On the Absurdity of Christian Bigotry

A reflection on what I was taught as a Roman Catholic in rural Northern Maine.

I considered myself Roman Catholic—which despite what some Christians think is a Christian denomination—well into my 30s. My family was very active in the church.

Mičuwé (my older Sister*) taught Catechism, Mithaŋ (my younger Sister*) and I were altar servers, I was a Lector, Akenistén:’a (my Mother°) was a Eucharistic Minister and a member of the parish council.

I don't know if my faith was typical of most Roman Catholics. 

I didn't think the Pope was anything but the head of the Roman Catholic church, elected by a bunch of Cardinals—the red robe wearing kind, not the birds—after Pope John Paul II—whom I liked very much—died. 

I wasn't a fan of Pope Benedict and unlike some Catholics I couldn't care less about what he said we should or shouldn't do. To me he represented everything I disliked about members of my own religion which I separated from the actual religion itself. 

Bigoted and backwards, now-disgraced Benedict and some others like him were leaders of the faith, but I didn't elect them nor did I support or condone their beliefs. Which didn't make me less Catholic since the only ones I was supposed to have faith and believe in were God and Jesus.

Mičhúwepi (my Sisters*) both left the church during their adolescence and Akenistén:’a (my Mother°) left in her 50s after her bipolar diagnosis and treatment.

As I've aged, I realized my fondness for Catholicism was about the pomp and circumstance of the religion, not any actual faith in a God or the Holy Trinity. My last straw with the Catholic church was the Maine Diocese's opposition to LGBTQ+ marriage equality.

In my 50s I'm more agnostic than anything.

My Formal Religious Education

I got my Roman Catholic religious education and concept of what it was to be a member of a Christian faith from my Mother, some great priests and nuns and some really good Catechism teachers who stressed to me:

• Neither God nor Jesus wrote the Bible

They are quoted in it several times which are the areas we should put the most focus on, but not every word came from either one of them. And both used parables to dumb concepts down for their audience.

• Everything in the Bible that isn't a direct quote or a narrative of the events in the life of a real person—Moses—or about Jesus' life was written by a specific person and addressed a very specific audience

That's why those books of the Bible have funky names like the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians because, guess what? It was originally a freakin' letter a guy named Paul wrote to a group of Christians living in Corinth to address specific questions they had or specific problems they were experiencing.

It's not called the Omnipotent Tome of Paul, Who Is Really God or Jesus in Disguise, Written for Everyone.

To apply the message completely out of context or to read them out of context—not knowing who wrote it, who it was written for, or what they were talking about—is just asinine. I got this directly from Bible study with a Seton Hall educated Jesuit priest.

• Most of the stories in the Old and New Testaments are parables, never intended to be taken literally

Genesis was given by God via alpine flammable shrubbery to Moses to explain creation and intro the 10 Commandments.

No, it wasn't literally seven days to create modern Earth, it was a dumbed down Big Bang or similar cosmic event. There was no Adam and Eve or Noah—because, ewwww, incest—they were all parables.

I got this straight from my rural Maine Catechism classes and reinforced by my Jesuit Bible study and it makes a Hell of a lot more sense than the Earth is about 6,000 years old, cassowary walked from Papua Niu Gini to the Middle East to get on a boat and God endorses the kind of family bonding that populates the Earth.

Twice. 🤨😒🤢

My Bible Study

Using the methods I was taught, I read the Bible like a book cover to cover. I  didn't bounce around all over the place to make it say what I wanted. I made sure I knew who was responsible for the creation of each section and the purpose of it. 

It still baffles me that Leviticus is even in there at all since Christians aren't Levites nor Levite Rabbis.

But there is quite a bit in the rules of conduct specifically addressed to the Levites that would satisfy the motives of power hungry European monarchs and church leaders back when the version of the Bible most people follow now was being put together, so it isn't incredibly surprising it's in there.

The same could be said for the Song Of Solomon, a love poem from a King to his wife the Queen. Well, one of his wives, we think, but it may have been to one of his concubines. 

Excerpts of this poem are quoted as proof positive that God thinks marriage is between one man and one woman, when the man that is credited with writing it practiced polygamy and adultery.

According to the Bible, Solomon had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines.

Really NOM?

This is your proof for what a Godly marriage is?

Of course Song Of Solomon doesn't appear in all versions of the Bible since it didn't suit everyone's motives.

This is why when people quote things from certain sections to justify hatred or bigotry I just have to assume they know absolutely nothing about the Bible. Or have never read it except in the choppy way so many Christians are taught to, with a verse here and a verse there to 'confirm' their own long held prejudices.

What I Learned From Bible Study

After reading the Bible several times and after extensive discussions with other members of my faith—philámayaye wopíla Jesuit Father Daniels—I gleaned the overall prevailing philosophies of God and Jesus are:

• you need to be a good person

• try to do the right thing in your own life at all times

• here are 10 rules We want you to follow

• here are the Beatitudes We want you to aspire to 

• mind your own damn business!

These themes aren't hinted at. 

They aren't based on a sentence or two found here or there in a passage that was never meant to be directed at us. They don't promote hate, bigotry or discrimination.

They show up over and over again. 

The 10 rules God gave aren't out there so people can point out all of their friends, relatives and neighbors flaws. People that did that pissed Jesus off and got told that they were pissing Him off rather forcefully. 

The rules are there to guide individuals and be self-applied to those individuals, not so they can judge the worthiness of others.

The things outside those 10 rules—the things Christians love to focus on instead of God's rules—is all just made up bullshit so they can blame their own small-minded prejudices on a God of their own creation.

I think Jesus made it very clear during his time on Earth how God felt about pharisees and philistines. I thought it was the reason Jesus was sent—people were getting the message horribly wrong and so God sent Jesus to set people on the right path.

Modern American Christianity

It astounds me when people who are 'deeply religious' and 'devout Christians' focus on shit that isn't even in the damn book. 

Oh, maybe their leaders can 'interpret it' based on this or that word or phrase or sentence that some guy like Paul said in correspondence with the Corinthians, or as part of the Rabbinical code for the Levites, or when speaking about converting from the Roman temple system—which included male whores/slaves that serviced visitors to the temple—to Christianity which told them to lose the sex slaves.

Really, Christians?

Your human leaders can interpret what God or Jesus 'really meant' based on stuff They weren't directly connected to?

Because God was pretty damn specific in those 10 Commandments of His. If there is something He wanted, He pretty much spelled it out. Jesus was pretty damn specific too.

Yet Christians focus on what was never mentioned by Them.

It's almost like their religion is a convenient excuse to be horrible people, not a belief in Jesus’ teachings.

Then they proudly spread their message of hate to the rest of the Earth through self-serving “mission trips” designed to coerce Indigenous peoples in Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Americas into becoming their brand of Christians with promises of healthcare, housing, clean water, food and education.

And don't even get me started on the bullshit "prosperity Gospel" grift.

Do these devout Christians think the homophobia and transphobia and misogyny they spew slipped their Gods' minds so some rando guy had to almost, sort of, maybe, kind of mention it if you read a sentence this guy wrote just right and entirely out of context?

Isn't that incredibly disrespectful to God and Jesus to think something that is a HUGE issue for Them—so huge Christians should spend time and money to combat its evil influence—just slipped God and Jesus' minds entirely and They forgot to mention how much They hate it?

Shouldn't devout Christians have too much faith in Them to believe that God or Jesus are simple-minded forgetful idiots? 

And if they think They are that stupid, why are people even Christian?

I know the Bible makes it very plain God and Jesus didn't give a crap about a person's sexuality.

If They did, They'd have spelled it out clearly.

Homosexual, heterosexual, asexual, bisexual, transgender, nonbinary, intersex, fluid, the entire spectrum—They don't care as long as you're a good person who follows the rules They actually set forth like:

• not killing each other

• not stealing from one another

• not lying

• freely giving to the poor

• housing the unhoused

And They have no stated opinions on marriage except one—once people are in a marriage they need to be faithful to the person they're married to.

So it’s spelled out repeatedly in the actual words of God—one thing you can't be while being an actual Christian is a racist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic, judgmental ass.

So why are so many bigots calling themselves devout Christians? 

I guess they joined without ever reading the rules…

~~~~~~~~~~~

* Lakȟótiyapi language—an Očetí Sakowin dialect, often referred to as “Sioux” after a Francosized derogatory name given by the Assiniboine

° Kanien'kéha language—often referred to as Mohawk after an Anglicized derogatory name given by the Algonquin