Theology 101

Last week I received—along with twenty or so others—the following e-mail from someone I have known as far back as I can remember:

Brilliant in its simplicity................
A. Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.
B. Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.
C. Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.
D. In three generations, there will be no Democrats.
Damn - I love it when a plan comes together
--
God Bless America

My reply (To all, of course; this is me we’re talking about):

I know well two gay couples who are married, one male, the other female. The men adopted an infant girl two years ago; the women each have a child from sperm donors. Those children are raised in loving, stable homes. If Rachel were of the proper age, I would not hesitate to let her stay with either couple.These are people who are hurt by the perpetuation of attitudes that convey them as somehow less worthy of the same consideration any of us would want or expect, not stereotypes standing in as straight lines for a joke.


Since we’re just kidding around and no offense should be inferred (right?), let’s talk about the inbred cousin fuckers who, left to their own devises, will constitute the core of Tea Party support in three generations.


Oh, wait. That’s been done already.

The sender of the original e-mail then replied with:


I am totally anti gay. You will never convince me that gay marriage is right or should be condoned. Thank god I live in a state where the governor thinks the same.

This leads me to several questions about Christians I have wondered about for years. I hope someone can enlighten me.

The dictionary definition of “Christian” as a noun is, “a person who believes in Jesus Christ; an adherent of Christianity,” and as “a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ.”

We all know I am no Bible scholar, but I’ve been around enough to know a little. Things like:
There are two books to the Bible: the Old Testament and the New Testament.

The New Testament covers the teachings of Christ.

Christ’s teachings include such sentiments as “love thy neighbor,” “hate the sin but love the sinner,” and, “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

The Old Testament tells the tales of God before Christ’s time, when, to paraphrase Lewis Black, He was a Prick. Fire and brimstone, stoning, plagues, floods, slavery. The Old Testament sounds a lot like Mississippi in 1957.

If we accept that the Old Testament was written before the New Testament, and that the writers of the New Testament knew this, then it is reasonable to assume the New Testament is intended to supersede the Old. Where they differ, the New should take precedence.

Christians, believing as devoutly as they do in the teachings of Christ, should then look to the New Testament when determining courses of action with things they do not understand or agree with. Forgiveness and forbearance replace the Old Testament’s eye for an eye vengeance, and punishment such as was administered to Sodom and Gomorrah. More than any other religion, and regardless of whether they truly believe homosexuality is a sin, Christians should accept and forgive; that forgiveness is the bedrock of their religion. True Christians would not dream of denying anyone, straight or gay, the same rights and pursuit of happiness they themselves enjoy.

So here’s my question: Where are all the Christians we keep hearing about in this “Christian” nation? Christianity in America is strictly Old Testament, unless someone is asking for a little forbearance and charity for themselves. That’s not what Christ had in mind for his followers. He wanted them to forgive others, not expect it for themselves.

American Christians need to walk the walk if they’re going to talk the talk. Being a Christian is not just saying all the right things when you want them to apply to you and dragging out the Old Testament when someone does something you don’t like. It means treating those others as you would like to be treated. Even more, it means placing yourself in their position, and wondering what it would be like to be treated as “good Christians” treat them, knowing the only forgiveness you’ll find will come only after abject surrender to their way of thinking.

What would Jesus Do? Right.

Another Inconvenient Truth

A little-quoted writing from Thomas Jefferson that seems to have slipped beneath the notice of those who claim to speak for what the Founding Fathers intended, especially along the lines of religious freedom:

"Whereas the preamble [of Virginia's Act for Establishing Religious Freedom] declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the words `Jesus Christ,' so that it should read, `a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."

(Lifted from Peter Rozovsky’s award-winning blog, Detectives Beyond Borders.)

So let’s knock off this “Christian nation” shit, okay?

God's Will

A Wisconsin couple was sentenced to six months jail time and ten years probation for refusing to seek medical attention for their 11-year-old daughter, praying over her with others while the child died of a treatable form of diabetes.

From the article:
"We are here today because to some, you made Kara a martyr to your faith," [Judge Vincent] Howard told the parents.

In testimony at trial and in videotaped interviews with police, the parents said they believe healing comes from God and that they never expected their daughter to die.

During the sentencing hearing, Leilani Neumann, 41, told the judge her family is loving and forgiving and has wrongly been portrayed as religious zealots.

"I do not regret trusting truly in the Lord for my daughter's health," she said. "Did we know she had a fatal illness? No. Did we act to the best of our knowledge? Yes."

Dale Neumann, 47, read from the Bible and told the judge that he loved his daughter.

"I am guilty of trusting my Lord's wisdom completely. ... Guilty of asking for heavenly intervention. Guilty of following Jesus Christ when the whole world does not understand. Guilty of obeying my God," he said.

Here’s a suggestion for what Judge Howard might have said instead:

This is God’s will. He took your daughter from you because you are unfit to be trusted with His creations. He has, in His wisdom, made available to you medical procedures that could easily have saved her, and you spurned His efforts. Had you truly trusted Him, you would have availed yourself of the He has provided for you and given Him His due thanks, as you do for every meal He has provided you throughout your miserable existence, you ignorant, small-minded bastards.

I suppose it’s too much to ask for their other children to be taken someplace safe, far away from their parents’ medical and theological expertise.

Not an Anti-Semantic Comment

From the Washington Post, Friday, April 3:

Pope Benedict XVI marked the fourth anniversary of the death of Pope John Paul II with a memorial Mass on Thursday and new prayers for the Polish pontiff's beatification.

Prayers are always appreciated. Whether you believe in them or not, it’s the thought that counts. It’s nice for Benedict to pray for JP’s soul, but for beatification, which leads to sainthood? It’s not God Who makes that Decision: men do. In this case, a man appointed by Benedict, Archbishop Angelo Amato, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.

Sainthood is nice, too, but it’s not a God-given appellation. (Neither is pope, but that’s a different heretical post.) It’s something the Catholic Church came up with on its own, for its own reasons. I think of it as the Hall of Fame for Catholics, but that’s probably the heretic in me talking.

Canonizing someone does not make that person a saint; officially, they were always a saint. Canonization is only the earthly recognition of this fact. This means God has already done his Part; it’s just a matter of getting we slow catchers-on to get with the program. Benedict has already waived the traditional five-year waiting period for canonization. Now he’s publicly praying and advocating for it, even though John Paul II is already either a saint, or he isn’t. Nothing Benedict, or any Catholic official, can do will change that. They’re just deciding about the human, earthly acceptance of it. (Which could be wrong, whichever way it comes down. Humans, unlike deities, are not infallible.)

Benedict isn’t really praying; he’s lobbying. He has his own bully pulpit as jefe Catolica, and he’s getting out The Word to those who will make the actual decision—and work for him—how he wants it to come out. Which is fine. Spare us all the mysticism. It’s not like a huge golden hand came through the ceiling and tapped Benedict alone of all the cardinals to make him pope; he won an election. Took several ballots, too. This means men chose him, independent of divine inspiration. God may be a lot of things, but not many would argue He’s indecisive.

God Hates Me

The Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, KS is notorious for picketing military and police funerals to protest the acceptance of homosexuals and other blasphemous behavior in America. In their own words, they protest at funerals “To warn the people who are still living that unless they repent, they will likewise perish….[A funeral is] the perfect time to warn them of things to come. Is it mean, hateful, uncompassionate, etc.? I'm sure it is, according to your standards. However, according to my standards, it would be infinitely more mean, hateful, uncompassionate, etc., to keep my mouth shut and not warn you that you, too, will soon have to face God.” (From the FAQ page at www.godhatesfags.com.)

Next month they’ll picket Walt Whitman High School in Bethesda, MD because Whitman was a homosexual. Honest to God. Later that day they’ll head up the road to the Federal Courthouse in Baltimore to protest President Obama, who they call the Anti-Christ. (I used some strong language when describing his predecessor, but “Anti-Christ” is a bit much, even for me.)

A couple of us are considering taking half a day off for a field trip. The Orioles play Texas that night, so we could make it a double header in Baltimore. If we really felt ambitious, we could hit all three.

I have no desire to be overly confrontational. There is one question I’d like to ask while they’re standing there, self-admittedly preaching hate. Is this is what Jesus would do?

Then I’ll go back across the street and wave my “Veterans for the Anti-Christ” sign. What the hell. As a fag enabler (their term), I’m doomed already.

The Church of Baseball

Apparently Michigan’s economic crisis has ended, because folks there now have time to argue about the starting time of the Tigers’ home opener. Detroit’s first home game is April 10, which is Good Friday. All thirty teams play that day, but only the Tigers have a game that starts during Holy Hours. (1:05 pm)

Time is our most finite and egalitarian resource; everyone gets exactly the same amount every day. Tough decisions have to be made. If personally attending the first of eighty-one Tigers home games is more important to you than observing an arbitrarily decided upon religious observance, dress warm. That’s why it’s a day game. Early April evenings in Detroit can get goddamned cold. (Pun intended.)

If the religious observance is more important in your pantheon of values, don’t go to the game. Either way, don’t expect the world to change its rotation because there’s something about the current format you don’t like.

Fortunately, modern technology has provided a reasonable solution: DVR the game, and watch it after Holy Hours have ended. (Would that make them Unholy Hours?) It’s just for such elegant compromises that God has allowed man to evolve to the point where such things can be invented.

Me? I’d go to the game, with nuclear-powered underwear. As the lovely Annie Savoy pointed out in the classic movie Bull Durham, there ere 108 beads on a rosary, and 108 stitches on a baseball. Coincidence?

I don’t think so.

Holier Than Thou

Mitt Romney officially declared himself a Christian today, thus observing the unwritten third qualification to be president. (The Constitution puts forth the other two: at least thirty-five years old, and born in the USA. Sorry, Arnold.)

Romney's guilelessness can be debated elsewhere. It may be unseemly to question someone’s sincerity on a matter of faith, but Romney’s earned it, since he’s as sincere as a whore’s orgasm the rest of the time. As political theater, the speech was unmatched since Lloyd Bentsen told Dan Quayle, “I knew Jack Kennedy, and you’re no Jack Kennedy.” Of course, Bentsen went on to lose the 1988 election behind Michael “Helmet Head” Dukakis, so that might not be the image Romney hoped to convey.

On the surface, Romney’s move is brilliant politics. No one doubts his real audience today was Mike Huckabee, who’s hot right now, and misses no opportunity to coyly diss Romney as a Morman. Romney’s speech leaves Huckabee with a Hobson’s choice: welcome Mitt into the Christian tent, or risk becoming the candidate of exclusion. Tom Tancredo would seem to have that gig pretty well wrapped up, but there’s always room outside today’s Republican tent.

The real loser in this Romney vs. Huckabee jihad is Rudy Giuliani. He’s dropped off the media radar faster than anyone since Philip Michael Thomas when Miami Vice was cancelled. This might not be a wholly bad thing for Rudy, as most of his recent coverage had been of the Judith Regan-Bernie Kerik “can my associations be any sleazier” variety.

I almost feel bad for the Republicans. Romney believes in whatever he thinks will get him elected at the time you ask what he believes. (Sort of the Republican Hillary Clinton, with better hair.) Giuliani has more skeletons in his closet than Alfred Hitchcock. Huckabee may be the nicest guy in the world, but he runs the risk of being the Republicans’ potentially most divisive candidate in the general election. John McCain seems to have just enough support to do what he did in 2000; win a surprise primary, excite people for a few weeks, then pull a Howard Dean. Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter? Come on, that sounds more like a firm of ambulance chasers advertising on TV at 3:00 AM than three potential presidents.

The big implosion could be on the way. “Faith” has become such a litmus test for Republican politicians that the radical right could provoke a discussion it can’t win by waking up the sixty per cent of the population who don’t have strong feelings about it one way or the other. The possibility exists that the Republicans, having opened the Pandora’s box of religion, could nominate a candidate to walk into the biggest defeat since Reagan clipped Mondale in 1984. Not saying it will happen; if it does, you heard it here first.