by Primo Encarnación y Hachecristo

There are a lot of things I agree with Pope Francis on. There are a lot of things I disagree with Pope Francis on. This was not always so. As a child, in Catholic school, I accepted the Catholic version of reality with unquestioning loyalty and faith. That lasted until I found out that there was more to that thing down there than just peeing. Suddenly, the Pope (Paul VI, at the time) and I had a parting of the ways.

The rift has only grown over time.

That rift has narrowed of late, not because underlying Catholic dogma has suddenly been rewritten, but because the emphasis of the Church has shifted. Francis has decided to lead by example instead of by fiat, himself following the example of the Gospels instead of the generations of misogynistic power mongers who have turned the red meat of Jesus’ message into pre-cooked kosher hotdogmas, suitable for re-heating in the pulpit every Sunday.

Feeding the poor, caring for the sick, nurturing our planet – none of these are new concepts. They never went away, they just got drowned out by the power-politics of sexuality. By that same token, the institutionalized misogyny and the outlandish concept that “spilling the seed” is a mortal sin, rather than a really fun, non-prescription relaxant, have not gone away. They’re still there, just – how shall I put it? – in the closet?

Which brings us to Kim Davis. Oh, BOY! Do the Pope and I disagree on this one. On the surface it would seem that this comes down to a classic case of Church/State dichotomy, and that the two positions are irreconcilable. An open, pluralistic society rooted in the concept of basic universal human rights will inevitably come into conflict with any religion hell-bent on being hell-bent. Or does it?

Let’s play in Kim’s ballpark: I am put in mind of the fable where Jesus, is asked about paying taxes. He asks to see the coin used to pay the tax, and demands to know whose image and inscription appear on the coin. On being informed that they are Caesar’s, he avoids the trap being set for him by saying “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s but render unto God that which is God’s.”

This is the Christological answer to the Kim Davis dilemma. Davis, for just about ALL of her adult life, has taken Caesar’s coin, first as a deputy to her mother’s multi-decade reign as clerk, then as clerk in her own right, where each and every year she collects $80,000 worth of Caesar’s coins, some of which she duly renders back to Caesar. But there is something else which Caesar owns, which by Jesus’ own words should be rendered: her job. Her job is not God’s. Her job belongs to the State. By taking Caesar’s coin and not doing the job Caesar expects in return, she is stealing Caesar’s money.

Now we come to the part of the discussion that Jesuits like Francis love: the lesser of two (well, three) evils. Not everything is black and white, and this issue, in fact, is about 50 shades of gay. Which, my friends, is the greater evil? To steal Caesar’s money holding a job – which apparently she considers to be a family sinecure – that she has no intention of doing to Caesar’s liking? Or to do the job she was hired to do and hand out civil marriage licenses to people her private religion tells her should not be married and, in fact, should be murdered, instead? Or to QUIT the job over a matter of principle, keeping what little-remaining virtue she possesses intact?

Jesus has an answer for that, too: “If thy eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it away.” If you can’t in good conscience do your job, then quit your job. No one is expected to stay in a job which endangers their soul. By that same token, Jesus makes it quite clear in these two passages that he doesn’t expect you to bend others’ circumstances to suit your own needs, but rather – however painful it may be – to bend yourself.

I suggest Kim Davis get bent.