Bridges

This weekend a grandchild sought information about the Von Trapp family beyond that offered in the movie, “The Sound of Music.”  I pulled out Maria Von Trapp’s book and familiarized the child with key differences between movie and reality.  This 4-year-old grasped that movies differ from reality, myth from reality.  

Also this weekend, the priest at Mass expressed hopes of Pope Leo XIV building bridges between progressives and traditionalists within the Church.  I started musing about parallels between these two weekend experiences. 

 

I don’t know much about the new pope so cannot predict what he’ll do.  However, I’m not yet sure if I care.  Maybe because to me, much of the hierarchy seems heavily fixated on a “Catholicism the Movie” type mythology while I’m tied to Catholicism in real life.  

 

Bridge building needs to be more substantive than a one-way bridge inviting progressive Catholics mostly operating in the real world to jump into the heavy myth world of traditionalist Catholics as if they are Mary Poppins jumping into a chalk drawing fantasyland.  The bridge cannot be merely smiley-faced traditionalists telling progressives they’re misguided but that said traditionalists stand ready with their halos in place and arms wide-open to welcome back these misguided souls.  Bridges will exist when traditionalists join progressives in reality as readily as they welcome progressives into their fantasyland.  This requires traditionalists being willing to question long-standing traditions because bridging means moving to meet somewhere in the middle.

 

I’ve read that the new pope prior to being elected pope defended a few long-standing traditions including the all-male clergy and disparagement of same-sex unions.  These traditions happen to be two biggies inspiring progressives to eschew the traditionalists and the Catholic Church itself.  We’ll leave another biggie: women’s reproductive health for another day.  To build a bridge between the traditionalists and progressives, Leo XIV is going to need to re-examine the foundations of those traditions and be willing to move.

 

Let’s quickly summarize the rickety theological scaffolding for the myths tied to these traditions which can be found in  Lumen Gentium, (The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church 1964 ), Inter Insigniores (Paul VI 1976), Theology of the Body and Mulieris Dignitatem (written in 1979-1984 and 1988 respectively by John Paul II whom I lovingly refer to as the patron saint of sexual predators based upon him protecting so many serial offenders who … pure coincidence here, I’m sure… fundraised boatloads of money for the Church, but I digress.) 

 

In summary, the hierarchy teaches:

1.   God is a dude based on the hierarchy selectively exclusively embracing scriptural metaphors referring to God as masculine and ignoring passages referring to God as feminine.

2.   Marriages are only between dudes and dudettes.

3.   Jesus is God and is married to the church, though Jesus never refers to the faithful as his bride, but instead only as sheep, children and wedding guests, and never compares the Kingdom of God to marriage but instead to weeds, seeds, yeast and vineyards. 

4.   Since God and Jesus are dudes, the Church must be the dudette bride in the marriage.

5.   For a sacrament to be “real” the symbols used in the sacrament must have a “natural resemblance” to what is being recalled.

6.   The sacrament of Eucharist is also the matrimonial sacrament of the dude Jesus marrying the dudette Church so that they can create together.

7.   Whoever plays the part of Jesus during Mass will act in persona Christi (in the person of Christ) … because they said so and despite Jesus telling the disciples to “do this in memory of me” not “do this in persona of me.”

8.   The only “natural resemblance” that will cause people to see Jesus in the Mass celebrant is if the priest has the same sex organs as Jesus, organs that will be suitably buried under the priest’s totally not girly-girl dresses – excuse me, vestments. 

9.   However, the part of the dudette church can be played by either boys or girls because sometimes priests celebrate Mass by themselves.  Don’t go there with imagery of a priest marrying himself.  Also, priests are the official voice of both the male and female sides of this Jesus/Church marriage. No, this is not the Church setting a precedent for priests dabbling in the trans realm with their manly men voices in dresses also being 100% the official voices of the girly-girl Church.  Gonna have to cut you off from the sacramental wine if you keep up with that kind of crazy talk.  Furthermore, sometimes boys don’t become priests and are just part of the dudette Church and they can’t come up with a better way to solve this.  So, dudes can be the dude and/or the dudette in the marriage.

10. Ergo the part of Jesus in the form of the priest must be a literal male but the part of the Church can be anyone capable of fogging glass because the Church is but a metaphorical female. 

11. If this union between the literal male priest and the metaphorical female Church does not occur, all of salvation history unravels.

12. “Good boys and girls” will not question any of the theological scaffolding that marginalizes women from one of the seven sacraments, Holy Orders.  Ditto for teachings about same sex unions.

 

That’s the movie version, the myth.  In the real world, people can see “natural resemblance” for men, women and non-binary people in the person of other men, women and non-binary people without confinement to gender.  “You remind me so much of your dad,” is a statement I’ve heard uttered at me repeatedly throughout life.

 

In the real world of logic, one can easily say, “You say males can play both the part of bride and bridegroom in a marriage?  I do believe you just gave theological justification for same-sex marriage and possibly trans individuals as well.”  This scaffolding of theology is so fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies that at most you can support one of these two traditional myths.  Either males can play both “marriage” roles in the Mass and you justify same-sex marriage, or both “marriage” roles in the Mass are metaphorical and can be played by men or women and you justify women’s ordination.  

 

There is also the option of having real live married people re-write the abundant theological myths about marriage and inject copious amounts of reality into those documents.  Ditto for women about women.  It would be comical were it not so negatively impacting to women that in Mulieris Dignitatem (The Dignity of Women), John Paul II acknowledges the rampant historic sexism and misogyny of the early Church “fathers” but then waves his hand dismissively saying that this didn’t impact their clarity writing about women’s roles in the church one iota.  Right… and I suppose JPII also believed that Klan members never allowed their prejudices against African Americans to cloud their judgment when setting policy about African Americans either.  

 

Now it’s time to fold in a third activity from this past weekend: enthusiastically singing along to music from the movie “Frozen” with the previously mentioned grandkid.  In “Let it Go,” that movie’s signature song, the young queen Elsa sings about struggling and ultimately setting herself free from the societal conditioning and consequently the gaslighting she’s been subjected to her whole life that’s been telling her to conceal her true self.

Don't let them in, don't let them see
Be the good girl you always have to be
Conceal, don't feel, don't let them know
Well, now they know

 

Let it go, let it go
Can't hold it back anymore
Let it go, let it go
Turn away and slam the door
I don't care what they're going to say
Let the storm rage on
The cold never bothered me anyway

 

Herein lies the split between reality and myth.  God calls women to Holy Orders.  God creates gay people.  Enough people have endured tremendous hardships to be their authentic selves that it's pretty apparent that this is how God made these folks.  The gaslighters try to tell women called to ordination and gays called to marriage that they’re crazy and/or evil.  But, for people thus touched by God to do otherwise than accept that this is who God made them to be, they are not only tormenting themselves, they are denying the truth of who they are. The torment they endure from external forces is cruel and abundant but less crushing than continuing to pretend they are someone other than who they are.  The hierarchy gaslighting such people is insidious and needs to stop.

 

Many progressives, whether they remain in the Church or not, can identify with Queen Elsa’s sentiments.  They’re going to walk in truth, becoming who God meant them to become and encouraging others to become who God meant them to become.  They’re not going to contort God so that the misinformed and misguided ramblings of many a sexist theologian can be preserved.  

 

They turn away and slam the door on the myth if the myth impedes or prevents people from becoming their full authentic selves.  They are walking away from gaslighting that paints people as “bad,” “disordered” or “damned” simply for listening to God or following Gospel premises.  They are beyond caring what the traditionalists say because they have been cold-shouldered by this crowd so much that they have become acclimatized to being out of favor.  Being held in low esteem by people who gaslight and dehumanize others is seen as a badge of honor rather than a tragedy.

 

Queen Elsa continues in the song,

 

It's funny how some distance makes everything seem small

And the fears that once controlled me can't get to me at all

It's time to see what I can do

To test the limits and break through

 

For centuries, the Church hierarchy controlled secular society in addition to religious dimensions of life.  That created growing spirals of power with control breeding fear leading to greater control and greater fear.  However, as the hierarchy’s secular control has diminished, so has their power because fear subsides. Consequently, here in the U.S. the hierarchy formed an unholy alliance with secular politicians who shine glimmers of hope that they will return control to them despite these same politicians violating gospel principle after gospel principle.  Side note: If the only way you can keep your spouse is to create an atmosphere of power-imbalance-fueled terror, you have a toxic unhealthy marriage.  Second side note: Marriage based upon coercion is considered grounds to annul the union. 

 

Those who braved challenging the hierarchy have realized with a little distance from the power myth that their fears were unfounded.  They step away and in doing so let loose with their God-given gifts that were previously suppressed and sometimes outright demonized by the hierarchy.  They help others become their authentic God-given selves too – others who have been tormented by the gaslighting trying to convince them that God’s calling and gifts were actually “evil.”

 

So what does bridge-building look like for people who, like Queen Elsa feel,

 

My soul is spiraling in frozen fractals all around

And one thought crystallizes like an icy blast

I'm never going back, the past is in the past

 

Once the myth’s spell is broken, can you ever go back?  Can or should someone who has broken the spell of a gaslighter return to the gaslighting environment?  We’re not trying to bridge the gap between a group of coffee lovers and hot cocoa lovers wherein we can simply serve both and everyone is happy.  The progressives aren’t going to strike a middle ground on dehumanization.  “Gosh, if you only dehumanize my gay family member 3 days a week instead of 7, I’ll come back.”  

 

The Rule of St. Augustine, the monastic rule to which Pope Leo, an avowed Augustinian, presumably adheres only has eight short chapters yet one entire chapter is devoted to maintaining chastity.  That chapter speaks about women as if they are temptresses to be avoided.  I struggle to envision someone who adheres to that rule making sufficient movement away from dehumanizing institutionalized sexism to build a bridge that a progressive is willing to trod upon.  The progressives are moving away from sexism and homophobia; they’re not going back.

 

Bridging in the Church is far more complex than my grandchild bridging fact and fantasy in “The Sound of Music.”  It will require the feminine voice being apparent within the official voice of the female Church.  It will require deconstructing destructive dehumanizing myths.  Most importantly, it will require traditionalists moving theologically– an activity they historically eschew.

I Know my Sheep

 Dear readers,

It’s been years.  So long that I write this article wondering if I’ll readily remember how to publish on my own blog site once completed.  It’s not that I’ve lacked thoughts over the last 3+ years.  I’ve lacked time.  However, I thought today’s article would be pretty quick to write.  

 

It’s “Good Shepherd Sunday.” I’ve recently been corresponding with my “shepherd”, my bishop, because of the ridiculous hoops imposed upon parents and prospective godparents in order to have a child baptized.  It’s kind of an “are you Catholic enough” litmus test.  Things like, “bring a note from your pastor if you are a prospective godparent, averring that your derriere regularly dusts a church pew”…and not just any church pew, the church pew of your parish.

 

I believe the motivation is tied to some convoluted logic that the mass exodus from the Catholic Church is occurring because parents and godparents suffer from a lack of Catholic-ness.  It reminds me a bit of the Deuteronomists of ancient days who thought that rather than treat people well, the world was a mess because people weren’t dutifully pious.  Just dip that genuflection 6 inches lower and miracles will happen.

 

I think part of this convoluted logic involves delusion that the shepherds have such gosh-darned insightful utterances shared only during their homilies that if one isn’t consistently absorbing them, the world falls apart.

 

In fact, the answer to why people flee the Catholic Church was spoken by every ordained clergy today who read the gospel reading.  “Jesus said: ‘My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me’.” (John 10:27)  TA DAAAAA!  You don’t know your sheep, so they don’t follow you.  Or in some instances, you don’t know your sheep but your sheep know you and flee in the opposite direction because you are so very, very lost.

 

Let’s examine this inane “are you Catholic enough” litmus test. Due to his regular mass attendance, JD Vance, the U.S. Vice President who repeatedly exposes himself as a self-righteous, pontificating jackass who brays like a donkey belying his poor grasp of Catholic social justice teachings is “Catholic enough” whilst he vehemently espouses Dickensian legislation to punish and deprive children of food, education, Elmo and due process but a person who attends mass at different parishes is not.  Pause for effect.  Someone dutifully in the pews but then screwing over the most vulnerable for his own political  gain is “Catholic enough.”

 

My dear shepherds, you are lost.  I repeat.  You are very, very lost.  If being Catholic is defined by you as “butt in pew, anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-women leadership, anti-birth control, and blind obedience to afore-mentioned anthology of anti stances,” you are lost.  Not only are you lost.  You serve spiritual poison not spiritual nourishment.  Sheep run away.

 

Why do people flee the church?  Do you know your sheep????? ....Is the pope Italian?

God Gives Us Science Too

 

I am genuinely sorry that as of this writing, Cardinal Raymond Burke has succumbed to COVID-19 and breathes via a ventilator.  I wish him well.

 

I learned of his illness via an email from Catholic Healthcare International (CHI), an organization embraced by Cardinal Burke which wants to build within my diocese a “peaceful pilgrimage site” devoted to Padre Pio.  This pilgrimage site hopes to be a veritable piety amusement park wherein one can partake of numerous pious activities all in one convenient location:

1.     Gaze upon a life size statue of a saint (Padre Pio)

2.     Visit a replica chapel of Rome’s Padre Pio chapel  

3.     Enjoy an outdoor grotto with a mural portraying this same chapel

4.     Pray the stations of the cross outdoors

5.     Walk and meditate along three scenic walking trails

 

The organization says it hopes the pilgrimage site inspires needed prayers so that they can ultimately build an entire healthcare related campus there including:

1.     A “Home for the Relief of Suffering” hospital

2.     A “truly Catholic medical school that will be fully faithful to the Magisterium of the Church”

3.     A public policy center related to healthcare

4.     A Terry Schiavo Home for the Brain Injured

Based upon the substantial capital needed to build these structures, I suspect a very serious objective of the pilgrimage site is also to generate funding to build their broader campus.  Thus, I’m pretty sure you’ll be able to buy copious amounts of religious souvenirs or just plunk down a wad of cash for the cause.  They might even take a personal check or credit card donation.

 

I cannot let the irony escape mention that Ray Burke, a man who has a history of spouting premium-grade scientifically void bullshit about the important healthcare topic of COVID-19, wants to jump headfirst into healthcare by building a hospital and starting a medical school.  It’s a safe assumption that his influential position amongst the uber-pious means his trumpeting COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, such as that it “implants microchips in people” so they “can be controlled by the state,” has deterred more than a few people from becoming vaccinated.  I can imagine this has had an impact on the resurgence of the virus and virus-related deaths. I don’t know about y’all but that’s a “hard pass” for me on wanting to be treated at a healthcare facility or by any professional taking medical guidance from someone whose utterances repeatedly belie a rejection of science while embracing and propagating false medical information. 

 

Gosh, can we hope that the proposed medical school would regress to teaching old-timey favorites like Aristotelian biology and the four humors?  I know how much the hierarchy depends upon Aristotelian biology to marginalize and discriminate against women.  Only problem is that key facets of Aristotelian biology have also been proven incomplete or false.  That’s the thing about science and medicine.  They keep seeking truth by making adjustments based upon new findings and understandings.  However, when you put on a pointy hat, plant your crosier in the ground and declare infallibly and immutably such and such is a “truth,” it doesn’t actually allow room for the truth.  It creates a fear of the truth.  That’s likely why Ray and his groupies fear science and medicine and spread misinformation about it.   

 

Side note to Ray and his fan club: the commandment against bearing false witness remains in full effect and Ray’s propagating false information falls squarely within that realm.  Furthermore, spreading false information that leads to anyone else's demise probably also violates the commandment against killing people.

 

I must confess that CHI’s endeavors have indeed already inspired my prayers because I pray to God that no one educated in medicine who must first bow and kiss rings and possibly the asses of prelates espousing medical advice from the “University of Kooky Conservative Social Media Memes” is ever permitted to practice medicine on anyone anywhere in the universe.  I also pray that my bishop stops lending his endorsement and support to such a project.  (Don’t make me regret the nice things I said about you last year, early on in the COVID pandemic.) 

 

I didn’t think that huffing too much incense caused brain damage, but I’m starting to wonder….

 

In all seriousness, my bishop is a smart, educated man, having earned a PhD in Church History.  But my daughter and son-in-law also are smart, educated doctors and, thus far, they have not yet – not even once - needed to refer to Eusebius’ “History of the Church” to treat a patient.  Just like you don’t want my daughter or son-in-law (especially not my daughter because – you know – girl cooties) to write homilies or Canon Law because it’s outside of their area of training and expertise, please dear bishops, dispense with the hubris of practicing medicine without a medical license or worse yet, of trying to gain legitimate medical credentials for people who practice medicine only according to how you think science should work. 

 

Had Cardinal Burke only had access to healthcare based upon scientific advances throughout history which aligned to his uninformed views of medicine and science, it’s unlikely that he’d have the ventilator which is currently keeping him alive.  (And my hope is that by the time this is published and read by folks, he’s still alive.)  When are the uber-pious hierarchy members and their followers going to accept that God gave us science too? 

 

I’m not even going to get into the hypocrisy of Cardinal Burke having access to expensive healthcare services while he fervently supports political candidates who think healthcare is not a universal right and instead should be meted out according to people’s ability to pay.  Nor shall I delve into a similar hypocrisy of the Cardinal railing against wealthy people donating money to fund certain healthcare programs while he is able to pay for his expensive healthcare due to socialistic pooling of money which is redirected to him via the Church.  Of course, the hierarchy happily redirects money from the wealthy or the poor towards themselves, so at least in this regard, they do not discriminate against the poor.

 

Currently the property where CHI hopes to build this pious amusement park and University of Memes Medical School is zoned for agriculture and country estates.  Therefore, establishing a place of worship on that property requires granting a special use permit.  Please note the word “special” which implies, they are not entitled to this permit.  Rightly so, local residents are concerned about potential increased traffic and noise that would arise from a pilgrimage site.  Therefore, the township board has rejected CHI’s zoning use exception for even just the pilgrimage site.  I’m not sure if CHI has been upfront about the full medical complex they hope to create there.  However, that definitely would increase traffic and noise.  And, if CHI wasn't forthright about their full set of plans for the site, again, that's violating the commandment against bearing false witness. 

 

Predictably, CHI has filed suit against the township board claiming violation of their religious liberty.  As is currently common amongst the uber pious in this country, they believe not getting their way equates to persecution.  My children when they were toddlers felt the same way.  However, just like my kids were not persecuted when they didn’t always get their way, CHI isn’t being persecuted either.

 

I pray that the special use permit continues to be denied and that the courts uphold this decision.  Look at that – another fervent prayer inspired by this whole project!

 

Again, in all seriousness, I am disturbed that rather than invest in the existing outstanding Catholic medical schools and hospitals which embrace and advance science and medicine such as Georgetown University, University of Notre Dame, Boston College, and about 50 other Catholic universities with medical schools, in addition to Ascension, St. Joseph, Trinity and dozens of other Catholic healthcare systems, the Cardinal and CHI wish to create a parallel system for medical training and healthcare practice.  My guess is they eventually hope to side-step the credentialing requirements of the American Medical Association (AMA) for those doctors trained by them wishing to practice in their hospitals and thus, operate outside of the mainstream governing bodies for medicine and healthcare.   

 

I hypothesize about CHI eventually hoping to sidestep credentialing governance because currently to become a licensed doctor, one must be able to perform an abortion.  Common medical situations such as a miscarriage (medically referred to as a spontaneous abortion) require this procedure and about 20% of pregnancies result in miscarriage by week 20 of gestation.  The AMA thinks any doctor should be able to competently address this common occurrence.  There are numerous other situations involving women’s health and end-of-life care about which people like Cardinal Burke make uninformed pronouncements based upon a lot of emotionally charged catch phrases.   I think it is a tragic day for women’s health the day that CHI gets to operate their medical school.

 

Is this inspiring you to pray too?

 

Note to readers who subscribe.  I used to use “Feedburner” for an email subscription service, but its email subscription service has gone the way of the dodo.  I am transitioning to using Follow.It.  Please be patient during the transition and also please be aware if you receive an email from Follow.It that it might be notification of a new blog article. 

"...And there was no needy person among them"

I thought about going to Mass today because I’ve recently completed my COVID vaccination series but decided against it due to living in the worst outbreak hotspot currently in my country…something about not wanting to inadvertently act as a plague vector though not being able to attend Mass in over a year.  Side note: Unlike many folks, I actually enjoy attending Mass and before COVID was among the Catholic minority attending weekly Mass and the even smaller minority attending daily Mass.  I opted to write a blog article instead.  Hopefully I chose wisely.

 

This Sunday, the first after Easter, always features the “doubting Thomas” gospel.  I’ve written twice before in 2011 and  in 2013 about how countless clergy over the centuries spin this narrative towards painting  the fearful herd sitting in a locked room, avoiding the dreaded “other” (in this case the Jews) as being more virtuous than Thomas, who was out actually imitating Christ without fear of his fellow humans.  My experience is today’s clergy’s behavior increasingly parallels that of the petrified pious pack featured in today’s gospel reading.  So perhaps clergy’s message spinning is their self-exoneration reflex for the power they wield, largely due to fanning flames of fear - of God’s created world and humans.

 

However, rather than exclusively comment on the gospel reading, let's also look at the second reading, Acts 4:32-35 which reads thusly:

 

The community of believers was of one heart and mind,

and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own,

but they had everything in common.

With great power the apostles bore witness

to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus,

and great favor was accorded them all.

There was no needy person among them,

for those who owned property or houses would sell them,

bring the proceeds of the sale,

and put them at the feet of the apostles,

and they were distributed to each according to need.

 

This passage counts among those that most influence my daily lived faith.  I sometimes quote from it without offering the citation.  Specifically, I’ll say something like, “…they had everything in common…there was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them…and the proceeds were distributed to each according to need.”  The more pious the Catholic and/or the more Republican the hearer, the more likely the other person incorrectly guesses Karl Marx rather than St. Luke as the quote’s source.

 

Let's look at the gospel and Acts passages together now.  By painting the nervous, judgmental and withdrawn crowd as the most virtuous, and having the present-day apostles subsequently imitate that isolation and apprehension, it makes for an en masse perversion of living that passage from Acts.  Church leaders’ power is derived from fearmongering rather than from fearlessly bearing witness to the resurrected Christ via care for the needs of all people.  They mostly fear for their self-preservation.

 

 

Lots of folks donate to their church as their way of living this passage from Acts, believing the clergy will funnel their donations to help other humans.  A group called Charity Navigator rates the health and transparency of charitable organizations.  They do not rate churches, but we can look at their assessment criteria to help us evaluate churches as effective charities, as perhaps, effectively living Acts chapter 4. 

 

Based upon Acts 4, the gospels, and also by reputation, we should be able to categorize churches as human services charities.  According to Charity Navigator’s rating table on finances, human services charities getting the highest rating direct 92% or more towards human services programs and spend only 0-3% of income on administrative overhead.  

 

But what do church leaders, fearful about self-preservation, actually do with that donated money?  In many parishes, most if not all of that donated money goes to the church institution itself – self-preservation: salaries, buildings, schools, etc…  Though the parish may have something like a St. Vincent de Paul society offering food, clothing or financial support, those organizations are not funded by the parish.   For example, a few years ago, I was an officer of a local St. Vincent de Paul chapter and people approaching the local parish seeking financial assistance were invariably sent to us.  However, exactly $0 in funding was sent to us from the parish coffers. 

 

My current parish does actually give to charity, towards “distributing to each according to need.”  Based on my experience being a Catholic for more than half a century, this parish is in the minority.  But, since it is an example, let’s examine their annual report.  It spends 2.2% not on overhead but on human services.  It spends the vast majority on itself, its administration, its buildings, etc… Were churches rated by Charity Navigator as human services organizations, they might find themselves as the topic of an advisory bulletin issued by the organization, warning people that their money does not get used as assumed.

 

This is not unique to Catholic parishes.  Look at the skew of monies your congregation spends on the organization itself versus on caring for other humans, regardless of your faith tradition or denomination.  If monies are primarily spent perpetuating the organization itself, then people’s donations are funding a spiritual country club, designed for members to feel better about themselves rather than to see that “there was no needy person among them.”

 

Donating to a church offers a lazy outlet to pat oneself on the back while claiming imitation of Christ, when in fact, it pretty much moves money from a person’s left pocket to their right pocket.  It’s all about benefiting the donor through institutional self-preservation. 

 

Worshiping Jesus by attending church or praise services is much easier than imitating Jesus because Jesus wasn’t about self-preservation.  Imitation involves completely letting go of one’s money to feed, house, clothe and provide dignity to people regardless of how they came to be in their financial situation.  It requires examining and fixing systems that consistently produce disparate outcomes based upon skin color, religious affiliation or gender.  How are you imitating Jesus to ensure there is no needy person in your midst?

 

What do you think?  Should I have foregone writing today and made myself a possible plague vector or did I choose ok?

Reverting to Type

Dear readers,

Long time, no transmit...so long it took me a while to remember how to post a blog.

I last wrote on October 14, 2018, an article about my pastor’s resignation due to committing, “sexual harassment.”  I speculated at that time that he must have harassed a man and probably a priest for such rapid decisive action.  Sorry for the delayed update, but I did talk to the parish administrator shortly after writing that article and he confirmed I was correct on both accounts: the pastor sexually harassed a priest and in the Roman Catholic tradition, that means he harassed a man.  I wish the church hierarchy was not so predictable when it comes to sexism.  But, there it is.

Since my last blog, I’ve had two kids get married, one parent decline into dementia and die, a traumatic brain injury and a few other things that occupied my time.  And now there is the matter of this pandemic.

There is a saying that during a crisis, people “revert to type.”  During more normal times a person might work to overcome certain characteristics but when the crisis happens, the mask comes off.  This raw character exposure is called “reverting to type.”

So what are we seeing amongst our hierarchy, our fellow believers and ourselves?  Are we living our stated value of protecting the vulnerable?

I think my local bishop is sincerely trying to do what is best, given that every day brings new insights about this virus.  Before government officials issued a stay-at-home order, he suspended liturgies.  Though religious organizations were granted an exemption during the stay-at-home order, he continued suspending Masses.  This Monday, weekday Masses will resume, permitting only 5% building capacity in attendance.  This will gradually increase over the coming months to higher percentage capacity attendance and more liturgies.  The diocesan staff has written extensive and well thought out guidelines aligned with the best medical guidance available, and update policies based upon new scientific findings.  At the same time, the diocese is focused on providing assistance to those suffering financially. When my bishop reverted to type during this crisis, he exposed the depth of his care for his flock.  Kudos on that. 

So, did I pull my laptop out of storage after about a year and a half hiatus just to praise my bishop?  No.  Though I support his pandemic-related actions, I am finding much fodder elsewhere for reflection as I observe behaviors. 

If you say you are “pro-life” yet don’t observe social distancing, don’t wear a mask to protect others, and rationalize that “old people die anyway so open up this economy,” please realize you are a fraud.  When you reverted to type, you demonstrated that you are all about caring for the vulnerable as long as the people expected to sacrifice to do so don’t include you.  Your first love is what is in your wallet.   When that appeared threatened, you caved and threw grandma and grandpa under the bus along with any other vulnerable person.  You scoff at women who cite financial distress as reason for seeking an abortion, labeling them as selfish monsters who are willing to sacrifice a vulnerable life for their financial security.  However, when it is your financial security that is threatened, you think it makes perfect sense to sacrifice the vulnerable with a callous, “they were gonna’ die anyway…”.  You’re a fraud.  Admit it and own it.  And expect to be challenged when next you try to assume moral high ground with your pretentious condemnations of others at the next elections.  You cashed in your credibility.

Similarly, if you call yourself pro-life and are supporting businesses and business owners that flaunt public health directives, you too are a fraud.  Though my bishop does not fall into this category, I do know of other Roman and Orthodox Catholic clergy who do.  They especially are frauds.  Why is it that you are at peace sacrificing the vulnerable when their protection interferes with your or your buddy’s freedom and autonomy to get a haircut or open a barber shop but you are completely intolerant of a woman saying she should have freedom and autonomy regarding her body?  Your philosophy,  is it that you think it is just the natural order of the world that some vulnerable people must die in order for the sanctified vanity of haircuts to continue but no vulnerable lives should ever die for trivial things like women’s health?  Yeah, you’re a fraud too.  Admit it and own it.  And pray do not try assuming any moral high ground come election time.  You cashed in your credibility for something like a haircut.

If you are suddenly super worried about the poor starving people in third world countries or even here in the US because you think stay-at-home orders which happen to inconvenience you are somehow putting these folks in greater vulnerability, please ask yourself: a) how much did you worry about the poor before these stay-at-home orders were issued, b) how aware are you of the impact your lifestyle and voting choices have in creating or sustaining poverty, c) what have you actually done to help address economic vulnerability amongst the poor pre-pandemic.  I know some folks sincerely not only worried about but acted to alleviate poverty before the pandemic.  However, if your concern for the poor suddenly emerged because you can use them as a poorly equipped phalanx to protect your financial self-interests, then you too are a fraud, especially if once the pandemic subsides, you resume your lifestyle and voting choices that disregard the poor’s needs.

 I might add that demographically, the working poor, often uninsured, are over-represented in occupying higher risk, lower protection, front-line jobs during this pandemic.  In the US, African Americans represent a much higher percentage of pandemic casualties due to co-morbidity factors often associated with poverty.  I do so hope that your concern for the poor includes addressing these issues versus feigning care for the poor whilst actually sacrificing their health for the health of your retirement account.  In that case, you would be reverting to type of using the poor and vulnerable for your own gain.

If anywhere in your possessions or social media bylines you have something that says, “What would Jesus do,” please be aware that Jesus was all about curing and healing not rationalizing death so he could gad about more freely and continue accruing wealth.  He said something like, “go sell everything, give it to the poor, and follow me,” not, “go sacrifice the poor so you can accumulate more shit and do whatever the hell pleases you.”  That latter message is more aligned with something one might hear on Fox News, which is an entirely different religion apart from and often conflicting with as well as perverting Christianity.

Amidst all this, a former religious education student of mine offered some of the wisest counsel.  He said, “We need to be empathetic.”  Yes, he is spot on.  We need to have empathy for the financially vulnerable, even the ones who were vulnerable before the pandemic and will continue to be after the pandemic.  We need to be empathetic towards the physically vulnerable, especially during the pandemic but afterwards too. 

An empathetic person dons a mask as a way of protecting another person versus deriding health experts for recommending their use, or deriding those who do don them.  If your medical credentials come from the University of Google, the University of Facebook or the University of Memes, please just stop trying to pass yourself off as an expert.

It is also lacking in empathy to deride people for listening to experts or the experts themselves by labeling them as fearful or fearmongers.  Those folks shouting for things to resume to pre-pandemic status must acknowledge that they fear too.  It is just that their fears fall into different categories.  Some fear financial impact.  Some fear loss of autonomy.  It is still fear.  It is ok and healthy to admit you fear the economic impact.   However, it is an unhealthy bullying practice to accuse others of fear without acknowledging yours.  Such tactics try to humiliate others into bowing to address your fears by diminishing their concerns all whilst saving face for your ego through presenting a false bravado.

This pandemic presents two problems: a global public health crisis and a global economic crisis.  We, as one Body in Christ must acknowledge the two crises and work together to address both.  That will involve sacrificing autonomy and financially in some instances.  Let us pull together, doing what Jesus would do, by being empathetic and caring for each other.  This pandemic crisis is exposing you as a Christian.  Are you reverting to type of graciously bowing to other’s needs in imitation of Christ or are you reverting to type of using Christianity as a front for your selfishness and hypocritically expecting others to sacrifice but not you.

Be safe and be well.  Hopefully I won't wait another 19 months to write again.