purity and modesty claptrap.

Elizabeth Smart, on the despair she felt after being kidnapped and raped...

" …Smart spoke at a Johns Hopkins human trafficking forum, saying she was raised in a religious household and recalled a school teacher who spoke once about abstinence and compared sex to chewing gum.

“I thought, ‘Oh, my gosh, I’m that chewed up piece of gum, nobody re-chews a piece of gum, you throw it away.’ And that’s how easy it is to feel like you know longer have worth, you know longer have value,” Smart said. “Why would it even be worth screaming out? Why would it even make a difference if you are rescued? Your life still has no value.”

"Smart said she "felt so dirty and so filthy" after she was raped by her captor, and she understands why someone wouldn't run "because of that alone."

I remember SO clearly being indoctrinated into purity and modesty culture. First as a child, then through homeschooling "raising women of virtue" type books, then through books and classes and talks at bible college, through seminary and more. I was asked to read and speak on books that told women that immodesty caused so much junk in their hearts that Jesus couldn't get in. I remember being told that evil lie "a woman worth being kissed won't be easy to kiss" because we ALL KNOW that women don't WANT to be kissed right away and if they DO then they are just a slut and if they are just a slut then they aren't worth anything! 

Of course, you *can* wear immodest clothes, but you *know* what that does to men, and when you *know* then their reactions become your fault/responsibility.

The right kind of guy will only want to marry the right kind of girl.

Men are more sexual and visual than women - and if you are a sexual, visual woman, something is wrong with you.

Toe cleavage - don't even wear sandals/shoes that show toe cleavage because that reminds men of boobies.

Everything reminds men of boobies.

If you dress like a slut, you'll get treated like a slut.

Well, she was asking for it because she wore a mini-skirt.

AHHHHRHRHRHRGRGHHGGGGGG.

These attitudes as normal in our culture is a symptom of rape culture, and the shaming/purity vs impurity that is added in christian purity culture is just a disgusting, worse and more disturbing form of rape culture.

Purity/modesty crap promotes rape. It promotes rape culture. It promotes the devaluing of women.

All while pretending to empower women.

Honestly, I'm not interested in making a purity culture is rape culture case here - as I know that most of my readers are probably unaware of rape culture or refuse to believe it exists. Actually, most people who read this blog probably are or were, like I was, active participants in promoting or living in rape/purity culture.

I'm not interested in shaming anyone who has been taught rape culture and is recycling it.

I am interested in encouraging everyone to stop. promoting. rape. culture. stop. shaming. women.

And stop treating men like they are inherently rapists.

At the very least to reconsider why they may act/react the way they do, and if there could be a better way to live.

This rant brought to you by the recent over-share of this blog. It is NO WONDER that being raped could cause a captive to despair when there are mothers of boys feeling it is right and noble to publicly shame young girls who post photos of themselves in pjs and subsequently tell them that they are blocking them on facebook. Essentially, sharing a pj photo makes you not good enough. Not for her boys. 

http://unchainedfaith.com/2013/09/04/fyi-if-youre-a-mom-of-teenage-boys/

http://diannaeanderson.net/blog/2013/9/what-boys-become-modesty-culture-and-learned-irresponsibility

"It teaches men that women exist on a spectrum of worth determined by their clothing and that it is their right as men to determine which women are worth more – and yet, modesty culture masks it as “keeping away from sexual sin.” It teaches men irresponsibility and plays it off as “integrity.”

Read that ^^ instead.

http://www.elizabethesther.com/2013/05/elizabeth-smart-the-life-threatening-danger-of-shame-based-purity-culture.html

http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/brand-dear-daughter-i-hope-you-have-awesome-sex/

"Because consensual sex isn’t something that men take from you; it’s something you give. It doesn’t lessen you to give someone else pleasure. It doesn’t degrade you to have some of your own. And anyone who implies otherwise is a man who probably thinks very poorly of women underneath the surface."

( why yes, I will be discouraging my daughter from ever falling for a guy who promotes rape culture/purity culture/modesty culture. )

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sarahoverthemoon/2013/09/you-are-not-your-own-only-bad-girls-say-yes/

"Heterosexual men’s sexual pursuit of women who do not express consent becomes normal. In fact, it becomes ideal, since the “high-designer, gotta-have” woman never expresses desire and the woman who actually wants to have sex is “a turn-off.”

http://www.shakesville.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

"Rape culture is the idea that only certain people rape—and only certain people get raped."

(go to that link and read all the links. read everything.)

http://youngmormonfeminists.org/2013/06/20/addressing-the-evolution-of-the-swimsuit/

( ^^ a few good notes on another horrific example of purity culture as rape culture. christians are not above using shoddy research to try to shame people into buying their crap.)

one of them

Rewind to Spring, 2012.

I had known for a year or more that I was "out" and there was no going back. I asked too many of the wrong questions. Those we fellowshipped with on the campus could ask all kinds of questions and have all kinds of varying opinions on things like justification, sanctification, TULIP and more - but as long as they agreed on the big things, they were "in."

What do I mean by the big things? I mean abortion. I mean homosexuality. I mean evolution.

A teacher dared to believe that Creation may (just MAY, not certain, just may) have not been a literal 6 days... and that was it. He was gone on his own accord, but we all knew that wasn't really the truth.

Seminarians would teach and blog and write and expound on Calvinistic principles, would revere the Young, Restless and Reformed teachers - all of which are antithetical to Lutheran views on TULIP - and even though those doctrines were the core of the faith, they were still "in" and revered and respected.

Boards made decisions to bring in spiritually abusive teachers whose views on sanctification and justification were opposite of Lutheran theology because they taught "gender roles and differences" and that was "more valuable."

If I taught young girls that the purity of men's minds depended on them? In!
If I taught young girls that if they filled their hearts with boyfriends and magazines then Jesus couldn't get in? Totally IN!
If I shared with the women that men who didn't find husbands for their daughters were sinning? Ding-ding-ding, you guessed it - IN!
If I believed that God ultimately cared about His glory? IN!
Conversely, if I believed that God ultimately was concerned with loving His children? Also IN!
If I believed that children of divorcees were fundamentally flawed and lacking and damaged, irreparably? IN!
If I held to arminianism? Still IN!
If I combined lutheranism with arminianism? Totes FINE!
If I held to mostly Calvinist beliefs? Well, that's a LEGIT way to read Scripture!
If I mutilated Lutheranism and Calvinism together? Awesome. You get to be a cool Lutheran AND get some YRR street cred. Still... IN!

But if I had the audacity to question gender roles? I was out.
Questioning why hell was essential for faith? Out. 

I told someone I thought that gay marriage should be legal? Way, way out.

It was so, so tribal - but the delegitimization of those they disagreed with was NOT based on theology and doctrine, not consistently. It WAS consistently based on the political Religious Right.

When I read this article today, by Zach Hoag, it all came flooding back. 

"The catalyzing force behind what appears to be the rise of a new religious right from among the neo-reformed ranks is, of course, marriage equality legislation. Like abortion legislation before it, this will, as the aforementioned pastor likes to put it, “separate the men from the boys” among those who claim conservative (true) Christian faith. Who will be willing to continue standing against gay marriage – in the pulpit and in the polls? This will reveal who is “with us” and who is “against us.”

I might have been "out" of the tribe for questioning, but more than anything else I knew the determining factor was my beliefs on homosexuality. If I practiced an egalitarian marriage and didn't parade my feminism about? Eh, I was shunned and gossiped about, but no one was going to stop me from ministry. If I questioned why hell was an essential doctrine? Well, the Seminarians told my husband I was a heretic, but they left me alone.

Hearing the rage over our egalitarian marriage was one thing. Sam being told that he needed to get me under control and tell me what to do was one thing. Friends, upon hearing that I supported marriage equality, telling me "If you ever turn gay we can't be friends" was horrifying, but it was one thing.

The animus unleashed on those whose views differed on the sinfulness of homosexuality? 

That. Is. Frightening.

I don't think policing your group's boundaries in such a zero-sum, us vs them kind of way is ever right, or ever promotes growth or learning or anything good - but what really gets me is the inconsistency. Pick and choose, pick and choose.

Disagree on essential scriptures? Disagree in love!!

Disagree on ONE VERSE? You're bringing down the world, destroying this country and Christianity. 

You're one of them.

As Fred Clark said in the article I already linked to above, "The belief that anyone who does not believe in “the big four” is an “outsider” and cannot be allowed to call themselves Christian is inaccurate. It is untrue — just as each component piece of the big four is untrue.

Embracing untruth as the very definition of one’s faith and the core of one’s identity is not a recipe for peace of mind."  

This is how I lost my confidence in Christianity. I was sold an untruth, in a community where any search for truth was shunned. I was given a packaged lie that only certain things can be true and can be believed if you are actually a real, true, Christian. 

Fred Clark is right. This Christian tribalism is NOT a "recipe for peace of mind" and if any of the defenses so carefully constructed to keep your mind safe from those evil librul not-really-true-christians is breached, then you find the foundation you built your life upon crumbling to dust.

The very things that are clung to SO tightly are the things that bring the end.

i have no words.

Live in a closed world of your own making long enough and you lose all touch with reality.

The consequences of that can vary, but they are a bit more visible when you are a Christian who runs an apologetics website - and you decide to participate in a Comedy Central show.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MYdvjdIFdnI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I'm not in the mood to mock this poor guy - he got enough of that on television. But there is a point in the interview where he makes claims about straights being targeted for bullying by homosexuals. You can read here how he believes he was misrepresented in the show.

The funny thing is, what he ends up saying about the *one* case he can point out where he *believes* there was homosexual targeting of a straight person makes him appear even less able to think logically than the interview does.

He says: "Is that the same thing? [being bullied specifically for being homosexual, vs the rape and killing of a child by homosexuals] Jesse [the victim] was definitely not homosexual, but the two homosexuals attacked a heterosexual. But, dare we say it was because he was young and the homosexuals were also pedophiles? Why did the media not mention this hate crime?"

First of all, because pedophilia is not a hate crime. It does not fall under the legal definition of sexual orientation (which includes that little word "consenting") and is not protected under any hate crimes legislation. The year before Jesse Dirkhising died, 1495 children were murdered. Granted, Jesse Dirkhising was a gruesome case, but there are thousands of children whose deaths have never been mourned to the extent they should have been. And, a month after the incident, the media was all over the situation, using it to their own purposes.

Also, Matt Slick may feel he can say with confidence that "Jesse was definitely not homosexual" in constrast to the perpetrators who claimed he was a willing participant. Obviously, there is no way to know if an abused and then murdered 13 year old had a sexual orientation that Mr. Slick would approve of. It certainly would be convenient for him if he could say that definitively, wouldn't it?

An apologetics leader who can't be bothered to acknowledge that he

A. Has no way to determine the sexual orientation of a dead child (and shouldn't be trying, good god)
B. Misuses and misrepresents hate crime legislation/definition
C. Is upset that the media didn't report the murder as something it actually wasn't

Just one little footnote on an article where he is supposedly defending himself and already his ability to think critically is in question.

Not. Exactly. Comforting.

The rest of his website is full of that crap. In the "Persecution" section he parrots Kirk Cameron's whining that Facebook blocked his promotions for his new film, Unstoppable. In his complaint he acknowledged that he couldn't put the full link because that would set off FB's filters. Matt Slick claims that fb later allowed the promotions without an explanation. Strangely enough, there IS an explanation, one that is easily found. His link used to be a different site (a spammy, virusy site) and FB had to verify the new site and change their automatic filtering before it would just go through.

Instead of looking for the truth, or a real explanation, Matt Slick uses it as a talking point:

" Who knows, but the fact is that Facebook apparently doesn't like Christianity.  What else are we to conclude?  After all, do you think they would have banned a link to a move that promoted homosexuality?  Of course not.  If they had, it would have been on the news circuit and late night TV.  The hypocrisy of double standards is alive and well in the media, and subtle, but increasing, persecutions like this one are on the rise."

Yep. Persecution of Christians is SO REALZ. What else are we to conclude?!?!

As a side note, the CARM website of said Matt Slick was one of the things that thoroughly undermined so much of Christian thought for me. It wasn't the ever-present poor logic, circular reasoning or appeals to ridiculous doctrines like Federal Headship - well, yes it was. It was all of that. But it was also the convenience of someone who claimed that the Bible was inerrant and infallible and without contradiction writing page after page of contradictions and expounding with their unsubstantiated and poorly argued bull.

There are no contradictions in Scripture!

Oh hey, here are all the contradicting verses and I'm going to explain them all for you!! Of course, if you don't agree with my exact doctrine and theology then these explanations fall apart. BUT don't worry because of all the theologians and historians and academics and brilliant men in all of history, I have the right combination of answers that magically makes the Bible WORK.

TADAAAA!

asbestos

We have been house hunting and, because of our inclination to DIY everything and our budget, we were looking at a lot of homes from the 1900s-1950s, homes that would need a lot of demolition and renovation. I knew that older homes just might have issues with asbestos, and I knew that was something I didnʼt want to mess around with. So I did what I do best - research. To be honest, I only took the time to research because I was worried about the kids. I didnʼt want them to deal with asbestos or lead poisoning as preschoolers. In this case, as usual, I wished I hadnʼt learned a single thing. 

Apparently asbestos was common until the 80s. And was used in everything from insulation to ceiling tiles to floor tiles to oven lining to oven mitts. It was used to wrap pipes and mixed into cement. It was a cheap building material and was widely applied. Apparently the tiny, invisible asbestos fibres enter your lungs and hook themselves into the lining of your lungs, never to leave again, but instead to wreak havoc on your health. 

The thing with asbestos is that as long as it stays in a solid state it is relatively harmless. For example, if you have asbestos wrapping your pipes, then as long as the insulating material is intact, youʼre most likely fine. Once it becomes damaged or ripped or the fibres are exposed to the air, you are at risk. Your best bet, in that case, is to encapsulate or seal the asbestos, to leave it as undamaged as possible, because any demolition is likely to cause more issues than it will resolve and be very, very expensive. (*side note* always use a professional abatement crew to deal with asbestos!) 

When I was in high school and leaning toward attending the bible college that was my future home, the reasons for attending were often recited to me. The most common reason was to “grow and become solid in your faith in doctrine, so you will not be shaken by the world” and it was said so confidently, as if all you really need is to seal up your faith with the right lessons and doctrine, to be “in the word” so much that you were f ireproofed from the world, the flesh and the devil. I had been fireproofed against all of that since I was born - with all the right doctrine, all the right restrictions, all the right everything that conservative christian parents were taught in that era. My parents, in fact, went further than most, working hard to keep their children safe and saved, and to live according to godʼs word. 

My entire formative years were spent building a home for my faith. My parents laid the foundation and my church and homeschool group and conventions and youth retreats and friends and books and bible college and, finally, the Husbandʼs stint at seminary, were all part of that home that was being built. Extensive work went into making sure it was fireproof and 100% safe and secure. 

It wasnʼt until I had my own children that I began to examine this house of faith with a critical eye. Suddenly there were portions that looked unsafe, or could possibly harm or damage this beautiful human that Husband and I had made. 

There were a few, just a few, things that I wanted to re-examine, and possibly demolish. So I tore off a few pieces of drywall, exposed some insulation underneath. I took up a few floor tiles, punched a few holes in the ceiling tile. I cut into some pipes to see what, exactly, there was once the outside veneers were torn away. What I released into the air poisoned me. 

That poison did not give me mesothelioma. It did not cause me to die before my age. But in a very real emotional way, I found myself dying. The very home that had been built and fireproofed and painted and sealed and decorated - the very home that had been built to the specifications of those wise men and women in my life - it was poisoning me. All it took was a few holes. I was given a home without substance. When I broke through the veneer - what I had been handed and told “this, and only this, is true” - I found the inside was hollow. In some places there was nothing, in others there was painful, poisonous materials. 

At that point, I had a choice. I could seal up the holes I had made, I could ignore what I had found and take the easy road. It was easier to ignore the problems, inconsistencies and hurts. I could have made my home beautiful again, lived in it for my entire life and then passed it down to my children.

 But. I couldnʼt. I canʼt. 

So demolition began in earnest. 

Those who had a hand in building the home - and even those who hadnʼt, but whose homes resembled mine - couldnʼt imagine why I would want to gut my beautiful home! It made no sense to those whose homes were still whole, whose “asbestos” (if they had any) was still well buried and not causing visible harm. Instead of happy interest and curiosity over my remodel, I was met with gossip, disdain and, strangest of all, pity. My shock at the pity was a measurement of how far I had come since I began the remodel, since the days when I didnʼt know there could be more behind my walls - let alone something poisonous. 

This remodel was a thing of JOY. It was hard, hard work, but it was work that was going toward making something beautiful that was whole and solid all the way through. This remodel is still ongoing. I doubt it will ever be finished. That can be exhausting, and sometimes depressing. And once in a while I wish I could just mentally and emotionally walk into a finished “home” and find a whole and coherent view of life and faith there waiting for me. 

But I would never trade comfort for a beautiful home built with poisonous materials

just. annoyed.

Somehow this ridiculous blog made it onto a news site.

I don't think something this crazy really needs criticism. It's one of those writings where those who are predisposed to believe it will drink it down and spread it around fb as this GREAT new thing they are reading!!!!11!!! and those who aren't already in that mindset... won't.

It's not like what I'm writing is going to be some great revelation or change something.

I'm just hella ANNOYED.

Because guys. GUYS.

He starts the piece with "Two years ago, the cutest girl in Indiana was taken off the market! "

Yeeeah.

Let's all take marriage advice from the guy who has been married two years.

That's not even the bad part. "The cutest girl" and "taken off the market!"

Eeeeew. Let's just start a marriage advice post by objectifying your wife and making it sound like you acquired her in a particularly lucrative deal.

JUST EEEEEW.

I know that sometimes those things are just "sayings" but they scream disrespect. My Man has been around those sayings plenty and never once, not in conversation OR a (hopefully) thought out written piece has he EVER said something like that about me.

Combine that with the rest of the piece and here's what you get:

(allow me to translate the christian-ese for you)

"OMG! Being married is harder than I thought - even though I married the HOTTEST girl! Somehow that isn't quite enough! And since I'm a Christian, we don't actually RESPECT each other - not without Jesus FORCING us to. BUT NO WORRIES! Because we have COMMITMENT. That my wife is committed to me is all I need to know about her! And her hotness when I bought her - I mean married her! Because that's way more important than whether we even are compatible or like each other because, ya know, Jesus conquers ALL. Even sucky marriages. Because society can't give us solutions for any marriage problems! Oh, and trust me. I've been married for two years."

That last line he actually says. ("Trust me. I know. Because I've been married, two years now, to a girl who has relentlessly committed to this task with me.")

And then the false dichotomy he creates, making it sound like the secular world ("by society's standards") is the one that tells people they need/deserve/can find a super spouse. HA. Because Christians TOTES don't do that!

Aaaaahhaahahahahahahah!

AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH!

Guys. GUYS. I just can NOT STAND IT.

Okay, I get the gist of what he is saying. No one is perfect. No marriage is perfect. And some people have their sights set a little too high and that's gonna come back to bite them in the butt. Probably for this guy and his wife this really IS a huge step in the right direction. And I know that when we married at the absurd age of 20 that we didn't have a full grasp of the realities of daily life with another person.

But there are a million other blogs that say that with much more intelligence, clarity and kindness to others who have a different experience. Someone who doesn't talk about his spouse like they are a piece of meat. Whose two freakin years of marriage haven't given them the impression they have the answer for everyone. Someone who is smart enough not to say that there are two kinds of people: "...wrong people who pretend to be right, and wrong people who are becoming right, through Jesus."

I have two friends who are a-religious and both married 40-some years. They speak in terms of soulmates, true loves and such things that this young man claims do not exist. And when I ask what their secret is they laugh and you know that, no matter the hard times, loving this person has been easy and right and beautiful and they tell me "I married my best friend, we respect each other" and one added "we never swear at each other!" This is just a tiny sampling of just people I know whose lives refute his certainty.

If believing that his marriage will always be hard work and that lowering his ideals is the only way to be happy, then good for him.

Some people don't have to live in that mental place, and are happy for 40+ years.

I can't even BEGIN to explain how much better, how much easier it was and how much more confident I became that I more than married the RIGHT one - I married a true friend, lover and soulmate - AFTER I let go of just the ideas and ideals this blogger promotes for everyone ("whether you buy the biblical view of marriage or not") and just approached our marriage as ours and cared for it as I would something beautiful, transcendent and oh so VERY "right." But that's me. That's US.

So go ahead, write what you know.

But when you're tempted to make it sound like you've found THE solution, and demand people trust you because you've been married two years?

STFU.

ignorant children

I'm just one of many who has, at some point in time, resolved to try to do better as a parent than my own parents did with me. Of course what that meant for me has changed a lot over the years.

As a college student I imagined that as a parent I would be sure to have family devotions every day, that my children would know, first and foremost, how important Jesus was to me. 

That changed.

Some of our friends had children around the same age as ours. I watched their children grow in "knowledge of the truth" and marveled at how such a large percentage of their funny-kid-stories were about how much of the Bible their children knew. Their kids talked about Jesus and knew the resurrection story and what that meant for their salvation. They sang hymns and knew Bible trivia and all kinds of stories. Two, three years old and they had it down pat.

Suddenly I saw how little of anything Bible my kids knew. We were still on the Seminary campus, still going to church regularly, still reading our Bibles, still immersed in Christian culture and the Word, still everything, or so it seemed. Husband and I told each other that we were just too exhausted to take the time to teach the children all the stories, to sing all the songs, to be *those* parents.

It was having three children in a year. Yeah. That's why.

I can't speak for Husband, but that wasn't why. I tried not to think about it, but when I did I realized that I really didn't want my kids to be talking or thinking about Jesus dying on the cross. I didn't care if they knew about Noah's Ark or David and Goliath and I didn't want them hearing stories of David and Bathsheba or Sodom and Gomorrha. 

Suddenly the stories I had heard and been told to love all my life seemed too disturbing and full of problems for my own children. Most especially the crucifixion - the heart of the entire narrative I had been given.

There was a time where this lack of Christian anything in my children bothered me a bit, mostly because I had been taught that it should bother me and that I wasn't a good parent without teaching my children, without bringing them up the way they should go.

Now all I feel about their ignorance is relief and a tinge of pride at what great children they are in spite of me and in spite of my failure to moralize and shame them into being who "god" wants them to be. 

And they know, first and foremost, how important they are to me.

in the name of god

We lived in Oklahoma for a mere six-ish months and in that short time the area sort of worked it's way into our hearts. More specifically, the people worked their way into our hearts.

I mourn with them, from afar, and will do the small things I can with my effort and money to help them in their time of need. Because they are people, and all people are my people. Because my parents experienced the terror of children in the path of tornados while distance separated them.  Because horrible things are horrible, and there are no platitudes or answers.

Of course, some (many?) Christians think there are answers. Or platitudes. Or prayers that make everything okay. Or that belief in God means - without exception - hope. Our only hope. 

Pat Robertson says insensitive crap. As always. And since it's Pat Robertson, you can lay his crazy at the feet of his own ridiculousness, his own self-absorbtion, his own need to decide when and for what other people are punished.

But John Piper, my least favorite famous pastor, from my own hometown, tweets Job 1:19 - "Your sons and daughters were eating and a great wind struck the house and it fell upon them and they are dead." And I watched the retweets add up (at least 65, and 23 favorites) during the short time before backlash drove him to take it down.

The always gracious Rachel Held Evans chronicles a fraction of John Piper's insensitivity to anything other than God's feelings here, and she does it with much more grace than I can muster toward Piper on a good day, let alone a day when he writes that about a place I love, for and about people who are hurting.

RHE, along with others who share her theology, are Christians I can like, who interpret the Bible in a way that can be beautiful and kind. And they have Scripture to back them up. Rachel says "What does the Bible actually teach about suffering?

That we don’t know exactly why suffering happens in every situation, and we shouldn’t claim to,

That we are to rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep,

That when God wrapped himself in flesh and walked among us, God suffered too.

The great irony of Piper using the book of Job to support his theology is that the story of Job stands as an ancient indictment on those who would respond to tragedy by blaming the victim. That’s exactly what Job’s friends did, and the text is not kind to them for it, because Job is described as “blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.” "

rit A year ago or more, I would've found great solace in the above - and said myself that the Bible, the book that most informed and guided my life, supported RHE's theology. I would've done my research, made the exegetical argument, gathered Scripture passages and maybe written a twenty-five page paper on exactly why the Bible is the way I want it to be, why my theology is the one that is correct.

But. I. Can't. Do. That. Any. More. 

I agree with RHE that John Piper's theology is abusive.

But I can't seem to get to a point where I can ignore the Bible passages that support it. They exist. Not that passage in Job, no. But his idea/theology of God's sovereignty is not some ridiculous construct that has no basis in Christian thought, or in the Bible. The idea of God using nature as punishment is not crazy. The thought that the only good thing is God and the only thing to live for is His Glory - and we are not even deserving of that! - is not without support in the Bible and many Christian faith traditions.

When we left seminary I was told "Remember, people will always fail you, but God never will." 

God, if he is there, already has.

A god who never condemns slavery has failed the human race. A god who can not make it clear whether or not he punishes people punitively and vengefully has already failed all of us. A god whose holy book punishes one gender with death and another with a fine makes it impossible for me to find in christianity the equality that is the first and most important line of defense against abuse. A god who creates people specifically for hell (as Piper believes) or a god who claims a victory in the end as 80% or more of the world burns in hell -  has already failed.

People like Patterson and Piper just point out how easy it is to abuse others in the name of God.

turning the other cheek

I read this older post at Slacktivist today. He references an article about Katy Perry where she speaks about her conservative Christian past. I already knew that she had grown up in a home much like my own (although with a mother who was a pastor as well as her father I thought it couldn't have been quite as conservative!) and that she was an apostate who showed the failure of her parents to protect her from worldly influences. Basically, she was a warning - a look-what-can-happen story. She was everything bad that could happen to a devoted Christ-follower. Fame, fortune, scandalous clothes and a song about kissing a girl - and LIKING it.

She got a lot of flack for saying anything about her upbringing and/or criticizing it. Here's what Fred Clark had to say about that: "All of which is to say that Perry doesn’t “slam” her strict, evangelical/fundamentalist upbringing nearly as much as she could or maybe should have.

It slammed her for 18 years and she walked away. That’s not retaliation, that’s turning the other cheek."

Ugh. That was like a punch to the gut. That's exactly how I feel right now - like my religion slammed me for 26 years. the first half of that is true of me - I was "slammed" by the christianity I was with and I slammed others in turn. The second half - the walking away - I can't seem to get. 

Hence the sick feeling in my stomach. Katy Perry - an apostate reviled by my peers and pastors alike - is a better person than I. For some sad reason I can not seem to move past wanting retaliation. Maybe it's because I can't seem to forgive myself for all the evils I in which I was actively participating or silently complicit. Maybe it's truly because I want to raise awareness. Maybe it's because I want to prove to the world at large that I am no longer *that* person.

Turning the other cheek in the form of walking away is something I sense I desperately need to do. I can see the value in progressive christianity, I can mentally assent to the truth that there are good people who are christians and bad people who are christian and being a christian is no guarantee of either. But I can not seem to get rid of this tightness in my chest when I hear the word christian - and on the other side I can not rid myself of the lingering fear of burning in hell for all eternity. I'm in a very strange purgatory where theology is still a fascinating interest to me and also the thing that gives me mental and emotional hives (and very real panic attacks) at every turn.

In the past week I also read the answers of Rachel Held Evan's Ask Jennifer Knapp. At one point Jennifer Knapp gives this insightful answer: "Retrospectively, one thing I’d say is that while it is possible to learn from the experience of being ‘in the spotlight’; it is not the most fertile soil for significant growth. The spotlight is where we celebrate and commune with what we’ve learned. The growth, the creation, self-exploration and processing, I just can’t see how we can possibly do that effectively with an audience. It’s too exposed. Being observed inherently shapes the outcome. We usually talk differently when we are being observed. We perform."

She is speaking specifically here of the spotlight that came on here while she was on tour, under a spotlight on stage, writing music, etc. But I couldn't help but find it to be true for me in a broader sense. I have never had a moment where I was not performing. I have always had to perform for parents, for grandparents, for aunts and uncles. I had to perform for people at church, at youth camp, at CYIA. Strangely enough I performed the least while at Bible college (while still a performance based atmosphere, I got by because I wasn't one of the "bad" kids) and then at seminary it was performance all the freaking time. All. The. Time. 

The word from the seminary now is that if you have social media (eg facebook) the seminarians and their wives are required to friend faculty - so the seminary can keep an eye on you. And social media is just another aspect of how public scrutiny, the spotlight, has intensified. In the past five years or so for me specifically.

This blog is a prime example of how, despite all experiences and evidence to the contrary, I seem to think that being honest in public, being open in public, being transparent through the process is a good or useful thing.

Maybe I perform, and maybe that is hindering my growth, or hindering my ability to just walk away. Maybe not. Maybe I am just delusional, thinking that honesty during the confusing times is helpful for someone - if not me, someone else - and that it won't be a hindrance to whatever I need to learn. I really have no answers.

All I know is that everyone should read all the things that were written by Jennifer Knapp. 

"The spotlight or the communal exhibitions of our human experience are necessary. It allows us to connect with others, build and reaffirm community. It can be a healing process or practical act of human expression in being ‘known.’ It’s a point of celebration of our achievements and passions. But it must be put into perspective. These are but moments-glimpses; a poem, a song, a photographic still frame in what is the long and rich story of our lives. To aspire to only that moment is to miss out on all the extravagance of life. It’s what we do into the lead up and aftermath to those moments that says more about us than fifteen minutes of fame ever will."

listening

My last blog post was a tad self-serving and whiny.

"C'mon guys, it's just SO TOUGH to learn these new languages and to be on the outside of, like, y'know, evvverrryyyythinnnnnggggg!"

And yeah. It is.  And yeah. Sometimes I suck at it. And yeah. I still don't have a clue what I'm talking about.

Maybe I should be waiting to blog until I am on more certain ground, until many of the questions I have run their course and until I have a clearer picture of what life will look like going forward. But to be honest, I think that the value (if there is any) in what I write is public self-examination, public transformation, public change. I don't want to make mistakes, or to get on my soapbox only to have it collapse under the weight of my ego.

So I'm going to just leave that post up and start talking about the important component that I ignored before.

Listening.

(Ya'll, this was inspired by a beautiful woman, whom I love very much.)

Feminism and inclusive language of all kinds are not my first language. I also had been taught a very specific way to misinterpret the words that I heard. When a feminist says "patriarchy" they mean "men are all evil and suck!" When a feminist says "down with the patriarchy!" they mean they want a matriarchy. When feminists say "women need men like fish need a bicycle!" they really mean we should ditch heterosexuality and all 'become' lesbians!

I was taught a specific way to interpret language about race ("they are just whining about old wounds!") and poverty ("they need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps!") and other denominations ("catholics worship mary! heathens!") and religions ("all Muslims are militant!") and just about any other group that was not a part of my family or social circle - or even those who were.

A few years ago when I was finally open to learning from others, that learning took the form of listening. Not listening with the goal of debunking their opinions. Not listening while inside forming my rebuttal. Not listening just so I could say that I had. Listening while trusting their opinions had merit. Listening and believing them when they said "I don't hate men" and "I can't pull myself out of this." Listening to the words they were using and asking them what those words meant, instead of deciding for myself that I had the right alternate interpretation.

I was not speaking my original language. I was learning not only new concepts but new ways of speaking about those concepts.

In my last post I forgot one very important thing. I don't speak their language because I am not done listening and learning. In all honesty I hope (and know) I will never be done learning and listening. It's not the fault of anyone but myself that I have taken so long to realize that I even NEED to learn other languages, that there even are other valid languages. And it will also be my fault if I ever think I can be done listening.

Part of the thing I miss about my uber-christian life is how I could speak with authority. I knew my subject, I knew my language, I knew my audience, I knew how to tailor my words and actions to be acceptable and laudable. I could bring others around to my point of view and just be seen as "godly."

The humility of needing to listen - of learning how little I truly know, how few languages I can truly speak - is a very good thing. I may feel slightly cut off from community right now, but part of that is because of my tendency to be the one speaking with authority. The one with answers. The one who has ingested all the researched and pooped out a perfectly formed truth. That kind of certainty accomplishes alienation, no matter what community you're in.

That's not me. Not anymore. Inside, anyway. Old habits, though, die hard.

I just hope I can continue to listen, continue to learn and continue asking the questions.

And I hope those in all communities and who are fluent in other languages will forgive me as I stumble along.

hymns

As a nanny I cared for the most beautiful, sweet, perfect child. He had neuromuscular problems, he couldn't move his legs and at a year he had the mental capacity of a three month old. I cared for him for a year, my first year away from Bible college, my first year as a married woman, my first year on my own. In that year I fell in love with him, his older sister and his younger brother.

I gave him baths pretty much every day, and for some reason I found myself singing to him.

he leadeth me, o blessed thought
o words with heavn'ly comfort fraught
what e'er i do, where e'er i be
still tis god's hand that leadeth me

sometimes mid scenes of darkest gloom
sometimes where eden's bowers bloom
by waters still, o'er troubled sea
still tis his hand that leadeth me

We were that christian family - the one who had the hymnal memorized, who sang together while washing dishes, whose love of music was based on The Concordia Hymnal.

When this little boy I loved with my whole heart left this world, I held to that hymn I had sung him hundred of times.

and when my task on earth is done
when by thy grace the victory's won
e'en death's cold wave i will not flee
since god through jordan leadeth me

I still cry, reading those words.

Today I was driving my own three precious children and listening to the ever-popular Mumford and Sons. The song was Below My Feet.

keep the earth below my feet
for all my sweat, my blood runs weak
let me learn from where i've been
keep my eyes to learn my hands to serve
keep my eyes to learn my hands to serve

I was singing along, quietly, and suddenly I heard the tone, the heart - it was a hymn. I was overwhelmed by how easily these words became a prayer of sorts, a hymn for me. I had no thought in my head that I was praying for some other One to keep the earth below my feet, or to keep my hands and eyes - just that these were things I desired. To learn from where I've been, to learn, to serve.

[Mumford and Sons, for the record, have stated that their music is not Christian and Marcus Mumford eschews the label, but if you look up the meaning for these lyrics person after person interjects Jesus and God and salvation and death and more.]

Guys. It felt so natural. Hymns.

Also this weekend I found myself attempting to talk about things I am learning about and things I absolutely care about. Inclusiveness, feminism, psychology and more. And I floundered. I totally floundered. Inclusive language, sensitivity to others, not acting like an asshole - I kind of flailed about.

In this blog post (which just exploded my mind with ZOMG that's ME!) the phrase "identity suicide" comes up and can I tell you that ZOMG that's ME.

I kind of can't find my footing right now. I imagine that feeling will persist for years. My identity was wrapped up in the Church, was defined by the Church and my future was written and determined by the Church. (Or God, or Jesus, if you prefer.)

I speak about fifteen varieties of Christian-ese. The uber-conservative one, the homeschooling one, the evangelical one, the slightly liberal one, the liberal one and more denominational and theological tongues than I care to think about. I speak these, for the most part, fluently and with a fairly comprehensive knowledge. I can converse with jesus-hippie-libs and dogmatic doctrine-over-person christians. I have the words!

That's important to me. To have the words.

But those languages, those words, are useless to me. Identity suicide somehow involves learning how to speak all over again.

So I find myself pouring over feminist literature, trying out new words. I am learning what kind of inclusive language my GLBTQIA (or QUILTBAG) friends would prefer. I even have to relearn what kind of language that I used to employ is implicitly (or explicitly) racist, sexist, ageist, ableist, etc.

Guys. I'm flailing here.

Twenty-five years of indoctrination and feeling that any other way of viewing things would cause God to be displeased with me? That conditioning is not easily overcome. But I'm working on it, I'm learning, I'm getting better.  Not fast enough, though, because one more hurtful word, one more racist or sexist statement is one too many.

And here I am, working at this like mad, and then hymns.

Maybe I need to do that most difficult thing and give myself time, forgive myself and give me a little space and grace. I do not know how to balance, to remember and enjoy the good parts of my history, my "culture of origin" and the faith that has defined my life for so long, with the new and good things I am learning now. How much can I or should I hold onto and how much should I leave behind?

Even in this, I find myself remembering one of the hundreds of verses I memorized -

"It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes." (ecclesiastes 7:18)

I'm not, according to my faith-culture, one who fears God. And, as I said, I have no idea if there are good things I should be holding onto as I reach for something better.

But perhaps, someday, I will find a new place that honors both the truth-seeker and the mystic in myself.

"After I deconverted and felt like I was losing all of my identity (since I had always shaped and understood every part of it around Christianity), in picking up the pieces I began to think that what must really have been core about me all along were my commitments to truth and to loving other people. Those were the real constants, the things that proved more important than the faith—enough that I had the strength to actually leave it even. And they have proved the most enduring parts of me too, as they remain core parts of who I am over thirteen years later."
( go here. read. )

she was a woman. that was bad.

The lovely Sarah Bessy asked, via twitter, for others to tell her the feminist stereotypes they heard coming from the church. I'm sure she will post about this, and I'm sure it will be beyond fantastic, as is all of her writing. And I won't spoil the fun of discovering the many disturbing tweets when she writes about them, or when you find them yourself on her twitter. I will say that I had heard all of those stereotypes before, and all from church leadership. Reinforced by family and homeschool leadership and basically anyone and everyone I knew. Including everyone I knew and discussed this with in college. And everyone I knew and discussed this with through my husband's seminary years.

Feminists: Destroying the Family Since The Feminine Mystique.

In 1992 I was six-and-a-half and precocious. I climbed trees and kicked boys in the shin when they looked up my skirt - although sometimes one of my withering looks was enough to scare them away forever. I read at least one chapter book a day and I had the vocabulary of a high schooler. And I absorbed everything. I remembered more than my parents comfort level could take.

There was, that year, a bit of political uproar in my house. My parents, my grandparents - I remember them despairing over the state of the world.

"His wife kept her maiden name. Hillary RODHAM Clinton. I guess we all know who wears the pants in that house!"

"I want to elect a man to the White House, not vote for his name and get the wife instead!"

We walked to the Post Office so my stay-at-home-homeschooling mother could mail her work-from-home crafts. She was etsy before there was etsy, selling her creativity all over the US.

Someone had hung a flier for Clinton.

My mother chatted with the Postal worker and mailed her packages and I read the flier. Six year old me, curious beyond belief about these people I had heard of and never seen. These people who were the ones bringing down the world.

I stared. I stared. I stared. There was a normal man and a normal woman. They had their pictures in our Post Office. He was trying to be President - but she was going to RULE.

"Hillary RODHAM Clinton. Hillary RODHAM Clinton."

I whispered those words to myself, rolled them around in my mouth. I knew there was something really awful about them - some horrific meaning to the word Rodham that I just could not comprehend.

She wore "the pants." That was bad.

She would give him advice, or tell him what to do. That was bad.

She was a woman who would give advice to the President. That was bad.

She was a woman. That was bad.


There are people in my life who believe I don't remember things the way they actually happened. Unfortunately these memories are as clear as day. I can tell you the bike I tried to ride to the Post Office. I remember the packages piled on my sister's lap in some kind of wagon. I can see the flier, and I can still taste the rancid word Rodham on my tongue.

That was the first anti-feminist (truly, anti-woman) beliefs and language that I can recall.

And I absolutely internalized this language in the way I detailed above. There was something wrong with women having power. There was something wrong with being a woman.

After all, if there was nothing wrong with being a woman, there would be nothing wrong with a strong, influential woman, who chose to name herself whatever she pleased.

missing community

Good Friday marked the passing of the Dean of Sam's Seminary. And for all the hurt I have from that place, for all the bad memories and the anger and pain, I still mourned.

I cried for his family, I cried for my old community and I cried for us. My heart broke a little for everyone he had cared for and especially for his six children and twenty-seven grandchildren.

He had been a kind man, a man who loved people, the best he knew how.

When I spoke with him and a few others (during Sam's exit from Seminary) and told my story so far, he accepted what I said with grace, and told me "what is important now is for you to heal" and at that time I desperately needed to hear those words. That is how I will remember him.

In many ways now it would be easy for me to say "I have had my time, I'm healed! I'm coming back to the fold!" and I can not deny that the passing of the Dean created this kind of guilt, the kind of guilt I haven't felt in a while. The kind of responsibility to my tradition, my community, my faith.

The funeral was beautiful and moving, and his son said that his father would be pleased if even one person came to know Jesus as a result of the funeral. I knew that, in his care and love for his students, he would be even more pleased if that one person was me.

I don't think I can convey how much I want it to be me.

I miss my community. I miss my status. I miss feeling like I am doing something worthwhile in the world. I miss fitting in, I miss having answers. I miss being good, really good, at something.

Now I don't seem to fit anywhere. I love progressive Christians, and I speak their language. But their enthusiasm for the church and energy to reform and love it has come and gone for me. I love feminists, but I am still such a new feminist, with so much misogynistic baggage, and I can't seem to truly speak with them or state my new-found feminist intersectionality without making some egregious blunder. I love the LGBT community, but I present as an obviously straight, cis-gendered woman and I can not relate to their pain in a way that makes me part of that community.  I'm an ally, not truly a member.  I love social work and progressive politics, but working through my tea party roots is just exhausting.  I love those who are working together to better the earth through all kinds of Green initiatives and yet I do not have the energy to work with them, to make their community my community. I don't speak any language except fundamentalist evangelicalism, and it shows. I haven't yet developed a varied community or another language.

I'm community-less.

And yes, still strangely happier and more content than I was while living under scrutiny and hoping the umbrella of lies and half-truths I had created would hold up to the prying eyes.

I would love to be back. I would love to be the lost sheep, returning. But I can't do it.

That wouldn't be honest.

I can not be the fundamentalist I once was, who is constantly reevaluating Scripture through Scripture and attempting to make it all fit together in a cohesive, literal bundle.

And yet I can not be the one cherry-picking the good and leaving out the bad, just so I can have my faith, just so I can feel like my soul is secure from eternal damnation.

I do not know where that leaves me, except alone with my questions.


"Non-fundamentalist religion, by definition, depends upon cherry-picking the given religion’s doctrines, discarding the uncongenial teachings and reinterpreting the others to make them more comfortable to live with. Think, for example, of the fact that the majority of Roman Catholics use contraception. The word that accurately and simply describes cherry-picking – choosing manageable commitments and ignoring inconvenient ones – is not a comfortable word; it is ‘hypocrisy’. But it is done with a blitheness, and often with a lack of self-awareness, that religion in some of its forms deliberately seems to promote, preferring half a loaf of adherence to no bread."

Grayling, A.C. (2013-03-26). The God Argument (pp. 6-7). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Kindle Edition. 

my barbarous ancestors

On March 14th I received this email:
[non-essential portions removed for brevity]

_________________________________________________________________________________

[Denomination] President's Alert - Please Act !

Please read this important message. Please act!

Yesterday a group of 12 Lutheran pastors met to discuss and determine what we could possibly do in regard to a bill that is right now being presented and discussed in our Minnesota state legislature which will legalize gay marriage .  The way things are right now it is very likely that those in favor of this bill have enough votes to pass the bill.  The bill was approved in both the house and senate committees on Tuesday and it will radically redefine marriage for all Minnesotans.  If this bill is passed the state will impose this redefinition of marriage upon our people by force of law.

What is needed?  

First of all we band together in prayer, calling on our Lord to move and change hearts and minds of those that are voting on this important matter in our behalf.  

Secondly, we as a people must stand up and speak up for what we believe God has to say in His Word about this. 

Our state representatives and senators need to immediately hear from us that we stand in opposition to such this bill and encourage them to speak and vote against the bill. Use as many means of communication as you can to get your message to them.  Phone calls, e-mails and snail mails should all be utilized. If possible, talk to your legislators face to face in love.

_________________________________________________________________________________

I could talk about the fear just wafting off this letter. I could talk about how they made a mockery of their founding motto: Free and Living Congregations. I could rant about their language of "must" and "please act!" and generalizing every member of their denomination in the state of MN as believing what "God has to say in His Word about this." (about what, exactly? Gay marriage? Or legislating your religion?) Or I could talk about how they were either deliberately ignorant or deliberately LYING with the wording of "If this bill is passed the state will impose this redefinition of marriage upon our people by force of law."  WHEN the bill in question has language that strengthens and supports religious exemption, including exemption of goods and facilities. I mean, the gays can't even use your CHURCH BUILDING if you don't want that to happen. And "our people"???!! How much more tribal and exclusive can you get?

Personally, I believe in legislating against liars.* If Pastors lie to congregations, I think we should take away their right to speech. I mean, liars speaking is dangerous, right? And lying is a sin. And no sin is worse than another, so we need to legislate them all. And lying, well, that impacts everyone around you. It impacts the decisions of others and, in this case, impacts the legal rights of others. So why not? If we are legislating our version of morality now, why the f*ck not?

I'll tell you (my version of) why not.

I fell in love when I was 19. I married when I was 20. I was an ignorant, ridiculous child. And I married the love of my life and I never once had to wish for a marriage that would not happen because other people thought it was bad or wrong. I knew that my financial life and my future would be easier. I knew that I could visit my man in the hospital. I knew I could make legal decisions for him if he was incapacitated and he for me, without parental or other interference. I knew I could choose any place I wanted to get married and anyone who was willing could marry us. I knew that he got health care through work and that I would qualify for that as well. I knew that I would benefit from his pension, his social security, his estate, etc.

Never once did I doubt that it would happen, or it even cross my mind that anyone would be able to prevent it. No one could, really. I was an adult. I could decide if, when and whom I would marry.

I had this thing called FREEDOM. And like most people who have had freedom, along with privilege, their entire life, I never gave it a second thought. I had freedom to be stupid enough to marry at 20, and no one could stop me.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out the next part. 

In our "free" and democratic society, some people are NOT free. Why? Because a segment of a religious group deems that their choices are sinful, harmful, or not valid.

When it comes to marriage, they have no freedom. 

That, my friends, is a problem. 

It is especially a problem when you fight for and believe that your religion and religious preferences should have unlimited freedoms that are under no oversight. Despite centuries of documented abuses of all kinds.

(It is even more especially a problem when you are a church body with Free and Living Congregations as your motto.)

Freedom for you, yourself and those who sin like you, isn't actually freedom.

"For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others." - Nelson Mandela

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” - Thomas Jefferson

"An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity." Martin Luther King Jr.

*shockingly, I don't actually believe in legislating against liars.

SAAW :: i freaking love my husband.

Spiritual Abuse Awareness Week - The Last and Final Blog

Uhm, don’t take that as meaning this is the last and final blog I will ever write about spiritual abuse forever and ever. Amen. I think that might be impossible. I blogged my way through high school (proud former Xanga community member!) and blogged on the now defunct threeinonemakesfive blog as I was reliving my childhood and discovering you can be a Christian and pretty much hate dislike John Piper. I have hidden blogs and topical blogs and a website for my photos (at www.rachelserine.com) and no matter how many times I regret blogging and opening my big mouth and putting something down on paper (figuratively) I always come back.

Sorry. Tangent.

So. I took the first two of these SAAW blogs pretty seriously. Sometimes I take myself a little too seriously. So I want to lighten the mood just a tad here and let some other people do a bit of the talking.

First of all: moving forward.

Things I want to say about that begin with this: If you are not me, please reserve your opinion on whether I am moving forward, have moved forward, am moving forward fast enough. Also, a great list of what not to say to someone who has left the church. If you stop reading what I have to say and just read this, I won't be offended. I will be happy. It's important.

Thank you.

Second, when someone has been through religious groups that undermine your very self and existence, working through that can sure make a dent in your faith. Especially when you come from an “all or nothing” religious tradition. In the traditions that give ultimatums like “if creation was ever proven false, then we can not trust anything in the Bible” or “Every word is inspired and infallible” or “atheists are unhappy and depressed” the result of actually meeting atheists or talking to evolutionists is this thing called cognitive dissonance.

And if you’ve been taught it’s all or nothing and you run up against a huge, gigantic, crappy load of cognitive dissonance? Welllllllll... you have to pick. All? Or nothing?

Fundie parents. Be careful what you teach your kids about faith.  They just might BELIEVE you. 

I have dealt with that, for the most part. I get it now. I get that there doesn’t have to be all or nothing in faith and I’ve realized that there are all kinds of beliefs in the wider Christian faith community. But it was hellish trying to figure that out, and it was horrible being slammed and having my faith questioned because I was finally giving place to others and acknowledging they had faith too.

But I'm very grateful the variety exists. 

So while my religious experiences sure did open the door for me to realize the general harm that Christianity does every single day and give me cause to take seriously the words of atheists and agnostics, that is not the only reason I claim hopeful agnostic as my own. There are really, really good reasons to leave Christianity. Logical reasons. Sensible reasons. Irritatingly good reasons. I WANT to stay in the faith community. Because, well, community. But... good reasons itch at my mind. 

(And, seriously guys, it's really insulting and NOT helpful to say things like "Christians will disappoint you but God never will" and to comment and insinuate that your only problems with the Church are jerks-for-Jesus. Um. NO. Or, if you must, feel free to say it. Just know it's demeaning, and I will probably not give you the time of day.)

Spend a few hours watching this guy on youtube and you’ll have a general idea of my issues.

So I'm a heathen. And yet my husband will tell me that I am Christ-like. Or loving. Or inclusive. Or caring. And have a Christ-like heart.

Of course, he is a little biased.

But what I want to emphasize here is that if we’re going by “fruit of the spirit” measuring sticks, I am MUCH more a Christian than I was when I had the “right” doctrine. If we are taking right doctrine as the measure (and after years of study, hello - what IS that anyway??!!) then I am hopelessly lost.

But ya’ll. Understand this. Do not take that to mean you should try to bring me back. There is no words about Christianity you can say, no arguments you can make, no Bible verses you can throw at me right now that will cause me to become more interested in Christianity right now. Not. One. Thing.

And I know some people who read this blog probably want to do that very thing. 

(There's a good chance I have already heard what you have to say, already used it on someone else. Queen of apologetics, here. And what I have not heard, I am reading up on. I'm still learning - I just don't want to be other people's project. Enough with making people "projects" already.)

Even as a Christian, one of my pet peeves about us was we just couldn't leave people ALONE. Or let our faith actions do the talking. We thought we could good-reasons-hell-scare-theology-talk people into faith. Or that we had some right to ignore personal and societal boundaries because SALVATION, obvs! And if we were called on it? Then persecution! Obvs. :)

I have to say that if my Seminary-trained-husband can refrain, so can you.

Which brings me to my next little piece of moving forward.

Working out what it means to be a hopeful agnostic married to a still-fairly-conservative-lutheran. Who still wants to attend a church that gives exegetical sermons and doesn’t want to give UU congregations a chance. Who held me and challenged me through two rounds of spiritual abuse.

When I told him I was going to be writing about this, he had a good laugh. “What are you going to say? That our marriage is awesome? That it works? What is there to say? We love each other?” 

I have to admit that when I look back and think about the hours of warnings I heard about how difficult it is to be unequally yoked in a marriage, I have all the lols.

Not that I want to diminish the friction that can happen in a marriage where one person has faith/another does not, or one person loses their faith and the other keeps it. There is plenty of friction possible there! Especially when you are in the fundie mindset and freaking-the-heck out about how your spouse is letting sin into the house and what do you do if they don’t want to go to CHURCH and how can I convince them that Jesus is REAL and Christians are Right About Everything??!! Because without Jesus there is only sin and pain and injustice and darkness and HELL! (actual quote)

But it is not that way for us. Not. One. Bit. Somehow we missed the marriage-killing-condescension.

No coercion. No distress. Except when I have a moment of guilt over what he has given up for me.

Our relationship is better. It is better now. We have had a better year this past year than we have since our first year of marriage. Actually, better than our first year. Way better. The fights are better. And fewer. And the fights we have are not related to faith. Life is more fun. We are more honest. The sex is way better - and it was great before. Our marriage has, somehow, thrived. 

I could probably write pages and pages on why I think that is. But I’ll try to take a short stab at the foundation.

Respect. Contrary to Eggerichs’ stereotypes, I need respect as much or more than I need love. And he needs respect too. He thinks I’m smarter. I know he is wiser. We get that both of us have very good reasons for our separate beliefs. We don’t worry about whether we are going to convert the other to our point of view. We know we will take the kids to church, of some kind, because Husband wants them to share his joy and I want them to have a religious education. We won’t lie about our separate beliefs, or worry about where our children will fall on the spectrum of faith/non-faith.

Husband has never been that Christian who is scared of sin (in himself or others) or ever been swayed from the basics of “Jesus loves me this I know” and that is all. That is all he knows for certain, and he is humble enough to give others their space.

I’m learning a lot from him. (understatement of the decade!)

And he is the reason I do not hate Christians. I find fundamentalist evangelical christian faith to be prone to abuse, coverups, thought reform, tribalism, infighting and worse.

But I live with (even if it’s only 2 days a week right now) a wonderful person who happens to be a Christian. And he is the reason I still have “hopeful” attached to the agnostic.

I’m hopeful for Christians, and the Christian faith. I’m hopeful that more relationships between Christians and agnostics (and protestants and catholics and conservatives and liberals) can be as non-adversarial as ours. I’m hopeful that, as understanding of faith traditions grow, there may be answers to some of the unanswerable things that keep me from fully committing to the faith my husband holds.

Most of all I am hopeful for my little family. I’m hopeful that my children will see I love them unconditionally, and that their worth is not tied to their (emotional or actual) virginity. I am hopeful that husband and I can create a safe space together, and build a new and beautiful life. I am hopeful that we will discover new and really cool things about each other, now that we live without the pressure of conforming to preconceived and unilaterally enforced notions of good and evil. And I am hopeful that we will meet and learn from all kinds of people who we would never have known in our previous life.

I’m also hopeful that someday, when the wounds have healed, husband will be back in faith ministry of some sort. Because the more people like him there are in the faith community, the better it will be.