Things denied

Mark 2:23-3:6

           It seems to me that there is a big difference between a Lenten sacrifice and actually forbidding certain foods and actions. Yet religions have denied the faithful things, foods and gifts freely given by God for millenia. I would not say that this is a fine tradition. What may be a fine tradition is some honest self assessment and a decision to do without something for spiritual gain and personal growth.

           I recall as a youth walking through an arboretum and plucking the pine nuts out of pine cones to eat. Still, I recall making blueberry pancakes from blueberries we picked as we were hiking in Maine. These seem to be gifts from God that take us back to the Garden of Eden or such time that we realized that what the earth provides              is a gift from our creator. The notion of plucking wheat while walking, while hungry or not, being a sin (as in this passage) seems against all that God wishes for us. Is it somehow disrespectful of God's gifts? Was it considered 'work' and disallowed on the sabbath for that reason? Did it break some man made fast? This kind of law only hits the tip of the iceberg.

            For one reason or another, religions have found it necessary to take gifts from God and place restrictions on them. In most cases there is some rationale, some circular logic that makes it 'holy'. My Father-in-law and I would call this happy horse-shit. My example is not being able to eat meat on Fridays. Perhaps that in itself is ridiculous but even more so when St. Patrick's day is a Friday in Lent and then a special dispensation is given to those who feel it would not be St. Pat's without Corned Beef and cabbage. That is bullshit. I'm not picking on the Irish though this kind of mandatory denials and hypocrisy abounds. My Father-in-law would point to one's inability to press a button to use an elevator on the sabbath (is it considered work?) unless someone else pressed the button. Then and only then could you use the elevator without sin. Again, happy horse shit.

            If you look at the rules about pork for instance, there you can see some semblance of intelligence. To a nomadic people in a time of no refrigeration and dusty hygiene at best, it makes sense to protect your population (the Israelites) against trycanosis. Is that a valid stricture today? Probably not, at least not in the United States. I know many Jews who have the same hankering for a good bacon cheeseburger as I do and they feel the bacon does not make them a sinner or less godly.

        Sadly, it isn't just food. Religions see fit to deny a whole array of things, if it's not foods it's one  practice or another and even sex. Of all the most wonderful gifts from God, sex?  Not even Saint Peter was celibate and yet the Roman church makes what could be a wonderful and joyous gift for some (celibacy) into a mandatory stricture that limits the calling to either those that can and to those that can't but can lie about it. The latter is quite prevalent I might add.

         Another sex related rule involves being gay.  Supposedly, being gay is ok and gay people should be loved in spite of being 'intrinsically disordered' (according to the Roman catechism). But you are "called" to live a celibate life. Really? Loving sexual relations are forbidden? Where did that come from and who invited any church into any bedroom?  Is it one specific act or is there a master list of what crosses the celibate sinful line?

         Denying people certain foods, actions and states of life is intrinsically against the love of God that Jesus so beautifully lived and gave example of.  If one wishes to feel a kinship with the denials that Christ lived or to offer a share in his suffering by denying something to one's self that becomes a whole different story. Self assessment, personal conscience, decision making and choice are all avenues to personal and spiritual growth. This kind of decision cannot be made for you though. Decisions and routes to spirituality cannot be mandated or legislated.

One sabbath he was going through the cornfields; and as they made their way his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, ‘Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the sabbath?’ And he said to them, ‘Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need of food? He entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and he gave some to his companions.’ Then he said to them, ‘The sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the sabbath; so the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath.’

Again he entered the synagogue, and a man was there who had a withered hand. They watched him to see whether he would cure him on the sabbath, so that they might accuse him. And he said to the man who had the withered hand, ‘Come forward.’ Then he said to them, ‘Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the sabbath, to save life or to kill?’ But they were silent. He looked around at them with anger; he was grieved at their hardness of heart and said to the man, ‘Stretch out your hand.’ He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. The Pharisees went out and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.