As a person who spent more than half my life in a country, Jamaica, known for its strong anti-gay  sentiments the question of the origins of anti-gay sentiments has been a recurring subject of my personal musings (and I will spare you the “some of my best-friends are ____ routine).”  So far I have come to believe that the same variables that supported the Crusades, the slaughter of the natives of “the Americas,” slavery, Jim Crow, “one hundred years of lynching” mostly carried out at church picnics, legalized beatings of women and children, the millions of American Christians that were members of the KKK in the twentieth century, Holocaust, and our continued segregated church in America, result in the justification of the death penalty for homosexuals. The two chief conditions are: 1. a system of thought that views difference as inherently dangerous and warranting a pre-emptive strike or exploitable- a tool to be used for our benefit, 2. unchallenged socializing agents/ agencies that buttress the aforementioned evolutionary or sinful impulses.

I know some will argue that homosexuality is a moral issue, a sin according Scriptures.  But this response clouds the issue rather than sheds light on it for me. First many of those who make the above claim also advocate for psychology programs (such as Exodus) to cure homosexuals, so is it a sin or sickness?  A more consistent argument is offered by those who view homosexuality as a wrong choice according to Scriptures.  I am aware of the frequently quoted list of prohibited sexual acts from Leviticus: incest, sexual intercourse with menstruating woman, a neighbour’s wife, another male or animals. But I am also aware that the Hebrew people whose blessing from God was to grow from a small family to a people “as numerous as the sand of the sea” placed a premium on the procreative aspect of sexuality. Hence, any sexual encounter that did not have procreation as the goal was taboo; Onan’s spilling his seed on the ground when copulating with his dead brother’s wife, Tamar, resulted in his death. Later Pauline text provide an explicit rationale,  Roman 1 indicates that homosexuality is unnatural but Pauline writers also argue in Corinthians 11 that short hair in women is unnatural (think of the kinky delicate African hair that readily breaks and was popular in Sub-Saharan Africa at that time and is still on my head). So what does unnatural really mean?

 So I guess I understand why Christians are divided on the subject of homosexuality but the visceral, fierce, hate-like response is something else. I can recall myself as a fourteen year old girl who gleefully pledged to participate in a violent anti-homosexuality rally to counter a rumoured pro -homosexual rally (fortunately for me neither came to pass). I was not consumed by the zeal of the Lord rather as a product of a mixed ethnicity, bipartisan, heritage the only people I could legitimately hate were homosexuals. Had I really been filled with the love of Jesus I would have treated “the sin” of homosexuality the same way Jesus did all sins; give up power over, incarnate, carry the cross, and as I am not Jesus point people to him- the only Truth.

Renegade- learning to hang around

In light of recent findings that black women are the least successful with online dating and my wish for an egalitarian partner, two weeks ago I registered with e-Harmony. Mine was an unpaid registration that consisted of answering questions, filling out a profile, and submitting two of my May graduation pictures during the free communication week-end (late December).  I was sent an estimated 100 matches (ethnic/racial breakdown: majority Euro-American close second African-American, one Korean and one Latino). As I was not a paying subscriber their pictures were concealed. I was intrigued by about four but I initiated contact with about twenty. In the e-Harmony system unless you specify a “fast—track approach” you go through four stages of structured communication which culminates in an open communication stage. Four  initiated communication with me, one made it to the third communication level and another to open communication both were African Americans.

• The first was a computer tech and youth minister of music, who sailed through the first two stages until premarital sex blew us off course. He sent a question about pre-marital sex and I selected the response that “I do not believe in premarital sex” then he selected “sex was okay if marriage was imminent.” My next question, a polite way of saying get lost was, “what is your theology of sex?” He abruptly “closed communication” and his stated reason was that our values were too different. The second “close match” was a cop who seemed to have all the right answers. I especially liked his response to the question about traditional gender roles where he wrote that as he could cook, clean, wash and change diapers the only role he wanted his mate to fill was to love only him. Was I in egalitarian heaven?
• Only open communication would tell. I called from a blocked number. Over the course of the conservation he ate, brushed his teeth, and apologized for doing so. He not so skilfully asked me about my immigration status.  He advised me that I would have more success on e-Harmony if my profile picture was the one of me in a spaghetti strap knee length dress rather than the one in cap and gown, to which I responded that I was not trying to attract shallow men. But what really sealed his fate was his take on egalitarianism. He became quite agitated, loud and incoherent when I told him that I believed everyone was equal. He argued that things that are different cannot be equal “women can have children and men cannot” (men can impregnate women ;-). To buttress his argument he stated that the word/bible said so.  I queried whether he an African -American male was equal to Euro-Americans and he stated that race did not impair one’s abilities. My second question was whether a neurosurgeon was superior to him a cop and he respond yes. After his rant I was silent, and realizing that something was amiss he apologized for becoming so worked up.  He indicated that he was pressed for time and needed to drop his child off. He said he was willing to discuss this further.  I appreciated his only slightly belated honesty (some men would have waited much longer) and closed communication.
• My take on e-Harmony? check out edatereview.com                                                                                                                                                                If you have seen the e-Harmony advertisements matches are allegedly based on more than “a picture and a paragraph” rather they are “based on 29 dimension of compatibility.”1. However these pre-screenings do not include background checks and you know us humans and honour systems. 2. Similarities in answers do not necessarily mean someone is a “highly compatible match” as responses are not necessarily honest or accurate. 3. Though Dr Warren is a psychologist the “29 dimensions of compatible questionnaire” does not measure psychological health 4. There are more women on e-Harmony than men. 5. Finally, I prefer the old fashion ways of  meeting “highly compatible matches;”  while living and doing  the things that make you feel most alive (not the ones you do for appearances) look out for the people doing them for similar reasons and viola your “highly compatible matches.”
• Renegade – “ One Love”

Prior to embarking on my birthday adventure, I read my morning meditation from the book of Exodus, and by chance, I was up to the point in the narrative in which Moses was told to prepare the Hebrew people to meet their God by bathing themselves and abstaining from sex. I believe it was an especially suitable text as part of my plans for my birthday celebration was to visit the Museum of Sex located in lower Manhattan. A more timid soul would have believed this was a sign from God to avoid such a den of iniquity but like Balaam I rode on to my destination via New Jersey transit mindful not to whip any donkeys.

The Museum of Sex at the time of my visit had two floors of display. The first floor provided examples of animal sexuality which generally debunked generally held ideas of the heterosexual, patriarchal nature of the animal world. Also on the first floor were different samples of the use of sexual intercourse or lack thereof over the course of American history by the media with examples such as the Sinclair Institute. The first portion of the second floor addressed issues of sexual paraphernalia, self-pleasuring/ masturbation and the changes in perception over time. The final section mainly addressed sex-workers in adult entertainment/ pornography industry. (It is an adult museum)

Why did I go to the museum? Part of the reason is that I like to shock people and sadly human sexuality still remains taboo especially in Christian circles. How could I explain my visit to Museum of Sex to a church to which I might be called in the future as I can no longer hide behind the guise of my visit being a requirement for seminary? I went on a journey of reconciliation and the best kind starts with the individual. Sexuality is one of the MANY areas within the Christian worldview that cries out for reconciliation. From the time of Moses to the present, sexuality and sexual expressions have been viewed as things that defile and make the person untouchable by even God.

As a result of the depreciation of sexuality our approach to sexual ethics for a long time has been the antithesis of the Nike slogan “just don’t do it.” But from the pulpit to the pews our lives have belied our message pedophile-priests and parishioners, date rapes on seminary campuses, sexual addictions, adultery and incest. And as a “Christian country” we support a billion dollar pornography industry, and we are avid participants in sex -slave trade and sex tourism. And some who really abstain in truth do it for reasons that reveal a hate for the physical- the sexual. Virginity, especially in case of women, has been held as a mark of superiority rendering them good enough to wed. Others refuse to participate in loving relationships because of fear of rejection for less than ideal body parts or unrealistic expectations of others.

Is sexual reconciliation possible within the individual or the church? The paradigm of clean and unclean sexuality and the hate of the physical body are both nullified in the incarnation of Jesus. If we accept that God became human, lived in the body of a woman, entered the world through her birthing canal and was clothed in male flesh the idea that there is something intrinsically wrong with the “material” aspect of humanity is quickly debunked. Second while Jesus did not address the issue of sex his treatment of those identified as unclean clearly indicated that the things viewed by humans as unclean such as leprosy, woman with issue of blood were not the things that the God-man viewed as breaches in God- human relationships. The incarnation and ministry of Jesus reiterates the value of the materiality of humanity. The incarnation reveals that sexuality, a naturally occurring element of humanity, is not inherently wrong.

Is there room for a Christian sexual ethic?

There are those within the church that advocate the seventies “free love, free sex” position but are quickly dismissed because of the lack of theological basis and short sightedness of their position. Could we really promote an anything goes sexual ethic -how about pedophilia or incest? A Christian sexual ethic is not a private sphere but should be an aspect of one’s general Christian ethic which is generally premised on the incarnation, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. One’s sexual praxis should be predicated on one’s publicly attested theological view of God and curtailed by love for self and the other. For example my belief in a God who loves humanity as we are results in shift from paradigms of clean and unclean sexuality to concepts of health/life-giving and unhealthy/ death-dealing, hence intercourse with a child is wrong because children like caterpillars are not “mature” enough to mate.

And my personal word to my future congregants? Sexual expression is akin to mango season in my country of origin. Prior to its season (time of harvest) mangoes might look fit to eat but if you bite in too early the mango sap will burn your mouth and the flesh will be too sour to enjoy. Though skilful cooks can use the green mangoes to make curries and stews  the distinct taste of the mango will be lost and seeds of the mango will not bear fruit… but if you wait till mango season, as one song records at that time you won’t have to coax the mango off the tree it will “ripe and drop.” The mango wanting only to exercise its potential to give life does everything to achieve its goal. The once almost impenetrable skin will give way to the advances of your teeth revealing succulent syrupy flesh rich with nectar; a mutually beneficial offering pleasing to your taste and an opportunity to uncover the mangoes potential to give life- its seed. And when its “mango time” even coffee one of Jamaica’s most lauded exports is regulated to the background— in service of mango monogamy.

Renegade – “running and running away but you can’t run away from yourself”

Truth, reparation and reconciliation: 9/11

In seminary I took a class on forgiveness and one of our discussion topics was the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001. I was the only person in the class with first-hand knowledge of what that day was like. At the time of the attacks, I was a student at John Jay College of Criminal Justice located at 59^th street in Manhattan and travelled under World Trade Centre earlier that morning to attend an 8 am class. I was one of the many people trying to get to safety, one of many who in the subsequent weeks walked around in a daze wondering when I would wake up from this nightmare. There are those who witnessed more, friends who lost loved ones, stood looking up while people jumped out of the buildings, searched through the rubble to find body parts.  So what about forgiveness?

Forgiveness is often touted as the sine qua non Christian virtue. Whether it is a harsh word or genocide the Christian advice most frequently doled out is forgive. The definitions of forgiveness range from not seeking revenge to maintaining relationships with the wrong doers. While I can readily accede that revenge seeking is not a Christian attitude, the same can be said for the maintenance or establishment of unhealthy relationships. My position is premised on my belief that the essential Christian state of being is love (God , self and others). My love policy is best summed up by a line from a Jamaican song “harm no one and let no one harm you.”

So what about those terrorists “axis of evil”?  I believe that love for self and fellow beings mandates that people and things that are inimical to human existence be quarantined until they cease to be so. I believe every effort should be made to find the guilty and thwart their schemes. Can I imagine a scenario in which those who lost their loved ones could establish relationships with the 911 terrorists? Yes if certain conditions are met: truth (repentance) and reparation ( fruit of repentance).  If the offenders were to come to share the point of view of the victims, that 9/11 was a wrong act and the offenders were willing to make reparation.

Renegade

“Spiritual supremacists protest Steve McNair’s funeral with sign-“McNair in Hell.”
At the core of domestic violence is the desire to exert power over and control of another individual. More times than not the perpetrators are males seeking to assert their allegedly “god-given” and society endorsed right to rule. One refreshingly honest answer in response to my question of why some men like relationships characterized by male dominance was offered by a German associate, who I affectionately called “Patriarchy.” “ Patriarchy ” confessed , “it’s not that I really believe that men are better equipped to lead than women but I have a low self-esteem and female subordination serves it.” Patriarchy’s statement captures the reason relationships of dominance are harmful; people are being used by the dominant group or individual as means ( objects, tools, slaves) rather than ends (subjects to be known and cared for). These relationships work for as long as the one designated as tool, slave, object, accepts the role but all humans have a breaking point.
So what does that have to do with McNair and Kazemi ?
FYI –Relationships characterized by infidelity and lies are psychologically abusive with the potential to become physically abusive ( STDs and murders). McNair played his way to the pinnacle of privilege and power but the grim reaper called “early retirement” appeared. But McNair held on tenaciously to male privilege with a wife of twelve years and family in another state and a recently turned twenty year old mistress on the side. The qualities that made the twenty year old a good prey ( high school drop- out and an almost teenager) also rendered her a deadly mistress. Maybe at twenty she was ignorant of the fact that, she was at the peak of her attractiveness to those who would use her as a sex object, so she accepted the story of an impending divorce without verifying it with Google, public records, his wife or TMZ. Accepting her role in the patriarchal paradigm as a dependent woman whose value and salvation is predicated on her ability to establish and maintain relationships with male power brokers when her knight in shining Escalade is revealed to be mere commoner, she snaps. As an experienced student of relationships of dominance she knows how to get her way- her man for all eternity. She goes to him at his most vulnerable, asleep ( as he came to her ?), and gets him to leave his wife and family to join her in the after-life .
So is McNair in hell?
Aren’t we all already there, a place where even God was temporarily dominated and killed. But not before we saw glimpses of heaven as the most powerful ( God) loving and serving the powerless (God’s creation). Aren’t we kind of left here in hell to practice appreciating God’s paradigm of power- the strong serving the weak so when next we see God face to face we won’t want to kill God again because God refuses to live up to our expectations, refuses to be a means but an end ? I pray for the family and friends of both of them and for us who want to put others in our hell.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/200686

The public-opinion two-step on the wisdom of closing the prison camp at Guantánamo is fascinating, and not just because, as recent polling shows, Americans are inclined to keep it open forever. The current legal meltdown over what to do with the 240 prisoners shows that Americans actually care a lot about prisons, prisoners and prison reform, but only when the inmates threaten to tumble out into their backyards.

That’s what Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) may be counting on as he launches an ambitious effort to reform U.S. prisons. In addition to proposing a massive 18-month review of the prison system, Webb wants to work toward reducing the overall incarceration rate while refocusing efforts toward locking up truly dangerous criminals and gang leaders, decreasing prison violence, establishing meaningful reentry programs for ex-offenders, reforming the nation’s drug policies and improving treatment of the mentally ill. It’s not quite as dramatic as the prospect of Abu Zubaydah bedding down at the Supermax prison in Colorado, but Webb wants to reignite the subject of prison reform, because he’s convinced that when it comes to their prison problem, Americans need only know how to count.

(CLICK ON LINK FOR THE REST OF THE STORY)

**This is a wonderful post that my former pastor Brooks Smith, posted on his blog.  Enjoy– (http://memoryandspirit.blogspot.com/2009/02/suffering-and-science-isa.html)

Dick McKenna was an extraordinary biology teacher at North Plainfield High School. He was scheduled to have spinal surgery that involved fusing several vertebrae. Fairly dicey stuff. When I visited him in the hospital, we began talking about evolution. He said that he knew teaching evolution was contrary to the Scriptures, but he believed in evolution and felt called to teach it. I felt blessed by the opportunity to talk about the Scriptures and the two creation stories and the way the first told an amazingly accurate story of the creation of the earth out of the watery chaos, the emergence of life and the eventual emergence of the human being. We then talked about how the second creation story was in fact the story of the birth of moral consciousness, the knowledge of good and evil.

 
Yes, evil, the power of the demons was real as it is real in the story of Jesus casting out those demons. But clearly thanks be to God for the birth of moral consciousness and therefore, of course, to Eve as the mother of moral consciousness—at least according to the Scripture.

 
My friend Dick had never heard of Teilhard de Chardin, the paleontologist /mystic theologian who embraced fully the mystery of the earth, who believe in the truth of rocks and all that rocks revealed and who believed in and experienced Christ present in the evolving universe. Teilhard wrote `If as a result of some interior revolution, I were successfully to lose my faith in Christ, my faith in a personal God, my faith in the Spirit, I think that I would still continue to believe in the world.’ Teilhard died in the mid fifties. Thomas Berry one of his interpreters and the author of Dream of the Earth said in the spirit of Teilhard, `The earth is the only thing we know for sure.’

 
Being a scientist, a biologist like my friend Dick McKenna, doesn’t mean that one is automatically religious or irreligious. Certainly, in Isaiah’s image we can look into the heavens stretched out and for those with eyes of faith we can see the mystery of God. At the same time, as we study the universe with our mind and we learn from the universe, we know those learnings shape our understanding of faith, of our sense of what God is doing in the universe. Teilhard said that evolution is so true and so glorious that it is the arc to which all our thought must conform. As a scientist he rejoiced in the truths that the rocks spoke—as a Christian, he rejoiced in the truth spoken by and through the Rock of Ages.

 
When I was in the last year of high school, I decided that I was no longer comfortable calling myself a Christian, based on my understanding of the Christian story. At the time I rebelled intellectually against Christianity for two reasons–Suffering and Science. There was no explanation as to why a loving all powerful God would allow such suffering in the world, so God must not exist, I thought. And like Dick McKenna and many in our culture I had come to believe that one had to choose between religion and science, between creation in 4004BC and evolution.

 
In Copenhagen, Gail and I visited an incredible church built I think in the late 18th century. The church proper was on the bottom floor. The inclined walkway led to a second floor that housed a library. The third floor was an observatory.

 
At the General Assembly last June, I was standing in line to buy breakfast and wandered into conversation with a delegate who was a professor emeritus of physics from Stanford. After a little chatter about upcoming GA business, we started in on religion and science. Born in Switzerland, a life long church-goer, he was currently involved in a research project to discover what happened to the anti-matter that is present somewhere in the universe. With my 45 year old memories of high school physics class fading a little bit, I listened intently and humbly. He explained how the universe contained as much anti-matter as matter. Ok—whatever you say. And I thought—by God I am proud to be a Presbyterian. One of our national organizations passionately explores issues of Faith, Science and Technology.

 
Science challenges theology—and too theology challenges and informs, but hopefully does not distort science. There is the possibility of a blessed partnership. Again, Teilhard blesses us.

 
“Throughout my life, through my life, the world has little by little caught fire in my sight until, aflame all around me, it has become almost completely luminous from within…Such has been my experience in contact with the earth—the diaphany of the divine at the heart of the universe on fire…Christ: His heart: a fire: capable of penetrating everywhere and gradually spreading everywhere.”

Just what is the Christian-ness of the United States? Curious, I checked up on the 2009 American Religious Identification Survey. And yes, the number of Americans who claim no relationship to any religion almost doubled from 8% to 15% between 1990 and 2001 and has now increased to 15%. However, the percentage of Christians has decreased from 86% to 76% since 1990. What is more, a Newsweek poll showed the number of people who look at the United States as a “Christian nation” has gone down from 69% to 62% between 2008 and 2009. 68% of the public thinks that religion is losing its influence in US society. As Crystal asked and discussed last week, what do these statistics mean for American people, our “Christian nation,” and for church and state? 

This crisis is termed “post-Christian.” What?!  A nation that is less Christian does not mean “post-Christian.” God is present. He is just less of a force in US politics and culture. This scares people: that Christianity is losing its binding authority. 

Politics and religion are both implemented on how people see the world.  We need a fluid and proportionate mix of the two. So, maybe the decline of Christian America creates a more serene playing field for political and cultural environments; faith-based reasoning is just one constituent of all decisions. Take issues that have become strongly political, cultural, and religious: for instance, conservative Christians believe they have lost the battle over issues of abortion, prayer in schools, same-sex marriage. Now, I would be concerned for the survival of Christianity if these were the values that define the religion. But, they are not and should not be. 

No country is truly Christian, or Muslim, or Jewish.  Only people can be affiliated to one religion as they are affiliated to one nation. God is above nations and I think unconcerned with religion.  Our greatest challenge is to be in this world but not of it; do not be conformed.  His kingdom is not of this world and neither shall our hearts.  What are the values that do define Christianity? Concern yourself with those as God would. There is still love. 

Gods greatest commandment is to love Him and love your neighbor. Augustine defines a nation as “a multitude of rational beings in common agreement as to objects of their love.” I believe we can be Christians that simply love and in so doing remain a Christian nation.

Number 3 – Calvinism… Not sure what to make of this.  I think Time may be combining a more wide-held return to a neo-orthodox sovereign God with a certain hard-line Calvinism.  

3. The New Calvinism

If you really want to follow the development of conservative Christianity, track its musical hits. In the early 1900s you might have heard “The Old Rugged Cross,” a celebration of the atonement. By the 1980s you could have shared the Jesus-is-my-buddy intimacy of “Shine, Jesus, Shine.” And today, more and more top songs feature a God who is very big, while we are…well, hark the David Crowder Band: “I am full of earth/ You are heaven’s worth/ I am stained with dirt/ Prone to depravity.”

Calvinism is back, and not just musically. John Calvin’s 16th century reply to medieval Catholicism’s buy-your-way-out-of-purgatory excesses is Evangelicalism’s latest success story, complete with an utterly sovereign and micromanaging deity, sinful and puny humanity, and the combination’s logical consequence, predestination: the belief that before time’s dawn, God decided whom he would save (or not), unaffected by any subsequent human action or decision.

Keep Reading