#and Ed Teach is being treated with grace by the creators

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

Also another thing with Ed and autism. He falls into the unstable genius trope. He's like Sherlock, man, his brain vibrates at a different frequency to everyone else. Like, that's an autistic trope, girl. As a savant myself I understand that these low needs overachievers are overrepresented when compared to other more common types of autism, but for years I've had to watch these one dementional white cishet savants who come off like huge douchebags trot across my screen and have all their problems written off as not being that important because they're very good at crime solving or being a doctor or making some very cool invention or whatever. And now I finally get one who's not a white cishet, I finally get one who experiences loneliness because no one understands him, I finally get one who experiences problems that he can't easily solve by being very good at the thing that he's good at, not only that but he experiences problems relating to the fact that he operates on a certain level of honesty and he sort of expects other people to do the same. And I'm not supposed to take the W here? And he's the lead in a ROM COM??? A character trope that usually gets treated as being an island and not needing anyone to the detriment of real people like them is getting applied to the lead in a ROMANTIC COMEDY??? Where he gets to FALL IN LOVE??? Where he gets to be DESIRED??? Where it's not all about how very good at the thing he is and instead it gets to be about his EMOTIONS???

[polyadvice]

What are Zinnia's thoughts on sex and masturbation when it comes to religion?

i was wondering, what’s your opinion on sex, masturbation, etc. and religion? i was raised religiously but i’m not as religiously involved as the rest of my family. plus i’ve masturbated a couple times but i’ve never had sex. unlike the church and religious standards i view these things as healthy and normal. i just wanted to ask what’s your take on it?

I am a Christian (you can read about my faith here), so I can really only speak to my religion. The word “religion” is so vague and encompasses a wide range of beliefs and practices, so we ought to be careful about painting all spirituality with a broad brush. Even “Christianity” includes a huge variety of philosophies and attitudes about sexuality, from extremely repressive to quite progressive. I belong to a very progressive church but have at times been part of more repressive environments.

My personal opinion is that humans were created with the Divine intentions of love, connection, growth, wholeness, joy, and creativity. When we act in a way that draws us away from a healthy, whole, joyful relationship with ourselves, other people, our communities, or our world, that takes us out of alignment with that Divine purpose. The universe - and its creator, the embodied, personified God I believe in - is fundamentally aligned with love, and that’s why hatred, violence, cruelty, pain, and stagnation are all such destructive forces - they pull us out of alignment with God and the reality God has created for us.

Therefore, anything we do with our bodies and our relationships that gives rise to love, joy, beauty, wholeness, creativity, and connection is not a violation of Divine will. And, anything we do with our bodies and relationships to foment cruelty, hatred, pain, shame, isolation - those, to use my youth worker voice, bum God out. There are certainly ways to have sex or masturbate or be in relationships that are fundamentally damaging and destructive, but we have to separate “inherently harmful” from “harmful because social structures say they are.”

It is impossible to make a clear argument that sex outside of marriage, or masturbation, are inherently damaging to our relationships with ourselves, each other, or the Divine. However, shame and guilt, or inaccurate information, or conditional social bonds, are clearly and demonstrably destructive. All people deserve clear and non-judgmental information about their bodies, all people deserve a healthy and fulfilling sex life (whatever that means for them). God wants this for us! God values wisdom and health, not shame and confusion.

I think Rachel Held Evans put it well when she wrote “If same-sex relationships are really sinful, then why do they so often produce good fruit—loving families, open homes, self-sacrifice, commitment, faithfulness, joy? And if conservative Christians are really right in their response to same-sex relationships, then why does that response often produce bad fruit—secrets, shame, depression, loneliness, broken families, and fear?” This quote is about same sex relationships, but you could very easily apply this theological logic to abstinence only education, shame and fear tactics around sexuality, treating bodies as inherently dirty or sinful, and strict gender roles. Do they bear fruit? Do they lead people into the types of healthy, whole, fulfilled lives and experiences that God wills for us? Or do we have story after story, and study after study, demonstrating that comprehensive sex ed, body acceptance, and freedom are far healthier? The Scriptures I follow call often for wisdom and growth and understanding and truth, and it would be foolish to ignore the reality around us.

Sex and masturbation are part of our community and our bodies, and the health of our community and our bodies are things God cares deeply about. We shouldn’t use them harmfully, and of course we can definitely be sinful or harmful with our bodies and with sex, but identifying what “harmful” or “unhealthy” means is a spiritual task we can draw on plenty of sources from, not just whoever is currently being loudest in Evangelical Christianity.

There is lots of sexual sin in our world - rape culture, sex trafficking, revenge porn, criminalization and marginalization of sex workers, lack of access to sexual healthcare, and so much more. Masturbation can become a numbing or addictive behavior. Sex can used destructively in a number of ways. But nearly everything can be used for good or ill. (God gave us fun and joy, and there’s nothing inherently sinful about play, but things like gambling addictions and the exploitation of young football players are bad.) Sex and masturbation are part of our lives that we need to learn how to make healthy choices about. Religious or not, figuring out how to be a healthy, happy, whole, joyful person takes nuance and effort. It is rarely achieved by following a strict, arbitrary, one-size-fits-all set of rules.

My religion - Episcopal Christianity - teaches that our God is a living God. Living things can be engaged with, life implies growth and change. Our faith is not dead or stagnant. Death has been defeated! It also teaches that we were gifted the Holy Spirit to help us in our interpretive and discerning work as we try to figure out how best to live in alignment with Divine love, light, grace, and mercy. Scripture is a living document, a history of people trying to figure that out in their own ways and their own times. We were also designed with wisdom and reasoning qualities, able to learn and question and grow. Being in a relationship with any Divine power, through any religion, should involve guidance from Divinity, as well as your community, scripture, and your own experience, on what is true and wise and holy.

If you have more questions about sex and masturbation, check out Scarleteen’s excellent resources.

[pamphletstoinspire]

Part 7 - The Last Installment On Catholic Social Teaching: Solidarity, Part 2

Last time, in this space, we noted that the Church speaks of solidarity as both a “social principle” and a “moral virtue.” Further, the Church doesn’t hesitate to teach that the state has a role to play in helping to reform “structures of sin” into “structures of solidarity” — since such a task is simply more than an aggregate of individuals can achieve.

At this point, it is common for some to complain that the state intervening with the force of law (in some cases) to help alter structures of sin somehow makes it impossible for the individual to do his part too. But this is like saying the Civil Rights Act destroying the structure of sin called “Jim Crow Law” wrecked the possibility of private business owners hiring black people at a living wage. It’s like saying that if the state were to demolish the structure of sin called the abortion regime by overturning Roe v. Wade, it would ruin the economy by adding more workers and consumers to the capitalist system.

Still others complain that if the state creates a social safety net for the weakest members of society, this is “wealth redistribution,” and Scripture envisages nothing but personal charity as the way to provide for the common good. But, of course, the fact is that Jesus and Paul both tell us to pay our taxes — taxes are nothing but wealth redistribution for the common good. Paul insists in Romans 13 that it is the proper office of the state to provide for the common good. So long as it gets done and everybody benefits from the good thing our pooled resources help accomplish, what difference does it make if it was done through private charity or the work of the state? There are still plenty of opportunities after we have paid our taxes to help those in need.

This is not, however, to say that we are to then leave the work of solidarity and the common good to the state. On the contrary, the bulk of the task falls to us as husbands, wives, sons, daughters, workers, owners and citizens to make it our very personal and hands-on business to love our neighbors. After rendering his taxes unto Caesar, Jesus (who was so poor he had nowhere to lay his head) still found plenty of opportunities to go about doing good. It’s supposed to be the same with us.

According to the Church, solidarity has to be deeply personal, not farmed out to some faceless bureaucracy while we play couch potatoes. So the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church continues, “Solidarity is also an authentic moral virtue, not a ‘feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good. That is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all.’”

This is what St. James is getting at when he says, “What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead” (James 2:14-17).

It’s the same point Jesus makes when he declares, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers’” (Matthew 7:21-23).

Solidarity is deeply threatening to much of Western — especially American — culture because we have deeply internalized the belief that “my rights” are the sole concern of law and the sole criterion of the good is “consent.” The idea that we stand in a permanent relationship of debt to God, to all who come before us and to all who come after us is abhorrent to many millions. Nonetheless, we are debtors, owing more than we can even imagine, much less repay. In the words of the Compendium:

“The principle of solidarity requires that men and women of our day cultivate a greater awareness that they are debtors of the society of which they have become part. They are debtors because of those conditions that make human existence livable, and because of the indivisible and indispensable legacy constituted by culture, scientific and technical knowledge, material and immaterial goods and by all that the human condition has produced.”

We owe our existence — and the existence of all that is — to God. But we also owe an unpayable debt to all who came before us and to the vast, interconnecting web of relationships that sustains us at this very hour. Without the civilization they built — without language, Mozart, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Bible, the man who made the first shoe, the inventor of the wheel, the company who is making sure your electricity is on right now, the creators of the trucking network who made sure you got the meat for your Big Mac at lunch, the soldiers who stormed Normandy, your mom who taught you to tie your shoes, the Framers of the Constitution, the scribes who invented the alphabet, the people monitoring weather satellites, the nuns who invented hospitals, the people who discovered fire, the inventors of agriculture, the martyrs who died for Christ, the people who cooked up the scientific method, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Hildegard of Bingen, Shakespeare, Les Paul, Ed Sullivan and Gregor Mendel — you and I would be bawling beasts in a howling wilderness and in all likelihood would have died in our infancy.

But we don’t just owe a debt to those who came before us. We owe a debt to pay it forward, just as they have paid it forward to us. We owe this debt because God has commanded us to love one another as he has loved us. That is how the debt is repaid, and by repaying it, we love the God who needs nothing from us and to whom we can give nothing that is not already his. Similarly, when we refuse to give generously (and this includes, especially, the forgiveness of enemies), we stand at peculiar risk of facing the same judgment of the servant in the parable who, having been forgiven a debt of millions by the King, turns on a fellow servant who owes him a paltry sum and treats him mercilessly. When the King discovers his treatment of his fellow servant and his refusal to “pay forward” the mercy he received, the King condemns him — not for his sin, but for his refusal to grant the mercy he himself received (Matthew 18:23-35).

Therefore, the Compendium calls us to exhibit “the willingness to give oneself for the good of one’s neighbor, beyond any individual or particular interest … so that humanity’s journey will not be interrupted but remain open to present and future generations, all of them called together to share the same gift in solidarity.”

Most of this teaching is both explicit and implicit in the natural law: the law written on the heart — what J. Budziszewski called “what we can’t not know,” the law known as the Golden Rule. But in the kingdom of God, grace perfects nature and raises it to participate in the life of God himself. And so the Compendium tells us that solidarity reaches its climax in Jesus, the Son of Man, who joins himself to our humanity, becomes poor that we might become rich and becomes sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). As the Compendium says:

“The unsurpassed apex of the perspective indicated here is the life of Jesus of Nazareth, the New Man, who is one with humanity even to the point of ‘death on a cross’ (Philippians 2:8). In him it is always possible to recognize the living sign of that measureless and transcendent love of God-with-us, who takes on the infirmities of his people, walks with them, saves them and makes them one. In him and thanks to him, life in society too, despite all its contradictions and ambiguities, can be rediscovered as a place of life and hope, in that it is a sign of grace that is continuously offered to all and because it is an invitation to ever higher and more involved forms of sharing.”

In the kingdom of God, says the Compendium: “One’s neighbor is then not only a human being with his or her own rights and a fundamental equality with everyone else, but becomes the living image of God the Father, redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ and placed under the permanent action of the Holy Spirit. One’s neighbor must, therefore, be loved, even if an enemy, with the same love with which the Lord loves him or her; and for that person’s sake, one must be ready for sacrifice, even the ultimate one: to lay down one’s life for the brethren” (1 John 3:16 and John 15:13).

That is why the Church — and each of us — is bound to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world: because the ultimate aim of working for the common good is that each person become a participant, not merely in economic life, but in the divine life, a member of the Body of Christ.

Just as the point of Catholic economic teaching is that we become workers and owners of property as well as generous givers to the needs of others, so the point of salvation is that we become active participants in the work of God, not merely passive patients. So Paul teaches God has given each member of the body “varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good” (1 Corinthians 12:4-7).

For our destiny is that each person become a full participant in the joy of glorifying God, loving neighbor as oneself and the splendor of the new heaven and the new earth, where every member is given his or her gifts, as Paul teaches:

“… for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed back and forth and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love” (Ephesians 4:11-16).

BY: MARK SHEA

From: https://www.pamphletstoinspire.com/

[sinrau]

By Sarah Pulliam Bailey and

close Sarah Pulliam Bailey

Reporter covering religion

[EmailEmail](mailto:sarah.bailey@washpost.com?subject=‘I find it baffling and reprehensible’: Catholic Archbishop of Washington slams Trump’s visit to John Paul II shrine) BioBio FollowFollow

Michelle Boorstein

close Michelle Boorstein

Religion reporter

[EmailEmail](mailto:michelle.boorstein@washpost.com?subject=‘I find it baffling and reprehensible’: Catholic Archbishop of Washington slams Trump’s visit to John Paul II shrine) BioBio FollowFollow

June 2, 2020 at 5:59 PM EDT

President Trump triggered sharp condemnation from top religious leaders for the second time in two days on Tuesday, with Washington Archbishop Wilton Gregory slamming his visit to a D.C. shrine honoring Pope John Paul II.

On Monday, Trump’s appearance in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church across from the White House set off a controversy because it involved aggressively clearing peaceful protesters.

“I find it baffling and reprehensible that any Catholic facility would allow itself to be so egregiously misused and manipulated in a fashion that violates our religious principles, which call us to defend the rights of all people, even those with whom we might disagree,” Gregory said in a statement as Trump and first lady Melania Trump arrived at the Saint John Paul II National Shrine in Northeast Washington.

The shrine was opened as a museum to John Paul in 2001 but nose-dived financially and was bailed out in 2011 by the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic men’s religious organization that has lobbied for conservative political causes, such as opposing same-sex marriage.

In his statement, Gregory noted the legacy of Pope John Paul II, suggesting he would not have condoned Trump’s actions, including his walk to St. John’s on Monday as hundreds of demonstrators nearby were protesting the death of George Floyd last week in the custody of the Minneapolis police. Once he got to the church, the president held a Bible aloft and news crews recorded the moment.

“Saint Pope John Paul II was an ardent defender of the rights and dignity of human beings. His legacy bears vivid witness to that truth,” Gregory said. “He certainly would not condone the use of tear gas and other deterrents to silence, scatter or intimidate them for a photo opportunity in front of a place of worship and peace.”

It’s unusual for someone like Gregory to make such a stark statement about Trump specifically; Catholic bishops generally speak about issues more broadly. In a statement last week, Gregory, who was installed as the first black archbishop of Washington in 2019, said Floyd’s death, “like all acts of racism, hurts all of us in the Body of Christ since we are each made in the image and likeness of God, and deserve the dignity that comes with that existence.”

Trump’s brief visit to the shrine appeared to serve primarily as another photo opportunity. The president and the first lady, who identifies as Roman Catholic, stood to face the media before facing the statue of John Paul II for a few minutes. Then they looked at a wreath of red and white roses that held a card saying “Mr. President.”

About half a mile away, several dozen protesters held signs that read, “Black lives matter,” “Trump mocks Christ” and “God is not a prop.” Just before noon, the group knelt down for eight minutes of silence and prayer — one for each minute a police officer kneeled on Floyd’s neck before he died.

Chian Gavin, 57, of nearby Brookland, wiped her eyes while the crowd sang “Amazing Grace.”

“Eight minutes is so long,” she said. “To think that someone would be in pain, would be suffering in that position for that long.”

Chanon Bah, 31, said she’s tried to explain the demonstrations to her 3-year-old son Cairo. Watching television images of riot police advancing on unarmed protesters has confused him, she said. “Mommy, who’s the bad guy?” he asked.

“I tried to explain that sometimes, the police are the good guys, but sometimes they’re not,” Bah said. “We talk a lot about feelings. That maybe those people out there are not mad. Maybe they’re sad. Or scared.”

Michelle Dixon, 38, said she was moved to come out to stand against what she saw as Trump’s disingenuous show of faith. Dixon, a congregant at All Souls Church, said God is “sacred, and really the embodiment of unconditional love.”

“How can you stand there and hold up a Bible and say you believe in this unconditional love that is God when you are sowing fear and hatred and shooting peaceful protesters just down the street?” she said. “It’s unforgivable.”

Trump’s appearances in front of St. John’s and at the shrine were seen as attempts to appeal to his conservative evangelical and Catholic voting base. Both appearances were met with fierce condemnation by religious progressives — and also concern from some religious conservatives.

“The Bible is a book we should hold only with fear and trembling, given to us that in it we might find eternal life,” J.D. Greear, president of the Southern Baptist Convention said in a statement to the Washington Post. “Our only agenda should be to advance God’s kingdom, proclaim his gospel, or find rest for our souls.”

Russell Moore, the president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Religious Liberty and Ethics Convention, said in a statement that he was “brokenhearted and alarmed.”

“For me, the Bible is the Word of the living God, and should be treated with reverence and awe,” he said, adding that Americans should listen to what the Bible says about the preciousness of human life, the sins of racism and injustice and the need for safety and calm and justice in the civil arena.

“The murder of African-American citizens, who bear the image of God, is morally wrong,” Moore said. “Violence against others and destruction of others’ property is morally wrong. Pelting people with rubber bullets and spraying them with tear gas for peacefully protesting is morally wrong.”

Episcopal bishop on President Trump: ‘Everything he has said and done is to inflame violence’

The Right Rev. Mariann Budde, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, excoriated Trump for standing in front of the historic church Monday — its windows boarded up with plywood — while holding the Bible aloft. “Everything he has said and done is to inflame violence,” she said of the president. “We need moral leadership, and he’s done everything to divide us.”

Budde and other religious progressives have denounced Trump in the past, on multiple issues. from immigration to fiscal policy to LGBTQ rights. But on Tuesday there was also criticism by others who are not vocal opponents of the president.

“There is no right to riot,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) in a statement. “But there is a fundamental—a Constitutional—right to protest, and I’m against clearing out a peaceful protest for a photo op that treats the Word of God as a political prop.”

Ed Stetzer wrote on his Christianity Today magazine blog that the president’s photo op was “jarring and awkward. It did not play well, even with many of the president’s supporters.”

“America is burning. We need a call to justice that sees each and every person as image bearers of their Creator—as the Bible teaches,” he wrote. “But, we did not need that photo op.”

Also on Tuesday, several pastors stood on the steps of St. John’s, calling for an end to police brutality.

Pastors on the steps of [^StJohnsChurch](https://twitter.com/hashtag/StJohnsChurch?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) calling for end to police brutality, solidarity with [^DCProtests](https://twitter.com/hashtag/DCProtests?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw). “God is always on the side of the oppressed. Mr. President, I promise your hands are too small to box with God.” pic.twitter.com/qthHdR47HL

— Heidi Thompson (@hthompson) June 2, 2020

John Paul II is especially remembered by conservative Catholics for his strong anti-Communist and antiabortion stances. In a statement Tuesday, the shrine said that the White House originally scheduled the visit as an event at which the president would sign an executive order on international religious freedom.

Later Tuesday, the president did sign an executive order that, among other moves, stated that $50 million in USAID’s budget should be allocated for advancing international religious freedom.

“St. John Paul II was a tireless advocate of religious liberty throughout his pontificate,” said the statement from the shrine, which did not address Floyd’s death or the related protests.

“International religious freedom receives widespread bipartisan support, including unanimous passage of legislation in defense of persecuted Christians and religious minorities around the world,” the statement said. “The shrine welcomes all people to come and pray and learn about the legacy of St. John Paul II.”

John Paul’s movement for religious freedom, including in his native Eastern Europe from communism, is considered one of his key legacies. Tuesday is the 41st anniversary of his first papal visit to Poland.

The shrine, according to its website, “is a place of pilgrimage housing two first-class relics of St. John Paul II. Here, through liturgy and prayer, art, and cultural and religious formation, visitors can enter into its patron’s deep love for God and for man.”

Stephen Schneck, former head of Catholic outreach for then-President Barack Obama and current executive director of the Franciscan Action Network, said he was “disgusted that the Knights would allow the Shrine to St. John Paul II to be used for what is transparently a Trump reelection campaign event.”

“Pope St. John Paul II was an ardent foe of racism. In his last visit to the United States the saint begged our nation to eradicate racism from its heart. One cannot imagine a worse insult to John Paul II’s memory than to hold a Trump re-election event at the saint’s shrine,” he told The Post in a statement.

Messages to the Knights of Columbus were not immediately returned Tuesday morning. Trump’s attorney, Pat Cipollone, was a top lawyer with the organization, holding the title “supreme advocate.”

Trump has signed several orders related to religious freedom. Charles Haynes, senior fellow for religious freedom at the Freedom Forum, said the orders have been primarily symbolic, but have the potential to change how federal departments enforce existing law.

Early in his administration, Trump promised to abolish the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits clergy from endorsing politicians from the pulpit. But it would take an act of Congress to change the amendment. Instead, Trump issued an executive order on how his administration would enforce the amendment. In another case, he signed a rule offering protections for health-care workers who declined services that violate their religious beliefs, a move that concerned LGBTQ advocacy groups.

“It reiterates the law in some cases,” Hayes said of the orders. “There already are religious liberty protections, but he wants to underscore we’re upholding them or we’re implementing them.”

Marissa J. Lang contributed to this report.