.

Canonization and Fandom Purity Culture

I wrote a 1k-word twitter thread (as proof that I am Not made for Twitter and it’s goddamn 240-character limit) and am pasting it here with edits and updates (it’s now 2k words). 

I have thoughts to share (which I know have been stated more eloquently before by others) about this trend of demanding/obsessing that certain ships become "canon" and how it overlaps with the rise of fandom purity culture.

Under the cut.

Here in 2021 there is a seemingly large and certainly loud and active contingent of online fandoms who desire (or even demand) "canon validation" for a given interpretation of a source material. This is more true with shipping than anywhere else.

First, it is important to note that the trend is not limited to queer ships or to any single fandom. In the past few years I've seen it for Riverdale, Voltron, Supernatural (perhaps most extreme?), The 100, etc., and less recent with the MCU, Sherlock, Teen Wolf, Hawaii 5-0, etc. It is a broad trend across ships, fandoms, and mediums.

So if it is more common for queer ships, it is hardly unique to them. Similarly, pretending that it is about queer representation is a clever misdirect to disguise the fact that it is most often about ships and shipping wars. If you ever need proof of that, consider that a character can be queer without being in a given relationship or reciprocating another character's affections. Thus a call for more/better queer rep itself is very different than a call for specific ships to be made canon.

Also note that when audiences frame it as wanting to recognize a specific *character* as queer, it is almost always in the context of a ship. Litmus test: would making that character queer but having them *explicitly reject* the other half of the ship be seen as a betrayal?

(Note: none or this is to say we shouldn't push for more queer rep and more *quality and well-written* queer rep! Just that that isn't what I'm talking about here, and not what seeking canon validation for a specific interpretation or a specific ship is almost ever about.)

Why does this matter?

the language of representation and social justice should not be co-opted to prop up ship wars

it is reciprocal with a trend toward increasing toxicity in transformative fandom spaces

Number 1 here is self-explanatory (I hope). Let's chat about 2.

Demands for canon validation correlate with a rise in fanpol / fandom purity culture. What is fandom purity culture (and fandom policing)? This toxic mentality is about justifying one's shipping preferences and aiming to be pure (non-problematic) in your fictional appetites regarding romance and sex.

Note that this purity culture is so named as it arises linearly from American Protestantism, conservative puritanical anxiety around thought crimes, and overlaps in many ways with terf ideologies and regressively anti-kink paradigms.

It goes like this: problematic content is "gross" and therefore morally reprehensible. Much like how queer sex/relationships get labelled as "gross" (Other) and thus morally sinful, or how kink gets labelled as "harmful" and thus morally wrong. The Problematic label is applied by fanpol to ships with offset age or power dynamics, complicated histories, and anything they choose to label as "harmful". As such, they would decry my comparison here to queerphobia itself as also being harmful, because their (completely fictional) targets are ~actually~ evil.

(The irony of this is completely lost on them).

This mode of interacting with creative works leaves no room to explore dark or erotic themes or dynamics which may exist in fiction but not healthily in reality. Gothic romance is verboten. Even breathe the word incest and you will be labelled a monster (nevermind Greek tragedy or GoT).

As with most puritanical bullshit, fanpol ideology only applies these beliefs to sex and never to violence/murder/etc, proving what lies at its core. It also demands its American-based values be applied to all fictional periods and places as the One True Moral Standard. It evangelizes – look no further than how these people try to recruit others to their cause, aim to elevate themselves as righteous, and try to persuade (‘save’) others from their degenerate ways of thinking. 

“See the light” they promise “here are our callouts and blog posts to convince you. Decry your past sins of problematic shipping, be baptized by our in-group adulation and welcome, and then go forth and send hate to others until they too see the light.” In many ways “get therapy” by the antis is akin to “I’ll pray for you” by the Christian-right (and ultimately ironic).

(Although it has been pointed out to me that these fans are likely not themselves specifically ex-evangelicals, but rather those who have brushed up with evangelical norms and modes of thinking without specifically being victims of it. In many ways they are more simply conservative Christian in temperament and attitude without necessarily being raised into religion by belief).

What this has to do with canon validation is that these fans look to canon for approval, for Truth. On the one hand, if it is in the canon then it must be good / pure or at least acceptable. The authority (canon) has deemed it thus. It is safe and acceptable to discuss and to enjoy watching or consuming. In this way, validation from canon means a measure of safety from being Bad and Problematic. 

For example, where a GoT fan could discuss Cersei/Jaime's (toxic, interesting) dynamic in depth as it related to the canon, fans who shipped Jon/Sansa (healthy, interesting) were Gross and Bad. The canon as Truth provided a safety net, a launch point. "It's GRRM, not me, who is problematic." It wasn’t okay to ship the problematic bad gross incest ship, but it being in the canon material meant it was open for discussion, for nuance, for “this adds an interesting layer to the story” which is denied to all non-canon ships labelled as problematic.

(Note: there are of course people who have zero interest in watching GoT for a whole slew of very valid reasons, including but not limited to the incest. That’s a different to this trend. A less charged example might be The Umbrella Academy, where a brother canonically is in love with his sister and antis still praise the show, but if you dare to ship any of the potential incest ships then you are the one who is disgusting).

On the other hand, a very interesting alternate (or additional) explanation for this phenomenon was raised to me on twitter. (These ideas aren’t mine originally, but I wholly endorse them as a big part of what is likely going on): Namely, as with authoritarian individuals in general, they see themselves as right and correct, but the canon (which has not yet validated their ship) is not correct, and is in fact problematic, and so they can save the canon from itself.

As mentioned, these fanpol types see their interpretation as Good and Pure. So if they can push (demand, bully) the canon into conforming to their worldview and validating their interpretation, then they have shown the (sinful) creators the light and led them to the righteous path. This only works if the canon allows itself to saved though, otherwise the creators remain Evil for spurning them.

How is this different from fans simply hoping for their ship to be canon?

For a second here, let’s rewind to the 90s (since Whedon has been in the news recently). This “I want it to be canon” thing isn’t 100% new, of course. We saw this trend then for the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but it was different then. At the time, fans who hoped for a ship to be canon might have been cheering for a problematic one to begin with (Buffy/Spike). So shipping was still present, minus vocal fanpol.

(And Buffy fans learned that canon validation...can leave a lot to be desired. A heavy lesson was learned about the ways that fan desires can play out horrifically in canon, and how some things are best left out of the hands of canon-writers).

These days, this is still largely true. Many fans hope for their ships to go canon, as they always have. There are tropes like “will they/won’t they” that TV shows may even be designed around, which a certain narrative anticipation and a very deliberate build up to that.

But while shipping *hopes* occur for many fans, almost all ships fans that *demand* to go canon and obsess over are now the ones deemed as Unproblematic, or as Less Problematic. I’m talking here about the ships that aren’t necessarily an explicit will/won’t they dynamic but do have some canon dynamic that leads them to being shipped, but which the creators aren’t necessarily deliberately teasing and building up a romantic end-game for.

These ships often have fans who are happy to stick to fandom, but there has also been a huge uptick in the portion of fans who are approaching shipping with an explicit lens of “will they go canon?” and “don’t you want them to be canon?” and now even “they have to go canon” and “the canon is wrong if they don’t make this ship canon”, to a final end-point of “if the ship doesn’t go canon, the source material is Wrong and Bad.”

These latter opinions are the one we see more by extreme fans (‘stans’), hardcore shippers, but especially by fanpol-types, the ones who embrace fandom purity culture at least to some extent.

Why them?

In pushing for canon validation, fanpol types seek to elevate their (pure) interpretation of canon. As mentioned above, it’s validation of their authority, a safety-net, and a way to save the canon from itself if only they can bully the canon into validating their right and good interpretation. 

There’s also another reason, which is that canon validation is a tool to bludgeon those seen as problematic. They can use it to denounce other (problematic) ships as Not Being Canon and therefore highlight their own as Right and Good, because it is represented in the True Meaning of the Work.

Canon validation then is a cudgel sought by virtuous crusaders to wield against their unclean enemies. It is an ideological pursuit. It is organised around identity and in groups sometimes as insular as cults.

How does this happen?

Fanpol tend to be younger or more vulnerable fans, susceptible to authoritarian manipulators. As many have highlighted before, authoritarian groups and exclusionary ideologies like terfs are very good at using websites like tumblr to mobilize others around their organizing beliefs. Fanpol tend to feel legitimate discomfort, but instead of taking responsibility for their media engagement, ringleaders stoke and help them direct their discomfort as anger onto others; “I feel ashamed and uncomfortable, and therefore you should be held accountable for my emotions.” Authoritarian communities endorse social dominance orientations, deference to ringleaders, and obedient faith to the principles those ringleaders endorse.

As these fans attach more and more of their identity to a given media (or ship), and derive more and more validation and more of their belongingness needs from this fanpol community, they also become more and more anxious about being excluding from this group. This is because such communities have rigid rules and very conditional bases for social acceptance. Question or "betray" the organizing ideology and be punished or excommunicated. If that is all you have, you are left with nothing. Being labelled problematic then is a social death.

What this means is that these fans cannot accept all interpretations of a media as equally valid: to do so Betrays the ideology. It promises exclusion. And, in line with a perspective around ‘saving’ canon and leading others into the light – forcing and bending the canon to their will is what will make it Good (and therefore acceptable to enjoy, and therefore proof of them as righteous by having saved others). As was also pointed out to me on twitter, endorsement from canon or its creators also satiates that deep need they have for authority figures to approve of them.

Due to all of this, these fans come to obsess over canon validation of their own interpretation. In a way, they have no other option but to do so. They need this validation -- as their weapon, as their authority, as their safety net, as their approval, as their evangelical mission of saviorship.

Canon validation is proof: I am Good. I am Right(eous). I am Safe.

(In many ways, I do ache for some of these people, so wrapped up in toxic communities and mindsets and so afraid to step out of line for fear of swift retribution, policing their own thoughts and art against the encroaching possibility that anything be less than pure. It’s not healthy, it’s never going to be healthy.)

In the end, people are going to write their own stories. You are well within your rights to critique those stories, to hate them, to interpret them how you will, but you can never control their story (it's theirs).

Some final notes:

This trend may be partially to do with queer ships now being *able* to go canon where before so no such expectation would exist. Similarly, social media has made this easier to vocalize. Still, who makes these demands and the underlying reasons are telling. There are also many legitimate critiques of censorship, queerbaiting (nebulous discussions to be had here), and homophobia in media to be had, and which may front specific ships in their critique. But critique is distinct from asking that canon validate one's own interpretation.

Women and “medieval cruelty and ignorance”

Okay. So. We could probably have guessed that this tweet was like waving a red flag in front of a bull, but here we are anyway.

(Tagging @artielu​ because I know she enjoys my history smackdowns and this is right in her wheelhouse of interest.)

First: nobody denies that the Alabama bill and similar efforts are absolutely heinous, are designed to be test cases to get Roe v. Wade overturned, and are deliberately gratuitous in their constitutional overreach and general horrible Handmaid’s Tale nature. But for well-meaning liberals, such as above, calling them representative of “medieval cruelty and ignorance” is a) not accurate and b) counterproductive. If we insist on using “the medieval” as a conceptual category inferior to “the modern,” these recent bills bear a complicated, at best, resemblance to medieval canon law and social practice. And there was never, I promise you, any law that prescribed a 99-year jail term for abortionists. So if we want to point out how the modern Republican party is actually much worse than their medieval counterparts, we can do that, but also: trust me, this is thoroughly modern cruelty and ignorance, and we should insist on that distinction.

First, obviously, women’s bodies have always been subject to a social discourse of power, control, gendered anxiety, and attendant responses. This was certainly the case in the medieval era, but our modern interpretations of that discourse can be... iffy, at best. In discussing the feminization of witchcraft in the late 15th century, M.D. Bailey critiques how scholars have tended to take the Malleus Maleficarum, the famous witch-hunting handbook, as representative of a self-evident and endemic medieval and clerical misogyny. In fact, the Malleus was the equivalent of the extreme right wing today, was relatively quickly condemned even by the church itself, and was largely reworked from earlier ecclesiastical anti-sodomy polemics, because the idea of “disordered gender” was certainly one that occupied medieval moralists and theorists. I have discussed the Malleus in other posts, but while it certainly is virulently and systematically misogynist, it also was a work of rhetoric rather than a reflection of historical reality. Medieval misogyny absolutely and obviously existed, and it impacted women’s lives, but we also really need to get rid of The Medieval Era Was Bad For Women, (tm), Therefore Everything Was Worse Back Then.

The possibility of magic being used to cause impotence/loss of fertility was another concern, and one of the main anxieties about the practice of witchcraft was that it would bring “sterility” and irregular sexual activity (usually with the devil). However, an extensive corpus of contraceptive and abortifacient knowledge has existed since antiquity, and in tracing the representation of unborn children in medieval theological thought, Danuta Shanzer notes:

My findings suggest that it is overstatement to claim that from the start Christianity considered the fetus a living being from conception. Augustine is a major agonized and agnostic counter-example.

Hence, contrary to right-wing claims that the church has “always” thought that life began at conception (spoiler alert: the church has never once “always” thought the same thing on anything), it was almost never the case in medieval legal or theoretical practice. Thomas Aquinas and other medieval theologians argued that “ensoulment” or the separation of the fetus into a living being happened at quickening, when the baby could move on its own (which medieval medical treatises had various standards for measuring, but it would be the equivalent of about 20 weeks of pregnancy). Monica Green, a leading medieval medical and gender historian, has examined a vast corpus of obstetric and gynecological Middle English texts, and in “Making Motherhood,” argues:

Texts on women’s medicine might also be concerned to “unmake” or prevent motherhood, either by preventing conception in the first place or expelling a dead foetus that would not emerge spontaneously. Abortion per se was almost never mentioned.

In other words: abortion was not paid attention to in nearly the same way we do today, and while canon law, in theory, prescribed penalties for contraception and abortion, historians have consistently (surprise!) discovered a disconnect between this and secular law and everyday practice. And while some twelfth-century (male) jurists did attempt to equate miscarriage with homicide, and to install it in canon law, these laws were almost never practically used or prosecuted. In Divisions of Labor: Gender, Power, and Later Medieval Childbirth, c. 1200-1500, Rebecca Wynne Jones surveys the extant literature and notes:

In his 2012 book The Criminalization of Abortion in the West, Wolfgang Müller documents how 12th‐century jurists' increasing tendency to equate violence resulting in miscarriage with homicide was institutionalized in canon law. Though this development led to the widespread criminalization of abortion in ecclesiastical jurisdictions, Müller has little to say about gender relations on the ground. Rather, by highlighting local communities' reluctance to prosecute, he presents laws that might once have been seen as proof of a medieval “war on women” as legislative enactments whose practical power remained limited.

Once again: medieval ecclesiastical proscriptions against abortion were, at best, sporadically enforced, communities were reluctant to actually prosecute women or to criminalize early-term pregnancy loss, and church law was not identical with secular law, which was the standard ordinary people used and were subject to. This concords with what Fiona Harris-Stoertz has found in her survey of pregnancy and childbirth in twelfth and thirteenth-century French and English law:

It is striking that in these thirteenth-century English texts, no penalty was assigned for the loss of less developed fetuses. This absence flew in the face of high medieval church legislation, which, in theory at least, took all contraception and abortion seriously. John Riddle finds that the idea that early-term abortion is less serious than late-term abortion occurred in the work of Aristotle and appeared occasionally throughout the early Middle Ages, particularly in church penitentials, although it also appeared in the early medieval Visigothic code.

While late-term abortion of potentially viable fetuses was still a crime, secular law still essentially held to quickening as the moment at which a pregnancy could not be terminated. Before that, however -- anywhere in the first 4-5 months of pregnancy -- it could often be dealt with, if desired, without any penalty. Anne L. McClanan has investigated the material culture of abortion and contraception in the early Byzantine period. And Ireland, which as recently as last year remained one of the last European countries to outlaw abortion, had a medieval hagiography that actively canonized abortionist saints:

Medieval hagiographers told of Irish Catholics par excellence, the saints themselves, performing abortions as well as of “bastards” becoming bishops and saints. In hagiography and the penitentials, virginal status depended more on a woman’s relationship with the church than with a man. To my knowledge, no other country in Christendom, medieval or modern, produced abortionist saints or restored virgins, apart from the nun of Watton. Why Ireland is among the few European countries to maintain severely restrictive policies on reproduction remains an unanswered question, but it clearly cannot be attributed to its medieval Catholicism.

Last part bolded because important. Modern bans on abortion don’t relate to how these notions were conceptualized or used in the past, and they are not holdovers from The Medieval Era (tm). They don’t represent medieval concerns or medieval ideas of gender, or at least certainly not in a direct genealogy. Even as late as the seventeenth century, when ideas of childbirth, marriage, and reproduction were more strictly controlled, the period prior to quickening, or the movement of the baby, was still generally not penalized or subject to legal control or coercion. So in sum: while religious moralists and canonical lawyers absolutely did object to abortion (aka right-wing men, the same ones who object to it today, funnily enough), in secular law and daily practice, a pregnancy that was terminated prior to quickening was not subject to practical prosecution or legal punishment, and medieval women had access to a vast corpus of gynecological texts, medical practices, herbal recipes, rituals, and charms intended to accomplish a wide range of fertility goals: conception, contraception, abortion, a healthy pregnancy and delivery, and so forth. I also answered an ask a while ago that discussed all this in detail.

Also: abortion was explicitly mobilized as a wedge issue in the 1970s and 1980s with the rise of the religious right in American politics, and that happened not because of abortion, but in resistance to the IRS penalizing them for refusing to racially integrate evangelical schools and colleges. Randall Balmer has written about the history of the “abortion myth”; do yourself a favor and read it. The Southern Baptist Convention campaigned in 1971 for the liberalization of American abortion laws, and hailed the 1973 Roe decision as a win for the rights of the mother. (Oh how the mighty have fallen?) The right wing came together as a political force to resist racial integration, exemplified by their loss in the 1983 Supreme Court case Bob Jones University v. United States. But since it was not a winning political strategy (yet, at least) to fly the flag of “let us be racist in peace,” they, as Balmer discusses, created the “abortion myth” to make themselves look better and to present a narrative of holy/moral concern for the lives of the unborn. The reason abortion is as huge as it is in the present American political landscape owes to modern religious conservatism and extremism, resistance to racial equality, ideological control over women, and other bigotry, and (again) not to medievalism or medieval practices.

So, yes. Let us call the Alabama bill and other heinousness exactly what it is: a modern effort by a lot of terrible modern people to do terrible things to modern women. We don’t need to qualify it by fallacious equivalences to so-called “medieval cruelty” -- especially, again, when medieval practice and perspective on these issues was nowhere near the stereotype, and certainly nowhere near this “99 years in prison for performing an abortion” dystopian nightmare. If we want to shame the GOP, by all means, do so. But we should not resort to distorting and simplifying history to do it, and using the imagined “bad medieval” as a straw man to club them with. There’s plenty on its own. The modern world needs to take responsibility for its own misogyny, and stop trying to frame it as a historical issue that only existed in the past, and that any manifestations of it must be medieval in nature. Because it’s not.

GO Rom Com Spotlight: @princip1914​

The marvelous @princip1914​  has claimed Latter Days to adapt for Good Omens in the Good Omens Rom Com Event.

For reference, here’s some information about the source material!

Synopsis of Latter Days: Aaron Davis (Steve Sandvoss), a young Mormon, arrives in Los Angeles with three fellow missionaries to evangelize. The group’s promiscuous gay neighbor, Christian (Wes Ramsey), makes a bet he can seduce and sleep with one of them, and his flirtatious ways help Aaron realize he is actually gay. Returning home to small-town Idaho in shame, Aaron is sent to a faith-based center to be cured of his homosexuality – while Christian, who’s fallen in love with him, desperately tries to find him.

We spent some time chatting about how the adaptation is coming so far, as well as future plans for it! Now, get to know @princip1914 (also here on Ao3) a little better!

goromcom:  You know how if you open a Tumblr chat with someone you haven’t chatted to before, Tumblr tells you two things they post about? Yours reports that you “post about #good omens and #crowley"–which seems legit.

princip1914​: I didn’t know tumblr did that but yes, that’s 100% of my content right now, lol.

goromcom: You chose to adapt Latter Days as your rom com. Has this movie been a favorite of yours, or is there some other reason you chose it?

princip1914​: I picked Latter Days because I remembered it fondly from my high school days when I was a baby gay unsure of myself or my place in the world. It was one of the first gay romance films I ever saw, but I definitely did not rewatch it before I picked it. Upon re-watching it now…wow, it has not really held up. The acting is cheesy, the characters fall in love, like instantaneously, there’s a Black Best Friend™️ character, and there’s a whole lot of ways in which the movie just uses AIDS, homophobia, suicide, and straight up torture as a plot device [ed: which we will talk about later under the cut, to make it easily avoidable for those heeding the content warnings that will be listed above the cut.] That really grosses me out.   But I love working with flawed source material! I think it’s fun to see what I can do with it. The most recent fic I wrote was verrryyy loosely based on some tropes from Groundhog Day, which honestly on a rewatch in 2019 also contains problematic elements. So I think taking these old, somewhat flawed, properties and transforming them is a great feeling!

That said, Latter Days also has some elements that really speak to me even though it is a bit cheesy/cringy at the end. One thing I loved about it growing up is that it really tries to engage with big questions about belief, faith, and being a good person in an authentic way you don’t usually see in Rom Coms. Its storyline–“Mormon and gay playboy fall in love, Mormon learns you can be a good person without organized religion, gay playboy learns how to confront his fear that everything is meaningless and make his own meaning in the world through relationships”–is actually pretty similar to Good Omens, although dressed up very differently. 

goromcom: What’s your favorite moment of your chosen rom com, and are you looking forward to presenting it in your adaptation? Any loose plans for that scene that you can share? 

princip1914​: I have a lot of favorite moments from the movie, it’s hard to pick just one, but here goes. [Spoiler alert for Latter Days and the upcoming GO adaptation fic] In the movie, there’s a character whose long-term partner has just died and the Mormon character (who will be Aziraphale in my version) is comforting her. He asks her if it was her husband who died and she says, “He wasn’t my husband. He was my best friend.” And let me tell you, I CANNOT WAIT to devastate Aziraphale with that line in my fic. [end spoilers] I’m also pretty excited to adapt the sex scenes to be honest. That movie earned an R for a reason.

goromcom: :waggles eyebrows:

Do you plan to stick very closely to the story beats of the original movie, or make bigger changes? And will this be a human AU, or will you fit it into canon?

princip1914​: I think it’s funny because Latter Days already feels like a Good Omens AU. As I mentioned, the themes are very similar and the Mormon character, in the first two acts of the movie especially, has a very similar character arc to Aziraphale.

I think I could stick closely to the movie if I wanted to do a simple human AU. However, the more I thought about it, I realized the more difficult and more interesting fic would be one that works within both the bounds of canon and the tropes of the movie, and actually ends quite differently than the movie. I’m not sure I can keep the apocalypse in play with the ending I’m shooting for, so my guess is this fic is going to end up being a canon divergence fic set somewhere in the ‘90s, which feels about as early as I could go without losing the early 2000s vibe of Latter Days.

Trying to adapt elements of the movie to Good Omens canon and not vice versa, has been a really interesting challenge. It meant figuring out what is essential to Latter Days and what can be changed without losing the shape or recognizablity of the source material. I’m keeping the setting in LA. I’m keeping the central philosophical question of the movie (which is arguably also the central philosophical question of Good Omens). One thing that obviously had to be changed for this story to fit into canon is that while Aziraphale and Crowley have a long history, Latter Days is essentially a meet cute. So, what I’m saying here is that the first lines of my fic are: “What the fuck,” hissed Crowley, “Aziraphale, you’re a Mormon now?” and it just goes downhill from there.

goromcom: That sounds great!

(I’m asking my closing question early, as we will be putting the answer for another question under the cut.)

I am blatantly stealing this question from The Good Place: The Podcast, but here goes: Tell me something “good”. It can be something big or small. It can be a charity you think is doing good work, or you can talk about how great your pet is.

princip1914​:  Well, my pet is amazing. Her name is D'Arcy, she’s a mutt terrier/lab mix and gives the best cuddles. But, since not everyone can cuddle with my dog, I think I’d like to just mention a charity that I started working with this year. It’s called Back on My Feet. Basically, it’s just an organization that sets up running groups in cities in the US northeast and south that connect people who are recovering from addiction or recently experienced homelessness or incarceration with other people in the area who like to run. It meets 3 days a week and we just go on runs and talk.

goromcom:  Exercise and helping people! It sounds amazing. :)

Okay, so other than NOT doing an AU, what’s an interesting decision you’ve made in your planning so far–a notable casting decision, a changing of venue, or some other plan you have to paint Good Omens all over your rom com?

[ content warning for discussion of conversion therapy under the cut–discussion is firmly anti conversion therapy. ]

princip1914​: I think that this is more of a general change to the plot, but one which I do feel is in keeping with Good Omens rather than the source material. I don’t really like to write (or read) dark fic or whump type stuff (totally fine if others are into that, but it’s just not my cup of tea!). The end of the movie has some very intense stuff that sort of uses horrible things like electroshock therapy to “cure” homosexuality as a plot device/obstacle to getting the two leads together and…yeah I am probably going to signficantly change a lot of that. Even if I wanted to keep it, I think it wouldn’t be appropriate for the Good Omens elements of the story. I think Aziraphale’s character arc is more about his internalized fear of heaven (which can, of course, be read sort of as internalized homophobia) rather than external fear of punishment. That’s the main difference between heaven and hell, right? Heaven punishes through guilt, and hell punishes through pain. I think it just wouldn’t work for Aziraphale’s character to have to go through a series of external tortures, so you can absolutely expect a lot of the 3rd act of the movie will be changed. If I can, I’d like to take it up through canon and have the third act of the fic feature the notapocalypse, but that might be too much of a tall order. We will see…

I’m also going to make full use of the LA setting! I really like LA and I have some complicated yet fond memories of not-dates I went on in various places in LA with a person who was unattainable romantically but a lovely friend.  I think the movie definitely had a tiny budget, which is why the “LA setting” is basically just reduced to the character’s apartments, but damn it, if I want Aziraphale and Crowley to have tense not-conversations about their relationship while watching the skaters at Venice beach, that’s exactly what’s going to happen.

goromcom: Looking forward to reading an adaptation that fits itself into near canon! Should be really thought-provoking.

768.

Why did you last feel like crying? >> When I checked my bank account because I was trying to decide whether to get HBO Max or not, and I discovered that my stimulus check is coming on Wednesday. I’m just really relieved, lmao. Had just about resorted to convincing myself that I wasn’t going to get one at all. But now I can get some stuff I need but can’t normally afford!

How long ago and why did you last feel infuriated? >> I don’t remember. It probably had to do with people making noise.

Do emotions control you or do you control your emotions? >> Er. Well, here’s the thing -- on a good day, when I’m not having Symptoms Of Disorders, my emotions can be pretty manageable, or at least my management of them can feel pretty competent and compassionate. On the other days, my emotions can be a fucking game of Minesweeper where all the squares have mines in them. Except one. One square has 100 mines in it. The probability of stepping on that square is like 80%. So.

Do you keep your friends secrets/private information to yourself? >> Well, yes, if that sort of thing was shared with me.

What negative quality do your friends bring up the most? >> I... don’t think I’d like to be friends with people who have a habit of bringing up “negative” things about me.

What quality do you think you have that others don't think you do? >> I don’t know, I haven’t taken a poll or anything.

Do you often "jump" to conclusions? >> I mean, maybe. I don’t know how often I do it but it’s probably the average amount.

Do you find being alone with strangers scary, interesting or indifferent? >> That definitely depends on the context of the situation.

Do you think you know a lot about the world? >> No, because I don’t.

What about the world do you wish you never found out? >> ---

Do you know first aid? >> Not really, mostly because I’ve rarely had an opportunity to practice it.

Does the sight of blood make you feel sick? >> Not as a rule.

Does your first name have an L in it? >> No.

Middle name have a C in it? >> No.

Last name have a R in it? >> No.

Do your initials spell a legitimate word? If so, what? >> No, they don’t. But Sparrow’s spells “SAD” and that’s pretty funny.

The word above, does it have any connection to you at all? >> I mean, she is on antidepressants.

Do you prefer classic rock or nope alternative? >> Nope alternative???? I don’t know if that’s a typo or what but that’s hilarious to me for some reason. Anyway, I listen to both classic rock and alternative.

Do you like Kings of Leon? >> Sure. They’re, like... motel-grunge/motel-rock adjacent. (I can’t be the only person who’s made up that term, for certain kinds of bands. Like Queens of the Stone Age and shit. Sometimes Kings of Leon gives the same vibe, but... cleaner, I guess.)

How about The Script? >> Never heard of them.

Does crying make you feel better? >> Sometimes, but first I have to go through the hell of letting myself cry in the first place.

Do you know a girl called Becca? >> No.

How about a guy called Gregory? >> No. I almost said yes and then I realised I was thinking of Greg Hirsch from Succession. smh

Does someones background effect whether you'll be friends with them or not? >> Their... background? What kind of background are we talking about here?

How about their religious background? >> I mean, I don’t think I could be friends with a fundamentalist evangelical Christian. But most non-fundie versions of religions are okay with me.

If someone admitted cheating in a past relationship of theirs, would you trust them? >> ---

Do you drink tea and/or coffee every day? >> Nope. It’s almost warm weather time, so I won’t be drinking much tea at all until fall, unless it’s iced.

Did you ever want to be a cook as a kid? >> No.

How about a fashion designer? >> Yeah, I used to draw outfits and shit. I still think fashion is a fascinating industry but I want no part of it myself.

Do you wish that magic was real? >> I mean, no, not really. Also, like. I have Inworld. So.

What food would you love to wipe off the face of the earth? >> ---

Can you use a bottle opener? >> Sure.

Do you own a cheese grater? >> Yeah.

What time will it be in 38 minutes time? >> 11.06p EST.

What day/date will it be in 11 days time? >> The 20th of May.

Have you ever owned a pet fish? >> Nope.

Do you prefer fire or ice? >> I have no general preference. They’re both valuable.

Do you rap along with rap songs? >> If I know the lyrics, yeah...

When happy, do you become more talkative? >> Not necessarily. Sometimes I’m happiest in silence.

Bowling or sailing? Why? >> ---

What colour is your kettle? >> Black.

How about your microwave? >> White.

Do you prefer sitting in the front or back of a car? >> It doesn’t matter.

How about in a train? On the bus? >> I have a specific seat I like on the bus. Train, doesn’t matter. (On the subway, I liked sitting in the smallest seats so there’d be less chance of someone sitting next to me. Some of the newer trains have that one-seater that flips up, by the door? Love that seat.

Do you care about politics? >> Fuck no.

Obama or Bush? >> Well, that’s this survey dated.

Blair or Brown? >> ---

When did you last cook something from scratch? >> I don’t remember.

What things make you jealous? >> ---

Are you offended easily by non politically correct language? >> I’m not easily offended, period. Most things I recognise aren’t meant to be taken personally by me, specifically. But obviously I’m leery of the usage of incendiary language -- I’m not going to hang out with someone who throws around racial slurs or mocks people for having feelings about words meant to hurt them, like, duh.

Do you think the censors/fcc go a bit too far or are just right? >> I have no opinion about this, especially not a generalised one.

Do you feel hungry, thirsty, sleepy or none of the above? >> I’m getting tired because it’s around my bedtime.

What's your I.Q? >> ---

What's your Mum's Mum called? How about your Dad's Dad? >> ---

Do you prefer crepes, pancakes or waffles? >> Waffles.

Do you have ice-cream in your fridge right now? >> I think Sparrow still has some in there. Oh, and I still have a few mochi ice cream balls.

How about chicken nuggets? >> No, just fried chicken.

Do you eat fish often? >> Not as often as I’d like.

Have you ever taken a martial art? Which one{s}? >> No.

Do you know anyone who is scared of you? >> I don’t know if anyone’s afraid of me. If someone is, I bet they’re not going to go around telling me about it.

What person who has died would you bring back and why? >> ---

Do you like watermelon? >> Eh. I don’t get the hype.

Can you remember the month of your first kiss? >> ---

Do you make friends easily? >> No.

What makes you different from everyone else? >> Nothing, dude. I mean, I obviously have differences from people I know, or people I might encounter, but not from literally every human on earth.

I give you a piece of paper. What do you draw/write on it? >> ...

What pictures or photos are up in your lounge? >> My what.

Do you like purple and white patterned things? >> Not especially.

Do you know anyone called Pipa? >> No.

I say purple, you think... >> Sparrow, because I think she’d paint the whole world purple if given half a chance.

What do you think is the most interesting thing about you? >> Just, you know. My existence.

Do you like being complimented or does it make you uncomfortable? >> It can make me uncomfortable because of brain shit, but I also appreciate it and will try to express appreciation instead of discomfort.

Does the description of your starsign correspond with your personality? >> No, because the language of astrology as used to describe a person is more complex than just wherever the Sun was when you were born.

Do you have a photo album? >> No.

What artists paintings do you find the most beautiful? >> *shrug*

What about the most disturbing? >> *shrug*

Have you ever gone to a camp or summer school? >> No. I did summer theater once and I’ve gone to day camps.

What was your favourite cartoon as a child? >> Johnny Bravo is the only cartoon I remember watching, tbh. I didn’t get to see a lot of television unless it was the boring ass shit (to a child, anyway) my dad watched.

What was your biggest fear as a child? >> Thunderstorms. Until I hit thirteen and then suddenly I just... wasn’t afraid of them anymore. Don’t ask me how it happened, I really don’t know. (It might have been more gradual than that, of course. Memory is unreliable, especially from that far back.)

Would you rather be able to fly or breathe underwater? >> Breathe underwater. So, you know, I could actually not almost drown for once.

What about invisibility or mindreading? >> Invisibility. I want nothing to do with other people’s minds.

Do you like what you see in the mirror? >> No, which is why I don’t look in the mirror unless it’s necessary.

Which stereotype do you dislike the most? >> All of them??? Stereotypes in general?

Can you remember all your past teachers names? >> I can remember more than I��d expect to remember, but definitely not all of them.

Do you like talent shows? Which ones? >> No.

Have you ever failed an important exam? In what? >> Yeah, I failed the English midterm and final in 11th grade -- well, I say “failed” but it’s more like “I got a zero because I literally turned in a blank sheet of paper”. I... was definitely struggling.

Do you find people taller than you intimidating? >> No.

Do you think you are better than people of a different country/background? >> Fuck no???

What's your favourite thing about your country? >> Dude.

What's your least favourite thing about your country? >> Sigh.

Who is your favourite bzoinker? >> I don’t have a favourite, I just use bzoink to find surveys.

What websites do you have bookmarked? >> I have a lot of websites bookmarked.

Do you use bows and ribbons to decorate your gifts? >> No. Well, I’ll stick a bow on a Christmas gift because why not, but outside of Christmas I don’t even wrap gifts. I might put it in a bag but that’s it.

Do you listen to the same type of music as your parents? What type is that? >> I grew up listening to soul and R&B and gospel, so yes, that’s all still part of me.

What TV show scared you as a kid? >> None.

Family Guy, The Simpsons or South Park? Why? >> Hmm. Well, I don’t really know anything about The Simpsons, but I’d probably like it better than Family Guy, and South Park is so hit-or-miss (with a lot of misses) for me that I can’t really deal with it anymore.

(part 1) this is random but something im curious about is do you think the next few years will see a radical shift in more lead lgbt couples in shows? i feel like when supernatural started it was all about subtext/queerbating between characters we would never see canon (maybe), the last few years have seen an update in more side lgbt characters/couples and while not a lot, more main lgbt characters then we had before. I don't know if tumblr/twitter fandom translates to general audience...

Yeah, I mean, the only way is up. I feel lucky that I managed to encounter a fair amount of queer content in my formative years, whether targeted programming on TV, or taking the route of not really differentiating the perceived cultural value of independent media like webcomics and webnovels etc from the mass media as I was young enough to naturally grow up on the internet as the internet itself was growing up and web 2.0 was pretty much taking off alongside my use of the internet. And that I had liberal parents who didn’t regulate our internet, and lived in a community where culturally I didn’t really fear being discovered casually accessing all this like in particularly this terrifying seeming evangelical christian community in America.

Which really makes me feel like A: everyone should feel that comfortable in themselves via the media as I did as a mass accessible thing or B: that the world at large should be soaked in as much representation and more that I encountered as a curious teen because at the very least it did me no harm and at best helped handhold me through an awful lot. 

And then brings us to the problem that the world isn’t actually like that and for a lot of people their media is restricted one way or another, from everything such as the era of social media weirdly making us much LESS broadly travelled on the internet as I was back in the day (SO many bookmarks - I had like 100 that I would check either daily or on their weekly update schedule, with enough habit that I had pretty much memorised it all without using an RSS feed or just following everyone’s twitter and waiting for update announcements, never mind the vast pit of things which I occasionally checked to see if their sporadic but very worth it updates had occurred somewhere in the last month/year) to the vastly overwhelming amount of media accessible to us. It seems almost to flood the market and creates this panic about watching the worthiest shows and campaigning for them and raising awareness and the FOMO and how things slip by and zomg you have to watch this that and the other, when even just making this list on Netflix now contains more hours of TV than a human lifetime and also one liable to disappear from the service at some point or another without warning. 

And then on top of that you have the absolute cultural monoliths that if you’re not going to have a cohesive culture - which now includes the entire population of the world because of our connectivity on the internet and mass-joining of services - based around smaller shows and stuff, then at the very least everyone is going to watch anything under the main Disney umbrella, other superhero flicks, animated things, and all the really big studio franchises and remakes, as well as a few TV monoliths which manage to get enough people talking to make it seem like “everyone” (again - these days it seems like that’s presumed to be the entire western world plus everywhere else these things air) are watching, like Game of Thrones or whatever… THESE properties are the inescapable ones and on that basis they’re the things we have to lean on the most for representation and then again barely get any, when it comes to gender and sexuality, due to them shooting for such worldwide markets that they can’t imply gay people exist to censors in places such as China. And it exposes the cultural awfulness inherent just in getting a white female character in the lead role of some things, or the absolute garbage fire lurking underneath that if you dare have a black stormtrooper or make one of your female ghostbusters black when you’re already ruining the childhoods of so many how dare… 

In those respects, having side characters who aren’t even major well-known superheroes or jedis or ghostbusters or whatever also be gay (because even well-known lesbian Kate McKinnon didn’t manage to get her ghostbuster to be canonically gay even if we All Knew) would be absolutely groundbreaking, even if it was, like, a role that could be snipped out for the Chinese market or something. And that’s probably exactly what would happen, and cue ensuing riot from whichever fandom, along with everyone rightly pointing out that even for us who got to watch it it was still a tiny side character… I mean Disney is still at the stage of what they did with Beauty and the Beast’s ~canonical gay character~ 

So yeah… that’s thrown back to TV and smaller movies to lead the way and because the generations showing most likely the real global percentages but actually just the young western world stats on queerness in any form (like… 25% instead of 1% or whatever and that’s STILL probably too low) are still teens to young adults. The previous gayest generation above them are still just arriving in power and settling in, and the excellent changes we already have from the generation before that is what we are seeing now... But given THEIR cultural context, even their best can still seem to younger eyes, moderate and not generally placing queer characters in lead roles except in niche or indie or otherwise “acceptable” places to take those risks. I think change is always coming and culturally each generation being more open and accepting that the last is really making changes and so on, hopefully things WILL change rapidly and what was the common state of affairs in the sort of indie media I consumed as a teen will be the mainstream soon because a lot of those creators 10 years later are kicking off… 

All that said, TV in the mainstream is still controlled by Mark Pedowitz types exercising their power over the Bobos who have their Wayward Sisters pitches with the clearly labelled main character for the main teen demographic being queer. The culture is very much that we’re now pretty open and can happily have queer characters, but the main characters are still largely held separate. A good example is Riverdale, which is on the CW, a newer show with writers such as Britta Lundin, who is young, queer, and wrote a novel blatantly based on being a Destiel shipper and fan interacting with the cast and crew in fandom spaces, and whose first solo episode of Riverdale featured a looooot of the gay stuff (yay). 

But while she’s a story editor and writer for the show and can use it as a platform for writing stories for its audience using a whole range of canonically queer characters, the show still keeps all 4 of its mains at a strict remove from this. Cheryl can come out as a lesbian in the second season after a lil ho yay in the first but no clearly marked storyline about her identity, but even though Betty and Veronica kissed in the first episode it was blatant fan service (for Cheryl in-story, lol) and mostly just set the tone that they are the sort of seemingly straight girls kissing for attention while having strong romantic or physical attraction to guys. In the second season the kiss comes up again in joking that Jughead and Archie are the only ones of the main 4 who haven’t kissed, Archie gets one planted on him by a dude as a “judas kiss” moment of betrayal in season 3 and he and Jug are teased that they were expected to get together because they were close but in the same sort of homophobic undercurrent tones as early Destiel snarking from side characters, seemingly less about their relationship and more to unsettle them with implications… I mean it was a complicated moment but in the long run it didn’t seem entirely pleasant to me, especially given the overall emotional state they were in and later plot etc etc. (My mum is 1000% invested in Riverdale now as a former Archie Comics reader as a kid so this is now my life too as I was in the room when my brother callously exposed her to it, hi :P) 

Anyway that’s just one case study but aside from SPN it’s probably the most mainstream teen demographic thing I watch… Other examples would be things like B99 which had Rosa come out as bi and that’s awesome, and made us all cry a lot, but Jake, the clear main character even in a very strong and well-treated ensemble, has a great deal of bi subtext, there’s no way given Andy Samberg’s apparent habit of ad-libbing MORE progressive jokes that he’d ever be intentionally harming people if that’s how his brain works (you know, like other people quick-fire offensive stuff from their mouth working faster than brain sense of humour :P). But at the same time for all Jake’s quipping about crushes and such and the fact the show clearly knows how to be sensitive to bisexuality with Stephanie Beatriz being a strong advocate, just because Jake’s the main character and adorably married to Amy. In NO WAY can that be threatened because they’re SO GOOD, so there’s STILL uncertainty that this will pay off in the same special episode “I love my wife but I am bi” kinda way that seems obvious that could just be said. We all carry on without it affecting anything because obviously Jake’s found his soulmate so we don’t mess with that but they should know it’s important to clarify it… Even with B99′s track record, I’m nervous solely because Jake’s the main character and main characters tend not to get self-exploratory arcs about latent queerness and ESPECIALLY not if they’re happily married. If ANY show was going to do it right and trailblaze in this exact era it would be them, but… gyah :P 

Anyway I guess the conclusion right now is that the more mainstream you are the more uncertain it feels, but we are right at that cliff edge, especially with shows putting in SOME of the work. If B99 doesn’t get us there (or the Good Place where they’ll happily confirm Eleanor is bi in interviews but I believe she hasn’t said it outright on the show despite clearly showing attraction to female characters, again, the denials we know so well in SPN fandom reflect a wider audience view of dismissing this stuff as jokes and not reflective of character feeling and identification without a Special Episode dedicated to confirming it >.>) then we’re very clearly on the cusp of SOME mainstream or massively well-known show doing it at least once in a meaningful way that has an Ellen-style cultural impact on TV writing. 

Let’s make it a goal for 2019 or 2020, and hope that a NEW show with a canonically queer main from the start is pitched and becomes a mainstream hit in the next 5… Still got a ways to go before Disney level mainstream but again there IS work going pushing the envelope, especially if we get a movie of a franchise such as idk Further Legends of Korra, or Steven Universe or something else that’s massively pushed the envelope with sexuality or gender for their main character on the small screen in the experimental petri dish they’ve had there for children’s TV. Something that would force Disney to blink about a lesbian princess or Star Wars to let Finn and Poe kiss or Marvel to let Steve and Bucky hold hands or something in order to remain relevant.

Once the Big Cultural Monoliths get in on it, I expect culture as a whole to first of all react quickly on the small screen, but honestly I’ve been waiting for them to snap pretty much my whole life since adolescence and they’re taking such wee tiny baby steps, and some factors are enormous geopolitical awfulness, that the story as a whole is unpredictable and we can only really hope that things don’t slow down. 

(Where this affects SPN is just impossible to say right now, given its almost unique position in this mess due to longevity vs fandom vs almost entirely new generation of writers’ room) 

Blind Date Chapter 3

“Bless me father for I have sinned.” Matt said ceremoniously as he sat in the small confessional. “It has been a week since my last confession.” He paused as he gathered his thoughts, attempting to find the right words for this.

“Matthew how many times do I have to tell you that the confessional is not for your personal therapy sessions?” Father Lantom half scolded as his eyes rolled behind the separation screen.

“No, I promise, this time it's actually a religion thing.” He assured him. “You see I've been seeing this girl and well she's kinda wonderful. We have fun and we seemed to really be working as a couple.”

“Seemed?” Lantom asked accusingly. “A girl willing to overlook your nightly hobby and you let her go?”

“You know you're really bad at this no judgement thing.” Matt quipped back. “And I don't know...the thing is she's not exactly a Catholic…”

“And?”

“Or even a Christian in general.” Matt added.

“And?” The priest so far was failing to see the problem here, then again knowing Matt as well as he did the girl could be an actual devil and there'd be little he could say.

“She's a Pagan father.” He clarified.

“Well now look who's judging.” He quipped back with a chuckle.

“Her words. She's very proud of it. She even  found a way to show me her tattoos of her gods.”

“And?” Matt blinked surprised, never did he dream father Lantom would approve of this.

“I'm pretty sure the bible is very clear on the subject of witches.”

“Matt, over the last few weeks i've been seeing much less of the devil out and about. I assume this girl has something to do with it.” Matt nodded, he's been so preoccupied with you that he hasn't been going on patrol as much as he used to. “This girl could be the daughter of satan himself but the fact is she is bringing out the best in you. At the end of the day that is pretty much the basis of any of all this. So stop acting like a moron and go be with her.”

“I may have really upset her.”

“Then bring flowers.”

~ ~ ~ ~

Matt drew in a deep breath of the floral aroma that flooded the small flower shop he knew. He couldn't count the amount of times he had passed by it on his way to work, never feeling a need to stop in until now.

“Matt right?” The girl behind the counter asked in a voice he found all too familiar, watching him perk up at the mention of his name. “Its Dana… from last night…”

“Shit.” He dropped his head realizing his poor luck. “Umm about last night… I'm really sorry for ruining your wedding and beating up your brother.”

“Please,” she said waving off the incident, “don't, Johnny is an asshole and deserved it. Honestly, if he wasn't my brother he wouldn't have been there.”

“Then maybe you can help me?” He asked with a sheepish smile. “I kinda fucked up.”

“Oh god...what happened?” She asked with a sigh knowing how you can be.

“Well uhh… I'm a Catholic and-”

“And (y/n) gets incredibly defensive about her religion.” Dana said with a nod, knowing exactly where this is going. “Even more so after my Evangelical brother started beating her for her heathanistic ways.” She let out a regretful sigh. “Wait right there.” He does as he is told, and soon he feels her wrap his hands around a bouquet of flowers. “They're hyacinth, her favorite,” she explained as a relieved smile brushed across his face.

“I think I smelled these at her place the other night?” Matt asked as he gave them a sniff.

“More than likely, she always keeps fresh flowers.” She explained with a smile, glad to see you found one that took the time to care.

“How much do I owe you?” He asked reaching for his wallet.

“With the way you jumped up to defend (y/n) last night? On the house. She could use a guy like you in her life.”

“You are an angel. Thank you.”

“By now she's definitely at her bakery, its on the corner of 10th and 48th, right across from Hells Kitchen Park.”

The bell above your bakery's door chimed softly as he entered. “Welcome to Magicakes! I'll be right out!” You called from the back, elbow deep in honey cake batter. Matt smiled hearing your cheery voice as he breathed in the sweet confections you surrounded yourself with every day. In a rush you grabbed a towel, wiping the batter from your shirt as you hurried out, stopping in your tracks once you saw who it was. “Oh...what do you want?”

“I want you to hear me out…” he held up the bouquet, “and I brought you these.” You silently folded your arms over your chest. “They're your favorite...right.”

You couldn't help feel your heart softening for him as he held the beautiful purple blooms out for you. “They are.” You moved to take the flowers from him. “Thank you.”

“Look, (Y/n), I'm not what one would call a good Catholic. I drink, I swear, I fight... Actually come to think of it I'm a pretty terrible Catholic.” He paused chuckling to himself. “But the last thing I ever wanted to do was offend you for your religion.” He held his hand out for you. “Please forgive me?”

You stood with a sigh as you looked him over before taking his hand, reaching behind him to flip the sign from open to close. “Come with me.. I have something I probably should have told you about ages ago.” You said as you lead him into the back, shutting the door to the kitchen behind the both of you. Once in private you lifted your shirt before taking his hand and running it over your back. He found the sin the be rough and striped with scar tissue.

“What happened?” He asked softly as he traced the small slashing scars running up and down your back.

“Johnny happened.” You admitted as you lowered your shirt.

“He did this to you?” Matt's voice lowered as rage for this guy began to boil in him. You nodded. “Why?” It didn't matter much to him. There is no reason to do this to a woman as sweet as you. But even he could see the abuse still affected you.

“Because I am proud to be Pagan, and very actively practice. He said he was trying to save my soul because he loved me.”

“(Y/n) I swear I would never…” he couldn't even bring himself to say it, just gently wrapped his arms around you. Your face burrowed into his chest as your arms wrapped around his waist.

“I know. I'm sorry. I just got scared.” You sobbed.

Matt pulled away from you, removing his glasses so you could see the sincerity on his face. “I promise I will do my very best to be as supportive of your religion choice as possible.” His words pulled a smile through your tears as his fingers gently brushed them away. “Well, there goes my plans of inviting you to Mass with me next week.” He joked, hoping to make your smile grow. “I think Father Lantom would really like you.”

You half heartedly laughed. “Well if you think I won't burn on church property maybe one day...but not next week. That's Litha.”

“Litha?” Matt asked curiously, wanting to show every effort to at least learn, to make you feel more comfortable.

“It's one of our holidays, the summer solstice, longest day of the year. Actually I was planning on inviting you. We stay up the night before singing and dancing around a fire, watch the sunrise. Then we spend the day honoring the sun gods and eating honey everything…” He smiled seeing your face light up being able to speak so freely about your religion. “This year is extra special since the Honey Moon falls on the same day.” You added with extra excitement as you made your way from the kitchen into the shop to flip the sign back to open. “I'm willing to bet the kids will make honeysuckle crowns.” You added with a chuckle.

“Wow sounds more fun than any of the holidays I got growing up...just meant an extra long service and sometimes a present to unwrap.” He said with a half laugh as he leaned against one of your glass display cases. “But I guess that's what you get when you're raised by nuns in a Catholic school.”

“Ugh that sounds horrible.” You both couldn't help laughing as he agreed.

“Oh! Here,” you paused rushing back into the kitchen, coming back with a small honey cupcake, “try this!” You exclaimed as you held it out to him. He popped the small dessert in his mouth savoring every sweet flavor of summer it had to offer.

“This is amazing! Is this for your celebration?” You nodded with excitement. “So how about after your done here we go get that lock changed and get some ice cream?”

~ ~ ~ ~

“Ok...ground rules.” You stated as you handed Matt his vanilla come. He nodded signalling he was ready to start negotiations as you took your raspberry swirl. “First and foremost...I'm only sticking around if I can start calling you my boyfriend.”

“Is this- Are we going steady?” Matt joked as he gently took hold of your arm, laughing as you childishly answered with a yes. “Good. Ok no guilt to the other for not wanting to take part in religious events.”

You nodded as you meandered through the city heading nowhere in particular. “Wouldn't have it any other way.” You paused for a moment, recalling everything about your last relationship that made you uncomfortable. “You can pray for me only if I can cast for you.”

“I'm not much for prayer.” He chuckled lightly. “Oh, here's a good one..you can't get pissed at me for my ignorance.”

“Hmm ok...but expect me to invite you. You don't have to say yes but its always a lot of fun.” You said as you reached up to give him a soft gentle kiss.

Dreams of Ill-Fitted Expectations

Y’all...It has legit been 10 years since I graduated high-school. 10 DAMN YEARS! I was reminded of this a couple weeks ago  when that group text came through saying: “Hey, Everyone! It's our 10 year HS anniversary this year. I thought it would be great if we got together to celebrate…” 

The funny thing is that I started writing this post months ago before that text even came though. It was finished, yet of course I sat on it for no good reason. I also find it funny that it quite effectively touches on my high school experience and how it has significantly affected my relationship with what I would consider my greatest adversaries: perfectionism, regret, and expectation. Let’s get to it...

Let me begin by telling  you about my high school experience. Or at least the aspects of it that will help this  post make sense. If I’m to be totally honest...for the most part, I WANTED OUT! Just give me my degree and let me be free! Now don’t get me wrong, I am grateful that my parents did all they could to make sure my siblings and I got the best education they could afford. But it was a Christian school, and Christian schools have the potential to do a number on you. The school featured capitalistic conservatism, radical evangelicalism and “covert” bigotry (among other things) clothed in Jesus’ fabulously righteous garments. This is never good for a black and/or closeted queer youth. (I could go on, but I won’t...nor do I think I need to) In my experience, I can say that it may have ingrained certain expectations and an obsession with unattainable perfection. This became a cocktail of people-pleasing and self-hatred. 

All of this is coming from the valedictorian or the class of 2009! (I’m still caught up on 10 years...And my have things changed within them…) I was the student who received countless academic and  “Christ Like Behavior” certificates as well as the peer who got cheated off of the most (If I even allowed it, which was rare).  I was a saint, doted on for my dedication to academics and God. I think y’all get the picture. In my head, perfection was expected of me, and I was to deliver. I was to “become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:22) Exhausting!! (or the way I internalized it then definitely was.) Chiiille, unlearning some of this mess is grueling work , but I think I’m doing a good job at it. 

If you do not have enough background, DM me. We can discuss. But we’re gonna fast-forward to today…

Click here and you will get a pretty accurate glimpse at my today as it relates to this post…

My high school experience is front and center in one of the most vivid dreams I’ve ever had, a dream that I continue to recall when I need  to get my life all the way together in my journey away from perfection and unsustainable expectations. 

In this dream, I find myself back in high school, and I am playing the part.  Respectful. Quiet. Smart. Liked, but not necessarily part of a clique. Awkward AF (and some things never change). I am seated with the student body and faculty in the main auditorium. Weekly chapel service is about to commence, but I have to go to the bathroom. I get up to tell my teacher, the physical embodiment of all the pressure I felt to meet every unsustainable expectation of my life who we are gonna called Ms. Beulah Harrison. This was a huge reason as to why I could not stand her, among a few other reasons. She was the worst, but she was human...even if she did not want us to know it.

“Young man you’ve got 5 mins,” she admonishes Beulah-ly (yes I turned her name into an adverb. Her personality was so big, her name could be any part of speech). To which I respond, “Girl, all I gotta do is pee. I’ll be back in 4! Bloop!” Back then I would have never said something like that to anyone, especially not Beulah! However, in this dream world, I did and my girl LAUGHED! 

Somewhere between amusement and utter confusion, I proceed, and find clothes strewn all throughout the bathroom. I also find two washers and two dryers (which were definitely not there in real life).I take care of business despite my confusion, and as I wash my hands I notice that my ass is standing there in some boxers and a t-shirt. My uniform must be somewhere in this mess! I manage to throw on what I believe to be the right clothes, turn to look in the mirror, and see that what I’m  wearing is definitely not my uniform. I am wearing hot pink jeans, and a slightly faded navy, black and hot pink button down that is both tiger-striped and floral patterned.

I am now frantically looking everywhere for my uniform. I can’t go back to chapel in this! I begin putting random garments in my backpack (which was actually my current one) that I think are mine, knowing damn well most of these items would not pass dress code. I look back at my bag which has become a much larger drawstring laundry bag. I look though the bag, but to no avail. Not knowing if what is in the bag is clean or dirty, I eye the washers and dryers. “Maybe if I wash all of this I’ll be able to find the uniform and get back to chapel.”  At that moment I say to myself (out loud...in the dream...calm as ever...), “Brandon, stop it. You know what this is about. Wake up.”

I don’t know if I would have ever found the uniform in my dream. I also don’t know if all of that took place in the 5 minutes Beulah gave me or in the 4 minutes I told her it would take me, but all of the above are somehow beside the point and the point exactly.

I’ve spent years trying to fit into “clothes”(expectations) that no longer fit or suit me. I’ve gone through a lot to try to do so as well. Sometimes I’ve sacrificed my peace of mind and happiness to remain in them, but the same way you outgrow clothing, you definitely outgrow expectations. These expectations weren’t just those that others had for me; they were my own as well. And of course, my own became a lot more stringent than those of others. Compounded expectations became burdens, and burdens can turn into familiar yet dismal comfort.

Upon waking up from this dream, I made a commitment to confront the ill-fitted expectations and perfectionism that have hindered me for years. Lawd knows It is not an easy task, but dedicating myself to this confrontation and detachment has made it easier to forgive myself for my imperfections, embrace excellence and move forward. With that in mind, I’m excited to try on some new clothes.

Rejecting parents’ religion: parenting advice from Care and Feeding.

Care and Feeding is Slate’s parenting advice column. Have a question for Care and Feeding? Submit it here or post it in the Slate Parenting Facebook group.

Dear Care and Feeding,

All my life I have raised my child Christian, and now as she moves on to college and has a boyfriend, I’ve got it out of her that they are atheists. It devastates me, but I also know it is up to her to get her salvation.

The above statements are what I know my parents feel. I am the atheist child.

What do I do to help my parents feel less crushed? I know they only want me to accept God again, but I just don’t believe. I understand their faith, I just don’t want them to continue to feel hurt by seeing me.

As I move on to hopefully marry someone who agrees with me on my views, I feel they will continue to be devastated. And, will cry tears of agony instead of joy if they attend my wedding.

I know my views could change, but I seriously just want to hear what I can do to lower their agony.

—Child Turned Away

Dear CTA,

You are a kind and gentle person. I’m actually very touched by the concern you express for your parents’ feelings. It indicates they are not being total D-bags to you about the situation, which is great, but also complicated: When parents are being total D-bags about your loss of faith (which may not be a loss for you), it’s a lot easier to tell them to pound sand and move on with your life. When parents just seem fragile and sad about it, a lot of protectiveness and misplaced guilt can kick in. Fragility and sadness can also be very effective tools of control. Don’t feel like you have to apologize, equivocate, or take on the burden of their sadness.

You’re no longer a child. You’re their child, but none of us get any guarantees about our children, I can assure you. I’m a generic Protestant who is pretty into it without being an evangelical, so my lovely and mega-progressive shit-stirring Catholic mom is only mildly disappointed I’m on the JV squad of God and not playing varsity, and my lovely atheist dad is mostly bemused, as he really did lay out a great case for Only the Sweet Release of the Cosmic Void Awaits Us All (frequently a very comforting thought in its own right). They’re fine. I have no idea if my children will turn out to want or seek or find faith. I believe in God and that one day the circle will be unbroken, but today I cried for (checks watch) almost 45 minutes about John Prine dying, so it’s certainly not a magic balm that eases all lives and has the power to protect us from the fear of death. Religion can be a real motherfucker, as history past and present shows us.

My answer is that I want you to try to first release this weighty sense of obligation for their feelings that so clearly presses on you. You have nothing to be sorry for. You didn’t burn down their garage. They have experienced a form of loss and that’s for them to work through. But you do feel a sense of obligation to lighten their load, and I want to acknowledge that and offer some words of help.

Don’t dangle any “well, who knows what the future holds?” carrots in front of them. If a burning bush speaks to you, you can handle that when it comes. Expectation management is one of the true keys of human existence.

You are a person with values. Some of those values probably came from your parents. You can thank them for those values, if they have helped you become the good person you clearly are, without needing to buy into the belief system that provided them to your parents in the first place. You can talk to them about your own values. You do not have to be the Best Atheist in the World Who Cares About All Living Things and Climate Change and Systemic Inequality Every Single Damn Day; you can just be yourself. You’re the same kid they had last year. A good person.

You can also, down the road, absolutely say, “If you are gonna cry tears of agony at my wedding, don’t come.” That’s nonsense. If they try to win you back to Christ with teary phone calls in the more immediate future, you can say, “Let’s talk in a few days when you’re calmer.”

Just be yourself, all of yourself, be gentle but firm, maintain boundaries when necessary, and love them the best you can. That’s all anyone can do. I also encourage you to be aware of your own sense of loss, if you ever do perceive it as such, and to seek help from secular counselors if you need to process it. That doesn’t have to mean “I miss believing in God”; it can mean “I am sad that my natural progression as a human who lives in the world has affected my most foundational relationships and need to mourn that.” I’m glad you have found meaning and happiness in your life, and I wish you all the joy in the world.

Dear Care and Feeding,

I have a 4-year-old son who hums loudly while eating food he really enjoys. My husband thinks this is inappropriate behavior at the table and is a problem to be corrected. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it and assume he will grow out of it. He’s a completely normal delightful/crazy-making 4-year-old.

I don’t want my husband wasting quality time with his son harping about something that doesn’t really matter. Am I wrong on this?

—Loves a Pleasant Tune

Dear LaPT,

Oh, what a deliciously small problem, thank you so much for this. Honestly, at 4, I think your husband is right that it’s time to phase out loud vocalizations during dinner. (If your son has any markers for any developmental issues other than joyous food humming, and it turns out to be a verbal stim, I would probe that first, and I would be more inclined to let him enjoy his humming.) In the absence of such a reason, it’s not going to go over great at school, it’s clearly annoying the heck out of your husband, and I enjoy tremendous numbers of things I cannot do in front of other people at a sit-down dinner. It does not have an impact on my human flourishing, I assure you.

I don’t think “please do not hum at the table” is “wasting quality time.” It’s just parenting. He’s not going to look back on his life and say, “If only the two weeks it spent me to get my kid not to sound like a bumblebee when we had stroganoff for dinner could have been spent tossin’ the old pigskin around.” This will be over quickly, and you will barely remember it. If your husband is the only aggravated party, obviously you can expect him to be the “no humming” point person on this. You do not have to chime in, but I would encourage you not to actively undermine him in his quest, which is always a mistake for nonabusive familial situations.

See, too, if there’s a way he can take this musical impulse and do something a little less disruptive with it. I don’t mean “get him a harmonica,” but he might enjoy learning to sing. Exchange the behavior for a more productive one, if possible.

Congratulations on being an excellent cook! If your husband is the excellent cook, please pass on my compliments.

• If you missed Thursday’s Care and Feeding column, read it here.

• Discuss this column in the Slate Parenting Facebook group!

Dear Care and Feeding,

Just like everyone these days, I fear COVID-19. I’m staying at home, going to the store only when necessary, etc. My boyfriend is a police officer, and although I know he is very cautious, I’m worried about him unintentionally infecting me due to him having to work and human interaction. I have an autoimmune disorder and have repeatedly told him these concerns, yet he still comes over daily. He knows it’s serious but at the same time thinks it’s completely overblown. I’ve been clear that I do not agree. He’s taking it personally which floors me. I’m at a complete loss on how to handle this at this point.

—Losing It in Longview

Dear LIiL,

I need clarity on one point: Have you told him directly that he needs to stop coming to your house? Because if you have, as opposed to just telling him you’re worried and concerned about your autoimmune condition and the possibility of exposure, then he is in direct violation of your personal autonomy and you need to a) break up with him and b) carefully, as he clearly does not respect a “no.”

If you haven’t said, “I need you to stop coming over until things are under control,” then you need to say it now, today, and if his response is that you might as well just break up, that’s his choice. If he continues to violate your wishes, see the above paragraph. Our essential workers are essential, but so is your health.

I am not a dating columnist, but you came to me and here I am. I do not like this situation for you.

Is It OK to Go to the Zoo During the Coronavirus Pandemic?

Dan Kois, Jamilah Lemieux, and Elizabeth Newcamp host this week’s episode of Slate’s parenting podcast, Mom and Dad Are Fighting.

Dear Care and Feeding,

I’m not doing well. Are other parents doing well? I feel like the only person drowning when I see Instagram posts of learning-and-chore charts. I have to “work from home” with two small kids, and there just aren’t enough hours in the day. We do our best to do the remote learning we’re given, but some days it’s “let’s read a few books and then watch educational shows on Netflix.”

—I Feel Like a Schlub

Dear IFLaS,

We live in strange times, as did all previous generations at one point or another (Joni Mitchell spent weeks in a polio ward with essentially zero contact with her parents when she was 9 and still wrote “The Last Time I Saw Richard” eventually). You’re doing fine. Instagram is a lie. Be kind to yourself, do your best, and remember that every other kid is going to eventually return to school in a slightly more feral state and will need to catch up on things. The teachers know this. It’s just reality. You do not have to be a superstar; you just need to get through this. I also feel like I’m dropping the ball constantly, and I’m supposed to be a professional.

We’re in this together. Most kids have two months of essentially no education every summer, and yet they manage to grow and flourish and learn. One year where every kid gets double summer is not going to amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. Younger kids, like yours, are going to barely remember this.

I let my kids watch part of Thor: Ragnarok yesterday. We’re all just making it through the day. My friends who are teachers are struggling just like everyone else. I think you’re great.

— Nicole

More Advice From Slate

My loving, kind boyfriend of five years has spent the last 10 months in prison. He was off to a great start in his profession when a friend snitched and he got in trouble for possession with intent to distribute an illegal drug (that is legal one state over). He is now getting out of jail in his early 30s with more than $180,000 in student loan debt, a felony conviction, and is losing his professional license. We have stayed together during this ordeal, and luckily my family and friends are very supportive. I love him dearly and can’t wait for him to be home, but as his release date gets closer, I am starting to have a return of some of the anxiety symptoms I began having after his arrest. I work full time in a field I am very passionate about and could eventually be employed by the government. I am worried about how his record will affect me in the long term. I also sometimes feel that I am being a real idiot for staying with him due to his poor decisions. However, I am crazy about him, and we have so much fun together all the time. Any advice?

Get more Care and Feeding

Slate Plus members get more parenting advice every week. They also help support Slate’s journalism.

This content was originally published here.

10 Wisdom Principles for Connecting in Our Post-COVID-19 Reality

A Word from Bob: Today’s blog is a guest post from my friend and fellow biblical counselor, Pastor Jonathan Holmes. Jonathan is the Founder and Executive Director of Fieldstone Counseling. He also serves as the Pastor of Counseling for Parkside Church Bainbridge and Green. Jonathan graduated

from The Master’s College with degrees in Biblical Counseling and History. He also earned his M.A. from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He is the author of The Company We Keep and Counsel for Couples and the forthcoming Rescue Plan (P&R Publishing, 2021). Jonathan has written for a number of sites and organizations including, The Gospel Coalition, Biblical Counseling Coalition, Covenant Eyes, and the Journal for Biblical Counseling. Jonathan serves on the Council Board for the Biblical Counseling Coalition and the Board of Directors for the Christian Counseling Educational Foundation; he speaks frequently at retreats and conferences. He and his wife, Jennifer, have four daughters, Ava, Riley, Ruby, and Emma. 

We Are All in This Together 

One of my fondest memories as a high school student was an English class in 12th grade. We were studying British literature and were reading British sonnet writer, John Donne. Donne amassed a large collection of sonnets and poems, many of which remain popular even today. His Mediation XVII has been particularly helpful to me during this season of COVID:

PERCHANCE he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him…

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.

Donne illustrates beautifully the reality that every human being is connected. Donne admonishes the reader to not ask for whom the bell tolls, because the bell tolls for you. Bells in Donne’s day would ring out in local villages to announce the death of someone in that community. Donne is telling the reader that when they hear the local bell announcing a death not to ask who died, rather realize that a part of you died.

Donne echoes the reality portrayed in Scripture:

“If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together” (1 Corinthians 12:26).

COVID has reminded us of this fundamental reality:

We are all in this together.

While you may not have contracted COVID, that in no way diminishes our collective responsibility to grieve the loss, the heartache, and the sadness of what this virus has wrought.

Our Re-entry Back Into Community 

As we prepare to enter into a post-COVID world, the abiding truth of our connected humanity must ground our re-entry back into community. As we come back together as a country, a local community, a neighborhood, a church, how can we enter in wisely and compassionately? Here are ten helpful ways we can begin preparing.

1. Enter into people’s stories with patience, pursuit, and purpose.

I don’t know about you, but I’m eagerly looking forward to being able to look people in the eyes and have a conversation. I’m excited to hear about their day and what happened. I’m excited to see new couples who have been married and new babies that have been born; but I’m also expecting that there will be grief and mourning for many. We are all entering into a state of collective grief and trauma.

Let’s be thoughtful about these stories and realities. For some, coming out of the shelter in place will be hard and actually include more opportunity for anxiety. For others, it will feel like a release from prison.

In The Magician’s Nephew, Aslan tells a recently bereaved boy:

“My son, my son I know. Grief is great. Only you and I in this land know that yet. Let us be good to one another.”

Regardless of where we come from, let’s be committed to esteeming and considering other’s interests above our own (Philippians 2:3-4).

2. Seek understanding and be compassionate.

From perusing social media, I can tell that there are a variety of opinions on COVID. Some believe the government did too much, others believe they have not done enough. The author of Proverbs states it well:

“Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions.”

As restrictions relax, and we enter back into community life, many will have opinions of what was done well and what was not done well. How can we grow in asking questions before we make pronouncements of judgment? How can we learn from others who hold to different opinions than ourselves? Above all how can we hold to Augustine’s statement?

“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

3. Look for ways to be generous.

Many people are being affected by COVID in the area of their financial well-being. We know people who are unemployed, underemployed, furloughed, etc. Being generous can most certainly apply to our money. Yet, there are there additional ways we can be generous with our time, food, practical help, resources, and connections. For those who received stimulus checks and are able to help others, who in your community could be the beneficiaries of your generosity?

4. Identify what has been good, hard, and bad for others.

Not everyone has experienced the shelter in place restrictions like you have. How can you have conversations that acknowledge this reality? One way is to simply observe what Scripture says about all of our realities: that it’s a mix of the good, hard, and bad. God is always up to good in the lives of those who are His (Philippians 1:6), the world we live in is broken and hard (Romans 8:19-22), and we continue to struggle with a variety of sins even as believers (Galatians 5:1-21).

5. Keep up practices that you found nourishing and life-giving.

Hopefully COVID disrupted some of our unhealthier practices and routines associated with over-work. What good practices did you put in place during your shelter in place? Meals together as a family? Family worship and devotions? Long, extended walks for conversation? Playing games together as a family? Lord willing those practices don’t end when the shelter in place ends, but rather continue into the future!

6. Examine what is of essential importance in your life.

A professor of mine in college had a saying that went something like this:

“You’ll never know God is all you need, until God is all you have.”

What has COVID revealed and exposed in your heart? Where have you misplaced your allegiances and loves? If it was your health, COVID has shown how quickly that can change. If it was your financial well-being, COVID has shown how quickly that can change. As Paul Tripp is fond of saying:

“God is taking you where you do not want to go to produce in you the change you could not on your own.”

7. Continue leaning into prayer.

When all seems dark and lost in our current age, is there anything more real, or more tangible than being able to go to our Father in prayer? Many of us, I am confident, are learning what it truly means to draw near to the Lord in prayer. When we realize there is not much we have control over, we can either despair or we can run to the All-Powerful God of this universe who is eager to draw near to us and hear our prayers (cf. Psalm 116:1-2). We have much to be thankful and grateful for.

8. Evaluate our relationships with technology.

For all those who have dumped on technology as a poor substitute for friendship and relationship (personally guilty here), I believe in many ways technology has been a great help to help us remain somewhat connected. Is it the same thing as in-person communication? No, but we would be foolish to say it’s not a gift to many in this time. Let’s be sure to keep technology in its proper place in our lives as we transition ahead. Technology is a good servant, but a terrible master.

9. Confess that we have taken community and relationships for granted.

A reality that I’ve realized and heard echoed from others is that many of us undervalued the community we had as a body of believers. From attending church on a Sunday to being able to gather in homes as a community group, many of us took those realities for granted. Apathy is a subtle pattern that can invade our hearts, and one which we must be ever mindful of.

10. Offer gratitude and thanksgiving to God and others.

Gratitude seems so underrated in our culture. Often, I’ve found myself with an attitude of entitlement: “I deserve _____.” Rather than an attitude of gratitude: “I am thankful for _____.” Like others, I was brought up being told that gratitude is an attitude. It’s an attitude and perspective of one who realizes that everything they have comes from the Lord. Like the psalmist in Psalm 16:8-9, 11, our hearts cry out:

“I have set the LORD always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be shaken. Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure. You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.”

Grace for Today 

Undoubtedly in the next few weeks and months, there will be countless hot-takes and how-to articles which will be offered post-COVID. Whenever the shelter-in-place restrictions begin to lift, there will be tide of inertia to pick up and resume life—a return to normalcy.

Perhaps one of the lessons we are all learning is that returning to normal isn’t the primary goal. Instead the goal is growth in what it means to flourish and thrive where God has planted us. Be slow though about this re-entry. Be thoughtful. May we all endeavor to take each day a step at a time in the Lord’s grace.

The post 10 Wisdom Principles for Connecting in Our Post-COVID-19 Reality appeared first on RPM Ministries.

Go to the article

If anyone is curious about what i mean by the type of Christians who specifically seek out Jewish people to try and convert them

there are some very good writeups about it on a website called Jews for Judaism (specifically meant to parody the name of a popular missionary movement, “Jews for Jesus”)

http://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/general-missionary-faqs/

Jews for Judaism is very aimed at... well, Jews, and operates from the PoV that Judaism is the correct religion (especially important for the purpose of providing a way to argue with Christian missionaries when they attempt to convert you by deception), so you may be kind of alienated trying to read through some of their other pages yourself if u are not Jewish. instead i leave you the above link, which is a very concise FAQ, and many excerpts from the other pages:

Missionary training manuals encourage use of the expressions believer rather than Christian; Messiah instead of Christ; tree instead of cross; and New Covenant instead of New Testament, to promote a more Jewish-sounding message.

In their attempt to justify their Jewishness, certain “Hebrew Christians” have labeled Rabbinic Judaism a cult since they claim that it “follows the words of men rather than G-d.” Besides being false, this statement is also hypocritical since “Hebrew Christians” use these very same rabbinic traditions to lend their practices a guise of Jewishness.

Since Jesus was Jewish and practice Judaism, and the entire concept of a Messiah emanates from Jewish teachings, it comes as a big surprise to many Fundamentalist Christians that Jews don’t “believe in Jesus.” Converting Jews, in the eyes of these fundamentalists, is seen as an affirmation of their faith and soothes any doubts.

According to evangelical Christians, or “Born Agains,” as they are known, the world is composed of two types of people – those who are saved, and those who are lost. Their core belief system teaches that all human beings are born in a state of sin and ultimately will go to Hell forever unless they develop a personal relationship with Jesus the Messiah and Savior. This simplistic way of viewing the world impels them to want to save good people from the fate of eternal damnation. Not that they need to do so to ensure their place in Heaven, rather out of a basically altruistic motivation to save others.

The purpose of sharing this information is not to bash Christianity or its followers. Rather, it is partially to instill within the students a greater recognition of the historical struggle we as a people have had to face in rejecting Christianity and to “just saying no to Jesus” as our Messiah. Jewish people willingly suffered martyrdom at the hands of the Romans, and later, the Church in order to remain faithful to the truth of our Torah legacy.

Parts of the Evangelical world, therefore, felt totally justified following Paul’s lead for they believed (according to the NT) that Satan has blinded the eyes of the Jews from seeing the truth. Paul even teaches that, “But to this day, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart.” (II Corinthians 3:15) In the middle Ages the followers of the Church claimed that the Jewish people really knew Jesus was the Messiah, but they were so evil to the core, they refused to accept the obvious. Considering such anti-Semitic sentiment, it is not surprising that the Church endorsed Paul’s philosophy in dealing with the “Unsaved.”

The Church staged “debates,” artificially-rigged against the rabbis who were restricted against posing any questions of their own and never allowed to say anything offensive against Christianity. Often times, even if they won the debate, they “lost,” – for expulsions of entire communities, Talmud burnings, and even death at the stake, were not uncommon consequences of winning such debates.

When speaking with unsaved Jewish friends and associates they avoid using the name Jesus Christ, rather they will use the name Yeshua, the Hebrew equivalent. (The word Christ means, “Messiah”) They will use the word “Moshiach,” instead. Likewise, their missionaries will not display crosses on their persons, in their homes, or in their offices. Instead of calling themselves a Christian they will identity themselves as a “Bible Believer”. By calling a baptismal service a “mivkah immersion” they are concealing its true function.

The Messianic “synagogue” was an innovation by these Christian missionary organizations to make Christianity more “Jewish.” They pray with a Hebrew prayer book, read from an actual Torah scroll, and adorn themselves with Tallit and Yarmulka, just as one would find in mainstream Jewish houses of worship. They give them very Jewish names such as Etz Chaim, Beth Yeshua, or Adat Ariel. They have a Passover service, however the 3 matzot represent to them the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit. The 4 cups of wine likewise represent the blood of Jesus in their usurpation of these symbols.

This “cross-cultural evangelism,” to coin a phrase, has its roots in the passage penned by Paul we mentioned above where he proclaims “To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law — though not being myself under the law…” (I Corinthians 9:20) Just how pervasive has this movement become? In 1970 there were 12 Messianic synagogues, today there are more than 400! They are sponsored and operated by groups such as Jews for Jesus, The Chosen Peoples Ministries, the Messianic Voice, and the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations.

In a certain way, Fundamentalist missionaries shoot the arrow in the target and then draw the bull’s eye around the arrow. In this fashion, they claim to always be correct, making the evidence conform to their foregone conclusions.

God Loves You, Which Is Why You’ll Burn In Hell (Part 1): What the Hell Happened to Claude Frollo?

Religion is very interesting in the Descendants universe, as The Hunchback of Notre Dame has it as the main theme and a gigantic source of conflict and motivation for its villain, Claude Frollo.

A conversation with @baby-prince-oppa brought up a lot of interesting questions and ideas as to what would have happened to one of the Disney-verse’s darkest villains after he was exiled to the Isle of the Lost, particularly because he was brought back from the dead, alongside his personality, and his faith.

So, without further ado, “What the Hell Happened to Claude Frollo?”

After being revived on the Isle of the Lost, Frollo did not do as many of the villains did and start bemoaning their fate, and the irony of the “Good” King Beast exiling all the “Bad” guys into this inescapable prison.

In fact, he was actually pretty giddy about it, seeing as the man was “burning in the fires of Hell” prior to his sentence.

(In truth, he describes the experience as more “an endless, dark void, cut-off from the grace of God, all us sinners left to fester and rot in our hate, our sorrow, our regret; Hell was not a creation of the Devil, but a prison of our own doing, the sum of all our wicked ways.”

However, describing it as a fiery, sulfuric pit of suffering and wailing with horned demons prodding you with pitchforks every once in a while keeps the crowds’ attention better.)

He has a massive change of heart, seeing his revival as evidence of the Glory and the Power of God, and the Isle of the Lost as “Purgatory made manifest,” and his new mission being to save all these “Poor, Unfortunate Souls” (and by extension, himself) from this self-made Hell they all live in.

Unfortunately, his intentions are good, but his actions are still as self-righteous and destructive as ever.

Initially, Frollo roamed all around the Isle with a literal soapbox or whatever would elevate him above the heads of the crowds, basically yelling at his fellow Islanders that they were all filthy sinners, and because God loves them, they would be destined to burn in hell until they change their wicked ways, upon which they would be worthy of entering Heaven.

He initially gets some support and even a small army of evangelicals and fellow religious leaders, until he starts to antagonize the Taoists, the Buddhists, the Pagans, the Greeks who worshiped the Pantheon, and all the many other religions I haven’t listed, going so far as to make enemies with the Muslims and the Jews despite worshipping the same God.

Everything but the last two, he describes as the worship of false idols and ridiculous superstition despite the numerous evidences of their existence, and the fact that, you know, the Greek Pantheon can actually be seen, interacted with, and talked to if you have an appointment, should you live in Auradon.

Judaism and Islam, he sees as “earnest, but ultimately misguided, like a young child writing a heartfelt prayer to God in crayon on the back of sacred texts.”

It doesn’t really help that many of the largely uneducated and ignorant population of the Isle realize that the bread and water he was talking about was a metaphor, and that the promise of “Heaven” wasn’t coming any time soon, and suicide would be a straight-away to Hell.

He is quickly ostracized and forced back to his church and home, which he tries to fight back until the Great Isle War begins, and he is permanently trapped there, rarely straying further than the rusted, twisted, wrought-iron fence for his personal safety, and surviving on water, various pests, and what little crops he can grow.

(Before you ask about his garden, his church was, like the mosque, the synagogue, and the various other temples and places of worship meant to be a safe-haven, where medical supplies, emergency equipment, and agricultural equipment plus seeds were meant to be stored and used, but all of them have long been looted, destroyed or burned in “scorched earth” campaigns during the War, or eaten by the rats and other pests.)

It doesn’t bother him that that his “sanctuary” is a damp, mossy, crumbling husk; the pews are rotted out and every step of the stairs up to the bell tower is a doozy; and his congregation is almost non-existent, save for some die-hard, desperate, oftentimes unhinged zealots alternately praising God and bemoaning the “devils and their Demon Queen” in their midst, and a group of transients that have long learned to drown out his evening sermons and winded homilies, and wake-up and leave before Frollo himself gets up to start the morning prayers.

He can always be found standing at the front of the doors every day, inviting people to join his church, regardless of whether or not there’s actually people walking by the district of religious institutions and places of worship, and especially if they are card-carrying members of the other religions.

Again, that no one takes him up on the offer doesn’t demotivate him in the slightest, believing that it’s only a matter of time that the believers will start trickling back in. He comforts himself with the fact that Jesus Christ himself was widely ostracized, had only twelve apostles to begin with, and was also persecuted by society at large.

There is a bright point when he meets Claudine’s mother, a woman who decided to take a shot at being a pious wife for a holy man, after either working as a prostitute, or having experienced what it would be like with all the other, faithless men of the Isle.

The relationship quickly sours when she discovers that for all of Frollo’s promises to love her and take care of her it also comes with extreme possessiveness, controlling her every move, him getting angry and raving and ranting about her modesty and her purity and getting jealous and paranoid if a male so much as looks at her, and his assigning her all manner of inglorious chores because it is her “duty as my faithful wife.”

It doesn’t help that he frequently calls her “Esmerelda” even if her name wasn’t even CLOSE to that.

She quickly leaves Frollo’s church for good, and only returns to drop off a rotting wicker basket with Claudine wrapped up in filthy, hole-filled blankets. Frollo is legitimately heartbroken, but focuses on raising a “good, Christian child” in Claudine, and believes that one day, his ex-wife will see the error of his ways and come back to his arms, ready to completely devote herself to a life of complete loyalty and to God and him, and modesty that would make the Virgin Mary proud.

If you ask Claudine, however, her reply is always, “Yeah, when Hell freezes over, maybe.”

Love or Money, Christians? Which is it?

By Chris Churchill 

If you are averse to religious discussions, I warn you now, “Bible Verses Lie Ahead.” Not for the reason you usually see them thrown around, though. I’m not going to judge you here. In fact, being a fan of the Bible for what I see it to be, I strongly value the statement, “Judge not, lest ye be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” Jesus (if that is Your real name...) said that in the King James Version of the Bible, Book of Matthew, Chapter 7, verse 2. There are countless translations, of course, take your pick.

It basically means that your treatment of others; your rules for other people, define how you are judged by God (or Love or the Living Universe, or that most honest part of your own introspection which will reveal itself to you only when you are at your weakest, or any other thing that works for you).t

Now you don’t have to believe in a localized, physical, magical creature that rules over us to follow what I’m about to say. I don’t think of God that way. Here comes another Bible verse. “God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.” That’s John 4:16b, apparently. Thanks Internet. I truly believe that God is literally Love. Capitalized. Love is the thing that defines the rules of existence. Not just between people but also in nature. Also at the infinite and the infinitesimal level. Animate and inanimate. For me, I recognize it on the subatomic level in things like quantum entanglement and gravity. We may not understand how Love affects anything other than people, but that just means we need to expand what we understand Love to be.

This is for my evangelical friends, of whom I still have a few, and those who might come across this. This is also for those who claim to “follow the Bible” but don’t even know what it says, let alone endeavor to understand what it means. Please take this in the friendly, loving spirit it is meant.

Here’s the thing many who espouse Christianity without actually practicing it seem to have either missed, forgotten, or chosen to ignore. "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” That’s Matthew 6:24, New International Version.

You may have missed it because the last time you heard it as a kid, falling asleep in church, it was probably spoken on the ever popular King James Version where, instead of “money” they used the word “mammon.” You didn’t know what mammon was. You fell asleep, thought about football or lunch, or you just let it float away. Anyway, you’re not thinking about that anymore are you.

Especially, in this era of Joel Osteen and all the other televised Mega Churches preaching that “God wants you to be rich!” I’ve always been baffled at this, due entirely to the verse above. How can you pursue wealth with all your being and still be serving God, i. e. Love? You can’t.

Reread that verse. If that doesn’t do anything for you, plug in some variables into this equation. If you are presented with a moral choice, or even a business related choice, you have the option to perform in service of what is best for your fellow human or what will preserve your economic interests. Do you overcharge someone because you can or because everyone would if the could or because they’d do it to you? Or do you not overcharge someone because you honestly know the good or service you offer is only worth so much or that they might need a break or you really like them so why screw them?

You see how one option is in service of money and one is in service of love? Now suppose these patterns were repeated by the same people over and over throughout their lives then, eventually passed on to their offspring. You have two different types of humans. You have the money driven and the love driven. You know what the love driven do in a moment of crisis? They consider what the right thing is to do. You know what the money driven do during those same moments? At the very least, they pause briefly and consider how this will effect their wallet, the economy or some other money related thing. That pause is enough to let the opportunity to do the right thing slip away.

(I’m not saying that all rich people are bad or all poor people are virtuous. There are rich people who get there because they are driven by their work. They love how it allows them to connect to others, to help others, to connect to a greater purpose. And sometimes those driven, effective, successful people get paid for it. As a side effect of pursuing a true love. Not just for pursuing money. Conversely, there are poor people who are just really misguided and really bad at crime. People who chase money to fill the whole they don’t even know they have and at the cost of their seven children, their broken-hearted parents, and society at large. They may never succeed at getting rich, but make no mistake, they love Money and do not serve Love.)

So when the evangelical crowd decides to back a political candidate or government official in their decision making because of money (or as we say in polite political discourse, “the economy,” “the stock market,” unbridled “capitalism”) and instead of Love (empathy, humanity, caring “for the least of us”), they don’t either know or care that they are no longer serving that which they claim to be serving. They’re serving Money. They’re abandoning Love or, as they purport to believe Love is, God.

I preached a short sermon one Sunday as a teen. Something from Psalms. (I couldn’t help but lead with, “I’m a hypocrite.” Just being honest, you know.) I still have a relationship with what I feel “God” means, but not one with any organized faith. Why? Because it seems that most “Christians” these days, at least the most vocal ones, love the label, the cheering for their side, but not empathy, understanding, concern for the “other.” That is to say, they seem to not care about the definition of God as laid out by the Messiah in their guiding book. That definition would be “Love.”

Or to put it in a pithy simple turn of phrase (which seems to work with many people): “Most ‘Christians’ love the rules but are not ruled by Love.”

So when you hear your “ordained” president speaking out loud that he’s actually weighing the financial cost of punishing a country that murdered an American citizen, you’re serving the opposite of God. If you have no problem allowing deregulation of companies that allows them to pollute more or to cut taxes for big business at the expense of those who need it, you’re serving the opposite of Love. If you hear an equivocation on any political point for which he has been paid by a lobbyist with whom his rhetoric aligns, then you know, it’s all about the money.

This is boring to a lot of you, I’m sure. I guess I’m talking to a specific subset of America. Those who hide behind flags and crosses because you’re too scared to have empathy for the “other.” Sorry. It IS fear that causes you to hate and rage and appeal to a paternal, judgmental (but only to your enemies, not toward you), anthropomorphized understanding of God who will quell your spiritual insecurities. It is. You’re scared. And you want Daddy to save you. Well grow up. “Daddy” tried to teach you what was important and you decided judgmentalism, vengeance in your heart, and, well, the love of money was the ticket for you.

A wonderful Jewish atheist friend of mine who is in Heaven now heard me mention that my dad, my grandfather and my great-grandfather were all preachers and she said to me, “Oh, you’re a preacher too.” This was based on my solo comedy shows where I just told stories, did bits, played funny songs on guitar. At that time, my pulpit was the top floor of a place called “Frankie J’s” on Sheridan Road in Chicago. It was a solo comedy and music show I used to do. I told people the truth. I tried to make Love the point. But don’t get me wrong, I was trying to do comedy too.

Sometimes my sincerity would get the best of me, though. As funny as I wanted to be, sometimes I just had to say what I was feeling with no frills, obfuscations or irony. And obviously, I have some background in the Protestant Christian Bible (not those extra books that Martin Luther didn’t like…there was a dragon in one of them, though, wasn’t there? that’s pretty cool). I also have a lot of experience in the world, with people, practicing Love. I don’t know why it is, but I tend to win children, animals, and even the occasional adult human over.

So both the book I was taught to revere and my life experience tells me that in life, it’s either Love (love for your fellow human) or Money (the love of money). In every moment of your life, in every moment of weakness you have, in every thought in your head, and in all your motivations, it’s either Love or Money. That’s the choice.

Franklin millionaire businessman Monthly bill Lee received a shock upset during the GOP gubernatorial most important in essence simply because he arrived throughout as a great dude. He did not run assault adverts, and he travelled throughout the point out in an RV 2 times, location up extremely scripted town halls in all ninety five counties. He talks a lot about his faith and how his enjoy for Jesus got him by way of the worst time in his everyday living, when his spouse died in a tragic horse-riding incident. But other than admitting he does not consider in gay relationship, Lee has not talked a lot about what that faith seriously appears to be like like, and the press corps has but to press him on it. For some cause, Lee has turn out to be noticed as a “moderate,” not compared with Governor Monthly bill Haslam. He’s not.

Some of this arrived to gentle Tuesday, right after The Tennessean exposed a point out trooper had been canned from Democrat Karl Dean’s protection detail right after leaking information to Lee’s campaign about a “Muslim function.” Explained function was actually a meet up with and greet at Yassin’s Falafel Dwelling in Knoxville, a cafe operated by a Syrian refugee with a genuinely inspiring tale, but Lee evidently thought it was in a mosque, and that a photo of Dean in a mosque would be damning.

But to attendees of Grace Chapel, the Williamson County evangelical church of which Lee is a longtime member, affiliation with Islam is very pretty much damning. 1 visitor pastor, Michael Brown, gave a sermon on March 1, 2015, on “Understanding Radical Islam,” which he says he was precisely requested to give by Grace Chapel’s pastor Steve Berger. Brown started off his sermon admitting that perhaps not all Muslims aid violence or are trying to choose above the nation with Shariah legislation, but as he went on, the implications are crystal clear: Christians in authorities are only trying to do “what’s correct,” whilst in Islam, “there’s no separation of church and point out,” and if Muslims choose above we could all be beheaded.

Islamophobia is not new to Tennessee politics, and it’s specially not new to evangelicals in Tennessee politics, but when 1 is operating for governor of a point out that has the biggest inhabitants of Kurdish immigrants in the nation, it’s value questioning why no 1 is inquiring Lee about this. It is also value inquiring about Lee’s sights on females and the LGBT group, above and outside of gay relationship.

During the most important, there were rumors that Lee had informed supporters at a compact fund-raiser that U.S. Consultant Diane Black “didn’t glimpse like governor material” and that he did not understand why she did not just want to remain home with her grandchildren. Lee and his campaign denied it, just like they denied inquiring the trooper to get a photo of Dean in a mosque. But it’s crystal clear Lee is not a proponent of females in leadership, offered the make-up of his personal corporation. Out of 13 people in leadership roles, together with Lee himself, only 1 is a female, and all are white. At Grace Chapel there are no woman pastors, and no female serves on the board.

Specified Pastor Steve Berger’s sights, on the other hand, it’s unclear why any female would want to provide in church leadership. On September 30th, Berger gave a sermon on Brett Kavanaugh, entitled “Biblical Skills for Bringing an Accusation In opposition to An individual.” In it he cites verses from Deuteronomy, Matthew, and 1 Timothy that say not 1 but two or 3 witnesses (at least) are essential to bring an accusation of sin in opposition to another person. “This is a moral legislation here,” Berger says.

“I’m telling you, I’ve been victimized. I’ve been abused by phony accusations,” Berger says, later on in his sermon. What accusations people may have been, Berger does not detail. But he states that considering that his accusers did not deliver many “witnesses” (which can, he says, consist of fingerprints or DNA evidence), then it was the accusers by themselves performing unbiblically. “For this cause alone, and listen to me, for this cause of two or 3 witnesses alone, Dr. Ford’s testimony, as it relates to this Choose Kavanaugh concern, does not meet up with the biblical requirements to bring forth a legitimate accusation.”

Berger went on to say that even if Kavanaugh did rape another person, he’s still certified for the Supreme Court, simply because “Moses was a assassin ahead of he was the world’s biggest lawgiver,” and “King David was an adulterer and assassin as a King,” and “Saul of Tarsus was a assassin ahead of he turned Paul the Apostle, the biggest Apostle in the heritage of the church.” (Notably, Moses and David and Paul all actually sought forgiveness, a thing Kavanaugh has not carried out.)

This is considerably from the only offensive sermon Berger has offered. In a June 28, 2015, sermon entitled, “It’s Evening in Sodom,” Berger laments the SCOTUS ruling legalizing gay relationship. He preaches that his followers should not be hateful to their gay pals, but they should “beg them to cease their wickedness ahead of it’s as well late for them” — i.e., ahead of Judgment Working day — and says that holding again “truth” in the name of “love” is the real “hate.” Useless to say, the church also does not consider transgender people are genuinely transgender both.

Berger is an energetic proponent of gay conversion treatment, i.e., the discredited belief that 1 can “pray the gay away.” Tennessee is sad to say not 1 of the 15 states and territories that has banned the observe, regardless of opposition by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Planet Health and fitness Firm. But Berger not only preaches about the observe, he’s on the board of the Reformed Hope Community, which describes alone as “a coalition of ministries serving people who motivation to conquer sinful relational and sexual challenges in their life and people impacted by these kinds of behavior, significantly homosexuality.”

Berger is 1 of the customers of Lee’s “Community and Faith-Based Advisory Council,” together with musicians Michael W. Smith and Ricky Skaggs, NASCAR driver Darrell Waltrip, and retired hockey player (and Mr. Carrie Underwood) Mike Fisher. Lee has talked a lot about producing a new point out place of work of faith-dependent and group initiatives if elected, which, at this point, appears to be just about unavoidable offered the polling and Dean’s unwillingness to go on the assault. Regardless of whether the place of work comes to exist stays to be noticed, but during an interview in early July, I requested him about the program. 

simply click to enlarge

Lee downplayed the faith facet of the place of work and informed me that he wishes to “reach out to nonprofits that are undertaking the perform that authorities are unable to and should not do, regardless of whether they’re faith-dependent or not.” At the time, a write-up on the Breitbart-esque Tennessee Star had expressed “concerns” as to regardless of whether the place of work would have to perform with Islamic nonprofits, and I requested Lee about it. He said he hadn’t browse the post. I then requested if he was attuned to the requirements of Muslims in the point out, specially offered the Kurdish group in Nashville.

“My spouse has worked in a ministry that serves Kurdish refugees, I’ve been to Kurdistan and served with refugees from ISIS in refugee camps,” Lee replied. “I consider that the perform of nonprofits is impressive and crucial, and that is what this is about. And I am a Christian, so my encounters and my perform with non-earnings that are undertaking productive perform has been Christian corporations, so that is what I discuss about, simply because I discuss about my encounter, and I will aid operates that are undertaking, conference some of the biggest problems in our group that I consider authorities should not meet up with, it’s not the role of authorities to do that. But it is the role of the nonprofit group and I would persuade that type of perform, for certain.”

When requested for remark on the numerous challenges Wednesday, Lee’s campaign communications advisor Chris Walker got a bit testy. “A cherry-picked sermon does not equivalent Monthly bill Lee agrees with this,” Walker said of the Kavanaugh sermon. I said that I wasn’t just searching at 1 sermon, that I wanted to know if Lee agreed with Berger about the “usefulness” of gay conversion treatment. “If this is a Steve Berger tale, you require to discuss to Steve Berger,” Walker replied. When pressed on regardless of whether Lee agreed with Berger’s benchmarks for “biblically reporting” sexual assault, Walker questioned regardless of whether I had long gone by way of all of the sermons offered at Dean’s church.

Dean is a Catholic who (when not campaigning) consistently attends the Cathedral of the Incarnation, the seat of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Nashville. The church has mass 3 instances daily (only 2 times on Friday and as soon as on Saturday), so even if all the solutions were archived on the web like Grace Chapel’s (they aren’t), it’d be a lot to go by way of. But, like numerous other Catholics, Dean has publicly damaged with the church on quite a few challenges. He does think abortion should be legal, he supported legalized gay relationship a long time ahead of SCOTUS did, and he’s okay with females in the pulpit. And compared with Lee, Dean is not operating adverts touting his partnership with Jesus.

Cari Wade Gervin is a freelance political journalist presently bouncing between a couple of metropolitan areas in Tennessee.

The post A Look at Bill Lee’s Uber-Conservative Home Church appeared first on PrideGuy - Gay News, LGBT News, Politics & Entertainment.

In my last life, back in the late 1990s when I was a fundamentalist missionary in Papua New Guinea, I came upon the online magazine Killing the Buddha.

Although I was quite aware that my life as a fundamentalist was nearly over, I did not know that I had about four years before any ontological aspect of my faith would be gone. How was I to know? In my heart, I knew I’d broken away from the body of Christ, calved like an iceberg. Unmoored I was, slowly drifting away, and my identity as a Christian melting.

I truly, consciously, thought in those terms.

On especially searing days there so close to the equator, I’d cheerfully joke to one fellow missionary or another that I was like the Wicked Witch of the West, “melting. I’m melting!” It made me both sad and secure knowing those fellow missionaries had no idea I was referring to my spiritual status. Sad, because I really had for some time of my Christian career experienced something of a romantic relationship with Jesus and the idea of that relationship disappearing grieved me. Secure, because I had long ago learned to not trust my fellow fundamentalists with anything remotely heretical.

As many readers of KtB know, it is stifling to be a fundamentalist.

Killing the Buddha was a breath of fresh air for me. Its early writers were so daring in the things they said, so very sincere and yet not at all adolescent.

And authentic. If there was any one trait about KtB that most drew me, it was how very real, how very true to life as I knew it the KtB writings were.

Back then, I pretty much valued authenticity as much as food and air. I had a couple friends who, although also fundamentalist missionaries, were brilliant with their open honesty about their struggles to live the Christian life. Once, one went so far as to say he thought “God must be some sort of evil cosmic masturbator because he seems to get off on our failures.” I nearly moved away from him when he added, “Or maybe he’s into voyeurism. You know, how he watches all we do. ‘Be careful little hands what you do, for the father up above, is looking down in love, be careful little hands what you do.'” I half expected to be ​hit by the lightning I thought God would strike him with for such authenticity. I feared it arcing from his body to mine.

So it was that when I encountered similar, daring authenticity in Killing the Buddha, I became a hungry, devoted reader of every new piece posted on its website.

And then came Bent, by Peter Manseau, a short fiction piece that came out at the end of 2000. Here was the story of some ancient monastics who spent so much of their lives on their knees in prayer that their femurs became permanently bent.

Had I ever been that devoted? I asked myself. Despite having left the comforts of America, despite having dragged my family to live with me as I worked as a missionary in a remote mountain tribe, despite that sort of dedication, I knew I didn’t have the same level of devotion as the monastics who bent their femurs from praying for hundreds upon hundreds of hours on their knees.

Maybe that’s what I needed to revive my faith, to keep my long dark night of the soul from completely annihilating any last shred of authentic, ontological aspect of my Christian life.

So, surreptitiously, I went to a Roman Catholic bookstore, in order to find for myself what I hoped might be the sort of prayer book the monastics of old might have used.

Once, several years before, I had visited the store to purchase an anthropological monograph with material about the culture of the tribe I had been seeking to evangelize. The bookstore was part of what is known as the Melanesian Institute, an organization, as I recall, dedicated to academic research and publication of material related to the peoples of Papua New Guinea. How it was affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church I do not know. But I do remember that there was enough affiliation that when a leader with New Tribes Mission, the fundamentalist mission society of which I was a member, learned about my intention to go there to get the monograph, I was ​strongly warned to be careful. He admonished me to remember that Satan was the true leader of Catholicism.

That first venture to the bookstore was several years before my faith was waning so precipitously. I had gone there truly expecting to see drunken priests and cowering little boys.  What I saw, instead, was a very well organized, very inviting bookstore.

Bear with this digression: I love bookstores almost as much as I love books. The first time I walked into Portland, Oregon’s, Powell’s Bookstore I got tears of joy in my eyes. I felt like I’d entered some form of paradise. So in love did I fall with Powell’s that I used to joke with those I felt safe that “if there is a heaven, it must be something like Powell’s.” Back to the Catholic bookstore in New Guinea . . .

I had already been living in Papua New Guinea for several years when I walked into that bookstore  to purchase the monograph and it was the closest thing to a Western-style bookstore I’d seen in the country. Right away, I felt at home. Since I figured it was highly unlikely that any of my Protestant fundamentalist cohorts would show up, I let myself enjoy a solid half-hour of book-browsing. Only once did the quiet nun wearing a light blue habit ask if I needed help. She bowed politely as she backed away from me and returned to the cash register.

And so it was that I ​returned to the Roman Catholic book store and bought a small, red, leather-bound missal. I had been surprised and pleased with how much of its text was Scripture. It was not what I expected.

My thought was that it could not hurt to assist my re-devotion, as it were, to fervent, sacrificial, down-on-my-knees prayer, as I’d read about in Peter Manseau’s story, with the same sort of prayers made by those whose femurs became bent.

And so, thank you Peter Manseau, for a year or so I staunched the flow of my bleeding, wounded-by-severe disappointment-and-doubt heart with a new regimen of prayer.

Daily, ninety minutes before the sun rose, at its almost never changing near-equatorial time of around 6:30, I quietly stole out of my bedroom and went to the east-facing veranda, got down on my knees and prayed. My ritual was ecumenical: I first prayed as a Protestant, “Dear Jesus this and dear Jesus that”. Then I opened the missal and prayed from it. I followed that with praying through a portion of the Psalms. Finally, I knelt in in silence, waiting and hoping to hear back from God. This whole process took all of forty minutes.

I had determined to follow this regimen for one year. Occasionally, I added to the forty minutes and supplemented them with twenty minutes of lectio divina, sacred reading. This was something I’d read about in an issue of Christianity Today, the Time magazine of American Evangelicalism.

For the first few months, I felt a slight bit of the old-fashioned zeal for Jesus and His way that had driven me to become a missionary in the first place. A couple times I may have even moaned with that zeal, thinking of Teresa of Avila and her orgasmic prayers.

Alas, that flicker of zeal faded, and after a half year of spending each morning on bended knee, I knew it wasn’t going to work. My faith was not coming back.

But I am not one to give up easily. So I kept at it for the full twelve months before finally owning up to the fact that –apart from shoving my hands into the pierced side of Jesus–there was nothing that would stop my doubts.

It was over. I bent myself to the breaking point. My femurs snapped.

My faith had melted completely away.

(Too many metaphors? Not for us who are given to finding purpose and meaning at nearly all costs.)

It took me nearly ten years to go public with the reality of my departure from God. That ten years included six more years in the ministry, the death of my marriage, estrangement from my lovely children, the death of a second marriage, triggered by my announcing I no longer believed in God and that I was attracted to men.

Now, here I am, out of the closet as an atheist and bisexual man for these past five years or so . . .

I am happier now. For me, giving up on God felt like I imagined it felt for Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress to be relieved of his sin. God was a burden for me. Even when I had some modicum of genuine ontological experience with God, I found Him very burdensome. And not at all easy.

God knows, if there is a God (I actually think of myself as a non-theist; one who just doesn’t have a place of substance for God; I don’t think of myself as anti-God, which is for me what the term atheist implies), that I tried. Like McMurphy in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, when he accepted the challenge of his insane cohorts to rip up the massive cement fountain in their asylum and throw it out the window so he could escape, “At least I tried, goddammit, at least I tried.”

Public Evangelism

Before setting out to conduct street evangelism and open air preaching it is a good idea to research the county and city ordinances regarding noise violations and disturbing the peace.  Odds are someone will get offended and call the police claiming one of the two.  When police are called, they have reasonable suspicion that a crime or ordinance violation has been committed.  They are obligated to respond and investigate.  This should be expected. (check out Is Street Preaching Biblical?). Some cities require you to obtain a permit to pass out flyers or do speeches on public property.  It is right to seek to obtain the proper permits as most cities will not deny them knowing it will be a religious assembly and protected free speech.  In some countries it is flat out illegal to give religious speeches in public.  This is where a more modest personal approach is best suited like walking up to individuals and speaking to them more privately in a public location.  Where religious proselytizing is illegal, than an even more subtle approach is required through networking and relationship building for the missional purpose of presenting the gospel.  Once understanding the governing laws regarding public evangelism, next it is important to understand the culture of that public area. College campuses, public parks around downtown business headquarters, suburb parks, tourist areas, and the region these parks are located in help understand the angle and focus of approach.  Regions that are less culturally divers or have a concentrated sub cultures are keys to understanding the spiritual needs of that area.  Once you have conducted the proper research and planning, having a game plan of what topics need to be touched and how to frame the conversations is next. Planned Discussion Of course the absolute end goal of all discussions are gospel presentations.  But getting there is not always straight forward.  On the personal level; You always want to introduce yourself, ask their name and if you can ask  them some questions.  Trust the Holy Spirit.  If they say no and do not want to talk, move on.  If you are open air preaching, and someone comes up asking genuine questions, you want to address them on a personal level.  If you have an evangelism team with you, have them address that persons questions and continue preaching. Personal Public Evangelism When walking up to people and getting their consent to ask questions always introduce yourself and ask for their name.  Throughout the conversation, call them by name; this is more personal and relates to how personal the subject matter actually is to them.  Avoid using phrases like "I believe..." or "I think..." because it is not a matter of your opinion verses theirs.  These are eternal truths, not personal opinionated beliefs. Q:  Do you believe in God? (yes/no) Deck of Cards analogy;  "If I throw a deck of cards in the air, what is the chance it will fall down in a completed house of cards?", "Where did the deck of cards come from in the first place?"  "If I don't have a deck of cards, what is the chance, a deck of cards will appear in my hand from nothing?" Piece of Paper analogy;  "If I write 'laws of nature' on a paper, then tear it up into very small pieces, then throw it up in the air, what is the chance it will fall back into place in the correct order?";  "Where did the piece of paper come from in the first place?"; "If I didn't have a piece of paper to write 'laws of nature' on, what is the chance a piece of paper will appear from nothing or the letters will form themselves to form the intelligible sentence structure and words?" Sometimes it is best, that when someone denies the existence of God, may was well just go straight to a gospel presentation.  You can do this by asking next:  Do you know who Jesus is?  Some may even argue that Jesus never existed either.  At that point you can attempt to explain to them the historical facts but odds are they will reject those too.  If that is the case, you can ask them what they believe or again, straight up ask them if they have ever heard the gospel itself.  If they are still willing to listen and engage in a friendly dialog, go right head and present them the gospel. If they already claim to believe in god, continue on to ensure they get to know the truth about the real God if they don't know him already. Q:  Who do you think God is? (the universe / everyone / one being / unknown)  These first two questions help gauge what the person believes; New age, agnostic, atheist, or theistic.  Q:  Do you think God is pleased with you and how you have live your life? Naturally most people will say yes.  The idea here sets up revealing to them their own contradictions and how they actually do not meet God's standard with the follow up questions: Q:  Are you a good person?  Are you morally perfect?  Again, naturally, most people will say yes.  The Moral crime proofs then expose some flaws in their claim. Moral Crimes Proofs;  "have you ever lied; have you ever stolen anything; have you ever hurt anyone, emotionally or physically; have you ever sexually desired someone; have you ever said GD or JC, and not as a noun?"  What do you call someone who has lied and stolen?  What do you call someone who sexually desires someone who is not their spouse? Repeat their own answers.  Of course people who steal are called thieves and people who have lied are called liars.  Then ask: Q:  Do you think God is pleased with thieves, liars, adultery/cheaters, and blasphemers?    The discussion then may steer to relative morality.  The follow up question related to relative morality exposes further dilemmas in that belief: Q:  Are you opposed to racism, rape, or killing homosexuals?  Why? They are compelled to admit they are opposed to these because they are wrong. Q:  Are countries and cultures that currently practice them, are they wrong?  Are societies in the past that condoned them, where they wrong?  How are they wrong, when their society condones it?  Is there a universal morality that applies to all mankind?  Where does that come from if not from society? Q:  Does someone who commits such crimes/moral wrongs be punished?  (yes/no) Here they have been lead to see that morality is transcendent and that moral wrongs deserve punishment.  Understanding the required justice is next.  This is where most Christians fail.  Understanding God's perfect Justice is very important. Q:  Why not just forget about the crime of racism, rape, and killing homosexuals?   Why even bother prosecuting them?  Just let them go free with no punishment.  Now explain the actual value of violating God's law and the worth of a transcendent crime.  Sin has eternal value in that it is an offense against the eternal God.  This eternal offense requires a just punishment. Q: How much good can you do to pay back an eternal debt?  How much good can a friend of yours do to pay back your eternal debt?  If the crime of racism, rape, and killing homosexuals is just given 2 hours of community service, is that enough, why not?   Q:  Early you admitted to being a thief, liar, adultery, and blasphemer.  You admitted to committing transcendent crimes against a perfectly holy and just God that you can not repay and still requires an equal just punishment.  Do you want to know how to be made right before God, have your debt payed for, and truly know God for all eternity? (Due to the examples used above and given the dysfunction of today's misquoting society, we must include this disclaimer:  we do not advocate, support, or encourage teachings or actions for rape, racism, and murder) Avoid the arianistic Christian cliche "accept Jesus in your heart" or "say the sinners prayer".  That is not what really happens and NOT what Jesus calls for.  Jesus called for people to REPENT and BELIEVE.  Thus, we should call for the same. Present the Gospel message: God sent his eternal Son from heaven in the form of Jesus to die for your sin on the cross, payed your eternal debt of sin, and rose again three days later proving that he has the power to give life, eternal life.  He did this so that you can be free from the punishment of sin and free to truly know God.  Only Jesus lived the life you could not live and pay the price for sin that you can not pay so that you can enjoy God in this life and for eternity after this life.  Are you ready to leave your sins behind, repent and believe in God The Son? Pray with that person and ask the Holy Spirit to work in their heart, empowering them to believe, make them born again, a new creation, adopted by God, be filled with the Holy Spirit, and follow Jesus Christ as their Lord God and Savior.  After praying, discuss any concerns they may have and give them your contact information. This is a very general discussion with the key talking points but you will encounter all kinds of different people with all kinds of different arguments and justifications.  Not having every answer is OKAY!  You must remember that you are NOT the spiritual eye openers, The Holy Spirit is.  You are called to be faithful to God and loving to neighbors, strangers, and enemies; and there is nothing more loving than sacrificing your time, emotions, and efforts to give someone the greatest gift we can offer, the Gospel of Jesus Christ and pray that God gives the greatest gift of all; eternal life.   If you have any questions or comments about this article please contact us or join our discussion forms

from Blogger http://ift.tt/2D55Uby