sophiaserpentia | I still feel abiding affection for Jesus

Current Music: Thievery Corporation "Sol Tapado"

Entry tags:

I still feel abiding affection for Jesus

...but i'd rather see Christianity eradicated entirely than watch it continue to be hijacked in the name of bigotry, greed, and sexism:

The Northern Marianas Islands are a U.S. protectorate (so it can label goods "Made in the USA") in the Pacific being used as a sort of labor gulag, with workers imported from China and elsewhere and paid pitiful wages. Jack Abramoff had a contract with the government of the Marianas to lobby against stopping the flow of immigrant labor to the islands and to prevent a minimum wage bill (mandating a level higher than the island's standard $3.05 per hour) from getting to the floor of the House.

The islands are home to classic sweatshops. In 1996 and 1997, Abramoff billed the Marianas for 187 contacts with DeLay's office, including 16 meetings with DeLay. In December 1997, DeLay, his wife and their daughter went on an Abramoff-arranged jaunt to the Marianas. DeLay brunched with the Marianas' largest private employer, textile magnate Willie Tan.

Tan had to settle a U.S. Labor Department lawsuit alleging workplace violations. According to the book "The Hammer" by Lou Dubose and Jan Reid, among the violations common on the islands is forbidding women to work when they are pregnant, thus leading to a high abortion rate.

Evidently, DeLay didn't have time to look into such allegations, since he was busy playing golf and attending a dinner in his honor, sponsored by Tan's holding company. According to The Washington Post, it was at this dinner that DeLay called Abramoff "one of my closest and dearest friends." He also reminded those present of his promise that no minimum wage or immigration legislation affecting the Marianas would be passed.

"Stand firm," he added. "Resist evil. Remember that all truth and blessings emanate from our Creator." He then went with Tan to see a cockfight.

This is why DeLay's professions of Christianity make me sick. He was there. He could have talked to the workers. Instead, he chose to walk with the powerful and do real harm to the very people Jesus mandated we especially care for.

from Molly Ivins: DeLay's sins

Speaking of Tom DeLay's profession of being a Christian, let's see some notes from a conference he attended recently in DC, alongside Senator John Cornyn, Gary Bauer, Alan Keyes, Phyllis Schafly, and others:

Beginning with the premise that there is a war on Christianity, conference organizers and participants were eager to issue calls to arms in response. “We are under spiritual invasion!” intoned Rod Parsley, an evangelist from Ohio. “Man your battle stations! Ready your weapons! LOCK AND LOAD!” (The audience responded to these imperatives with a raucous and exuberant standing ovation.) Parsley also claimed that those Christian churches not sharing the perspective of the Christians represented at the conference constitute “the devil’s demilitarized zone,” naïvely and fatally embracing “peace at any price.” Meanwhile, Laurence Wright, a Lutheran pastor and co-president of Vision America, announced that the time of a peaceful and contemplative Christianity is over; that Christians have been AWOL (“absent without Lord”) in the battle; and that “We must attack the evil now where it is strongest” in order to restore America, the city high on a hill.

... Perhaps the most explicit call to arms came from Ron Luce, the president and founder of Teen Mania, a Christian revivalist youth ministry, and the author of Battle Cry for a Generation, a multimedia campaign that deploys military images and language to recruit soldiers in Christ’s army. Toward the end of his speech, Luce invoked the biblical story of the Levite’s concubine in Judges 19. (In the story, the Levite’s concubine is gang-raped by men who wanted to do sexual violence to the Levite. When the Levite’s host refuses to deliver the Levite to the assailants, he offers them his own virgin daughter and the Levite’s concubine instead. When the assailants reject such an exchange, the Levite simply expels the concubine from his host's house, leaving her to be raped repeatedly throughout the night. The following morning, upon finding the concubine’s dead body on his host’s doorstep, the Levite dismembers her and sends her body parts out to the twelve tribes of Israel as a provocation to revenge.) “I kind of feel like the Levite,” Ron Luce confessed. And then he uttered a battle cry of his own: “CUT UP THE CONCUBINE! CUT UP THE CONCUBINE! CUT UP THE CONCUBINE!”

from Notes from the War Room (thanks to _raven_ for the link)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Expression of such vile hatred in the name of religion aught to be grounds for taking away the group's non profit status, and also be grounds for criminal investigation of the persons making such statements looking into possible child &/or spousal abuse.

At this point i doubt whether i agree that religious organizations should have tax-exempt status, period.

I can live with that. Seems to me that teaching mythology is not really in the same league with teachiing science or history.

Nope, not even if it's nice mythology about peace and love. I am a firm believer in divorcing mysticism from materialism entirely, because interjecting material concerns leads (inevitably, it would seem) to commodification of the mystical message. Which in turn allows the message to be twisted and misused.

Compassion and loving-kindness cannot be taught in a book and do not require huge edifices; they are best taught one-on-one, by the examples of people's lives, or in small discussion groups.

I think you are soon going to see, Miss Serpentia, a break-up of the so-called "Christian Coalition."

For one thing, the "catholic" and "apostolic" churches--the ones with a more or less coherent theology (and, therefore, the ones able to deal with the moral ambiguity that plagues all human concerns)--will be parting soon from the single-issue politics that keeps the Republican Right in business.

If you've paid attention to what I write, during the past couple of years we've been on each others' friends lists, you know that my experiences in the Third World taught me to recognize some of the most divisive issues that fret Western Christians to be essentially frivolous, as compared to the destruction of the planet, of its indigenous peoples, and the enslavement of the world's poor to the gross materialist imperatives of the "global economy." It's not that I don't sympathize with "gender politics" or don't recognize the injustices done to women and queer people, BUT THESE POPULATIONS ARE NOT BEING FORCED TO DIE!

Well, now that the issue of legalized immigration is surfacing in our politics, I think that the matters of paramount concern to the poor of the Third World are coming home to roost here. And this issue will be followed soon by concerns regarding the destruction of the planet. The Catholic magazine The Tablet--published in England, where I now am--opined on its editorial page the other day that Catholic Christianity must come up with a theory of environmental justice IMMEDIATELY. The times are changing; it was inevitable...

It's not that I don't sympathize with "gender politics" or don't recognize the injustices done to women and queer people, BUT THESE POPULATIONS ARE NOT BEING FORCED TO DIE!

Sure they are. Just not as visibly. For example, withholding the HPV vaccine will kill several thousand women a year in the US alone. The fundamentalist "war on condoms" leads to many unnecessary infections by AIDS, Hepatitis, and deaths by childbirth complications (which is the leading cause of death for women in many countries). I've alleged that religious intolerance of queer people has lead to a stealth genocide: one in four queer people are kicked out of their homes as teenagers, and one in three queer teens attempts suicide, and virtually all are victims of bashing and harrassment. It's not happening in death camps or in the streets, it's happening behind closed doors, in people's bedrooms and bathtubs, but it is genocide nonetheless.

These things are all being done in the US in the name of Christianity. It's not as visible as classist cannibalism in the third world, but it is no less real.

I have to disagree with you that women, gender minorities and sexual minorities are not being forced to die. Thousands of female fetuses are aborted in India and China each year, to the point where boys are having trouble finding spouses. Iran hanged two teen boys for allegedly being gay last year. Gwen Araujo was murdered because her sex partners feared questioning their own sexuality--they have said as much in court. Young girls die every year in Africa from septicemia due to unsanitary clitoridectomies. Women and girls in the Middle East are routinely executed by their own families for "honor". I could go on but we'd be here all day.

I hope you're right that Catholic churches will soon visibly part from the Religious ~~Right~~. I've commented before on a pattern i've seen in the mass media, a deliberate attempt to wallpaper over existing differences between right-wing Protestantism and Catholicism, in support of the Chaliban's campaign to recruit Catholics to their cause.

Racism is going to be a big issue in politics this year, because of the immigration debate and because of Katrina. Here's one matter where Catholic doctrine is at distinct odds with Chaliban ideology, and Catholic leaders are not afraid to speak their mind on important issues...

A group of Catholic priests are at this moment hunger-striking outside Hastert's Batavia IL office until he meets with them regarding just treatment of illegal immigrants. Hastert is famous for simply refusing to speak to any constituents who might disagree with him.

I try not to hold Jesus' followers against him, but it sure is hard not to do so.

"God, you're a pretty groovy guy, but save me from Your followers."

You should not conflate those who call themselves "Christian" with those who follow Christ's teachings. As one can not practice Dominionist Christianity and follow Christ's teachings at the same time, to lump us all together is silly. It is no better than to say that because of the Nazis, all people of german heritage must be racists.

I don't want to hear it. If you have a problem with people who have been abused by Christians their ENTIRE LIVES being angry at Christians as a group, then you need to fight the abuses, not those suffering from having been abused. I'm sick of everything being on me. I see only the barest minimum of effort being put out by "nice Christians" to stop the screaming theocrats. And yes, I do hold ordinary Germans who sat back and did nothing in the face of Naziism partially responsible for the death camps. What, would you lecture Jews for mistrusting Germans?

Well, if a Jew hated the comic strip Peanuts solely because the author was of german descent, I would consider him an idiot and gladly lecture him for his bigotry. Funny, I see a lot of Christians actively fighting the Dominionists and their political lackeys. When I was at the Pierce County Democratic convention I saw a large number of people from my own church were delegates, and a Jesuit priest was a fellow Kucinich delegate. Fr. Bill spent a year in a Federal penitentiary for his work fighting the School of the America's. Granted, the lack of coverage in the mainstream media may be a factor, but could it also be your personal biases that prevent you from seeing that there is significant resistance from those who follow Christ's teachings? Or are you just so blinded by your own anger that you have just as closed-minded and bigoted as those you hate?

I'm not impressed by your kind and gentle version of Christianity if you feel you need to make patronizing comments to me about how I shouldn't be angry and I must be biased and I'm some kind of sick person for fighting back against the people who have abused me and are still abusing me and the people I love. I don't have time to equivocate and try to soothe your feelings and put a disclaimer before every thing I say. You are the one with misplaced anger if you think it will do a bit of good to approach someone who is angry about being abused and take them to task for overgeneralizing. That's some Christian compassion you have going there. Does it make you feel all warm and fuzzy and self righteous to scold me?

Well put.

Hmm, someone says this almost every time the Chaliban come up in discussion in my journal. Frankly, it is fruitless to complain to non-Christians if they develop the wrong idea about Christianity because of the Chaliban... especially those who have been spiritually abused their whole lives by people claiming justification in Christian teachings.

This just makes me want to weep.

*shudders*

The more they talk about being persecuted, the more I want to organize a revival for them, so they can fully understand persecution. I think some lions would do the trick. At least the show would be fun to watch.

It's galling that they point to examples of Christians actually being persecuted in other countries, and then claim that this is evidence that Christians everywhere are being persecuted, even here in the US. Every oppressor wants to think they're a victim.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with my father, the year after I started college. In response to hearing about gay marriage, my father said it would set a bad precedent because then "everyone would think it's okay to be gay/Black/White/whatever", to which I responded, "Dad, people are BORN gay/Black/White/whatever".

"But homosexuality is condemned in the Bible, and we should follow the Bible," he said, because everything would be better if we followed God's word to the letter.

I reminded him that if he really wanted to go that route, the Bible also advocates genocide and stoning of adulterers. Point being, it's a brutal bit of writing and has no place as a code of law in a just government.

I read your LJ from time to time because you're on my friendsfriends view. I often hear you say that you want liberal Christians to stand up and resist fundamentalist, Dominionist versions of Christianity, to demonstrate that there is more to the religion than obsessing about certain passages in the Scriptures that seem to pertain to same-sex relations. My question to you is: How shall we do this? That is, how can the average lay Christian, someone who is not a priest/minister, not a religious educator, not a vestry member, resist fundamentalist definitions of their religion? Obviously, if someone in one's social circle--family, friend, coworker--happens to be a fundamentalist, one can respond to that instead of "politely" ignoring it. But what if no one in one's social circle is spewing hatred? What do you want liberal Christian to do to show that they are on the side of love and compassion and justice?

Hmm. With a few exceptions, the average person can only do what the average person can do. I write here in this blog, and work, and spend money from time to time, and have a small circle of friends, and that's pretty much the entire extent of my actual influence on the world. Which is about what all of us have to offer.

So, really most of my criticism is directed at liberal religious leaders. I don't get the sense that they realize there's an actual war going on. I don't sense any anger from them. I see them continuing to want to use dialogue and reason and other civilized tactics -- which would be great, if the Chaliban respected that.

Every now and then i do see things from liberal Christians that give me a glimmer of hope. But for the most part, most liberal churches i've observed are turned almost entirely inward.

So, more expressions of anger might be good, and more public outreach on the church level (though i know some of these efforts are actually being thwarted by the mainstream media). In short, some zealous evangelism.

What i'm really looking for is a sense that the majority of people don't actually believe that the Chaliban speaks for them. The majority has been continuing to vote for Chaliban candidates and same-sex marriage bans, and they rally around causes proclaimed by the Chaliban. I want to know that i'm not hated by a majority of the people around me. I used to harbor some hope that liberal Christianity was in a good position to take over the voice of moral righteousness, but it hasn't happened, and i see little indication that there is a mass movement to prove to America that the Dominionists and Chaliban do not speak for Jesus.

I can certainly understand--and second--your desire that religious leaders speak up. I don't know why there isn't more public outrage. My own background is in the Episcopal Church--which is having its own problems right now, with which I am disgusted--and I see Fundamentalist Protestantism as a weird aberration of Christian tradition, less than 200 years old, theologically wrong-headed in its basic premises as well as in its ethical teachings. Why take it *seriously*, you know? I mean, on an intellectual level--as a political force with no good intentions, yeah, take it seriously.

As a borderline member of a fairly liberal denomination, though, it seems to me that I have as much chance of stopping the Chaliban as I would of stopping Jaganatha's chariot. Which is one reason, I suppose, why I feel less and less engaged with Christianity.

Yes, i think that's part of the issue -- a lot of liberal Christians are getting discouraged, because they do not feel connected to their religion anymore. So why should anyone else feel connected to Christianity unless they are a fundamentalist? It's a self-feeding pattern.

Well, here's one practical suggestion, which i would urge of every liberal Christian, and which i will make some effort to start doing, though i do not necessarily identify as a member of any religion.

The mainstream media is playing a particularly important role in framing discussion about religion in a very dualistic way: i see many pieces in the news and other media depicting Christianity as being co-equal with fundamentalism, and everything else as militant secular atheism. So i think anyone with an investment in keeping the name of Christianity from being associated solely with fundamentalism in the public eye should take on the task of writing the media every time they do a piece which shows this bias in a blatant way.

For example, if there's a piece in one's local paper about the evolution vs. creationism debate that assumes "all Christians believe in creationism and all others believe in evolution," then one could take a few moments to fire off a letter saying that this is overgeneralized. On a larger scale, the liberal churches could take on the organization which writes the news guidelines and work on them to make reporters and editors aware of this bias and the unfairness of it.

So, really most of my criticism is directed at liberal religious leaders.

I think this reveals a fundamental flaw. The liberal religious leaders are not the "good guys." Just look at the situation in the Episcopal Church, where the "tolerant" liberal religious leaders are frequently silencing, kicking out and taking away the property of those who dissent with their politics.

I think the answer lies not in finding the Christians who share your ideology. You will find that their dominionism just takes on a different form. Instead, I think that your appeal should be to those who actually show fidelity to Christ. To a certain extent, I have to agree with

digbydolben here, the issues that the US has its panties in such a wad over are not the only issues out there. We have tunnel vision and *that* is the problem, so appealing to those going down that same tunnel but in a different direction isn't going to help.

We have to get past this fundamental insanity that dignity is somehow tied to agreeing with our position. But both liberal and conservative Christians in this country have a fundamental problem with love the sinner even if you hate the sin .. they just define sin differently and go their merry way hating both the "sin" and the "sinner." And that is the problem. We are appealing to ideologies and not to people. So often we reject the solidarity of those who do not share our ideologies even when we have common cause.

If you only appeal to "liberal" Christians, you are just going to find the same dominionism, just under a different guise, seeking to establish a different dominion. If you only appeal to "liberal" Christianity, "conservative" Christianity will just find it all the easier to denounce you .. they've already put so much into denouncing your ideology. But if you just appeal to Christians, I think something else will happen.

If an appeal to "and the greatest of these is love" does not move them, then they do not follow Christ .. but honestly, I think so few American Christians do. It is not an ideology thing, its a fundamental breakdown in post-protestant Christianity. The individual is the ultimate arbitrator of Truth, and Jesus is an idealized version of the individual. So much of American Christianity is seeking to remake Christ in their own image rather than remake themselves in Christ's. The "liberals" are just as guilty of this. But any true support you will get from Christians is going to come from the Christ, not a remade Christ. And it is going to come to you as a person, not your ideology.

The liberal religious leaders are not the "good guys."

Hah. Well, they are not making money sending out fundraising letters to millions that encourage hatred of me, they are not agitating against laws that protect me from discrimination, and they are not generally saying bad things about me and the people i care about. So they may not be the good guys per se, i have my share of qualms with them, but i much prefer them to the conservatives.

I think the answer lies not in finding the Christians who share your ideology.

I have had an extremely hard time finding Christians who don't share my ideology who are willing to dialogue with me in a compassionate and respectful way. For the most part, i have not found such people to be willing to listen to even the most basic points. My experience of conservative Christians has mainly been them shouting at me for one reason or another. It's not particularly inviting. After years of extending the olive branch to have it mostly batted away, i've finally given up entirely on meaningful dialogue with Christians who don't share my ideology. My discussions with you are one of the very few significant exceptions to that.

If you only appeal to "liberal" Christianity, "conservative" Christianity will just find it all the easier to denounce you ..

How could it be any easier for them to denounce me? It doesn't matter what i do or say, most such people are not going to like me. I see something in the news every day about one Christian leader or another complaining about gay people, and at least once a week i hear it about transsexuals. The best i can do really is to offer the witness of the bravery of just living my life.

But any true support you will get from Christians is going to come from the Christ, not a remade Christ. And it is going to come to you as a person, not your ideology.

This sounds rather like the belief/faith distinction i've drawn in recent posts (correct me if i'm wrong).

Sadly, at the moment i don't have much hope or faith that what you are saying will come to pass. Most Christians i encounter do not seem willing to come out to the wilderness where i am to meet me, nor even to meet me halfway; they insist that i do all the sacrificing, all the compromising, and come to them. I just want to know that my story and those like mine are at least being heard, but i don't even see much indication of that. Voices like mine have just not been much welcomed within Christianity.

My experience of conservative Christians has mainly been them shouting at me for one reason or another.

That's my point. Whether self-identifying as "liberal" or "conservative," they have already stepped away from the message of Christ, the very source of the compassion you desire. I won't defend "conservative" Christians, and it pains me that people can even imagine that they could be representative of my faith. Christianity in this country is in a shambles, and I see a rallying together of Christians of all denominations who find both "liberal" and "conservative" ideologies increasingly antithetical to the message of Christ. But that is the consequence of putting your politics before your faith.

How could it be any easier for them to denounce me?

I meant dismiss. The syncretism, relativism and rampant disregard for the ancient beliefs of Christianity - and I am not even talking about moral issues here - make "liberal" Christianity a less than credible voice within Christianity, "conservative" or not.

My discussions with you are one of the very few significant exceptions to that.

That is truly sad. But I must admit that it has become increasingly hard over the last year. I find that the wilderness has gotten larger and larger, and my points of view that were once tolerated have met increasing hostility. I understand why it has happened and find that even more sad. But this is why I suggested looking elsewhere within Christianity, to non-political Christianity, neither liberal nor conservative, people who do not find it necessary to agree with your position to have compassion or to defend your human rights .. even if our differences may go so far as to conceive of what are actually human rights differently. ;)

Thank you for this. One of the problems I've had lately with people in my life complaining about lack of privilege is that none of them define what their desired "victory criteria" is, what they want/expect people to do to make them happy. It's very helpful to hear concrete ideas about what would make you feel progress was being made.

The one thing I am leery of in your answer is the use of anger. It can be used to fuel positive change, but anger is such a powerful and often unpredictable force that I fear it backfiring, making things worse instead of better. It's a short leap from anger to hate. I wish I could figure out a way to help get more mass media air time for the liberal message without making hateful, hurtful statements that ultimately weaken our position.

Well, on a personal level, i do have a lot of discomfort with anger. So it's not that i'm really telling people to get angry. It's more that i don't understand why more liberal Christians AREN'T angry.

It seems to me that if a group of people took my religion, which i experience as a shield from the ills of the world, and a community that nurtures love and compassion, and twisted it in public perception into the exact opposite of that, i'd be furious about that.

There is fury, yes. And indignation. And sadness. And despair. And hopelessness. And fear. And bafflement. None of which tend to lead to motivating media copy...;P

And deep down, determination. The trick is reminding ourselves to not let that become inflexible stubbornness, and to not let the anger tun into defensiveness or hatred. It's a delicate balancing act, and I frequently ponder how I can better present myself/make myself visible without being either (a) a doormat or (b) offensive/triggering. (

lady_babylon and

rhonan's thread is a perfect example...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I still feel abiding affection for Jesus

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

"Christianism" Vs. "Christianity"

Re: "Christianism" Vs. "Christianity"

Re: "Christianism" Vs. "Christianity"

Re: "Christianism" Vs. "Christianity"

Re: "Christianism" Vs. "Christianity"

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm

Re: I swear to God this is an honest question, not sarcasm