Comments for An Anglican Blog http://anglicanblog.org anglicanblog dot org Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:18:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 Comment on Homosexuality and Reason by Scott http://anglicanblog.org/?p=6&cpage=1#comment-15 Scott Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:18:57 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/08/13/homosexuality-and-reason/#comment-15 Ariana Parker Says: Friday, 10 October 2008 Listen. I’m Bisexial and let me tell you something. . . . I have been waiting for some time for such a narcissist response to my posting. Your personal lust is a social problem. I would suggest that having comradeship with you is nearly impossible for anyone as it seems you lust after everyone. Make no mistake about it, your response is narcissist in the extreme. It has, in all societies, been a function of society to control sexual lust or at least the acting upon such lust. It is not my intent to ruin your life, but I cannot support or condone your lifestyle. Again this is a religious blog and the Christian answer to your post is clear. Please let me tell you something in all love and charity. You are in willful conflict with the teaching of Christ and the Church. Please consider seeking help to guide you in repentance and amendment of life. Ariana Parker Says: Friday, 10 October 2008 Listen. I’m Bisexial and let me tell you something. . . .

I have been waiting for some time for such a narcissist response to my posting. Your personal lust is a social problem. I would suggest that having comradeship with you is nearly impossible for anyone as it seems you lust after everyone.

Make no mistake about it, your response is narcissist in the extreme. It has, in all societies, been a function of society to control sexual lust or at least the acting upon such lust. It is not my intent to ruin your life, but I cannot support or condone your lifestyle.

Again this is a religious blog and the Christian answer to your post is clear. Please let me tell you something in all love and charity. You are in willful conflict with the teaching of Christ and the Church. Please consider seeking help to guide you in repentance and amendment of life.

]]> Comment on Homosexuality and Reason by Ariana Parker http://anglicanblog.org/?p=6&cpage=1#comment-14 Ariana Parker Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:29:23 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/08/13/homosexuality-and-reason/#comment-14 Listen. I'm Bisexial and let me tell you something. ITS NOT A SOCIAL PROBLEM Im that way because I WANT to be. I like girls and guys I like penis and vagina.' I love the body of a woman and of a man Thats is how I will allways be and its people like you who ruin the lives of people like me. I think your just IGNORANT!!!!! Listen. I’m Bisexial and let me tell you something.

ITS NOT A SOCIAL PROBLEM

Im that way because I WANT to be. I like girls and guys

I like penis and vagina.’

I love the body of a woman and of a man

Thats is how I will allways be and its people like you who ruin the lives of people like me. I think your just IGNORANT!!!!!

]]> Comment on Women as Priests by Scott http://anglicanblog.org/?p=33&cpage=1#comment-3 Scott Fri, 09 May 2008 11:50:00 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/women-as-priests/#comment-3 [blockquote] I am puzzled. How can there be “traditional” Anglicans and “conservative” Anglicans who cling to truths which have been passed down through the ages? The very founding of the Church of England was a political act, disguised as spiritual “reform”. [/blockquote] It is true that in many ways the formation of the Church of England was a political act. However I should be realized that the Roman Church at the time was a very political body, very much part of the politics of Europe. [blockquote] Subsequent developments were a departure from tradition, precedent, and “truth” as defined by a unified Church before the Reformation. [/blockquote] As an Anglican I try to look at the truth as told by the unified Church, but I look to before the Great Schism, as well as before the Reformation. [blockquote] You decry the existence of women priests and denounce homosexual acts as contrary to God’s “will”, yet do so from a platform built on greed, deception, selfishness, and the depriving the English people of their collective spiritual inheritence, that a king might be pleased. [/blockquote] It has had it problems, but the Anglican Church has tried to be the catholic church in England. I assume from context you are talking about the Roman Church in reference to collective spiritual inheritance. I would point out except for married priests and lack of a Pope, the reforms made by Anglicans are now for the most part of the Roman Church. Scott+ [blockquote]
I am puzzled. How can there be “traditional” Anglicans and “conservative” Anglicans who cling to truths which have been passed down through the ages? The very founding of the Church of England was a political act, disguised as spiritual “reform”.
[/blockquote]

It is true that in many ways the formation of the Church of England was a political act. However I should be realized that the Roman Church at the time was a very political body, very much part of the politics of Europe.

[blockquote]
Subsequent developments were a departure from tradition, precedent, and “truth” as defined by a unified Church before the Reformation. [/blockquote]

As an Anglican I try to look at the truth as told by the unified Church, but I look to before the Great Schism, as well as before the Reformation.

[blockquote]
You decry the existence of women priests and denounce homosexual acts as contrary to God’s “will”, yet do so from a platform built on greed, deception, selfishness, and the depriving the English people of their collective spiritual inheritence, that a king might be pleased.
[/blockquote]

It has had it problems, but the Anglican Church has tried to be the catholic church in England. I assume from context you are talking about the Roman Church in reference to collective spiritual inheritance. I would point out except for married priests and lack of a Pope, the reforms made by Anglicans are now for the most part of the Roman Church.

Scott+

]]> Comment on Women as Priests by Hans http://anglicanblog.org/?p=33&cpage=1#comment-2 Hans Thu, 08 May 2008 19:20:15 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/women-as-priests/#comment-2 I am puzzled. How can there be "traditional" Anglicans and "conservative" Anglicans who cling to truths which have been passed down through the ages? The very founding of the Church of England was a political act, disguised as spiritual "reform". Subsequent developments were a departure from tradition, precedent, and "truth" as defined by a unified Church before the Reformation. You decry the existence of women priests and denounce homosexual acts as contrary to God's "will", yet do so from a platform built on greed, deception, selfishness, and the depriving the English people of their collective spiritual inheritence, that a king might be pleased. I am puzzled. How can there be “traditional” Anglicans and “conservative” Anglicans who cling to truths which have been passed down through the ages? The very founding of the Church of England was a political act, disguised as spiritual “reform”. Subsequent developments were a departure from tradition, precedent, and “truth” as defined by a unified Church before the Reformation. You decry the existence of women priests and denounce homosexual acts as contrary to God’s “will”, yet do so from a platform built on greed, deception, selfishness, and the depriving the English people of their collective spiritual inheritence, that a king might be pleased.

]]> Comment on No scientific basis for ‘born gay’ theory by Dr Schori and Pelagianism « ECUSA Mess http://anglicanblog.org/?p=4&cpage=1#comment-6 Dr Schori and Pelagianism « ECUSA Mess Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:43:16 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/07/16/no-scientific-basis-for-%e2%80%98born-gay%e2%80%99-theory/#comment-6 [...] with the data is that certain genetic makeup provides a proclivity for homosexual attraction. See a paper I have written 5 Schori Interview: What are you: a [...] <em> I answer; I have been an engineer for 32 years and I have been a traditional priest for the past few years. I have seen a good deal of junk science used in this and other political charged topics. The willful misuse of data, to distort cause from correlation is a common event. After all milk causes homosexual attraction, as proof, I suggest that almost all those with homosexual attraction drank milk as children. Bad use of data? Of course but not nearly as bad as some "science" I have read concerning homosexual attraction. </em> [...] with the data is that certain genetic makeup provides a proclivity for homosexual attraction. See a paper I have written 5 Schori Interview: What are you: a [...]


I answer;

I have been an engineer for 32 years and I have been a traditional priest for the past few years. I have seen a good deal of junk science used in this and other political charged topics. The willful misuse of data, to distort cause from correlation is a common event.

After all milk causes homosexual attraction, as proof, I suggest that almost all those with homosexual attraction drank milk as children. Bad use of data? Of course but not nearly as bad as some “science” I have read concerning homosexual attraction.

]]> Comment on No scientific basis for ‘born gay’ theory by Erik Cowand http://anglicanblog.org/?p=4&cpage=1#comment-5 Erik Cowand Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:37:04 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/07/16/no-scientific-basis-for-%e2%80%98born-gay%e2%80%99-theory/#comment-5 I think what Scott is trying to say is that there is no rock solid proof that no person is born a homosexual. Scott, I thank you for writing a piece such as this. This has been my argument to gays and lesbians for years in the church, and they just don't hear the argument. I ask for unbiased evidence, and they just call me a homophobe... I guess that is just their knee-jerk reaction... I think what Scott is trying to say is that there is no rock solid proof that no person is born a homosexual. Scott, I thank you for writing a piece such as this. This has been my argument to gays and lesbians for years in the church, and they just don’t hear the argument. I ask for unbiased evidence, and they just call me a homophobe… I guess that is just their knee-jerk reaction…

]]> Comment on No scientific basis for ‘born gay’ theory by Dr Schori and Pelagianism « A Traditional Anglican Blogging http://anglicanblog.org/?p=4&cpage=1#comment-4 Dr Schori and Pelagianism « A Traditional Anglican Blogging Sun, 04 Mar 2007 14:05:50 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/07/16/no-scientific-basis-for-%e2%80%98born-gay%e2%80%99-theory/#comment-4 [...] with the data is that certain genetic makeup provides a proclivity for homosexual attraction. See a paper I have written 5 Schori Interview: What are you: a [...] [...] with the data is that certain genetic makeup provides a proclivity for homosexual attraction. See a paper I have written 5 Schori Interview: What are you: a [...]

]]> Comment on Homosexuality and Reason by franksta http://anglicanblog.org/?p=6&cpage=1#comment-13 franksta Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:01:11 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/08/13/homosexuality-and-reason/#comment-13 Scott, I am coming late to this dialogue, as I just found your blog today, so I don't know if you'll read this. Of course, sodomy is a sin--Scripture, tradition, and reason all bear this out--the acceptance of sodomy is the reason I left TEC. And I will even agree with your thinking up to a point, namely that the presence of a sexually active homosexual in a group of men threatens comradeship. BUT, I am curious...are you saying that the presence of ANY man who has EVER experienced homosexual attractions also threatens that comradeship? Does it matter if that man has homosexual attractions but has never acted on them? Or if he has, but it was in the distant past? Or if his homosexual attractions are fleeting or infrequent? The reason I ask is two-fold. First, I am an "ex-gay," once practicing homosexuality but repentant of that and seeking to live a holy life. The thought that my presence in a group threatens comradeship would surely come as a surprise to my close, intimate friends and fellow churchmen (all of whom know my past). Their comradeship, which at times has involved working together closely or sharing close quarters, has not proven destructive for any of us, but in fact has been a significant avenue of "recovery" for me as I have come to find a better understanding of masculinity by being in the company (and acceptance) of men. The second is like unto it. I have led a support group and counseled men with homosexual attractions. The overwhelming majority of those seeking my assistance were married, churchgoing men. Their struggles were unknown to anyone outside of the support group--their comrades had no idea of their battles. My point is simply that in any company of Christian men, it is impossible to know for certain that no one there has such attractions. So, if this makes sense, I'm curious for your response. Every blessing, Frank Scott,

I am coming late to this dialogue, as I just found your blog today, so I don’t know if you’ll read this.

Of course, sodomy is a sin–Scripture, tradition, and reason all bear this out–the acceptance of sodomy is the reason I left TEC. And I will even agree with your thinking up to a point, namely that the presence of a sexually active homosexual in a group of men threatens comradeship. BUT, I am curious…are you saying that the presence of ANY man who has EVER experienced homosexual attractions also threatens that comradeship? Does it matter if that man has homosexual attractions but has never acted on them? Or if he has, but it was in the distant past? Or if his homosexual attractions are fleeting or infrequent?

The reason I ask is two-fold. First, I am an “ex-gay,” once practicing homosexuality but repentant of that and seeking to live a holy life. The thought that my presence in a group threatens comradeship would surely come as a surprise to my close, intimate friends and fellow churchmen (all of whom know my past). Their comradeship, which at times has involved working together closely or sharing close quarters, has not proven destructive for any of us, but in fact has been a significant avenue of “recovery” for me as I have come to find a better understanding of masculinity by being in the company (and acceptance) of men.

The second is like unto it. I have led a support group and counseled men with homosexual attractions. The overwhelming majority of those seeking my assistance were married, churchgoing men. Their struggles were unknown to anyone outside of the support group–their comrades had no idea of their battles. My point is simply that in any company of Christian men, it is impossible to know for certain that no one there has such attractions.

So, if this makes sense, I’m curious for your response.

Every blessing,

Frank

]]> Comment on Homosexuality and Reason by traditionalanglican http://anglicanblog.org/?p=6&cpage=1#comment-12 traditionalanglican Tue, 15 Aug 2006 20:51:28 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/08/13/homosexuality-and-reason/#comment-12 One of my points is that I should be allowed the assumption that when with a group of men, there will not be sexual attraction. If there is sexual attraction between certain members then they should be excluded from the group. I know this offends liberal orthodoxies, but so be it. I could expand this idea but will not do so here, choosing to stick to the topic of comradeship for the secular discussion. This is a religious blog. Tradition and Holy Scripture condemn sodomy, so even if you do not like my logic, sodomy is still wrong. One of my points is that I should be allowed the assumption that when with a group of men, there will not be sexual attraction. If there is sexual attraction between certain members then they should be excluded from the group. I know this offends liberal orthodoxies, but so be it.

I could expand this idea but will not do so here, choosing to stick to the topic of comradeship for the secular discussion. This is a religious blog. Tradition and Holy Scripture condemn sodomy, so even if you do not like my logic, sodomy is still wrong.

]]> Comment on Homosexuality and Reason by NancyP http://anglicanblog.org/?p=6&cpage=1#comment-11 NancyP Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:09:28 +0000 https://traditionalanglican.wordpress.com/2006/08/13/homosexuality-and-reason/#comment-11 I have to say, what makes you think that gays are automatically attracted to every individual of their own sex? Straights aren't attracted to every individual of the opposite sex. Some individuals are less picky than others, true. And attraction varies according to venue - a man might not look twice at a sweaty dusty woman doing construction chores on a Habitat for Humanity site, but might be interested in the same woman in the clean state in a swimsuit at the beach, or in a sexy dress at a club. And individuals have the ability to repress their attraction in situations where that is necessary, eg, at a retreat, or at Mass, or at work, or.... Even if Jane thinks Father John is hot, she oughtn't to be thinking about hotness if John+ is married, gay, priest of her parish, or in the middle of priestly duties at the time. I happen to agree with #1 - the concern with other people's sexuality is often an insecurity in handling your own sexuality - whether a heterosexual p0rn user or a repressed heterosexual or a repressed gay. I have to say, what makes you think that gays are automatically attracted to every individual of their own sex? Straights aren’t attracted to every individual of the opposite sex. Some individuals are less picky than others, true. And attraction varies according to venue – a man might not look twice at a sweaty dusty woman doing construction chores on a Habitat for Humanity site, but might be interested in the same woman in the clean state in a swimsuit at the beach, or in a sexy dress at a club. And individuals have the ability to repress their attraction in situations where that is necessary, eg, at a retreat, or at Mass, or at work, or…. Even if Jane thinks Father John is hot, she oughtn’t to be thinking about hotness if John+ is married, gay, priest of her parish, or in the middle of priestly duties at the time.

I happen to agree with #1 – the concern with other people’s sexuality is often an insecurity in handling your own sexuality – whether a heterosexual p0rn user or a repressed heterosexual or a repressed gay.

]]>