Menu Close

Catholic Church Forbids Sex for Civilly Divorced and Remarried Couples

Bruce Gerencser 5 Comments

marriage

Archbishop Charles Chaput, head of the Roman Catholic Church in Philadelphia, reminded civilly divorced and remarried Catholic couples that they are NOT allowed to engage in sexual intercourse. Those who ignore Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage, according to Archbishop Chaput, and have sex are committing adultery and are not permitted to take communion. CBS News reports:

The head of the Roman Catholic Church in Philadelphia is closing the door opened by Pope Francis to letting civilly remarried Catholics receive Communion, saying the faithful in his archdiocese can only do so if they abstain from sex and live “as brother and sister.”

Archbishop Charles Chaput, who is known for strongly emphasizing strict adherence to Catholic doctrine, issued a new set of pastoral guidelines for clergy and other leaders in the archdiocese that went into effect July 1. The guidelines reflect a stance taken by St. John Paul II.

Civilly remarried couples must have their previous marriages annulled before they can receive the Sacrament of Penance and eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. Having had a son and daughter-in-law go through the annulment process, I think I can safely say that Catholic marriage annulment is a way for the Church to get around the teachings of the Bible. Using theological sleight of hand and a mountain of paperwork, civilly divorced Catholics can have the Church wave a magic wand over their marriages and VIOLA! the marriage is jettisoned into outer space, never to heard of again. My wife and I, along with several of our older children, had to sign papers of behalf of my son, stating that has past marriage was defective and that he is of good moral character. I signed the papers because my son and daughter-in-law — who are already civilly married — can be viewed as married in the eyes of Church. I told them, at the time, that I thought the whole marriage annulment process was bullshit — a wink-wink, pretend-pretend act that says a previous marriage never took place. The things we do for our children.

It is  time for the Catholic Church to enter the 21st century. While some people see Pope Francis as a reformer, patiently dragging Neanderthals such as Archbishop Chaput into the modern era, I tend to see a man who is long on words and short on concrete action. The Pope says all the right things, but within the walls of Catholic Churches things remain just as they have been for the past hundred years. I will believe Pope Francis is a serious reformer when he issues papal decrees allowing women to be priests, same-sex couples to be married, and allows civilly divorced and remarried Catholics to be members in good standing — allowing them to take communion. I will believe the Pope is serious about reform when he roots out every last child abuser from within the Vatican and Catholic parishes. The Pope talks about the importance of good works, yet he himself is long on words and short on works. If Pope Francis wants to show that he truly cares about Catholic parishioners, how about telling Archbishop Chaput to shut the fuck up and stop attacking civilly divorced and remarried couples. And if the Archbishop refuses to obey the Vicar of Christ? Remove him from office. If the Catholic Church ever hopes to stop hemorrhaging members, it must embrace 21st century life, complete with its changing gender roles and sexual practices.

Millions of Roman Catholics are civilly divorced and remarried. Many of them hide their marital past from the church, thus allowing them to take communion. Suggesting as Archbishop Chaput does that these couples should sleep in the same bed night after night without engaging in sexual intercourse is absurd. To avoid adultery, civilly divorced and remarried couples are required to treat each other like siblings. As I read Chaput’s words, “undertaking to live as brother and sister is necessary for the divorced and civilly remarried to receive reconciliation in the Sacrament of Penance, which could then open the way to the Eucharist,” I thought, the Catholic Church is promoting incest.

By the way, there are Evangelical sects who hold to a similar view on divorce and remarriage. I plan to write a post on this subject at a later date.

The Sounds of Fundamentalism: One Word For Women Who Have Had an Abortion by Garrett Kell

Bruce Gerencser 0 Comments
garrett kell

This is the seventy-sixth installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section.  Let’s have some fun!

Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip from an anti-abortion video by Garrett Kell, pastor of Del Ray Baptist Church, Alexandria, Virginia. Del Ray is a Calvinistic Southern Baptist congregation.

Kell sees Jesus as the answer to abortion. And for those who have gone through an abortion and are hurting? Still Jesus. Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, a word that is as meaningless as Evangelicals saying, I’ll pray for you.  Hemant Mehta got it right when he said, in response to Kell’s video:

Women who had or are about to have abortions don’t need a lecture on what’s best for them. Just because he’s unhappy about being party to an abortion doesn’t mean everyone else feels the same way. They need access to a clinic where they can obtain a safe procedure without unnecessary obstacles. That’s what the Supreme Court said about Texas’ horrible law, and that’s what Kell can’t bring himself to say because he seems to think abortions ruin the lives of every woman who obtains them.

What would I say to women who have had an abortion?

“Do you need anything? Support? Help? Assistance? Someone to talk to Kell so he’ll be distracted from lecturing you? Let me know. I’m here for you

Video Link

The Sounds of Fundamentalism: Once Saved, Always Saved by Billy Kelly

Bruce Gerencser 0 Comments

billy kelly

This is the seventy-fifth installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section.  Let’s have some fun!

Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip from a sermon preached by Billy Kelly, an Independent Baptist evangelist and the director of Greer Baptist Camp Meeting in Greer, South Carolina. Kelly died April 1, 1997. Kelly was one of my favorite preachers.

Video Link

Billy Kelly also had a wonderful singing voice. The following old recording does not do his voice justice.

Video Link

Shacking Up: Most Americans Approve of Cohabitation

Bruce Gerencser 3 Comments

dangers of premarital sex
The Dangers of Premarital Sex according to the married Catholic Ada Eze

According to a June 2016 Barna Group study, two-thirds of Americans believe it is okay for couples to live together without the benefit of marriage. The study found:

The majority of American adults believe cohabitation is generally a good idea. Two thirds of adults (65%) either strongly or somewhat agree that it’s a good idea to live with one’s significant other before getting married, compared to one-third (35%) who either strongly or somewhat disagree.

It comes as no surprise that Millennials — mirroring the sexual revolution of their Boomer parents — are twice as likely to approve of cohabitation than their grandparents and great-grandparents:

barna cohabitation 2016

It should also come as no surprise that religion is the primary reason people disapprove of cohabitation. Barna reports:

  • 41 percent of Christians think cohabitation is a bad idea.
  • 88 percent of non-religious people believe cohabitation is a good idea.

According to Barna, 57 percent of Americans have either currently or previously lived with a boyfriend/girlfriend. Again, those who are religious are less likely to shack up, but even here, a large number of Christians choose to “try the car before buying it.”

Barna concludes:

“America is well beyond the tipping point when it comes to cohabitation,” says Roxanne Stone, editor in chief at Barna Group. “Living together before marriage is no longer an exception, but instead has become an accepted and expected milestone of adulthood. Even a growing number of parents—nearly half of Gen-Xers and Boomers, and more than half of Millennials—want and expect their children to live with a significant other before getting married.

“The institution of marriage has undergone significant shifts in the last century,” continues Stone. “What was once seen as primarily an economic and procreational partnership, has become an exercise in finding your soulmate. Where once extended families lived within a handful of miles from each other, now the nuclear family often strikes out on its own. Such shifts placed a new emphasis on marriages as the core of family life and revealed fault lines in many marriages. These pressures, along with a number of other social phenomena—including women’s growing economic independence—led to unprecedented divorce rates in the second half of the twentieth century. As a result, many of today’s young people who are currently contemplating marriage, see it as a risky endeavor. They want to make sure they get it right and to avoid the heartbreak they witnessed in the lives of their parents or their friends’ parents. Living together has become a de facto way of testing the relationship before making a final commitment.

….

“However, religious leaders will be wise to notice that a growing number of their constituents—particularly in younger demographics—are accepting cohabitation as the norm,” concludes Stone. “As with premarital sex, the arguments against cohabitation will seem increasingly antiquated as the general culture accepts and promotes it. When everyone in their circles and everyone on television is living together, young people will begin to see it as benign. Religious leaders will need to promote the countercultural trend by celebrating the reasons to wait—rather than trying to find evidence for why it’s wrong (because such tangible, measurable evidence may not exist).

I suspect that most readers of this blog are not surprised by Barna’s findings. Boomers, Gen-exers, and Millennials alike have endured three generations of religious and political moralizing, all the while watching those screaming against “sin” do the very things they so strenuously oppose. Their message of do as we say not as we do now falls on deaf ears. Perhaps it is time for 2016 rewrite of God’s “timeless” moral code, one that reflects that women now have the freedom to use birth control and lustily fuck whomever, wherever, and however. Women are no longer subservient to the sexual whims of men. Sexual slavery, once the gospel of American Christianity, no longer plays well in Peoria. And this, dear readers, is the real problem, at least in the minds of conservative, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist clergy and political leaders. Women no longer need men or marriage to find fulfillment, and this scares the hell out of preachers and conservative politicians. As Barna admits, we are now well past the tipping point when it comes to cohabitation. Time will tell if Christian moralizers will finally admit this fact and choose to focus on matters of faith instead of what goes on behind closed bedroom doors.

Larry Dixon Says Premarital Sex is Abnormal, Unnatural, and Definitely Not Fun

Bruce Gerencser 27 Comments

fear and hysteria

Those of us raised within the confines of the Evangelical ghetto have vivid memories of preachers telling us that certain sins were not fun, pleasurable, or enjoyable. Smoking weed? Drinking booze? Masturbating? Copping a feel on the back of the church bus? Making out with the preacher’s daughter? Running through the third base coach’s stop sign and sliding into home? Hanging out with “worldly” school friends? Going to the dance? Going to the prom? Such behaviors are sins against the thrice holy God, says the preacher down at First Baptist Church. Hoping that good old-fashioned Evangelical guilt and fear will rob sinners of derived pleasures, these stuffed-shirt preachers call on offending parishioners to “repent” and get right with God. And just like trained seals at the zoo, these sinners dutifully confess their sins to the fun-and-pleasure-hating God, promising to never, ever sin again. Of course, these sinners know that, come next Friday or Saturday night, they will once again sin against God, choosing pleasure and fun over the Puritanical morality of their Evangelical pastors and parents.

Larry Dixon is a professor of theology at Columbia International University in Columbia, South Carolina. In a post dealing with the sin of cohabitation, Dixon wrote:

But many today are “buying it”! They’re buying into the lies that premarital sex is normal, natural, and fun — provided certain precautions are taken. They’re buying into the lie that sexual intercourse with life-long commitment is strictly a personal matter. They’re buying into the lie that just like you have to test-drive a car before you buy it . . .
This most intimate of human social actions is neither shunned nor shamed in the Bible, the Word of God. Sex was God’s idea!

The church must wake up and realize that the majority of men and women to which it will minister will not be virgins! They will have sexual scars which cannot be erased, but can be forgiven

Let me break down exactly what Dixon is saying:

  • Sex was created by God.
  • Saying premarital sex is normal, natural, and fun is a lie.
  • Premarital sex is not normal, natural, and fun.
  • Saying sexual intercourse (who, what, when, and where) is a personal matter is a lie.
  • Saying that couples should see if they are sexually compatible before marrying is a lie.
  • People who engage in premarital sex will likely be scarred from their experiences.
  • These sexual scars can’t be erased, but the voyeuristic Christian God will forgive them.

Astoundingly, Dixon admits that most adult Evangelicals are not virgins. I am sure Dixon thinks that the root problem is disobedience to the teachings of the Bible and the moral pronouncements of Evangelical preachers. If people would just listen and obey, all would be well. Certainly that is one way to look at this issue, but I wonder if Dixon has ever considered that what he is preaching is the problem? Perhaps telling people that this or that human behavior is NOT normal, natural, and fun is the problem. Maybe it is time for the Larry Dixons of the world to be honest with people, admitting that preachers and parishioners are alike need, want, and desire sex. While people should be free to “save” themselves for marriage, doing so does not make them morally superior. Surely Dixon is aware of the fact that countless virginal Evangelicals have sexual problems after they marry — problems that could been exposed if the couples had taken the car for a test drive.

Dixon, bound by the sexually repressive teachings of the Bible, will likely continue preaching the gospel of virginity. He should know, though, that most of the students he teaches likely have varied sexual experiences. If Dixon really wants to help his students, perhaps he should teach them how to handle their sexuality and make responsible sexual choices. Telling people that premarital sex is NOT normal, natural, or fun is….how shall I put it in Baptist preacher parlance….a boldfaced lie from the pit of hell. Sex is meant to fun and pleasurable whether it is premarital or post-marital.  Further a marriage license is no guarantee that it will be.

Dixon, by the way, is not preaching anything that is not standard operating procedure at the state accredited Columbia International University. Columbia’s student handbook(pages 22, 23) states:

In keeping with the design of God and the commands of Scripture concerning sexual purity, students are required to maintain irreproachable behavior in sexual matters and to avoid situations that would unduly tempt them to compromise moral standards.

Couples should avoid being alone together in any place of residence or private area. Any sexual misconduct, including, but not limited to, adultery, homosexuality (including any same-sex physical expression of romantic affection), any form of premarital sex, indecent exposure, sexual harassment, use of sexually explicit materials for sexual gratification, and sexual abuse of children, is forbidden.

Expressions of Affection:

Hugs are to be appropriate as between brothers and sisters. Individuals involved in casual dating are to refrain from all expressions of physical affection on and off campus except for brief hugs.

Couples who have committed to date each other with a focus on the possibility of engagement and marriage should be prudent and intentional in establishing boundaries in regard to physical expressions of romantic affection. These couples are to refrain from all expressions of physical affection on and off campus except for hugs as noted above, holding hands, and a brief kiss. In addition, we strongly encourage such couples to establish accountability relationships with mature believers.

Engaged couples are also to be prudent in setting appropriate boundaries to maintain purity and a godly example. Here again, we strongly encourage the establishment of accountability relationships with mature believers. Expressions of affection on and off campus are to be limited to appropriate hugs, holding hands, and brief kisses [what about the slippery slope argument?].

Out of sensitivity to our unmarried students and campus atmosphere, married students should be exemplary models of appropriate public physical expressions of romantic affection. [Yes, you read that right. Married couples should avoid  physical contact lest they cause unmarried students to “sin.”]

Prior to 2007, Columbia did not allow dating unmarried students to have ANY physical contact with the opposite sex except from for brief hugs.

The Sounds of Fundamentalism: Washing Our Feet in Sodomite Blood, Praising God by Steven Anderson

Bruce Gerencser 12 Comments

steven anderson family
Steven and Zsuzsanna Anderson and their eight children. November 2015

This is the seventy-fourth installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section.  Let’s have some fun!

Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip from a sermon preached Steven Anderson, pastor of Faithful Word Baptist Church, Tempe, Arizona. Note all the children on the front rows.

Video Link

Fundamentalist J.D. Hall “Apologizes” to LGBT Community

Bruce Gerencser 16 Comments

jd hall

Last year, attention whore J.D. Hall, pastor of Fellowship Baptist Church in Sidney, Montana (the church’s website proudly reports that men such as Fundamentalists Paul Washer, James White, Voddie Baucham, Chris Rosebrough, Douglas Wilson, Ray Comfort, Phil Johnson, Justin Peters, and Sye Ten Bruggencate have preached there) , wrote an “apology” letter to the LGBT community. He reposted his letter today on the Pulpit & Pen website — a trash repository for all things Fundamentalist, Baptist, and Calvinistic. When I first saw  the headline of Hall’s post I thought, has J.D. Hall had a come-to-Jesus moment? Dare I hope that Hall is repudiating his hatred for LGBT people? These thoughts were quickly extinguished by the fact that unless Hall is admitting he is a transvestite Baptist, there’s zero chance that he will turn from his gay-hating ways.

Hall used his “apology” letter to the LGBT community to remind them of the following:

Dear Gay Community,

As a Christian who has been forced to evaluate where I stand in recent days in light of Scripture, in both tone and message, I would like to apologize for myself and other Christians…

1. I’m sorry that any of us ever referred to you as a “gay community.” Really, that’s not helpful. A “community” is a group of individuals that either live in the same place or share the same values. Sodomy (defined as unnatural and immoral sexual behavior) is not a value. Sodomy is a deviancy. Now, if you defined “community” as sharing interests and not values, then there could theoretically be a gay community because you hold unnatural and immoral sexual behavior as a common interest. However, to call you a “community” would legitimize this sin in a way that we don’t legitimize any other sin. For example, we don’t recognize “the thieving community” or the “the lying community” or “the bank-robbing community” or “the rapist community” or the “white collar criminal community.” If communities could be founded upon self-destructive behavior, those communities would be self-defeating, and a self-defeating community is no community at all. In fact, a truly “gay community” would be extinct within one generation. Your unnatural sexual deviancy leads to death; legitimate communities are self-populating and regenerative. It was a dumb term for Christians to start using, and I apologize for all of those who inadvertently give credence to the narrative that yours is a community and not a group of sinners who share in community-destroying behavior.

2. I’m sorry that Christians have made a habit of referring to you as LGBT or LGBTQ or by any other acronym or term, identifying you by your sin. First, it is unfair and unhelpful to identify you by your sin. This is actually discriminatory against you, because we don’t behave this way toward any other group of sinners. Adulterers don’t find their identity in adultery. Liars don’t find their identity in lying. Gluttons don’t find their identity in gluttony. We tend to view others as “people who happen to [fill in the blank with any number of sins].” We haven’t viewed you as people – first and foremost – who suffer from the sinful desire of sodomy. Now, you have self-identified as LGBT, because there is a unique tendency when it comes to homosexuality to let the sin consume you as a person, but we should not have participated in the unfortunate reality that your identity has become wrapped up in sinful behavior. If you thought of yourself as a person who suffers from homosexual desires, rather than as a homosexual, you might realize that you’re more than your specific sexual deviancy.
….

3. I’m sorry that we’ve given you the impression that “self-identifying” is a thing. Yes, I know I’ve used the term to get a point across in this letter of apology. But, here’s the thing…you don’t get to “self-identify.” God gave you your identity. Bruce Jenner is not Caitlyn. That’s silly. He’s a guy who emasculated himself to look like a woman, adding breasts and makeup and tucking appendages. It’s a game of dress up, essentially. And if he were to remove his genitalia, he still wouldn’t be a woman. He’d be a man without his genitalia. Bruce Jenner will never have PMS. That’s because he’s not a woman. It’s really, really mean for Christians to be anything but straightforward with this reality. I’m convinced that Bruce Jenner doesn’t have people around him that loves [sic] him, or else they would tell him that he doesn’t look like a beautiful woman. He looks like the person that kids on the bus snicker at behind them, and dare one another to go up and touch. Christians, if we were loving, would say “Bless your heart, but you’re not a woman. You’re a man trying to look like a woman, but no one really thinks you’re accomplishing that so well. You are Bruce, and God made you to be Bruce, and you can never be Caitlyn.”
….

6. Finally, I apologize for all the professed Christians that you thought had convictions, only to find out that they were sniveling, driveling compromise machines. It probably surprised you how they changed their tune and their tone when the Supreme Court ruled. That’s especially tragic. It’s tragic, because I know that your conscience is cutting you. I know that even truth suppressed in unrighteousness hurts. It’s painful, I’m sure. You might even be on the look-out for conviction and resolve and truth, and while perhaps being glad to see the rainbow filter go on your professing-Christian Facebook friends’ profiles, you’re a little let down that there isn’t an unchanging reality out there somewhere. Down deep, you know that you need that. I’m sorry for all those who have professed Christ, but haven’t loved you (or Him) enough to dig their heels in and speak a truth that’s as helpful as it is inconvenient.

I sincerely hope you’ll forgive us for these shortcomings, and we strive to do better in the future.

You can read Hall’s non-apology letter here.

While Evangelicals fall all over themselves attempting to explain that Steven Anderson is some sort of lone homo-hater, Hall’s “apology” letter is a reminder that hatred of LGBT people can be found in EVERY Evangelical church. (Hall’s church, for example, is a Southern Baptist congregation that self-identifies as Reformed Baptist.) I am sure Hall is a proud as a peacock over his “apology” letter. Ha! Ha! Ha! No apology here, you sexual deviants. God’s still hates you, and since I, a properly circumcised Calvinist,  love what God loves and hate what God hates, I hate YOU! As Steven Anderson does, J.D. Hall and the Pen & Pulpit blog have a large following — including 2,373 likes on Facebook and 6,708 followers on Twitter. Hall and other Pulpit & Pen contributors also use a radio program, podcasts, frequent blog posts to promote their version of Evangelical Christianity. Evangelicals who now realize how their vitriol towards the LGBT community caused much harm need to own the fact that there are numerous Halls and Andersons within Evangelicalism (and the Southern Baptist Convention). Granted, many of these haters will never preach hateful sermons as Anderson does, or pen hurtful “apology” letters. Many Evangelicals are too “nice” to ever do such things, but don’t be deceived by their niceness. Behind closed doors, in the safety of their faggot-free churches and homes, these “nice” Evangelicals continue to rail against the letters of the rainbow, condemning LGBT people to hell.

The Sounds of Fundamentalism: The Filthy Sodomites Are At War With Us by Steven Anderson

Bruce Gerencser 17 Comments

pastor steven anderson
Steven Anderson pastors an Faithful Word Baptist Church, an IFB church in Tempe, Arizona. Pity the children.

This is the seventy-third installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section.  Let’s have some fun!

Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip from a sermon preached Steven Anderson, pastor of Faithful Word Baptist Church, Tempe, Arizona. The saddest thing about this video is a child’s laughter as Anderson rails against “filthy sodomites.” There’s no hope for Anderson, save him finally coming out of the closet and admitting he is a repressed homosexual. There’s still a glimmer of hope for the children of Faithful Word members. Sadly, as each week passes, and their minds continue to be assaulted by the homophobic, bigoted Anderson, hope’s light grows dim. My heart aches for children who are raised in such toxic environments.

Video Link

Songs of Sacrilege: Dead and Gone by The Iron Boot Scrapers

Bruce Gerencser 0 Comments

iron boot scrapers

This is the one hundred and twenty-second installment in the Songs of Sacrilege series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a song that is irreverent towards religion, makes fun of religion, pokes fun at sincerely held religious beliefs, or challenges the firmly held religious beliefs of others, please send me an email.

Today’s Song of Sacrilege is Dead and Gone by The Iron Boot Scrapers. Dead and Gone is a tribute to the late Christopher Hitchens.

Video Link

Sacrilegious Humor: The Religion of Bart Simpson

Bruce Gerencser 0 Comments

baby jesus bart simpson

This is the thirty-seventh installment in the Sacrilegious Humor series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a comedy bit that is irreverent towards religion, makes fun of religion, pokes fun at sincerely held religious beliefs, or challenges the firmly held religious beliefs of others, please email me the name of the bit or a link to it.

Today’s bit is a clip from The Simpsons.

Warning, many of the comedy bits in this series will contain profanity. You have been warned.

Video Link