Christianity & Homosexuality

[Philosophy Now]

Rick Aaron argues that religious recommendations are sometimes unrealistic.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/138/Christianity_and_Homosexuality

[Gutprof]

I appreciate this article and I think the basic point is one that I can agree with. However, there are some issues with this particular argument.
First, Christianity never speaks with one voice, which I think the author acknowledges. But even lumping conservative Christians together as a group may be less helpful than arguing against specific recommendations that may be made by official religious bodies. It risks setting up a straw man.

Second, the argument about solitude misses an important point and may be colored by the author's experience of living among Christians who are embedded in the individualist culture of contemporary North America. Chastity is not a virtue to which I aspire, but it isn't likely psychologically impossible if lived out in a community of like-minded persons, like a religious order. No doubt, there were plenty of abbeys and monasteries where nuns and monks were sexually active with one another, but it's clear from early sources like the Sayings of the Desert Fathers and Mothers that communities worked together to live out their faith, including their commitments to chastity. Living in community with others is still an option for many Christians, although it's likely an alien idea to some. It's a false opposition to suggest that a life lived in chastity is a life lived without love. The erotically-charged ecstasies of mystical writings and the genuine closeness felt by those living in community often led practitioners to believe that they were better able to love precisely because they abstained from sexual activity.

For the record, I'm not a Christian any longer, although I was once a pastor and seminary professor. I was drawn for awhile to the possibility of a monastic communal life and came to admire many aspects of it, although I realized like any human endeavor it has it's problems.

[Ansiktsburk]

I appreciate this article and I think the basic point is one that I can agree with. However, there are some issues with this particular argument.
First, Christianity never speaks with one voice, which I think the author acknowledges. But even lumping conservative Christians together as a group may be less helpful than arguing against specific recommendations that may be made by official religious bodies. It risks setting up a straw man.

Second, the argument about solitude misses an important point and may be colored by the author's experience of living among Christians who are embedded in the individualist culture of contemporary North America. Chastity is not a virtue to which I aspire, but it isn't likely psychologically impossible if lived out in a community of like-minded persons, like a religious order. No doubt, there were plenty of abbeys and monasteries where nuns and monks were sexually active with one another, but it's clear from early sources like the Sayings of the Desert Fathers and Mothers that communities worked together to live out their faith, including their commitments to chastity. Living in community with others is still an option for many Christians, although it's likely an alien idea to some. It's a false opposition to suggest that a life lived in chastity is a life lived without love. The erotically-charged ecstasies of mystical writings and the genuine closeness felt by those living in community often led practitioners to believe that they were better able to love precisely because they abstained from sexual activity.

For the record, I'm not a Christian any longer, although I was once a pastor and seminary professor. I was drawn for awhile to the possibility of a monastic communal life and came to admire many aspects of it, although I realized like any human endeavor it has it's problems.

Hell yes, the second part of your argument is kinda what I felt too, but like the other way around. Its not like Healthy Heterosexuals in marriage walk about screaming for joy about getting succesful orgasms all the time or walks on the clouds of love all the time. People divorce like never before. Being a people person or a self person is highly in the genes. Some people do extremely well on their own.

This is not to say that gays should not marry, me personally I couldnt care less, but that argument in the article was more hallelujah than what I heared in my childhood church.

[Gary Childress]

I appreciate this article and I think the basic point is one that I can agree with. However, there are some issues with this particular argument.
First, Christianity never speaks with one voice, which I think the author acknowledges. But even lumping conservative Christians together as a group may be less helpful than arguing against specific recommendations that may be made by official religious bodies. It risks setting up a straw man.

Second, the argument about solitude misses an important point and may be colored by the author's experience of living among Christians who are embedded in the individualist culture of contemporary North America. Chastity is not a virtue to which I aspire, but it isn't likely psychologically impossible if lived out in a community of like-minded persons, like a religious order. No doubt, there were plenty of abbeys and monasteries where nuns and monks were sexually active with one another, but it's clear from early sources like the Sayings of the Desert Fathers and Mothers that communities worked together to live out their faith, including their commitments to chastity. Living in community with others is still an option for many Christians, although it's likely an alien idea to some. It's a false opposition to suggest that a life lived in chastity is a life lived without love. The erotically-charged ecstasies of mystical writings and the genuine closeness felt by those living in community often led practitioners to believe that they were better able to love precisely because they abstained from sexual activity.

For the record, I'm not a Christian any longer, although I was once a pastor and seminary professor. I was drawn for awhile to the possibility of a monastic communal life and came to admire many aspects of it, although I realized like any human endeavor it has it's problems.

Wow! That sounds like a fascinating turnaround, from pastor and seminary professor to non-Christian? What made you depart from Christianity (if you don't mind sharing a little of your story) and do you still believe in a god?

I'm always fascinated by such dramatic changes in people's lives. I've sort of had a bit of perhaps the opposite. I was a pretty passionate atheist in grade school, growing up (after seeing Carl Sagan's series "Cosmos"). But lately, I've warmed up a bit to the idea that religion maybe isn't such a bad thing as I used to think it was. I'm perhaps still a little on the agnostic side but I sort of hope there is a loving supreme being out there.

[Immanuel Can]

For the record, I'm not a Christian any longer, although I was once a pastor and seminary professor. I was drawn for awhile to the possibility of a monastic communal life and came to admire many aspects of it, although I realized like any human endeavor it has it's problems.

Were you Catholic? The "monastic" reference suggests that, although of course, there are other denominations with quasi-monastic styles of clerical activity...and the word "pastor" is not the usual one for Catholics...so maybe...Lutheran? Anglican? Something fairly "high church," I'm guessing...

[Gary Childress]

For the record, I'm not a Christian any longer, although I was once a pastor and seminary professor. I was drawn for awhile to the possibility of a monastic communal life and came to admire many aspects of it, although I realized like any human endeavor it has it's problems.

Were you Catholic? The "monastic" reference suggests that, although of course, there are other denominations with quasi-monastic styles of clerical activity...and the word "pastor" is not the usual one for Catholics...so maybe...Lutheran? Anglican? Something fairly "high church," I'm guessing...

I've wished sometimes that there were such things as secular monasteries, or else monasteries for agnostics. I just don't seem to fit into the "normal" world very well. I don't do very well in the competition and pressures of the work-a-day world. I tend to just shut down psychologically when I'm under pressure.

[Gary Childress]

romantic attraction is part of what gives birth to a good marriage relationship. The heart of a stable long-term relationship is initially birthed by attraction, and the life of a relation is sustained as it progresses by that attraction, which is eventually superseded by the bond of true love. Romantic attraction serves as a kind of nutrient-rich soil in which a relationship can grow into something more beautiful.

I sometimes wonder about this. I've seen what seems like some rather homely looking couples out there. Maybe it's just me but I find it hard to believe that there is a romantic attraction in some of those cases. And yet, many of those couples seem to do very well together, raising a stable family and the whole nine yards. Is romantic attraction really a necessity for a stable long term relationship? Maybe some people are just looking to raise a family and just settle for someone close at hand who can fill that capacity?

[Immanuel Can]

I've wished sometimes that there were such things as secular monasteries, or else monasteries for agnostics.

What a charming idea...a quiet place for people to divest themselves of worldly distractions and undertake deep reflection on their situation, regardless of their particular ideological bent.

Agnostic monasteries. We need a bunch of those.

I just don't seem to fit into the "normal" world very well. I don't do very well in the competition and pressures of the work-a-day world. I tend to just shut down psychologically when I'm under pressure.

Anxiety, Gary? Overwhelm? Apprehension?

[Ansiktsburk]

I've wished sometimes that there were such things as secular monasteries, or else monasteries for agnostics.

What a charming idea...a quiet place for people to divest themselves of worldly distractions and undertake deep reflection on their situation, regardless of their particular ideological bent.

Agnostic monasteries. We need a bunch of those.

We used to have that. For guys. It was called ”värnplikt”(draft).

[Immanuel Can]

Agnostic monasteries. We need a bunch of those.

We used to have that. For guys. It was called ”värnplikt”(draft).

Draft beer, you mean? Or the NFL draft? Or both?

Where is "we," ansiktsburk? I don't know of any such thing. Tell me more.

[Gary Childress]

Agnostic monasteries. We need a bunch of those.

We used to have that. For guys. It was called ”värnplikt”(draft).

Draft beer, you mean? Or the NFL draft? Or both?

Where is "we," ansiktsburk? I don't know of any such thing. Tell me more.

I think he means military draft. I suppose if it was good enough for Descartes it would have been good enough for me but I was very immature around the time I was eligible to enter the service.

Now of course, here in the US, we have Americorps which is a more peaceful national service. I wish they had that when I was younger but I believe it started with the Clinton administration. I came of age under Reagan.

[Immanuel Can]

We used to have that. For guys. It was called ”värnplikt”(draft).

Draft beer, you mean? Or the NFL draft? Or both?

Where is "we," ansiktsburk? I don't know of any such thing. Tell me more.

I think he means military draft.

That seems rather the opposite of any monastic life.

[Gary Childress]

Draft beer, you mean? Or the NFL draft? Or both?

Where is "we," ansiktsburk? I don't know of any such thing. Tell me more.

I think he means military draft.

That seems rather the opposite of any monastic life.

That was kind of my thought too. But I suppose there are some similarities such as communal living arrangements. Not 100% sure, though, why he mentioned military service. Unless he did in fact mean draft beer.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯