My parents were Catholic and so they took it up themselves to raise their five children as Catholics. In order to make this happen, I endured 12 years of Catholic schools. I am afraid the Catholic school system let them down terribly. On the plus side I acquired a pretty good working knowledge of the Bible and religious doctrines, at least, as understood by the Roman Catholic Church.

The first big roadblock to me continuing as a Catholic was I could never understand why Jesus Christ had to die for our sins. Nobody could really explain the reasoning. It hardly seems fair to have an innocent man die an incredibly violent death in order to save the souls of the worlds’ sinners.

Now, I get that something had to be done. The sinners were doomed for Hell but why God determined that the only way this could happen is for Jesus to die. Wait, I take it back, I really don’t understand why God created a world of sinners that needed Jesus to die in order to save them. Jesus whole death sentence is based in the failure of humanity to uphold God’s laws. Something he knew was going to happen when he created Adam and Eve.

Why does God need to have such suffering in order to say, well OK, Jesus died a horrible death, by dying, Jesus showed how much he loved human beings so I will give all human beings a second chance to get into Heaven. Even more troubling to me is that God knew Jesus would willingly die on the cross so even before He set all of this in motion, why bother?

I was in a Spanish Church with a Christian friend. We were marveling at the artwork which depicted Jesus on the cross when she said “you know he would do all again. Die for our sins.” Which,OK, given Christian Myth, true. But why? This wonderment that Jesus would willingly suffer death to redeem man leaves out the important question, at least for me. God could ask anything, certainly less painful methods of execution, yet he demanded death, a rather unpleasant death at that. Why?

Based on this fundamental tenant of Christian faith, why would I believe that God is a loving God. He sounds more like a sadist to me. Pain and suffering is a part of the plan. Dear God, why?

I know a Christian who, on occasion, posts about the coming of judgment day. She thinks it is  imminent. She usually adds a little jibe about how an awful lot of people are going to be going to Hell if they don’t get right with the Lord now. I am sure she would see this as a gentle reminder about finding Jesus before it is too late but it reeks with delight that a bunch of sinners will finally get what they deserve. I wish I believed her good intentions story but there is too much condescension in her tone to ignore. She is trying to save us from Hell but people are ignoring her.

This nasty superiority, more than anything else, detracts from what passes as Christianity in the modern world. So I wasn’t much surprised that Pope Francis was criticized for wanting to find Hell empty if he ever happened to visit. Of course, these Christians felt Pope Francis was missing Jesus’ whole point (see here, here and here) which is sending non-believers and miscreants to Hell.

It isn’t that Jesus wants us to be good so we can join Him in Heaven. The important thing here is that sinners must be punished. What is the point of being a good Christian if everyone gets to Heaven later?

The more I hear about these Christians, the more I prefer Hell than their version of Heaven. Besides most everyone I know and like will be in Hell so I much rather spend an eternity with people I like than with those assholes.

One of the most annoying things about the Christian Right is that they try to reposition Jesus as an angry warrior for Right-Wing causes. Jesus was remarkably silent about the wrath of God although you would never know this from the Jesus these Christians describe. Sean Walsh, in TCW Defending Freedom, reacting to Bishop Budde’s inaugural church service where she reminded Trump of Jesus’ compassionate approach and urging him to consider it when he makes his decisions, says Jesus was a difficult person who would be reviled by liberal Christians because he advocated for adherence to Hebrew laws.

This is a pretty nice trick. He ties Christians to the Old Testament’s angry God, the punishing God, the God that will send you to Hell for any wrong move. But Jesus wasn’t all that much on punishment. Remember the woman who he saved from stoning. He just wanted her to sin no more. He saved her from death which, according to Hebrew law, was the appropriate end for this woman. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Is Jesus then an angry warrior for Hebrew Law when he actively worked to prevent it from happening?

The reason that Jesus urges compassion is that all humans are sinners. The men with stones. The woman being stoned. Even his own apostles, his most trusted friends, would disappoint him. Every last one of us. Jesus realized that people will sin and keep sinning. Some day, we could wind up on the wrong side of the stone thus the reason for compassion when dealing with sinners.

Walsh ignores another big problem with the Old Testament Law. Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These books are chokablock full of things that modern Christians ignore. Forgive your debts every seven years. How many Christians do that? I am betting none. Christians having been picking and choosing what they follow and what they will ignore for centuries. Jesus would want us to follow the entirety of these laws.

No better example can be found than divorce. Jesus actually talked about divorce so I imagining it was important to him while completing ignoring homosexuality which the modern Christian Right want complete adherence. Jesus had a very ancient Hebrew outlook on divorce. He didn’t like it one bit. Given that there are vastly more heterosexuals than homosexuals, divorce should be a bigger problem for Christians than homosexuality.

So, then, where is the outrage with Trump’s marriage history. Well modern Christians have come to terms with divorced Christians. Second marriages involving a divorced person can even be performed in many churches without a second thought. If Jesus is a cultural warrior for values, Jesus, being Jewish, would want adherence to all Judaic Law. This means the laws detailed in the Old Testament.

Walsh is making a big assumption about Jesus here. Jesus would be offended by immigrants and would strive to keep them out. There is little evidence that this is true. Given what we know from the New Testament, we know Jesus spoke repeatedly about compassion and forgiveness. I think it is safer to say this is what Jesus was concerned about and not the Hell and brimstone prophet that Walsh and his compatriots are so wild about.

Members of a Catholic church in England reported their priest gave a sermon suggesting that, given the way Jesus died, he probably died with an erection. So now it has become big news and a lot of people are talking about it. Which is irritating for the following reasons:

  1. What Jesus’ erection has to do with the crucification is beyond me. It sounds like the priest was giving graphic details of how a man dying on the cross would suffer. The priest was giving way to much data here. Yes, it is important to know Jesus suffered, but I think even a child can figure out that being nailed to a cross is no picnic. Why the priest had to throw in all the gory details which included that in Jesus dying minutes the blood rushed to his penis and caused him to pop a boner seems beyond the pale. It’s irrelevant to the Easter Story.
  2. Since there is no earthly reason for the priest to discuss Jesus’ erection, why did he drop this little bomb into his Easter sermon? He had to know that mentioning the word erection during a church service was going to cause a commotion. The mere mention of anything sexual perks up the ears of the more Puritanical members of any congregation. They heard erection and their knives were drawn and ready. This was professional suicide on a grand level. It says a lot that he decided to kick the chair out from under him during one of the most well attended church days of the year. I can only think that he was sick of his job and decided to go out in a blaze of glory. He succeeded.
  3. It doesn’t really matter because popping a boner while dying is not a sin. Even though the priest has been removed from his position and it looks like he did something wrong, there is absolutely no theological debate regarding men who have erections while dying. Men in their prime often find themselves erect for no apparent reason whatsoever. It just happens. I realize that Jesus’ erection is unimportant and the Pope has way more important things to deal with but he might mention this in a future speech or sermon sometime if he is running short of material — erections are not sinful.
  4. Jesus, up until his death, was a human being subject to the same human temptations as any other human being. Isn’t that an important part of the Jesus story? He struggled with his humanity like any other human while he was here. An erection just humanizes the man. Although, I think, in keeping with the Easter story, that Jesus’s death is a better illustration of his humanity and is very much in keeping with the Easter Story.
  5. Some of the church scolds were worried that children might have heard this story. Let me assure everyone, as a young person who once spent every Sunday in Mass, the children missed it entirely. All I recall about Mass was my eyes would glaze over upon entering church and for the next hour I daydreamed or looked at people or tried to talk to one of my siblings in the pew with me but I rarely, if ever, paid attention to the priest. The only thing I can remember is my parents rousting me out of my slumber in order to get to communion. Mass, as every kid forced to go knows, is a snoozefest.
  6. This is not a free speech issue. The Catholic Church is not a public entity and should be free to police their employees as they wish. They did.
  7. Why is this getting so much press? I can see that it may be an issue for the members of the church, but for the larger world it is nothing but the press stirring a pot to see what kind of controversy they can create with a nothing event. I don’t know why they wasted precious headline space on this when they could be talking about something really important like the Met Gala or Taylor Swift. It’s like the press has lost all sense of what is important.

Finally, on a brighter note, I would recommend the name Jesus’ Erection as a great name for any new band who are looking for a catchy name. It is sure to get noticed, all you have to be is good and the world is your oyster.