within the pure river of life I am spreading my wings homeward bound. The mirror and the image in the mirror merged. Oh the mystery of love, the fiery lover in red and his beloved the sleeping beauty in white. I just love this discussion.

To be a secret closet bisexual is not being true to yourself and others and can be a death sentence in todays age.

Yes, to be a secretly practicing and bisexual in this day of AIDS�yes, a very dangerous thing. I agree, Freebird. One might as well put a single bullet in a gun, point it at one�s spouse, and play Russian Roulette.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
[qb] What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality
by Daniel Helminiak

One can read a couple chapters of it here.

I�ve read a bit of one of the chapters. But I have no idea if he is able to, via scripture, to carve out a legitimate space for homosexuality. He certainly thinks he has, that�s for sure. [/qb]

Right. I think Helminiak's books on spirituality are superb, but this one limps a bit in places. He does a nice job parsing the meaning of some of the language condemning homosexuality in Scripture, taking the sting out of many of the passages and placing things in a more historical context. E.g., it seems some of the condemnations have more to do with hospitality issues than with the morality of homosexual acts.

Re. the quote from Paul above, even that can be construed as an opinion based more on natural law than revelation (which is why I quoted the whole passage). As natural law can be "updated" as our knowledge of nature changes, so, too, can our understanding of ethical principles flowing from the nature of things.

All that said, it's nonetheless quite a stretch to say that Scripture condones intercourse in anything other than heterosexual relationships -- and monogamouse ones at that for the past 2,700 years or so. As we've gone into this matter in great depth on a couple of other threads, I'll encourage those interested in the topic to do a search and find out what we've already discussed.

This issue is a fairly controversial one for virtually all Christian denominations and also for religion in general. Homosexual behaviour (along with sex outside marriage and adultery) are generally either regarded very negatively or are forbidden by all the major world religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism. I was reading an article on the Dalai Lama today and he said he didn't approve of homosexual sex or relationships either.

Yet like in Greco-Roman times like the one Paul lived and preached in, homosexual relationships have become widely accepted in most Western secular countries along with adultery and pre-martial or extra-marital sex in various forms. Paul no doubt aimed his sermons at the Pagan culture of the time where sacred prostitution occured at many temples involving men and men and men and women and also at the pagan practice of pederastry, which was quite common and accepted (so long as one wasn't too public). Approval and condemnation of these sorts of behaviours varied amoung pagan writers, some denouncing and satirising such behaviour and others approving of it.

Generally however, religions of all types emphasize the believer needs a high degree of moral purity to attain the vision of God or to experience the numinous and holy, and this was common to Greek religion, Neo-Platonic Philosophy, Judaism and also later religions such as Christianity and Islam. Paul, being trained as he was in Jewish law, appears to have taken on board the accepted Jewish codes of morality, which forbade homosexual sex, sex between close relations, and sex with animals.

Unfortunately one problem with condemnation of homosexuality as I see it, is that it is done by some Christians with extreme hatred and anger. Paul also reminds us in Romans that all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory and we are all in need of redemption, and also Christians do not have the right to puff themselves up arrogantly with self-righteousness and judge others with virulent hatred. There have been many great 'crusades' in the past by well-minded Christians to change some aspect of public behaviour (such as banning alchohol in the 1930's) which have in the end tended to do more damage and made the problem worse rather than better.

I feel the approach of love and charity is a better one than hasty hatred and judgement of a group we single out as especially sinful, and in my view the dangers of moral self-rightousness while overlooking our own flaws and sins are just as dangerous as the ones we see in the group we judge.

quote:

I feel the approach of love and charity is a better one than hasty hatred and judgement of a group we single out as especially sinful, and in my view the dangers of moral self-rightousness while overlooking our own flaws and sins are just as dangerous as the ones we see in the group we judge.

I think that's extremely well said.

Yes, Gregory, that is a good summation of my own feelings as well. As I worship among a few gays at our local parish, there simply isn't a concern with their sexual orientation, or that the issue of morality or psychopathology is something vitally different for them than for heterosexuals. At the local level of common worship, we all work out our salvation in "fear and trembling," as the old saying goes, meaning, to me, awe and humility in response to an indwelling presence we all share.

OTOH, the Catholic church will probably never be able to convincingly address this issue as a consideration of alleged increased psychopathology among gays vs. straights in trying to increase emotional maturity among its seminarians. There are some fairly reliable personality tests, like the MMPI, that can detect personality disorders, but if applied broadly among all seminarians could even further limit the pool of candidates for holy orders. It would be quite a progressive step to insist, for instance, that those whose tests show characteristics indicating personality disorder be placed in intensive counseling. Again, that could require a lot money and make the seminary environment a more open system, i.e, a good thing in some ways, imo, but not likely to happen.

Here are some clinical findings that strongly question the pathological model of homosexuality:

http://www.gottman.com/marriage/gaylesbian/


http://www.gottman.com/research/projects/gaylesbian/


Here's a summary of Gottman's findings:

http://www.washington.edu/news...archive/k102003.html


"Gay and lesbian couples are a lot more mature, more considerate in trying to improve a relationship and have a greater awareness of equality in a relationship than straight couples," said John Gottman, a University of Washington emeritus professor of psychology who directed the research along with Robert Levenson, a University of California, Berkeley, psychology professor.

"I think that in 200 years heterosexual relationships will be where gay and lesbian relationships are today," said Gottman, who now heads the Relationship Research Institute in Seattle."


_______________________________________

What struck me about Gottman's findings is his suggestion, perhaps unintended, that gay relationships may be more like friendships, and less complicated that heterosexual relationships. Perhaps also there is a sense of greater appreciation among gays for a trusting relationship given how much harder it is to find partners and achieve a sense of belonging re: society in general. This, along with the likelihood of joining the relationship later in life, may be partly what accounts for it. And, I have no idea how to square Gottman's findings with those cited earlier showing increased psychopathology among homosexuals.

But if Gottman's findings aren't biased, and other researchers not wedded to the PC agenda find similar outcomes, then as far as the church is concerned, evaluating candidates for the priesthood should probably include the MMPI for both straights and gays.

It would be a relief for me to find Gottman's findings honest and substantial, since my experience of gays hasn't been troublesome, especially so far in the church where I attend.

And so were the pathological model shown to be innacurate, the church would only have the older notion of "evil" to fall back on. And that would be a shame.

And just to show the ambiguity that exists in this area of research, consider these two articles:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/en...&itool=pubmed_docsum \

This second article suggests that there is a stronger likelihood of gays becoming straight than straights becoming gay, but then there's little social pressure for the latter scenario:


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/en...&itool=pubmed_docsum

Good summaries. Goes to show that the topic is much more complex than either side will usually acknowledge.

yes. homosexuality is a sick pathology, a demonic perversion

That's too harsh and judgmental, wopik, bordering on "hate speech," really. Not one of the mainline Christian churches takes such a position. Let's have no more of of this kind of inflammatory rhetoric. Thanks.