"I am" or "I have"?

      True confession (although probably not a surprise to anyone):  I have "Christianism". And, to complicate it, I suffer from an extreme form of it:  "Clergyism". Some folks might nod their heads -- either with humor, or disdain, and say, "Yup, you aredisordered!". Most others, however, would probably shake their head and say, "What is he talking about?" Most of us don't use those words unless in some semi-scholarly sense, and certainly notabout ourselves. Most ordained folks might say "I am a Christian clergy-person". It is part of what makes us who we are; I doubt few of us would think that either our religious identity or clerical identity was something that could be easily removed.
       I think a lot about identities. Certainly that topic is a matter of much conversation on college campuses. Students gather around their identities. Whether it's the Muslim Student Association or the South Asian Student Association or the Black Student Alliance, students in these groups celebrate their common identity with pride, and advocate for recognition and acceptance in the wider "culture". These groups are more than simple interest groups that bring together folks who share a hobby or professional goal. In my professional context, of course, I think most about religious identities -- "identities", not "conditions".
      Yet there are other identities that are often discussed in the manner of conditions; identities that become marginalizable as "-isms". I was reminded of this the other day when a video was shared on Facebook in which the subject was described as "having dwarfism". I understand that the word "dwarf" can have a lot of negative baggage associated with it -- although some wear it with pride, but it is not a condition (i.e., "dwarfism") that can be remedied. It is an identity, in his case, an easily seen identity.
      There are, of course, "invisible" identities that are treated as conditions. I think of people who are autistic or dyslexic. When we speak of them "having autism" or "having dyslexia", we make them "other", and potentially subject to different sets of "rules". We may seek to "cure" them, or, as was the case in 1940's Germany, to eradicate them, since they aren't "normal" -- as wemight define it.
      I can't deny anyone the right to "self-define", but I do believe that when we start classifying people who differ from us in any was as "disordered", we've crossed a line. My "Christianism" compels me to agree with Pope Francis who reportedlytold a gay man earlier this week that “You have to be happy with who you are. God made you this way and loves you this way, and the pope loves you this way.” And, although he didn't say it, I would imagine he would agree with a saying I recall from several decades ago, "God don't make no junk." Or, to quote another figure from this week's news, Episcopal Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, "When love is the way, there's plenty good room - plenty good room - for all of God's children." *

Namasté

Gary

* From his sermon at the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.