saving faith

Having probably alienated a huge chunk of my (potential if not actual) readership with that homophobic rant 2 posts back, it is only fair that I now attempt to insult the rest of you - namely, the Christians, because you started it first *na nana na na*.

Some months ago mum got roped into Church Going ('CG') before she had a chance to register what had hit her. This has been a tremendous (and increasing) source of amusement (bewilderment? disturbance?) for me ever since, not only because of the terrible cynic that I am, but also what I know about her. That's all I'm going to say about it; people partake of CG for all sorts of reasons, and "good on yous all" I say. I mention it merely to set the scene: but for her new-found... interest? pastime? ...? (oh let it go already I don't mean to patronise), the incident I'm about to relate would have been completely avoided.

So, Thursday morning I was merrily going about my own business (= stumbling out of bed after sleeping in), vaguely aware that the pastor's wife ('PW') had come to help mum catch up on bible study (see, not a single euphemism, quotation mark, capitalisation or font emphasis in that whole phrase - I am too behaving myself!), but totally unprepared for what stood in the way between me and my breakfast cereal. Within 30 seconds of my emerging from my room, I had:

• made the crucial error of giving PW a warm greeting (handshake + enquiry as to her preferred title);
• become physically restrained by PW (offering my hand was a baad idea); and
• started receiving Lesson One of Welcome to Christianity.

Methinks I might've enjoyed the experience slightly more if - oh I dunno -

• I didn't have a stranger middle-aged woman's hands around my wrist the whole time;
• PW spoke better Chinese (yes people, it is a Chn-speaking congregation that mum's been recruited by; why would you have assumed otherwise);
• PW was more articulate, or at least better informed, about the subject matter, and did not employ Passion of Christ-esque re-enactment or slagging on Buddhism (in equally inarticulate, ill-informed fashion) as major marketing tactics; and/or
• I'd been in a coma for most of my life and was awakening for the very first time to the exquisite prospect of Exploring Spirituality.

And guess what I did? I just stood there and took it - for a good half-hour, all pleasant and humble like, whilst inside getting more agitated than any other time in recent memory (bar the NYE incident, which created a league of its own). Sure I'd been caught off-guard, and didn't want to make it awkward for mum; still - I was soo disappointed with myself! And in true wuss-style I now inflict upon you this mini gripe, hehe.

Maybe I got more worked up than I should've been; certainly more than I wanted to be. But really. Who meets somebody for the first time and asks them to choose between 'heaven' and 'hell' (She did! I swear! Preceded, of course, by an uninspiring spiel incorporating those and other catchphrases which no one of average intelligence and social integration hasn't heard before; use your imagination).

I respect that it's part and parcel of your glorious undertaking to spread the good news and all (don't say "it's only the evangelists who do it" because you all are and you all do in some way, often without even realising), but where is your respect for my capacity to think and feel for myself? Have you lived so much more than I have that you're qualified to fast-track my spiritual journey for me? Will my conversion, immediate or progressive, affirm your own faith? And if "that's not the point" as you protest - almost always a reflex - then tell me, what is?

Above all I am offended, yes she who is near-impossible to offend, is offended - deeply so - that whenever resistance is shown, or reservation held, towards the hypotheses posited by you, it is invariably and dismissively attributed to lack of information (ignorance), of curiosity (mental sloth), of humility (arrogance), or of a willingness/readiness to embrace the Incontrovertible Truth (stunted spiritual development). The dismissals vary only in form. And how does one argue with you using an entirely different, and therefore inapplicable, frame of reference?

As usual rebuttals/abuse are embraced with warmth and deference. *glances at my Christian Scientist (former) reader*