Last night, Young Son #2 went to a local Assembly of God church with a friend. The church showed a movie where pretty much everyone went to hell for sinning and not repenting. An alcoholic went to hell for being an alcoholic. His son went to hell for bringing a gun to school and shooting two kids who were teasing him about his alcoholic father. One of the kids doing the teasing went to hell.
When Young Son came home, he was so freaked out by the movie that he said to me, “I want to try this ‘getting saved’ thing.” Whoa, Nellie!
He told me he wanted to get saved before he described the movie to me.
After I heard this, my blood began to boil. This is a tactic, a well-planned tactic that evangelical churches use to gain converts. They go right to children. They use the children of their churches to suck in friends for these “entertainment” nights, and once outside kids take part, they try to sign them up without parental involvement or consent. The same scenario happened with my daughter when she was younger, only it was an Alliance Church that tried this.
If there is one thing I can’t abide, it’s churches attempting to bypass my parental authority, especially churches that use fear and intimidation to get people to join. These same churches are very good at getting people to shut off their brains and play follow-the-leader. My primary goal in raising my children is exactly the opposite. I want them to be independent thinkers who know how to examine a thought, view or argument in a reasoned manner, not just fall for fear talk.
When I tucked Young Son in last night, I asked him to describe the movie. When he told me about all the “sinners” dying because they wouldn’t “repent,” I asked him, “How do you define sin?” In my estimation, there are actions that evangelical churches call sin that I don’t consider being sins at all – being gay, for example. I also asked Young Son if the entire school district in the movie went to hell for not stopping the teasing. In the course of our conversation, I told him that I grew up in a religion that rules by fear (Catholicism) and I did not want him to endure the same thing. While I resonate most with Unitarian Universalism, which believes in every individual’s right to a free and open search for meaning, I am not going to allow my son to get sucked into a religion that squelches that right before he has a chance to know his own mind.
Understand that I was vibrating with emotion during this conversation, utterly ticked that a church, of all things, would take advantage of my son. Young Son is normally a wheedler. He’ll wheedle me until I give in. My emotion and strong stance on the issue halted his wheedling. When I told him he would not be allowed to return to that church, he simply said, “Okay, Mom.”
A Mom’s gotta do what a Mom’s gotta do.
18 comments
November 20, 2007 at 9:18 pm
ordinary guy
Perhaps you may like to let Yong Son knows that God is actually a gentle person who loves him. Not the punishing God he sees in the movie. It’s the approach the various Christian denominations adopt in trying to woo more followers. In being too `aggressive’, it warps the understanding of God. ut it was good that your son communicated what he has been through with you for an open discussion and confiding in you. God bless
November 20, 2007 at 9:39 pm
woowooteacup
Thanks for your kind comments, ordinary guy. That’s my feeling of God, only I don’t think of God as a person, or a “Guy in the Sky,” more a universal force. I told Young Son that if he wants to read more about evangelical religions, he certainly can, so he can understand what they’re about without the pressure of conforming to a group before he knows his own mind. It’s tough to remain open to other religious teachings when coercion and fear are used to gain converts. Thanks for stopping by.
November 21, 2007 at 1:53 am
Reynvaan
I am very glad your son came to you before making the decision to become a member of that church. Being a 20-year-old guy, I can only try to imagine your anger as a mother.
A church that claims to follow the teachings of a man like Jesus (or Krishna, the Buddha, etc.) should never use such an underhanded tactic. Conversion by fear is the worst tool in the evangelical arsenal, the second worse being the one a church tried on me last summer: conversion by presentation of religious belief as indisputable fact while denouncing science and other religions as works of the devil.
Peace,
– Reynvaan
November 21, 2007 at 11:05 am
infestedsmith
I find it interesting that you think the Catholic Church rules by fear. Catholicism is probably the only religion that actually teaches consequences for sin. It sounds to me as though you simply do not like to have yourself or any other person take responsibility for their actions. The Catholic that obeys the laws of the Church does not live in fear, the Catholic that habitually sins, does. Unless you committed mortals sins as a Catholic, and did not confess them, you should have had nothing to fear, indeed there is great comfort in being Catholic and knowing the wonderful effects of Sanctifying Grace.
November 21, 2007 at 8:20 pm
woowooteacup
I feel for you, Reynvann. I believe the reason we have science at our disposal as humans is that it is a part of God’s creation. Same for other religions. All are expressions of God. It sounds as though you are well on your way to figuring out your unique spiritual path, one that is nurturing, rather than destructive, for you soul. Good luck to you.
Infestedsmith – Quite the leap you’ve made there about my ability to take responsibility for my actions. This because I dared to criticize the Catholic church. Tell me, then, what you make of Original Sin, which is the doctrine whereby we are born of sin, without having done any more than arrive via our mothers’ wombs. That, perhaps, is one of the greatest examples of the Catholic church’s rule by fear. Simply for existing, we are considered sinful. Somehow, I don’t think a kind and loving God would agree with this. Why would an all-powerful God create something which he/she hates so much? If we are supposed to be made in God’s image, yet we have Original Sin, doesn’t that mean that God is sinful, as well?
The extent of my “sins” as a child, when I regularly went to confession, ran the gamut from eating candy during Lent to having a squabble with my sister. (My husband said, upon reading your response, that I’m one of the least sinful people around, so I guess I’m plenty capable of taking responsibility for my actions.) Confession taught me that the Catholic church is nit-picky about sin, while also treating all “sins” as equal. I would bet if a murderer confessed his crime in the confessional, he’d get the same 10 Hail Marys and 15 Our Fathers I got for eating candy during Lent.
As I said in my original post, I don’t believe being gay is a sin, yet the Catholic church, which has historically been a hideout for gays, considers it a sin. And, speaking of history, what would you make of Catholicism’s role in the Inquisition? The Catholic church has plenty of sins to atone for itself before I am willing to believe that confessing to an earthly priest is going to guarantee me a spot in heaven.
November 21, 2007 at 11:10 pm
Ryan
Wow – this whole topic is so emotional. It makes my skin crawl.
As a gay man AND a Catholic, I can say that the only word to describe my religious situation is… complicated. The hardest part for me has always been juggling all of the mixed messages I’ve received over the years from church leaders via Rome and the priests and sisters I’ve known personally in my own community. The hot-button topics such as abortion, homosexuality, capital punishment, etc. are heavily debated within the Church leadership, and I’ve heard many priests actually admit to struggling with some of the Doctrine. However, they are obligated by their vows to uphold the values of the Universal Church, and do their best to lead their congregations likewise.
That said, I’ve never EVER had a priest reject or humiliate me or condemn me to hell. But I have been blasted personally by Baptist preachers, not to mention every anti-gay sermon on TV. Mary, while I totally understand and relate to your quibbles about confession (I never really got it, either), I was always comforted by the dialogue. Confession seems to be a form of rehabilitation… a kind of healing process. It suggests that we are ALL sinners, from the most righteous all the way to the most criminal. My impression of evangelical churches is JUDGEMENT. A gay person, or a woman who has had an abortion, or what have you… they have no rights, no relationship with God, no way out of hell. That is very not cool to me. If I had to chose, it would have to be confession.
Phew… anyway… as a kid that experienced a very similar situation to the one your son endured, I was encouraged by the way you dealt with it. Spot on, really. Fear is a tactic used by all organized religions, no matter how they try to spin it, but from what you wrote, your son sounds too smart to buy into it willy-nilly. And that… my friend, is all you!
November 22, 2007 at 12:19 pm
woowooteacup
Amen, Ryan! Emotional, complicated, mixed messages. That says it. Every one of us is on our own spiritual path with our own experiences of the divine, including those within organized religion. For me, the Catholic church simply didn’t click, even at a young age. I do think the church higher-ups are more likely to engage in the judgment messages than people on the local level. Maybe it’s like being online. If you can’t see the person you’re giving a message to, you don’t feel the need to couch it in kindness.
I understand about confession feeling like rehabilitation. Don’t we all feel better when we get something that’s been bothering us off our chests? You could confess to a priest or a friend or a family member and it all feels good. The weird thing about confession for me was that the punishment (all those Hail Marys and Our Fathers) didn’t seem to fit the crime. If the priest had told me to apologize to my sister, that would have been appropriate penance for fighting with her. If he had told me to eat carrots to offset the effects of too much candy, that, too, would have been appropriate.
Tell me, where you are from, do Catholic families believe that if someone in the family becomes a priest or nun, everyone else in the family goes to heaven? That’s a common view here. Of course, the area I live in is also often called the “Holy Land” because there are so many towns here that were founded by a particular priest. Go figure that most of them start with the word “Saint.”
Take care, Ryan, and thanks so much for your comments, especially that one attributing my son’s smartness to me. Must be in the hips!
November 23, 2007 at 10:03 am
infestedsmith
I never meant to say that you are a habitual sinner. I have no idea. I was saying that to the sinner who tries to correct his faults, and confesses his serious sins and make peace with God, the Church is a wonderful place indeed. What you call “rule by fear” is actually teachings of consequences for our actions. Our Lord Himself preached condemnation to those who refused to correct themselves, and he also forgave those who did correct themselves.
While it is understandable that you may think a penance of Our Fathers or Hail Marys is worthless, you have to understand, that you’ve done more them harm someone, you’ve harmed God. And the penance is a way of saying “I’m sorry” to God. You say you bet murderers would receive the same penance, but you have no idea whatsoever, so your point is moot, you don’t know, I don’t know, don’t make any assumptions on it.
Original sin is quite obviously the result of Adam and Eve’s sin, by disobeying God, and eating forbidden fruit. God didn’t want every baby to be born with original sin, but Adam and Eve made it so by their disobedience. We all have free-will, and if God were to correct all harm we caused to ourselves and others whenever we did something wrong, then that free-will would hardly be “free” at all.
Also, when we are born with original sin on our souls, we are NOT sinful, there is simple a stain on our souls, which bars the way to heaven (see Limbo) until we are baptized.
One thing that is absolutely essential to understand, is that while God is 100% merciful, he is also 100% just! As it written:
“In Love He created them, in JUSTICE He condemned them, and in mercy He redeemed them, through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Now, about your comments about homosexuals. Do you understand the difference between being homosexual (having homosexual thoughts/desires) is not sinful UNLESS the homosexual person submits to them. If a normal man has lustful thoughts about a woman, or lustful desires, him having them is not a sin, what makes it a sin is when he accepts them, or does not try to resist them. A homosexual person is under the same restrictions.
Someone who is homosexual needs to understand two things, first, his desires are NOT normal. Second, sex between two people of the same gender is absolutely and completely wrong. Not only that, but it’s also unnatural, and completely abuses the whole point of sex, which is too have children. And no, do not say “but some animals do it!” this may be true, but humanity is not an animal, we are rational thinking beings, with free-will and a conciounce.
About the “sins” of the Church, I’ve gone through this many times with people, and it’s the first thing they mention. The Church cannot sin, the people within the Church can. It’s that easy. It’s entirely possible for there to be evil religious within the Church, BUT, that does not change the Church. “The Gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.
November 23, 2007 at 10:07 am
infestedsmith
“Tell me, where you are from, do Catholic families believe that if someone in the family becomes a priest or nun, everyone else in the family goes to heaven? That’s a common view here. Of course, the area I live in is also often called the “Holy Land” because there are so many towns here that were founded by a particular priest. Go figure that most of them start with the word “Saint.””
There is one basic requirement for someone to go to heaven, and that is, to die in a state of grace. If you die, free from mortal sin, you will reach heaven. This is something the person must do, a priest or a nun in a family will guarantee nothing.
Please excuse spelling mistakes, I was typing fast, and forgot to edit.
November 23, 2007 at 8:19 pm
woowooteacup
Infestedsmith – Regardless of whether there is one requirement for going to heaven (i.e. dying in a state of grace), many of the traditional Catholic families in my area have acted as though having a priest or nun in the family will save them. It is their belief. Further, some have gone so far as to buy themselves favors within the church. My sister-in-law’s ex-husband paid to have their marriage annulled. This after years and years of marriage and the production of three children, so there was no question the marriage was consummated. My sister-in-law, who is not Catholic, absolutely refused to agree to the annulment because it would be a denial of her children.
I don’t believe my point about what sort of penance murderers get after confessing to a priest is moot at all. According to several sources online, the Roman Catholic church has a firm practice of confidentiality concerning confession, extending further, according to one source, than doctor/patient or lawyer/client privileges. Protecting someone from taking appropriate responsibility for such a crime denies justice to the victim. The particular article I’ve read does indicate that priests can report such crimes if they are not revealed in the confessional, and they will if they can. Still, I wouldn’t make it long as a priest if such a thing were confessed to me. Link here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/24/MN76841.DTL
As for homosexuality, I’m pretty clear on the difference between thought and deed. There are some who believe that thought is identical to deed, that simply having certain thoughts is sinful. As for me, I don’t find homosexuality a sin in either thought or deed. I am as firm on that belief as you are in believing the opposite and I can’t be convinced otherwise.
It is good that you take great comfort in Catholicism. You have found a religion that fits you, your one true religion. Yet, there are multitudes of other people who would claim that their own religion, be it Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc., is the one true religion, the perfect expression of God. Somehow, I think God is okay with that. After all, we were given free-will, as you’ve so helpfully pointed out.
November 23, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Ryan
Infestedsmith – your little speech would have hurt my feelings if I hadn’t heard it all before… a thousand times!
Most gay people I know, myself included, are SO OVER this stuff! I’m just the way God intended me to be, and if that’s not OK with the Catholic Church or Infestedsmith or anyone else, that’s their problem.
Oh, apparently I’m to understand that I’m “not normal.” Well, that’s Fantastic! Because if normal means spamming someone’s blog with hate speech, then I don’t want to BE normal!
November 24, 2007 at 11:35 am
woowooteacup
Hey, Ryan – How about you and I and my husband and all of us other “not normal” people band together and God can put us in the “not normal” section of the afterlife? We can have fun being “not normal” together. I can’t believe the church still thinks masturbation is a mortal sin. A mortal sin? Human sexual pleasure is a sin? I’m not buying it.
Besides, the Vatican decided within the last year that Limbo doesn’t exist. Apparently the papacy has been arguing about this for years and years. Kind of arbitrary to do away with a section of the afterlife, but then, we humans have long been good at determining what’s going on in the mind of God. If the papacy can get rid of Limbo, then, given the right Pope and a supportive society, maybe it will eventually determine that masturbation and homosexuality are no longer mortal sins. We can only hope. Until then, know that I’m with you on this.
Here’s the article on the dissolution of Limbo: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/12945/pope-to-abandon-idea-unbaptised-babies-suspended-forever-in-limbo
November 24, 2007 at 3:41 pm
infestedsmith
Ryan, God does NOT make someone homosexual, or deformed or anything at birth. He allows all these things to happen, as they as will happen, just as He allows suffering and death in the world, if He were to fix everything that went wrong, sin would have no consequence at all. God did not make you homosexual, he made you a human being with a soul. But everything else including physical, mental and personality traits were caused by natural reasons. Natural meaning without any divine intervention.
What I say is not hate speech. I don’t hate you, neither does the Church. What I do hate, and what the Church teaches strongly against, are the sins of sodomy and fornication, if you are free from those, you are doing what God wants homosexuals to do. Perhaps you can even shake homosexual desires, and return to the desires of the opposite sex, which IS normal.
I’d like you to answer a question for me though. Would you say it would be fine if everyone in the world was homosexual? If not, why?
Also, is this your blog?: http://reevadubois.livejournal.com/
November 25, 2007 at 8:01 am
infestedsmith
Actually, let me re-phrase that little badly written sentence.
“Perhaps you can even shake homosexual desires, and return to the desires of the opposite sex, which IS normal.”
What I meant was:
“Perhaps you can even shake homosexual desires, and return to the desires FOR the opposite sex, which IS normal.”
November 25, 2007 at 8:51 am
woowooteacup
Did you know, infestedsmith, that one of the definitions of blasphemy is “the act of claiming for oneself the attributes and rights of God”? (Dictionary.com – http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/blasphemy) To say that you know for sure what God thinks about homosexuals, to even claim to know how God does or does not make the creations of the world, is to claim to know the mind and intentions of God. I do not know the mind of God, but you seem to be pretty certain about these things. I think, perhaps, it would be better to turn these matters back over to God.
There are people who do not believe as you do concerning homosexuality. There are even religious traditions that preach exactly the opposite of what you preach. One of them is the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA), which includes such dignitaries as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, Clara Barton (founder of American Red Cross), Paul Revere, Daniel Webster, Ray Bradbury, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Louisa May Alcott, Susan B. Anthony and Rod Serling. (More famous UUs here: http://www.famousuus.com/)
Current UUA President William Sinkford has said, “For Unitarian Universalists, it is homophobia that is the sin, not homosexuality. Unitarian Universalists Stand on the Side of Love. . . .” (Link here: http://archive.uua.org/president/060711_ftm.html)
The United States was founded on religious plurality and freedom, not on Christianity, as our current White House Administration would have us believe. Proof of this can be found in The Barbary Treaties: Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796, article 11. Link here: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm#art11
I hope the day never comes that the United States adopts a nationwide religion, especially one that preaches the intolerance you espouse.
November 25, 2007 at 7:19 pm
infestedsmith
Ryan is a Catholic. Therefore, the things I say to him and you will be primarily be of Catholic nature. Specifically Catholic doctrine.
Your link about blasphemy is irrelevant. I never claimed for myself attributes or rights of God. What I stated about homosexuals was taken from the teachings of the Church, not from my own personal opinions.
Just because someone has an inclination towards something, it doesn’t mean it’s right. If I were to be inclined towards irritable reactions, that doesn’t mean I can do it. Just because I’m inclined towards drinking, doesn’t mean I can drink as much as I want. Homosexuality is an inclination towards desires for people of the same gender. Just as certain inclinations are more particular to a certain type of living, or family, lifestyle, so to is homosexuality.
Here’s something interesting though, at the end of your post, your posted a quote “For Unitarian Universalists, it is homophobia that is the sin, not homosexuality”. Are you actually calling me a homophobe? Because that’s a rather cheap way out, in fact, it’s THE #1 way out for every argument about gays, just call ‘em a homophobe, and it’s over! Well that’s not the case. I’m not afraid of homosexuals, but that doesn’t mean I don’t like what they do.
In fact, I have a relative who is gay. My sister used to do some yard work for her mother, and they got along fine. What changed our opinions of her, was this: One day she began getting very close with my sister. She would act all pal-sey, like she was my sisters best friend or something, and she would make it clearly obvious to my sister, just how gay she (not my sister) was. Eventually, my sister stopped working for this woman’s mother, because the daughter wouldn’t stop pestering her. She was trying to impress her “gayness” on my sister, which was just plain wrong. And no, she was not simple being nice, we weren’t the only people to have this problem with her.
Here’s the big problem though. The people who defend homosexuality, are in fact, not defending IT, but the sins of sodomy and fornication. Marriage is the union of a man and woman for the purpose of a lifelong commitment to love each other, to serve God, and to have children and raise them to be good people. The father and the mother (man and woman) both have intrinsically different personalities, and those differences make them distinctive role models for a child. If a child has two moms or two dads, he won’t have the special combination of motherly love, and fatherly love, which are so different, but still amazingly wonderful.
Now you say, why would this prevent gay couples from getting married? They don’t have children, so no problems right? Wrong. It all goes back to what your were saying about masturbation being a sin. You know why it’s a sin? Because sex isn’t for just one person! In fact, sex is the right of only a married man and woman, because all the reason of it lead to just that. Speaking from a man’s perspective, a man is usually attracted to a woman first, then he may marry her, since one of the primary reason for being married is children, the pleasure of sex provides a real incentive to have it. Sex between gay couples is wrong, because it is only for pleasure, and NOT for any other reason besides. If a gay couple didn’t enjoy it at all, they would have it at all. Wheres a normal, and real couple would, because they would understand their duty to have children. But, such as it is, there is pleasure, and so we should not abuse it.
One last thing, I’m not going to reply to any more of these post any more, unless something very big comes up, because your quote of “homophobe” is a cheap tactic, and I like an upright serious fight, and tactics like that ruin it.
November 26, 2007 at 3:54 am
Ryan
Infestedsmith…
*sigh* As tempting as it is to get into all this with you, I’ve learned from experience that the outcome will be a draw. I over-reacted before, and I retract the whole “hate-speech” thing and I offer my apologies. It’s completely knee-jerk, I’m afraid. So rather than type out my Gay Manifesto… I’ll just answer your questions. Anything more than that will result in back-and-forths and talking-in-circles, etc. etc. etc.
First of all, for me, the idea that the Church accepts homosexuals but NOT homosexual sex is a complete brainfreeze. I mean, that’s the whole thing, isn’t it? If homosexuals weren’t having sex, there wouldn’t even be a discussion. What it IS is a cop-out. It’s hiding the judgement and emnity of the Church behind a technicality. I’d rather they just hate. It makes more sense. I was taught that a sin is a willful rejection of God’s laws. There’s nothing willful about being gay, because (and you can believe this or don’t (I know you won’t)) I didn’t choose to be gay, and I can’t control it.
Second, the idea of a person who identifies as gay “shaking” their homosexual desires is ludicrous. A gay person’s attraction to the same sex is just as natural-feeling and visceral as a straight person’s attraction to that of the opposite. It can’t be removed by therapy, brain-washing, prayer, or magic. A gay person can CHOOSE to deny their natural feelings and rejoin the straight world, and I’m certain many do, and that’s where those conversion groups get their success stories. Many gay people are simply not strong enough to be true to themselves, so they submit to the wishes of their families and churches in order to belong. But they are living a lie. I don’t blame them for choosing that route, but I can’t be one of them.
Would it be fine if everyone in the world were gay? Yes, I think it would be totally fine… and very tastefully decorated (couldn’t help it!). It would never happen, though. The fact is, sexuality isn’t two sides of one coin: gay or straight. Sexuality exists on a continuum. We are simply too intelligent to be ruled by instinct, and that is a gift. And believe me, if the survival of the speices was hanging in the balance and there were only gay people around, there would be straight sex going on. Gay people are totally capable in the making babies department… it’s just not our first choice.
And yes, that’s my blog.
And that is ALL I have to say about that!
November 26, 2007 at 10:52 am
woowooteacup
Let’s all give a big AMEN to the end of the discussion.
I’m going to disable further comments on this post. (Hope the program works the way I want it to.)