boyer

Hi Christians (and otherwise),

I've been following the homo***ual debate in the Catholic list as well
as the Episcopal, what with the Gene Robinson controversy.

Notes:

The arguments often are reduced to ad hominem flame wars.

This polarization is indicative of the larger societal culture war
between the liberal/progressive/secularist/humanist culture vs. the
conservative/traditional/orthodox/"values-based" worldview.

As such, arguments purely on religious grounds as found in these
Usenet groups must subsume themselves to increasing polarizations in
societal worldviews -- religion being a sociological expression of
belief systems.

What the flame wars expose is that the underlying authority for either
side of the debate has eroded. Currents for adherance to tradition,
Scripture, and orthodox theology run equally strong as currents for
inclusion, pluralism, and non-judgmentalism. They are both perceived
by adherants as "good."

The crisis of Western Culture is this lack of underlying authority --
scandals, post-modernist deconstruction, relativism, and "future
shock" -- that is, overwhelming and constant societal change in the
family, rights, immigration, demographics, communication, education,
etc. leading to general alienation and withdrawal.

The debate has devolved, then, to people in both camps "talking past
eachother," quite powerless to resolve the issues at hand.

It would be far wiser for all posters to leave their computers for
awhile and work on their own prayer life and spiritual integrity. If
there is to be a revolution in society that the Church-at-large can be
a contributer to, it will of necessity proceed from the deeper
promptings of God's Holy Spirit within us all. Your only duty as
Christians is to nurture your depth relationship to God, and to avoid
the hysteria that society and these e-groups find themselves at a loss
in.

My 2 cents.

-Steve Boyer.

boyer

Hi Christians (and otherwise),

I've been following the homo***ual debate in the Catholic list as well
as the Episcopal, what with the Gene Robinson controversy.

Notes:

The arguments often are reduced to ad hominem flame wars.

This polarization is indicative of the larger societal culture war
between the liberal/progressive/secularist/humanist culture vs. the
conservative/traditional/orthodox/"values-based" worldview.

As such, arguments purely on religious grounds as found in these
Usenet groups must subsume themselves to increasing polarizations in
societal worldviews -- religion being a sociological expression of
belief systems.

What the flame wars expose is that the underlying authority for either
side of the debate has eroded. Currents for adherance to tradition,
Scripture, and orthodox theology run equally strong as currents for
inclusion, pluralism, and non-judgmentalism. They are both perceived
by adherants as "good."

The crisis of Western Culture is this lack of underlying authority --
scandals, post-modernist deconstruction, relativism, and "future
shock" -- that is, overwhelming and constant societal change in the
family, rights, immigration, demographics, communication, education,
etc. leading to general alienation and withdrawal.

The debate has devolved, then, to people in both camps "talking past
eachother," quite powerless to resolve the issues at hand.

It would be far wiser for all posters to leave their computers for
awhile and work on their own prayer life and spiritual integrity. If
there is to be a revolution in society that the Church-at-large can be
a contributer to, it will of necessity proceed from the deeper
promptings of God's Holy Spirit within us all. Your only duty as
Christians is to nurture your depth relationship to God, and to avoid
the hysteria that society and these e-groups find themselves at a loss
in.

My 2 cents.

-Steve Boyer.

zayton

In genersl, I would agree with what you say, but I protest your conceiding
Scripture and authority to "them". Both sides feel themselves to be rooted
both is Scripture and in tradition.They just disagree on how to understand it.

zayton

In genersl, I would agree with what you say, but I protest your conceiding
Scripture and authority to "them". Both sides feel themselves to be rooted
both is Scripture and in tradition.They just disagree on how to understand it.

high_colonic

That was your 2 cents worth? I'd like my change please.

mike rhodes

Because scriptures clearly stated are clearly denied. And one can't
just change homos to not being homos. (*)


Nothing new here.


We can't have polarization now, can we? Sure we can! It's
Scriptural! Didn't you know?! What world are you from?!


It always appears 'eroded.' The others tend to keep their mouths
shut, for reasons marked (*) above.


_Equally_ strong?! You may keep your world.

In this context I would agree. Authority has eroded. What do you
suspect is the cause? I think you know, but say nothing. And you've
said nothing for too long.


The issues _can't_ be resolved; not in the grand structures you
describe. But maybe individually, and who are willing to extract
themselves, from what ...?


So it would seem. But it would also seem valid for just about any
other argument I've seen on the usenet. I think you don't want a war.
You may be wrong in this.


I think the nature of those who call upon the Holy Spirit is often to
freeze in their actions, and then lose the energy they had at that
time. Maybe finding something else to do. Such as your desire?
Which is to ignore homo***uality in the Church? I think that is what
you are wanting, though that may not be the desired act by the Holy
Spirit. Cleaning house by not-so-peaceful, flaming actions seems
spiritual to me.
Flaming may not be not so unspiritual. The condemned think they
can take the higher ground by its condeming. (I'm presuming a belief
on you, and feel justified, since you did not choose to clarify yours,
and presumed, instead, to take the 'higher' road.)

We can't worship continually. I have matters to tend to, and you will
not take them from me.


You are not 'lost'?


You may take them back.
Mike

bob w.

Neither can one turn Neanderthals into Homo Sapiens Sapiens

Sacrificed any animals on an altar lately?

Bob W.

mike rhodes

Because scriptures clearly stated are clearly denied. And one can't
just change homos to not being homos. (*)


Nothing new here.


We can't have polarization now, can we? Sure we can! It's
Scriptural! Didn't you know?! What world are you from?!


It always appears 'eroded.' The others tend to keep their mouths
shut, for reasons marked (*) above.


_Equally_ strong?! You may keep your world.

In this context I would agree. Authority has eroded. What do you
suspect is the cause? I think you know, but say nothing. And you've
said nothing for too long.


The issues _can't_ be resolved; not in the grand structures you
describe. But maybe individually, and who are willing to extract
themselves, from what ...?


So it would seem. But it would also seem valid for just about any
other argument I've seen on the usenet. I think you don't want a war.
You may be wrong in this.


I think the nature of those who call upon the Holy Spirit is often to
freeze in their actions, and then lose the energy they had at that
time. Maybe finding something else to do. Such as your desire?
Which is to ignore homo***uality in the Church? I think that is what
you are wanting, though that may not be the desired act by the Holy
Spirit. Cleaning house by not-so-peaceful, flaming actions seems
spiritual to me.
Flaming may not be not so unspiritual. The condemned think they
can take the higher ground by its condeming. (I'm presuming a belief
on you, and feel justified, since you did not choose to clarify yours,
and presumed, instead, to take the 'higher' road.)

We can't worship continually. I have matters to tend to, and you will
not take them from me.


You are not 'lost'?


You may take them back.
Mike

bob w.

Neither can one turn Neanderthals into Homo Sapiens Sapiens

Sacrificed any animals on an altar lately?

Bob W.

mike rhodes

(Oops, got back to this one a couple of days late)

And if I had, or was going to, then it would mean something to you,
and really terrible? An immediate judgement without thought? I think
the post deserved a considered response, not flaming, nor the pretense
which preceded it.
Damned queers, 'empowered.' I've had my fill, since the troubled
eighties. There is a sickly feeling one gets when one nears their
affections, having seen my friendly intentions gone awry, and abused.
So I'm not surprised to see them sickly, and dangerous, as a whole.
Ugh! (token neanderthal response) Then to see their predatory
nature! I have! So have lots of Catholics. Angry Rosie gave lots of
toys to lots of girls. Yet I see they're working at rehabilitating
her public image -- of anger, while ignoring the rest. If she was
straight then they (Hollywood) would've let her fall.
And they have the nerve to get angry?! 'Cause they aren't treated
as if they were like anybody else everywhere else? I am greatly
offended, and of course. Any counter response to normal offense is
just noise, having power only by the level of danger it reaches. It
is war. 'Discussion' cannot resolve this matter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consider these...

The way things should be, but are not.
The way things are, but shouldn't be.

Digested, (and honestly), into...

The way things are, but are not.
The way things should be, but shouldn't.

It's can be a painful exercise. But you can usually tell who are the
ones willing to make that extra effort. The others aren't worth the
time of day.