The Vatican inspires me to write...

I've posted an article below. I find humor in it. But first, my commentary on it. Scroll down for the article.

First let me begin by saying, I love the Catholic Church. In large part, it made me the person I am today. But as a self-identified mystic Christian-without-a-church, who admittedly entertains many heretical beliefs and practices, I think the church has gone very, very astray from the teachings and Spirit of Christ over the centuries, but especially in the past few decades.

According to 95-year old Jesuit theologian, Fr. Roberto Busa, "When you look at vices from the point of view of the difficulties they create you find that men experiment in a different way from women."

His thoughts were expanded upon by Msgr. Wojciech Giertych, theologian to the papal household (every household should have its own theologian, don't you think?), who said the most difficult sin for men to face was lust, followed by gluttony, sloth, anger, pride, envy and greed, and that, for women, the most dangerous sins were pride, envy, anger, lust, and sloth.

Well, first, I have to question the control groups being used in this experiment, who include only Italian Catholics who are prone to going to confession. It's noteworthy that Italy suffers some of the worst Catholic church attendance in Europe. Their masses are sparse and rote, despite the rich beauty of their buildings.

Dig deeper, and you will find that there's a difference between what's easy to confess and what's hard to confess. In a macho culture like Italy, you would get off easy confessing lust. It's expected, and perhaps even a point of national identity. The fact that the Catholic church is unnecessarily fixated on sexual behavior (which culturally gets laid on men's laps), makes this a no-brainer. On the other hand, it takes bone-shaking insight -- often great pain -- to realize when you've been prideful, because once you have, you've probably already really hurt someone.

In other words, it's easy to tell a stranger, "I looked at my buddy's girlfriend lustfully (lust), I ate too much pizza last night (gluttony), and I should have visited my mother instead of playing with my Wii (sloth, or something else masquerading as sloth)." But you have a lot more soul-searching to confess, "I won't call my brother because of something he said five years ago that pissed me off (pride/anger), I drank too much last night because I hate my job and feel trapped (anger), when I see my brother's wife and apartment I feel inadequate (envy), and I took credit for my co-worker's idea so that I would get the raise (greed).

I'd like to have a discussion with these theologians about the nature of sin at some point.

Women are every bit as lusty as men. If you don't know this first-hand, trust me on this. They are. They just don't talk about it. Especially to priests in confession. For starters, they don't feel so guilty about it. However, because women (generally) instinctively place a higher value on relationship, they know what pride can do. So of course they will confess pride before lust. In the confessional, these women know not to sweat the small stuff.

According to Pope Benedict, "We are losing the notion of sin." He said, "If people do not confess regularly, they risk slowing their spiritual rhythm."

Sorry, Benny. People are confessing, but not to you, and not to the priests. (I speak in general terms here.) They are confessing to their therapists, their spiritual directors, their friends, their online buddies, wherever they find it safe, and the ears compassionate.

To be a worthy confessor, you need to create a safe space, a non-judgemental space, that doesn't threaten with hell.

That is all. Here's the article, from BBC:

Two sexes 'sin in different ways'

Italian confession boxes have been used less in recent years

Women are prouder than men, but men are more lustful, according to a Vatican report which states that the two sexes sin differently.

A Catholic survey found that the most common sin for women was pride, while for men, the urge for food was only surpassed by the urge for sex.

The report was based on a study of confessions carried out by Fr Roberto Busa, a 95-year-old Jesuit scholar.

The Pope's personal theologian backed up the report in the Vatican newspaper.

"Men and women sin in different ways," Msgr Wojciech Giertych, theologian to the papal household, wrote in L'Osservatore Romano.

"When you look at vices from the point of view of the difficulties they create you find that men experiment in a different way from women."

Msgr Giertych said the most difficult sin for men to face was lust, followed by gluttony, sloth, anger, pride, envy and greed.

For women, the most dangerous sins were pride, envy, anger, lust, and sloth, he added.

Secretive department

Catholics are supposed to confess their sins to a priest at least once a year. The priest absolves them in God's name.

HIS AND HERS - THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS Men 1. Lust 2. Gluttony 3. Sloth 4. Anger 5. Pride 6. Envy 7. Greed Women 1. Pride 2. Envy 3. Anger 4. Lust 5. Gluttony 6. Avarice 7. Sloth

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that "immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into Hell".

Traditionally, the seven deadly sins were considered: pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed and sloth.

The Apostolic Penitentiary, one of the Vatican's most secretive departments, which fixes the punishments and indulgences handed down to sinners, last year updated its list of deadly sins to include more modern ones.

The revised list included seven modern sins it said were becoming prevalent during an era of "unstoppable globalisation".

These included: genetic modification, experiments on the person, environmental pollution, taking or selling illegal drugs, social injustice, causing poverty and financial greed.

The report came amid Vatican concerns about the declining rate of confessions.

A recent survey of Catholics found nearly a third no longer considered confession necessary, while one in 10 considered the process an obstacle to their dialogue with God.

Pope Benedict, who reportedly confesses his sins once a week, last year issued his own voice of disquiet on the subject.

"We are losing the notion of sin," he said. "If people do not confess regularly, they risk slowing their spiritual rhythm."

The Valentine Blog

I was struck by a powerful thought a few weeks ago that has managed to diffuse any sentimentality about Valentine's Day for me this year. Valentine's Day, for many people, is SAD (Singles Awareness Day).

The marketing machine plows through our collective consciousness and unconsciousness, creating feelings of inadequacy for many of us who have no sweetheart, no flowers or candy or romantic dates. But this is hardly news for those of us who are unattached. If you've spent as many of your years single and unattached as I have, you have a lot of time to ruminate about your situation, as not only the self but the relatives and friends ask, "Why haven't you gotten married yet?"

What I'm about to say might exile us to a life of indefinite if not permanent singlehood, or maybe it will liberate us and even make us available to the partner we've always dreamed about.

The simple thought I'm putting forward is this: A relationship is a response, and not a goal.

Perhaps we've all held relationship as a goal. I know I have. "I want to be married some day." "I don't want to be alone." "I want to find my soulmate." When there is a goal, there is always looking to the future for a change in status, and with that, typically a lack of capacity for living in the present. It's natural enough, especially if you want to be a parent someday, or if there are things you fantasize about doing with a partner, generally and specifically.

What's interesting about this is that there is a role, a blank line __________ of your imagination that may or may never be filled by a special stranger. Perhaps you have a plan, and you're hoping that the universe, God, the Goddess, or whatever higher power you believe in, will provide this very special character actor to round out your special cast.

Let's look at the notion of relationship as a response. Backing away from the model of a romantic relationship, most all of our non-blood relationships are responses. I meet a guy at work, we converse about things that interest us, and we decide to hang out after work and share a drink. Over time we get to become good friends, sharing things that matter to us. Our response to encountering each other takes the form of a friendship. I eat lunch at the same restaurant every week and pretty soon the waitress knows my usual order, and over time we learn more about each other and begin a friendship that exists within the confines of the restaurant. We are responding to each other as customer and server, and then as friends because we like each other. If either of us were unfriendly, there would be no response, no relationship.

Looking at past loves with whom I'm still connected in some way, perhaps there was a goal of relationship, and that relationship ended, and whatever is left is my response to the human being whom I was privileged to spend time with. That response could be an ongoing connection, perhaps no connection at all, or something occasional. But interestingly, whatever remains may have authenticity that was lacking in the romantic phase of our relationship, simply because it arises from something that is there, instead of a goal that is created. In the same way, even a relationship that begins as a goal and deepens over time, if it is healthy, transitions to a response to the reality of who your partner is, rather than a goal. If the person remains a character, a role, instead of a "what-you-see-is-what-you-get human being, the relationship will fail, will be miserable, or both.

So consider yourself as a response waiting to happen, indeed, happening to everyone you meet in some way. Every day is the opportunity to respond to someone new, to create new relationship, to bring new levels of chaos, amusement, and depth into your life.

It has been surmised that you can't love any two people the same way, that love is defined anew every time you fall in love. I believe this is true. And I believe this is because love is, at its core, a response to someone. You cannot respond to a unique, individual human being the very same way you would a different unique, individual human being. Using the metaphor of alchemy for relationship, all of us are distinct elements that react to each other. Every combination of elements causes a unique reaction. We see that one person brings out the best in us without even trying, while another person seems to cause us to misspeak, misstep, get angry or flustered, or be awkward. Still others are like "inert" elements to us, that seem to cause no immediate reaction whatsoever.

So, if Singles Awareness Day is causing you anxiety or regret, try on this new context. Notice how you respond and react to the people you encounter in your day-to-day life. If relationship still occurs as a goal despite your best efforts, try making it into a game of just observing whom you respond to, and observing the responses. In the meantime, know that you have plenty of other elements to respond to that may show up as a myriad of relationships: best friends, lovers, companions, all based on the natural, organic response of your personal alchemy. Put yourself in the "science lab" of life as fully as you can, and enjoy all the natural relationships that ensue.

Of course, this could just be another one of many vain explanations I have come up with to explain something that I wish I had a better explanation for. But hey, I do enjoy many responsive relationships and I am happy. May you enjoy this day and whatever it brings to you. Al

Vatican "forgives" John Lennon

Here's the story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7744282.stm

So, in a nutshell, back in 1966, when the Beatles were a worldwide sensation, John Lennon made a remark comparing the Beatles' popularity to that of Jesus Christ. The church took umbrage at that.

Now, about 28 years later after Lennon's death, the Vatican has found it in its heart to forgive the rocker.

H.G. Wells has been quoted as saying, "Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo." I believe that the Vatican was suffering some jealousy over its failure to have relevance with the youth culture back then.

I think it's the Vatican that should be asking Lennon's forgiveness.

In his incarnate days, Jesus was never out to win any popularity contests. He said, "My kingdom is not of this world." Yet, ever since Constantine made Christianity the official state religion of the Roman Empire (some suggest this was the death knell for Christianity as a true expression of Christ's teaching), Christianity has been anywhere from concerned to obsessed with concerns that are very much "of this world," namely politics, war, commerce, and other pursuits linked to the acquisition of money, power, and influence. Christ, in his day, forbade people from referring to him as a messiah -- even showing discomfort with the title of "teacher." Perhaps his reasons were self-preservation, since Christ probably knew that Rome didn't look favorably upon upstart movements that could be seen as challenging its authority. True as this may be, he frequently reflected people's light back to them: "Your faith has healed you," not "I have healed you."

All of this points uncomfortably to the recent furor in California over Proposition 8, which would write the definition of marriage as a heterosexual union into the state constitution. Churches claiming Christ as their leader came out very heavily in favor of this proposition, which passed (and is now being challenged). It also points uncomfortably to some Catholic dioceses (regional organizational jurisdictions) whose bishops demanded penance from anyone voting for Obama, since Obama is "pro-Abortion," according to them. Never mind that more Catholics (54%) voted for Obama than McCain this time around.

In a brilliant statement about love, St. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians, stated:

"Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." (1 Cor. 13: 4-7)

Whether we belong to a church or not; whether we believe in the God we were raised with or not; whether we're comfortable with people whose highest love is reserved for their own gender or not; and whether we agree or not, let us always put love first.

For if our first and highest purpose is love (notice I'm saying "love" and not "tolerance"), not for somebody but for everybody -- especially those with whom we're not comfortable -- then what kind of world will each of us create around ourselves?

I welcome your comments.

Stand against virulent anti-gay protesters in Portland on Monday

Dear Community,

Westboro Baptist Church (www.godhatesfags.com) will be in Oregon on Monday, Nov. 24th to protest. This group originally started through Rev. Fred Phelps and travels the country protesting the rights (and existence) of LGBT people, soldiers who have fought in wars, and many others. They have been known to protest military funerals, as well as funerals of other innocent individuals based on their sexuality, race, religion, etc. This group will be in Portland in various locations, as well as Silverton, OR to protest Stu Rasmussan, the nations first transgender mayor.

We are a group of grassroots activists, queers and allies that have decided to turn the WBC's message of hate into something positive for our community. Rather than engaging this group with hate, we would like to fight them by raising money for an organization that supports our community, Outside In. You can see the services that Outside In provides to low-income adults and homeless youth, with lots of services for queer/trans youth, by visiting (www.outsidein.org). We are asking our local businesses and individuals to donate any amount of money from $.05 and up, for each minute that Westboro Baptist Church protests in our community(with a minimum donation of $10.) The church is scheduled to protest from 7:30am to 12:30pm at various locations. The idea is that for every minute they spend in Oregon trying to tear our community down, they will actually be building us up.

How can you help?

Spread the word. Email you friends, your family, your neighbors, businesses.

Solicit donations. Make 3 calls to people you think might donate. Ask 3 businesses for support.

Donate to fight hate in Oregon!

Let's pull together and show this group that hate will not tear our community apart!

If you are interested in donating, please contact us at cryangage@yahoo.com. We will contact you after Monday the 24th to let you know how long the Westboro Baptist Church protested and how best to send in your contribution directly to Outside In. If you would you like to send in a flat donation amount directly to Outside In now, be sure to put "WBC" in the memo line or mention it with your donation.

Family Matters

My family, which includes my two living parents (still happily married), nine children, seven spouses, 22 nieces and nephews and some grand-nieces/nephews, has a Yahoo group listserv that I set up several years back, and over the past year it has become quite a forum for political and religious debate.


As the family is loosely based in Southern California, the debate is revolving around Proposition 8, which I don't know the details of, but seems to be put forth by opponents of same-sex marriage. Within my family, the religious bloc (Roman Catholic and Evangelical) has a solid majority and has been weighing in solidly in favor of Prop 8. Apparently, zealots who are not in favor of Prop. 8 have been doing inappropriate things like ripping the Yes on 8 bumper sticker off my nephew Sam's car and stealing yard signs from other family members. This the family Prop 8 supporters use as evidence that homosexuals are an angry lot who are asking for more than they deserve. Um, good going, anti-Prop 8 zealots... NOT!

Anyway, I have been mostly responsible within my own family for waving the liberal flag while also pointing out the consistencies of progressive views with the Christian gospel. It hasn't been an easy task. No matter what I say, none of the family religious conservatives seem to concede any points to me. What? Did I think I could change their minds?

I ask questions, the most compelling ones of which are mostly answered with silence. If abortion is made illegal and women who break that law are charged as murderers, do we try them for infanticide? What is the appropriate punishment? (Hello? Anyone here? Echo echo echo echo...) What is sacred about your marriage? So far, mostly silence, except from one sister and her husband who are heavily involved in the Marriage Encounter movement.

My essays are well-crafted and I use all my writer's faculties of eloquence, using apples-to-apples comparisons, and employing compelling images. If I'm not going through all this trouble to change them, then why am I doing it? After all, the more truthfully I write, the more I "out" myself as a freethinker, a free-doer, and a free-lover. I surely risk their affinity if not their respect.

I do hope that I prick at their conscience as reality pricked at mine, eventually eroding my orthodoxy. But there's another reason.

Remember that huge family of mine? Take 22 kids, and there's going to be a homosexual or two, probably an abortion in there somewhere, some drug use, perhaps some other things that may one day lead to alienation. I hope to be, and it would be my privilege as well to be, that family member they can come to for support. Maybe I can even be a support for the one caught in hatred or discomfort who wants to get past it. I hope to be a vessel, a container, for that trust and love. Perhaps it will never come to pass within my own blood family, but I am blessed to be that container for my "larger" human family.

In her missive about gay marriage, one of my sisters, the one who is involved in Marriage Encounter, went down the line of all my married brothers and sisters, praising them for what they and their marriage bring to the world. When she got to me, the last of the nine, and the only one who has never been married, she said, "sorry we are not too close ... and so I can't comment on how you are life-giving to others in your daily life."

So I invited my sister to call me and find out. And after I wrote that response, I was suddenly confronted with how it would be difficult to communicate that to her. I think she could get her brain around the spiritual direction work I do -- after all, that comes from the Catholic tradition although it has been adopted by most major spiritual movements today. That I helped establish a fish farm in the Peruvian Shipibo hamlet of San Francisco Yarinacocha should provide some information. But what about the work that I do in sacred sexuality, endeavoring to make it safer for people, many of whom like myself are single and sexually active, to become more alive, more pure energetically, more satisfied, and more loving of themselves and others? Could she get this when she believes that sex outside of marriage is a sin by its very nature? Do I go all the way, and share that last component with her?

It is not easy to be an outsider, the mysterious and feared "Other" who lives outside the city walls, to be the one who on one hand feeds the larger culture's imagination and yet is reviled and suspected on the other hand. It's a tough, sacred mission. It is big fun, big trouble, and rarely is it ever popular with one's own family of origin.

It's Nature's Way...

(AP Photo credit)

My good friend Bill called me this morning to shoot the breeze while we were both on our way to work. I was nearly to Salem, and would be in the parking garage in a couple of minutes, and he was stranded in the midst of a Sigalert traffic jam on the 118 Freeway in LA, with the traffic halted because of a severe fire.

As I spoke with him, and later as I logged onto the news and saw reports of the sundry fires hitting Southern California, I had a sense of relief, the kind of relief one might have after dodging a bullet. I remembered a time after I had sold my home in LA and I was driving north -- perhaps it was May 2006 and I was headed up to explore the Pacific Northwest. Whenever it was, there was a big headline-grabbing fire and I remember driving up I-5 toward the Bay Area, and seeing the inferno engulfing the hills along the north rim of the LA Basin. As I was driving north, I had the sense that at the very least, I wasn't supposed to live there anymore, and that, on a deeper level, neither is anyone else.

Don't get me wrong: I love Los Angeles and relish my memories of life there. But there's a place where my body intersects with my understanding of ecosystems, and my intuition about Pacha Mama to say that We Are Not Welcome there anymore. The hills are burning, we are being smoked out of our suburbs, and we can't afford the water it takes to keep putting out these fires. With each fire, comes subsequent mudslides that in turn, wreck our houses and our roads.

Now, in my condo in Van Nuys we only had to deal with the smoke, as the Valley floor was set safely back from the chapparal and the lawns and trees were moist with Colorado River irrigation. But to think that the water that was nurturing us came from miles away, and at the grave expense of other natural communities, gnawed at me. To hear about a new fire and wonder if my friends in the hills would be threatened by it, gnawed at me. Another fire, after another fire, after another fire, after another fire... Humans are supposed to have rainy seasons (the Southwest has ceased to have those anymore), sunny seasons, fall seasons, spring seasons ... but ... fire seasons?

It takes an immense effort of artificial infrastructure to make Southern California a habitable environment for mass quantities of humans, at great expense to all aspects of the environment. If I had to move back, you would probably see me making some kind of appeasement offerings to Pacha Mama on a regular basis to remind her that I know she doesn't prefer me here!

Here in the Northwest, our water is local and pure. Our lawns grow green in the winter and brown in the summer, but there's always an emeraldness to this place. We live in the midst of a fertile, green valley flanked by a giant River That Runs Through It. It's never brittle-hot in the Willamette Valley. We have spruce, firs, maples, moss, and ferns. The latter two grow wild in our lawns!

I remember a TV commercial from my youth, for a hand lotion where they took a dried-up sycamore leaf, and rubbed it with lotion to moisten and restore it. Living here, I truly feel like that dried up leaf turning green again. When it doesn't rain for a few days, I miss it and look forward to more rain. It keeps us alive, moist, softened.

I am grateful for my myriad LA friends and look forward to visiting all of you when I make it down there ... And I hope there are no fires going on when I do! And I would love for any of you to come visit here, try living here... in the end, it's MUCH more sustainable. I'm just sayin'...

It's tough these days for a Goddess

(photo credit: Associated Press)
It's very interesting how in pagan and tantric circles we speak of "Goddess worship." For the uninitiated, "Goddess worship" here in the West has meant anything from letting the woman have her way to paying a woman to pleasure her as she pleases.

But in Nepal, a young child is selected by a panel of duly qualified judges, subjected to some interesting tests, and then worshiped as the deity Taleju by Hindus and some Buddhists while isolated in a palace until puberty, when she is divested of her divine status and attempts the difficult transition to "normal" life. (See article below.) So in Nepal, clearly another paradigm is at play.

Or is it?

When the biblical prophets spoke out against idolatry, they were making an important point that is often lost by Christians (and others) today: that there is only one God, and that everything else is a manifestation of God, so worship God and not the manifestation. Even the Hindus, with their colorful pantheon, believe that all these gods are manifestations of God.

As a brief note on this particular blogger, I believe there is one God, whom at times I worship as Goddess, or as Jesus, or as Spirit. I even use statues and iconography to focus my worship -- a practice I jokingly call "idolatry for fun and profit."

A priest and theologian I knew in my college days had a compelling definition of idolatry. Fr. Jim Nisbet used to say that idolatry is taking anything, even God, so seriously that you can't laugh at it.

Which brings me to my point: Nepalese kumari worship and western "Goddess worship" aren't that far apart.

I'll be bold here: Women are no more or no less "Goddess" than I am. And no, I'm not letting you in on my secret choice of underwear or anything else related to my exterior form.

What I'm talking about is this: The Goddess, the Divine Feminine, is a force that abides in every human being, not to mention everywhere you find beauty and love. Sometimes she even resides in dark, messy, destructive places. But she is a spiritual force that neither woman nor man can claim for her or himself.

I love being "worshiped" just as much as the next guy. Seriously. Rub my feet, feed me gnocchi and tollhouse cookies. Have beautiful naked women feed me cherries and tell me how awesome I am. I will gladly accept your worship, whether you call me God or Goddess. But allow me to chuckle, secure in knowing that God is being worshiped in both the giver and receiver. If I take your worship personally, please print this blog out and wave it my face.

Be careful when you call yourself or your friend a Goddess. The murkiness that you're entering is that every human being partakes in the divine equally. We are, all of us, gods and idiots. We are saints and criminals. Can you own that you are a luminous child of God, and at the same time, not take yourself personally? Can you behold a perfectly "average" woman, or a three-year-old "perfect" Nepali girl, and your own reflection in the mirror, and realize that there is no difference in the measure of divine substance, the Goddess herself, in each one?

If you can, then let's get down to some serious Goddess worship.

Nepal appoints 3-year-old as new living goddess

KATMANDU, Nepal - Hindu and Buddhist priests chanted sacred hymns and cascaded flowers and grains of rice over a 3-year-old girl who was appointed a living goddess in Nepal on Tuesday.

Wrapped in red silk and adorned with red flowers in her hair, Matani Shakya received approval from the priests and President Ram Baran Yadav in a centuries-old tradition with deep ties to Nepal's monarchy, which was abolished in May.

The new "kumari" or living goddess, was carried from her parents' home to an ancient palatial temple in the heart of the Nepali capital, Katmandu, where she will live until she reaches puberty and loses her divine status.

She will be worshipped by Hindus and Buddhists as an incarnation of the powerful Hindu deity Taleju.

A panel of judges conducted a series of ancient ceremonies to select the goddess from several 2- to 4-year-old girls who are all members of the impoverished Shakya goldsmith caste.

The judges read the candidates' horoscopes and check each one for physical imperfections. The living goddess must have perfect hair, eyes, teeth and skin with no scars, and should not be afraid of the dark.

As a final test, the living goddess must spend a night alone in a room among the heads of ritually slaughtered goats and buffaloes without showing fear.

Having passed all the tests, the child will stay in almost complete isolation at the temple, and will be allowed to return to her family only at the onset of menstruation when a new goddess will be named to replace her.

"I feel a bit sad, but since my child has become a living goddess I feel proud," said her father Pratap Man Shakya.

During her time as a goddess, she will always wear red, pin up her hair in topknots, and have a "third eye" painted on her forehead.

Devotees touch the girls' feet with their foreheads, the highest sign of respect among Hindus in Nepal. During religious festivals the goddesses are wheeled around on a chariot pulled by devotees.

Critics say the tradition violates both international and Nepalese laws on child rights. The girls often struggle to readjust to normal lives after they return home.

Nepalese folklore holds that men who marry a former kumari will die young, and so many girls remain unmarried and face a life of hardship.