Buffman

Rev. Joshua

Thank you. Would that there were more like you to help those in need of religious faith guidance.

No. Although there is certainly some practical content to the homily, its primary function is to describe the interaction between the text and the situation of the congregation. It's not interchangeable with a secular morality tale or ethical discussion.

Naturally I find this thought somewhat incongruous with a definition of morality. You seem to be saying that your faith beliefs are the only ones that are the true arbiter of right and wrong. Why do I suspect that each religious sect and denomination holds the same belief about their interpretations of right and wrong? Perhaps I feel the way I do because I believe that all morality was initially founded in secular social experiences that were then adopted, and poetically embellished, by religious faith beliefs in order to attract adherents to one system over another.

Rev. Joshua

Buffman,

The component of a homily which is specifically focused on "right behavior" is not unique, but the homily itself (which deals with many issues beyond simply ethics) is not interchangeable with a non-Christian discussion ethics because a homily is inherently built around the Christian scriptures.

Joshua

HelenM

Indeed

love
Helen

HelenM

Originally posted by DMB:
Well if you think the book is simply a load of waffle, you can stop reading it. You are not a captive audience, as you are in practice in a church.

Only for a few minutes, DMB, then you need never return!

But if you're really upset you could leave in the middle of a sermon, even. People do occasionally get up and leave during sermons - for a variety of reasons. "Severe uncontainable emotional distress" would be a valid reason, presumably

In the case of an interesting book where you want to take something up with the author, unless the author is dead, you simply write to the author care of the publisher.

And what are the chances that they will actually write back?

And if they don't you'll never really know whether they a) saw your letter b) read it c) paid any attention to what you said

love
Helen

Opera Nut

Severe uncontainable emotional distress -- yeah I have been there. In a previous time when I went to a black baptist church some second-string preacher got up and ranted about how horrible King David was, lusted after Bathsheba, had her hubby killed in battle, etcetera, killed their baby because he was sinful, bla, blah.....

After it was over I was so damn depressed that I went up to the guy and screamed in his face: DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT SERMON MAKES ME FEEL LIKE?? IT MAKES ME WANT TO CRAWL IN A HOLE AND DIE!!!
[keep in mind that I am a five foot 3 blond white woman and this guy is over six feet, young, and black.]

Well he did not have an answer. His barbie-wife stared at me like she was shocked and said "I'll call you later..." yeah, sure....never happened.

I got so fucking depressed after hanging out with these mindfucking alleged Xtians that I tried to slash my wrists and checked mself into the county funny farm. I decided that if god works thru his people on earth, god didn't give a damn about me and god didn't care if I starved to death, since his people wouldn't help me and BF find jobs. Nor would they pay us for the professional work we did for them to help them spread their message.

Something I don't understand about black people: If whitey told them they were crummy pieces of shit, they would be rioting in the streets.
But when a black preacher tells them they are crummy pieces of shit due to original sin, they eat it up. These are well-educated black people. WTF???

I conclude that ALL forms of Xtianity are socially sanctioned emotional abuse, because of the unearned guilt of original sin and the idea that everything that is fun must be sinful and that everything you do has some %$#@ fucking moral dimension to it, so you cannot even breathe or have a random thought without wondering if god is gonna slap you down. Terribly terribly disfunctional way to live.

Since they think heaven is so great, I wish they would all kill themselves to hurry up and get there. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Buffman

Rev. Joshua

The component of a homily which is specifically focused on "right behavior" is not unique, but the homily itself (which deals with many issues beyond simply ethics) is not interchangeable with a non-Christian discussion ethics because a homily is inherently built around the Christian scriptures.

I was under the impression that a homily was a sermon used to help edify the congregation on some "practical" matter. Additionally, I believe that you stated that it was also inherently built around the Aramaic/Greek/Hebrew scriptures as well as those considered Christian ones.

Might I inquire what you consider to be " non-Christian discussion ethics?" (Do you differentiate between "ethos" and "ethic?") I thought that "ethics" was the study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his/her relationship with others. So I am becoming somewhat confused about the purpose of a homily...as used by a Christian Preacher. What are the issues beyond ethics and practical matters? Spiritual? If so, would that not bring us back to an "ethos" rather than an "ethic?" IMHO, an ethos is culture/group/mores specific, whereas an ethic is not. Should that position have any merit, then my comment about whose "ethos" is the only "right" one remains unresolved.

(If my philosophically ungrounded questions are becoming annoying, please feel free to just tell me to bugger off. I have already asked far too many self-interest questions of you and have already enjoyed the challenges posed by your thoughtful responses....for which I am most grateful.)

Rev. Joshua

Buffman, not a problem.

For the record, the Christian Scriptures include the Hebrew Bible. They do not, however, include things like the Vedas or the Book of Mormon. That's why I don't just say "the Scriptures."

A sermon is not necessarily practical, and it may not even resolve anything. A sermon on the crucifixion, for example, should have more mystery in it than answers. The sermon should do what the text does, and should relate the text to the contemporary situation - but the Bible is not just morality tales or ethical instruction.

In addition, even when the focus of a sermon is purely pragmatic and ethical, the nature of the sermon is still different. If I were a secular ethicist, I might say "Don't steal because of Kant's categorical imperative." In a Christian homily, I might say "The purpose of having something is to give it to someone in need. Wealth keeps us from hearing the voice of God." (This is a somewhat superficial example mind you. If you look at some of my <a href="http://www.villines.com/Joshua/research" target="_blank">sermons</a> you might see something of what I mean.

Interestingly, one area where very liberal and very conservative Christians overlap is their desire to view Christianity primarily as a moral system. A fundamentalist may use the threat of Hell to try to force someone to behave according to first century cultural norms. A liberal may wax poetical about Jesus' passion for social justice.

The reality, of course, is that the ethics of the Bible aren't always the best (murdering children, etc.). The Bible is primarily about the human experience of God, and sermons should reflect on the experience. Christian ethics are certainly a part of that, but only a part.

In addition, my experience is that most people, Christian or not, follow their own moral compasses regardless of what they claim to believe. A mature Christian hopefully beheves in a way that reflects the depth of their faith, but that behavior stems from their faith - not from constantly being told what to do.

Thanks for your interest. As long as you keep having questions I'll keep trying to give clear answers.

Joshua

Godless Dave

Well put. Could you please clue other Christians into this fact?

Buffman

Rev. Joshua

Once again, thank you.

For the record, the Christian Scriptures include the Hebrew Bible.

That's my fault for not amplifying. I was attempting to address the issue that Christians claim the OT as part of their faith belief system, but have little understanding of the culture and society that produced those OT writings. (I know you are aware of the bloody enmity that has existed throughout history between Christians and Jews.) That is why I found it interesting that Christians would attempt to produce homilies about OT moral, or practical, issues and pass them off as their own. I suspect that it is the "selectivity" with which today's Christians take from the OT that gives me a certain level of angst.

Let that issue rest for another time. One of my interests has long been the techniques involved in conditioning the human mind to accept that which can be falsified. I consider religious leaders to be masters of these techniques whether they recognize the fact or not. The more honest and sincere the the religious preacher, the more difficult and fascinating it becomes to expose these techniques to critical examination. Your honesty and sincerity have made that examination a pleasurable one. Thank you again.

NOGO

Yes, and some people are wired this way.