polygamous_presbyterian_divorce epitome of incomprehensibility I'm joking about this today, but last night and this morning my emotions were pretty torn up and scattered. That's how one feels when one's metaphorical family is breaking up, even if that family is just a background smattering of churches on a map. And all they had in common were a specific name and maybe some meetings together. Too many meetings, that's what the jokes say. But there's one General Assembly a year, and the decisions made this time are causing churches to break off from the main church. I got the insider scoop from the pastor of my parents' church, who decided to rapid-fire some speech at my ear while I hadn't had supper yet. She can be forgiven for not knowing that; it was past 9 PM. She forgave me for slapping her in the face several years ago, so that calls for a Christian mitzvah, n'est-ce pas? Inshallah. Total Number of Presbyterian Ministers I've Slapped in the Face: 2. (What, you thought it was higher?) Okay. Deep breath. As far as I know, for a couple of years the Presbyterian Church in Canada has had a ruling that allowed ministers to do same-sex marriages but wouldn't force ones who didn't want to. And they did it delicately enough that conservatives weren't leaving in a pique engendered by the Presbyterian Mobile Pope (aka the moderator) allowing the Rainbow Alphabet Terrorists to wreak havoc upon the bewildered masses. I don't like the idea that there are two sides. It is more complicated than that. And no one is really traditionalist or progressive, because EVERYONE probably has things that they want to change and other things they want to stay the same. Marriage changed in Biblical times, too, and presumably the people in favour of monogamy-for-everyone vs. polygamy-for-the-powerful were said to be the progressive ones. Closer to home: fifty-odd years ago, our minister wouldn't have been allowed to do the job she's does now - due to being a she and not a he. Anyway, now the progressive side is pushing back against the so-called traditionalist one by refusing to agree to a fairly innocuous statement, that each side can recognize each other as "God-fearing Christians" even if they disagree, or some words to that effect. At least, that's what I understand from Sybil and Dad. And it discouraged me, even as I understand the desire to exclude someone who not-so-long-ago excluded you. To turn the tables. But...why not turn the other fucking cheek? Or non-fucking cheek. You know. So I was upset with both loosely-defined groups, with the tit-for-tat. I kind of respect what Sybil said. She's going to keep on believing what she does without trying to leave the PCC out of spite. "If they ask me to go, I will. I won't make a fuss" (despite some phone rants to some seemingly like-minded people). Yes, I respect her. I really do, even if some of her expressed attitude pains me, and however she might feel about me if she knew I weren't completely heterosexual. Pah, she already thinks I'm crazy. But has SHE ever demonstrated excessive concern with what's "normal", disgust with what's not? That's more Mom's deal, and she's the one who got clinically depressed...which isn't even Christian karma, because she didn't deserve that. Now she is doing better, but as for her attitudes... It's not a complete excuse, but her own mom was a perfectionist to a strict degree. We pass on baggage, shapeshifting baggage that's hard to register at customs because customs change too. Anyway, I can disagree with the pastor's ideas of what it means to love God and neighbours without hating her. But since when am I so religious, anyway? Only rebelliously, only to demonstrate things go by contradictions. My background is Christian, my personality agnostic (it's okay, God made me that way). I don't know what I'm saying anymore. I don't blame other LGBT+ people for being upset. Maybe I don't like how some people (who wouldn't all be gay and such, of course) reacted in a reactionary way - reactionary in a politically neutral sense - but I think more humility about claiming definite knowledge about impossible-to-know things might be in order. Starting with me, of course. If I'm not careful, it'll seem like an old chestnut from joke_splices actually relates here: I'm bisexual; I hate everyone equally. 220608 ... e_o_i joke_splicing, even 220608 ... past (e_o_i, i don't even know how to respond. i feel like someone is probably yelling "splitter* like from life of brian somewhere but that's probably not the most appropriate comment, but hey i also just wrote it? anyways, this line is amazing: "We pass on baggage, shapeshifting baggage that's hard to register at customs because customs change too.") 220609 ... e_o_i Ha, ne worriez pas, that made me laugh. I wish I remembered the context - something about the Judea People's Front vs. the People's Front of Judea? All that ranting when I could have been writing or reading or getting ready. Coincidence, though, that two out of my three_words fit - the_parishioner: let_all_beings_be_at_peace. 220609 what's it to you? who go blather from