I’ve been thinking on this part of this ask for weeks now and the way my mind works this may or may not flow well. One thought led to another one and things expanded from there. This is the portion I’ve concentrated on:

“To be a member of the Roman Catholic church means that you accept that the Pope is infallible when he speaks on matter of faith, and is communicating the the true will of God. That also means that you accept that acting on homosexuality is sinful and disordered, separates one from Christ, and that gay people are called to celibacy, as the Pope has stated.”

 

I know a lot of religious people have opinions on social issues and politics based on their concept of their religious teachings, their interpretation of the Bible and their surroundings (the people they know, their experiences.) I’ve also never heard of homosexuality being ‘disordered’. I’ve also said before that priests were previously allowed to marry, and if not marry, there was an open secret that they had women and children who were acknowledged by the church officials.

I don’t know where along the way there was this mix-up between social, moral, civil lives and faith. I’ve always thought of religion separate from religion. That may be having grown up in the US with the Bill of Rights as my benchmark.

Unfortunately, the simplicity of the First Amendment of the US Constitution is also equally complicated.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. [*] [Bolding mine]

Herein lies what we laymen (and Thomas Jefferson) call a wall of separation between church and state.

The government cannot create, establish, make a religion for everyone to follow. It cannot prohibit, stop, cease, interfere with the individuals practicing of their religion.

This doesn’t mean that businesses are people and that they get to decide whether or not their employees take contraception (or abortive drugs). I mean, they don’t even get to decide how much to pay their employees. [i.e.: minimum wage]

What this means is that the US has no official religion, and the government cannot stop any of us from practicing it.

It’s simple really, but sadly, most think that this country was founded on the base of a Christian religion (although many say Judeo-Christian just to keep the ACLU quiet – they mostly don’t care about the first half (technically more than half) of the Bible. And please dear all that is Holy don’t remind them that Mohammed is also a child of Abraham and Allah and G-d are One.

Thomas Jefferson, the man most refer to in our Christian values didn’t live the life of a Christian. He was a Deist. Benjamin Franklin also was a Deist. There was one Catholic, two Quakers, two Unitarians and a boatload of Episcopalians and Congregationalists who signed the Declaration of Independence. Even so, not every one of those believed in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

In 1947, Justice Hugo Black wrote in his opinion that:

The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another … in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between church and State’ … That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach. [*]

I went on a retreat this weekend, and the facilitator was artist, Brother Mickey McGrath. One of the things that he said stuck with me as a polite version of, “I’m too old for this shit.”

He said that before his forties whenever he entered a room, he was timid. He was afraid of making a good impression, worried what others might think of him. Will they like me? Will I be interesting enough? Witty enough? Good enough for these people?

And then, one day, somewhere after he turned forty-something, he walked into a room and he wondered to himself, “Will I like these people?”

Just like that, one day, he didn’t care what anyone thought, only himself.

It’s unfortunate that this doesn’t come to us younger. For some of us, it does and we get labeled arrogant, self-aggrandizing, full of ourselves, but it’s really that we are a little bit more mature than those insecurities we all have at some point. We see the big picture, and if someone doesn’t want to be in the big picture with us, let them go away. We have ourselves, and WE are Great to Be Around!

I am not in that place. I want to be liked. I want people to read my words and want to read more. I am likeable. For the most part. But then someone asks what I think about this, or what I think about that, and opinions are the like sliding a zipper open. Everything it was holding in falls out and there’s a mess on the floor and no one wants to clean it up. Or talk about it. They step over it, and around it, and when someone does ask about it, the response is, ‘what mess?’

“Sorry, I can’t stay,” they say. “It was nice…..yeah, nice.” And you are left with the mess, not always knowing what the mess is exactly.

That’s how I feel.

I know how I feel about my religion. I am even more comfortable about my old religion, and don’t think of it as a conversion as much as a transition. I love going to Mass and receiving the Eucharist, but despite that I am still finding my way in my rituals and my spirituality, which is a part of my religion. When people question me, politely, I am happy to talk about it. When I get an accusing tone as if I’m doing something wrong or improper, I get defensive and insecure before I can come up with something profound and worthwhile to say.

It is more than George Costanza having the perfect one liner. No one wants to be the one being laughed at, and the line that comes out immediately only makes the embarrassment worse. It sounded better in my head.

The Internet is semantics. If we can’t argue about subject, let’s argue about semantics.

You spelled their wrong, so there! You have no idea what you’re talking about!

The jerk store called, and they ran out of you!

It really did sound better in my head.

I think three tangents are my limit in my digression; my procrastination in claiming the controversial soapbox if only for a moment.

As I said, I’ve been thinking quite a lot about this and my wording may change over the years as I become more aware of my own thinking and feelings, but my main thing is that I don’t think  my faith has anything to do with social issues. As Thomas Jefferson said, there is a wall of separation, and for me, there is a wall, or perhaps a hedge of separation between my faith and beliefs, my social beliefs and my spirituality, and all are evolving as I get older and learn more and take in new things.

My faith is a faith in G-d, not in the stories and Scriptures; the parables and simple children’s lessons. I try to follow the tenets of the Catholic religion, but faith has nothing to do with whether or not someone is gay or transgender or uses birth control.

My faith tells me there is a G-d, one G-d, and I believe in Him even though I can’t see him. I believe Jesus is the son of G-d, which is something that came to me two years ago, and he is both son of Man, human and divine. I take that belief on faith. My faith doesn’t talk about His orientation.

The Bible was written by men, fallible men. They are the stories that we use to understand what we can’t see; what we didn’t witness two thousand years ago.

I’ve been reading the Bible to my daughter. I think it started because she asked how people were made. Since her question was so clearly not about babies or birds and bees, I went to Genesis and started reading aloud. We both enjoy this time, the tone and cadence of the Scripture and the reminders of stories that I heard so long ago when I was her age.

I understand man shall not lie with man as he does with woman, but I’ve heard other interpretations in addition to the popular conservative one. For example, women were property, unequal. You weren’t to treat other men as lessers. It had nothing to do with sex or marriage.

And marriage. Adam and Eve. Am I the only one that doesn’t see the word ‘wife’ in their story? I don’t remember flowers and a cake, although semantically I’m sure that a Garden of Eden had some flowers. Or even a ceremony joining them in marriage. The word isn’t used. I believe that G-d gave Adam a companion.

And how many wives did Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have? We know the one who bore our lineage, but there were many others.

This is the Creed I state:

I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen. [*]

When I recite this Creed, I state my beliefs as a Catholic: my faith, the mystery of faith and nowhere in that does it ask me to stand against gay folks or stone (figuratively or otherwise) pro-choice people or those who believe in their reproductive rights. It also doesn’t tell those who don’t recite this creed to do any of those things either, and it is not on me to force non-Catholics to see my side, only to live my life through Christ, and to share that love with others so they can come to Him on their own.

I can have my faith and follow the right path, not just for history, but have both and not betray my heart.

 

[*Quotations of the First Amendment, Justice Hugo Black and the Apostles’ Creed are from Wikipedia, used under Creative Commons.]