Posts Tagged “Christianity”

The End is NearAs I’ve said many times, one feature of fundamentalist religiosity — regardless of which overall religious tradition it’s in — is immaturity. They have a very powerful sense of how things should be, but are blissfully unaware of the fact that none of that is even remotely realistic. So they’re repeatedly thwarted by what they perceive as a hostile world around them … and they can’t handle it. It makes them become angry and resentful.

This is illustrated rather clearly in a New York Times article on the status of evangelical Christians in the US (WebCite cached article):

Now, a year later, [Betty and Dick Odgaard] and other conservative evangelicals interviewed in central Iowa say they feel as if they have been abandoned. Many say that they have no genuine champion in the presidential race and that the country has turned its back on them. Americans are leaving church, same-sex marriage is the law of the land, and the country has moved on to debating transgender rights. While other Americans are anxious about the economy, jobs and terrorism, conservative Christians say they fear for the nation’s very soul. Some worry that the nation has strayed so far that God’s punishment is imminent.…

The change in America seemed to happen so quickly that it felt like whiplash, the Odgaards said. One day, they felt comfortably situated in the American majority, as Christians with shared beliefs in God, family and the Bible. They had never even imagined that two people of the same sex could marry.

Overnight, it seemed, they discovered that even in small-town Iowa they were outnumbered, isolated and unpopular. Everyone they knew seemed to have a gay relative or friend. Mr. Odgaard’s daughter from his first marriage disavowed her father’s actions on Facebook, and his gay second cousin will not speak to him. Even their own Mennonite congregation put out a statement saying that while the denomination opposes gay marriage, “not every congregation” or Mennonite does. Mrs. Odgaard, 64, the daughter of a Mennonite minister, was devastated.

“It all flipped, so fast,” said Mr. Odgaard, a patrician 70-year-old who favors khakis and boat shoes. “Suddenly, we were in the minority. That was kind of a scary feeling. It makes you wonder where the Christians went.”

The Times continues explaining how alienated American fundagelicals like the Odgaards feel. The article focuses on recent societal changes, such as the advent of gay marriage, but things like that don’t entirely explain the reality of this alienation. At the Friendly Atheist I posted the following comment, based on my own experience as a fundie Christian:

As a former fundamentalist/evangelical Christian, I must point out something: Their sense of alienation has nothing to do with gay marriage. Not. One. F-ing. Thing. That’s just a convenient scapegoat.

No, the reason fundagelicals feel alienated, is because they’re fundagelicals. No matter what may (or may not) be going on around them, their beliefs define them as a downtrodden minority in what they perceive to be an overwhelmingly “worldly” society. And for them, “worldly” means “Satanic” (because they believe their deity has handed the Devil authority over “the world,” until the Apocalypse).

Fundagelicals believe themselves to be outnumbered and outgunned, constantly oppressed by profane “worldly” forces trying to wrench them away from their deity and deprive them of their sanctity.

For them, this perspective is definitional. As they see it, it’s laid out for them in scripture; they believe it, and that’s that. Everything that ever happens to them simply fits in with this view. Bad things happen to them because “the world” is out to destroy them because of their vaunted holiness. (Anything good that happens to them, of course, is because of said vaunted holiness.) Essentially it’s a rationale for their persecution complex (which, in turn, is the product of Christianity’s underlying psychopathology, going back nearly to its origins).

Sure, things like gay marriage play into, and perhaps even increase, fundagelicals’ prevailing sense of alienation. But those external factors did not create that sense of alienation, and if they were to vanish, would not make it go away. That alienation is ever-present in fundagelical Christianity and is part and parcel of it.

To be clear, this sense of alienation is something I experienced when I was a fundie, and that was during the early 80s. That was a time when gay rights weren’t being discussed very much, gay marriage wasn’t on the horizon, and for nearly everyone the word “transgender” didn’t even exist. Yet, that alienation was very real for those in my little faith community.

So … if fundagelicals feel alienated, too bad so sad for them. All they need to do is let go of the alienation, and it will be gone — because they’re manufacturing it, themselves, out of whole cloth. It’s not based on fact, but on their persecutorial metaphysics.

In sum, I don’t pity these folk one bit. They’ve created their own despair, having crafted it from their own delusions. Whatever anxiety they feel, is purely theirs. No one’s forcing it on them.

Photo credit: Scott Leslie, via Flickr.

Hat tip: Friendly Atheist.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments 1 Comment »

'What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... such lies would not be against God, he would accept them.' -Martin Luther (PsiCop original graphic)I’ve blogged previously about the fake “historian” (actually, pseudohistorian) David Barton. He’s deluded himself — and most of the Religious Right — into thinking the Founding Fathers were militant fundamentalist Christians like himself. Proceeding from this delusion, he runs around telling everyone the founding documents were actually sacred Christian scripture, and vice versa. His idea, of course, is to promote his own militant Christianism as the US “state religion,” implying all Americans must be Christianists like himself. Ultimately he wants a Christocracy ruled by Christofascists who meet his standards.

All of this is a steaming load, of course, heaved right out the back of the barn. The US is not a “Christian nation,” and never had been intended as one. What’s more, the Founders literally couldn’t have been fundamentalist Christians, having lived a century prior to that form of the religion coming into existence. Everyone outside of fundie Christendom knows this — but the fundies don’t accept that reality, and get their panties in knots whenever someone tries to explain it to them.

As Right Wing Watch reports, Barton has continued his delusional and dishonest propaganda campaign. He said the text of the Constitution was lifted wholesale from the Bible (WebCite cached article):

A few years ago, right-wing pseudo-historian David Barton developed a new talking point in which he claimed that the Constitution is filled with direct, verbatim quotes straight out of the Bible.

We pointed out repeatedly that the clauses in the Constitution that Barton insisted were direct quotes from the Bible were nothing of the sort and Barton eventually stopped making this obviously false claim.

But when he appeared on the Messianic Jewish program “Jewish Voice” recently, Barton dusted it off when he once again insisted that the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution by using the “exact language” of the Bible.

Here’s the RWW article cataloging many of Barton’s specific claims of Constitutional-Biblical plagiarism (cached); read it, and see for yourself that the verbatim Biblical quotations he says are in the Constitution, very clearly and obviously are not. In other words, Barton lied. And he’s continued to lie, on “Jewish Voices.”

The problem with guys like Barton is that he has an audience which very seriously and assiduously soaks up his every word, because they view him as a real “historian,” unlike what they view as all the “fake” historians who work in academia and who therefore are insidious, insolent “secularists” who want to destroy devout, dutiful believers like themselves and wipe all trace of Christianity from the planet.

The truth is quite the opposite: It’s Barton who’s the fake historian; as I’ve mentioned previously, he has no credentials whatsoever in the field, and his only degree is a bachelor of religious education from Oral Roberts University. Barton claimed to have an earned doctorate (as opposed to an honorary one) but has produced no verifiable documentation to confirm it.

At any rate, little things like “credentials” hardly matter in fundie Christendom. Barton’s peeps are all convinced that he’s right, and the rest of the world is wrong — period, end of discussion. There is no way to get them to understand otherwise because they’re impervious to correction. Being told they’re wrong offends them and plays into the existing persecutorial psychopathology inherent in their religion. So they react by clamping their eyes and ears shut, and clinging harder than ever before to whatever they already believe, because they find those lies more emotionally satisfying than the truth. And for them, their own emotional satisfaction is far more important than anything else in the world.

I’ll finish this post by granting David Barton platinum membership in my “lying liars for Jesus” club. As a blatant liar and devout Christianist, I’m sure he’ll be happy there.

Photo credit: PsiCop original graphic based on Martin Luther quote.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Phony Right-Wing Historian Lies About the Bible and Constitution

Linda Blair, Max von Sydow, and Jason Miller in The Exorcist (1973) / via IMDBThe Roman Catholic Church is facing a crisis. No, I’m not referring to the worldwide clerical child-abuse scandal that’s wracked the Church for over 15 years, nor the resulting problem of dioceses experiencing financial straits and even bankruptcies. The Church’s problem is a shortage … but not of priests — a problem it’s faced for the last few decades (WebCite cached article).

While those are genuine problems the Church faces, they’re not the dire crisis I’m blogging about just now. That happens to be a different kind of shortage: A shortage of exorcists. Satanism and the occult are spreading like rashes, as the (UK) Telegraph explains, but the Church has too few anti-demonic personnel to fend them off (cached):

Exorcists are in urgent demand as a result of a sharp rise in people dabbling in Satanism and the occult, experts from the Catholic Church in Italy and the US said.…

Valter Cascioli, a psychologist and scientific consultant to the International Association of Exorcists, which is endorsed by the Vatican, described as an “emergency” the lack of priests capable of fighting the forces of evil.

“The lack of exorcists is a real emergency. There is a pastoral emergency as a result of a significant increase in the number of diabolical possessions that exorcist priests are confronting,” he told La Stampa newspaper.

“The number of people who take part in occult and satanic practices, which lead to serious physical, psychological and spiritual damages, is constantly rising.”…

“It is dangerous to underestimate a phenomenon that is caused by the direct actions of the devil, but also by a decline in faith and values.”

Cascioli’s complaints about the spread of what his Church considers black magic practices and “a decline in faith and values,” reflects the bellyaching of the main character in my last blog post (a Connecticut police chief who thinks the growth of atheism is making the crime rate go up). This sort of thinking is common in Christianity, what with its persecutorial psychopathology that causes them to delude themselves into believing they’re under siege and about to be wiped out at any moment.

Really, Cascioli has nothing to be worried about. Demonic possession never happens. There are no demons or devils, no Satan leading them, and no such thing as black magic, either. Exorcisms occur only in horror movies. There’s no viable reason for the Roman Catholic Church to divert any resources to creating a demonology school (which Cascioli has demanded). It’s all metaphysical nonsense, which until just a few years ago, the Church had de-emphasized through most of the 20th century. They should resume that policy and ignore Cascioli’s absurd kvetching about Satanism and “black magic.”

Photo credit: Still from The Exorcist (1973), via IMDB.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on R.C. Church Faces “Emergency” Shortage of Exorcists

Residents came out to show thier [sic] supports [sic] for Bridgeport Police Officers with a community march in solidarity in Bridgeport, Conn., on Saturday Sept. 24, 2016. Dozens of residents joined members of the department and local clergy and officials at New Hope Missionary Baptist Church on Park Avenue and then proceeded to march to police headquarters nearby.  / Christian Abraham / Hearst Connecticut MediaIn the world of sanctimonious Christianist nutjobbery, atheists are only just a shade better than Lucifer himself. They’re to blame for almost everything that ever goes wrong, and even Christian-world villains like Muslims and pagans earn more respect from Christianists. An example of this sort of thinking, as reported by the Connecticut Post, came from the chief of police in Bridgeport, CT (WebCite cached article):

Teens joining gangs? Shooting incidents on the rise?

The city’s top law enforcement officer thinks irreligiosity is a major factor in the problems facing the city.

“We need God in our lives,” Bridgeport Police Chief Armando Perez said Saturday to a group of around 50 people following a police solidarity march.

Perez, who is Catholic, addressed a group of mostly church members between the police department and City Hall.

“The problems that we’re having is because people have abandoned church, people have abandoned God, and that cannot happen,” he said.…

Perez, in his remarks, advocated a lot more praying.

“Let’s bring God back in our lives, back in our church — bring our kids — in our city, in our schools — absolutely,” Perez told the crowd.

When asked to clarify his remarks, Perez said that he didn’t advocate a specific religious belief, though he stood by his statement about religion in schools.

Gee, it was nice of the Chief not to demand that everyone in Bridgeport convert to a particular sect of a particular religion; it’s OK by him, I guess, if that city’s citizens join a religion of their choice. But, he does appear to think everyone must belong to one religion or another. Non-belief isn’t an option, in his book.

He wouldn’t be alone in that regard. There’s a significant wing of American Christianism that genuinely thinks there’s no such thing as freedom from religion; that it’s possible — and legal! — to force every American to have to be a religious believer … of some sort. (Yes, they do. For real.)

Chief Perez doesn’t seem to realize that, although non-belief has been rising over the last several years, crime rates haven’t matched that curve. Despite his whining about atheism growing, the majority of Americans are religious believers (cached). And the proportion of folks in prison who’re atheists is actually lower than that of the general population (cached) … meaning that atheists are less likely than believers to have been convicted of crimes.

Crime and non-belief are not linked lock-step in the way he asserts. To be generous, the Chief is blowing smoke; to be more blunt, he’s lying through his teeth.

It’s long past time for religious believers to grow the fuck up for once and get over the fact that atheists (and other sorts of non-believers) exist. They need to stop getting their panties in bunches over the insolence of those of us who refuse to believe in their absurd metaphysics. They erroneously think they’re personally harmed by the presence of non-belief in their communities; that’s just fucking absurd. They object to atheists (and other sorts of non-believers) for only one reason: They’re insecure in their beliefs, and knowing there are people who don’t believe as they do, only serves to heighten those insecurities. Since they’re not mature enough to handle those insecurities, they lash out against them, like infants. “Waaah! Mommy, the bad people are <sniff> atheists! Wah waah! <sniff> Mommy, make the bad atheists go away! <sniff>” What a damned joke.

Photo credit: Christian Abraham/Hearst Connecticut Media, via Connecticut Post.

Hat tip: Friendly Atheist.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Police Chief in Nutmeg State Says Atheism Causes Crime

Robert JeffressIt’s amazing how resistant many conservative Christians are to the idea that, perhaps — just perhaps! — too many blacks (mostly men) are dying at the hands of police (often white) in confrontations that didn’t necessarily have to end that way. As a rule, conservatives tend to be very distrustful of government as a whole, so theoretically at least, one would think they’d be predisposed to question police officers’ motives and actions. But in the face of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, they’ve become sanctimoniously outraged that anyone might ever question the judgement of any police officer anywhere in the country. In their minds, all killings by police must automatically be viewed as “righteous kills,” so that means anyone who disagrees must be “anti-cop” and want all police killed. Or something.

Since their petulant refusal to accept even the remotest the possibility of error or even criminality on the part of an officer contradicts their overall anti-government philosophy, it’s fair to wonder why this is so. Well, evangelical megapastor Robert Jeffress of Dallas revealed at least one reason for this, as Raw Story explains, when he appeared earlier today on Fox & Friends (WebCite cached article):

Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor at First Baptist Church in Dallas, lashed out at what he called “bogus ministers” who did not preach about having “respect for the police.”

“The New Testament says in Romans 13:4 that law enforcement officers are ministers of God sent by God to punish evil doers,” he opined. “When you think about it, police officers are just as called by God to do what they do as pastors and priests are called by God. And I think we need to remind our members of that.”

Now, Jeffress cited Romans 13:4, but I’ll quote the whole passage in question (including that specific verse):

Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. (Romans 13:1-7)

If Jeffress — following Paul — is correct, then questioning any police officer’s actions is un-Christian, since as representatives of the state, they’ve been appointed by the Almighty as his/her/its direct agents and therefore are sacred, inviolate, and ever-perfect. This passage from the epistle to the Romans is often cited in Christian circles to back up authoritarianism and the presumption that government is always right and that total obedience to the state is a Christian virtue. Back in my fundie days, this passage and a few others were bandied about this way.

But let’s face it, these folk are selective in how they apply their principle of Biblical authoritarianism … and Jeffress himself shows exactly why, in this very same segment on Fox:

The megachurch pastor also claimed that President Barack Obama had “exacerbated the racial divide instead of healing it.”

“I’m afraid the president, just like he did with conservative Christians after the beheading by ISIS of Christians, it seemed like he wanted to blame conservative Christians in the past,” he said, “instead of putting the blame when it belongs.”

Note that Jeffress — who had just moments before pontificated on how Christians are required by Jesus to submit wholly to the government and to their rulers — just questioned his own president, accusing him of having rhetorically gone after police and “conservative Christians.” So while he advocates unquestioning acceptance of all police officers’ words and actions, he refuses to do the same for the president’s. Hmm. I see more than a little hypocrisy here, not to mention cherry-picking. I’m guessing Jeffress is unaware his own Jesus clearly and unambiguously forbid him ever to be hypocritical, at any time or for any reason.

What’s more, I’ve searched and searched, but have yet ever to find that President Obama has ever blamed ISIS’s beheadings, police killings of blacks, or the public reaction to such killings (e.g. the BLM movement) on “conservative Christians.” He never used words to that effect, that I know of. I challenge Jeffress to show that Obama explicitly stated “conservative Christians” (using those words) were behind either. Go ahead, Pastor. Prove your contention — if you dare! Citations, please, or it didn’t happen. And if it didn’t happen, that would make you a lying liar for Jesus.

Here’s video of Jeffress’s appearance, if you care to view it:

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore, via Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments 1 Comment »

Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul, Philadelphia, PATraditionalists in the Roman Catholic Church have had a difficult time with a lot of what Pope Francis has said and done since he assumed office. They’ve complained about him, dismissed him, ignored him, and otherwise tried to act as though none of his innovations was ever offered.

An example of this, as the Philadelphia Inquirer reports, comes from Archbishop Charles Chaput (WebCite cached article):

Divorced and civilly remarried Catholics, as well as cohabitating unmarried couples, must “refrain from sexual intimacy” to receive Holy Communion in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput has asserted in a new set of pastoral guidelines.

Released Friday, the guidelines instruct clergy and other archdiocesan leaders on implementing Amoris Laetitia, a major document on family that Pope Francis issued in April.

His six-page instruction, which appears on the archdiocesan website, may be the first of its kind issued by the bishop of any American diocese in response to Amoris Laetitia, Latin for “the joy of love.”

Acknowledging that it is a “hard teaching,” Chaput goes on to say that Catholics in same-sex partnerships, those remarried without a church annulment, and cohabitating persons may not serve on parish councils, instruct the faithful, serve as lectors, or dispense Communion.

Allowing persons in such “irregular” relationships, “no matter how sincere,” to hold positions of responsibility would “offer a serious counter-witness to Catholic belief, which can only produce moral confusion in the community,” according to Chaput.

I get that, as a bishop, Chaput is entitled to issue these sorts of directives, and that as a prince of the Church he can govern its affairs and enforce its doctrines as he sees fit; if gay, cohabiting, or remarried Catholics don’t like it, they can leave their Church. That’s absolutely the case. What’s harder to understand is why Chaput, or any leader within the Church, could be so determined to slam the door of the Church in the faces of some of its lay members. The R.C. Church in the US has been on the wane for years. Traditionalists like Chaput are working to push even more folks out. It’s a dysfunctional way to operate.

But hey, what could this cynical, cold-hearted, godless agnostic heathen possibly know about such important sacred considerations?

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Philly Archbishop Pushes Back Against “Irregular Relationships”

Albert Chevallier Tayler - The Christmas Tree 1911The annual “war on Christmas” is an agnostic blogger’s dream. Few things seem to bring out the juvenile insanity within America’s “Christian nation” like Christmas. (Which — contrary to what some of them have said — is most certainly not their religion’s most sacred holiday. That, I have to point out, is actually Easter.) They need to be surrounded, from Thanksgiving through New Year’s each year, by an endless chorus of “Merry Christmasses.” Everyone they come into contact with must say that to them, without regard to whether those they meet celebrate Christmas themselves or wish to have to say “Merry Christmas” continuously for 5 weeks or so every year. If that doesn’t happen, they think Christmas has been outlawed and they’re being denied their “religious freedom.”

Or something like that. I guess.

I honestly have yet to understand it, but then, I’m just a cold-hearted, cynical, godless agnostic heathen, so what the fuck do I know about it?

It’s only June, and early in the year for me to address the annual fraud which is “the war on Christmas,” but I find I must bring it up. You see, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald “it’s my own orange hair!” Trump convened a meeting with a cadre of militant Christianists. (You knew nothing good would come from that!) As Raw Story explains, based on Right Wing Watch video, Trumpie promised he’d force people to say “Merry Christmas”: (WebCite cached article):

Donald Trump greeted religious right leaders [cached] by asking not what Christianity could do for them but boasting about what evangelical voters had done for him.…

Trump launched a broadside in the so-called “war on Christmas” Tuesday afternoon at the event organized by the anti-LGBT groups Family Research Council, Vision America and AFA Action.

“I’m a tremendous believer, and we’re going to straighten it out,” Trump said. “You know, oftentimes at some of my rallies I’ll have 25,000 (or) 35,000 people more, and I say in a joking fashion — but boy, do I mean it, we’re going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”

Yeah, Trumpie. You tell ’em! You’re going to make those insolent Jesus-haters out there all say “Merry Christmas” until their faces break. Right? Fuck yeah!

Here’s an open invitation, Mr Trump: You track me down and make me say “Merry Christmas” to whoever you want me to say it to. Go ahead. You just do that. OK? If you haven’t got the courage to force me to say “Merry Christmas,” then you’re nothing but an infantile chicken-hawk who talks big but who refuses to get off his ass and actually do anything.

If you won’t do that to someone who’s invited you to give it your best shot, then what makes anyone — including the militant Christofascists you’re pandering to — think you’ll do it to store clerks around the country? Sorry to say, it’s not going to happen.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on War on Christmas 2016, Part 1