By Whose Authority? Sexual Ethics, Postmodernism, and Orthodox Christianity

Mary Ford
{"title":"By Whose Authority? Sexual Ethics, Postmodernism, and Orthodox Christianity","authors":"Mary Ford","doi":"10.1093/cb/cbaa010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The traditional Christian teaching is that engaging in sexual activity, whether heterosexual or homosexual, outside the marriage of one man and one woman is sinful (as distinct from having thoughts about illicit sexual desire, which need not be sinful as long as they are not meditated and/or acted upon—in the same way that the Church teaches about any “logismoi”). In direct contrast, there are those in the Church who quite recently have begun to insist that the traditional teachings concerning sexual sin need to be changed. In particular, the effort is being made to have the Church accept homosexual behavior as not sinful or problematic in any way—at least not for committed homosexuals, as comparable to committed heterosexuals in a marriage. As we all know, this relatively recent view has been promoted heavily in the media and popular culture, and even by our national government. As we make our observations, we will particularly focus on traditional Orthodox Christianity as the fullness of the truth and, thus, the source of the true alternative to this “new” outlook that is gripping much of popular Western culture today.","PeriodicalId":416242,"journal":{"name":"Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbaa010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The traditional Christian teaching is that engaging in sexual activity, whether heterosexual or homosexual, outside the marriage of one man and one woman is sinful (as distinct from having thoughts about illicit sexual desire, which need not be sinful as long as they are not meditated and/or acted upon—in the same way that the Church teaches about any “logismoi”). In direct contrast, there are those in the Church who quite recently have begun to insist that the traditional teachings concerning sexual sin need to be changed. In particular, the effort is being made to have the Church accept homosexual behavior as not sinful or problematic in any way—at least not for committed homosexuals, as comparable to committed heterosexuals in a marriage. As we all know, this relatively recent view has been promoted heavily in the media and popular culture, and even by our national government. As we make our observations, we will particularly focus on traditional Orthodox Christianity as the fullness of the truth and, thus, the source of the true alternative to this “new” outlook that is gripping much of popular Western culture today.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谁的权威?性伦理、后现代主义和东正教
传统的基督教教义是,在一男一女的婚姻之外从事性活动,无论是异性恋还是同性恋,都是有罪的(这与非法性欲望的想法是不同的,非法性欲望只要没有冥想和/或行动,就不一定有罪——就像教会教导的任何“逻辑”一样)。与之形成鲜明对比的是,教会中有些人最近开始坚持认为,有关性犯罪的传统教义需要改变。特别是,人们正在努力让教会接受同性恋行为在任何方面都不是有罪的或有问题的——至少对坚定的同性恋者来说不是,就像在婚姻中坚定的异性恋者一样。我们都知道,这种相对较新的观点在媒体和流行文化中被大力宣传,甚至被我们的国家政府宣传。当我们进行观察时,我们将特别关注传统的东正教,因为它是真理的完满,因此,它是当今西方流行文化中“新”观点的真正替代来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Theological Framework for Understanding Hope in the Clinic Responding Faithfully to Women’s Pain: Practicing the Stations of the Cross Responding to People in Pain with Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park Reclaiming Broken Bodies (or, This Is Gonna Hurt Some): Pain, Healing, and the Opioid Crisis Health Care in Service of Life: Preventative Medicine in Light of the Analogia Entis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1