Random Thoughts Anew

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

Legumes are fruit.

Qué?

C'est vrai.

Here's a clue. It's an Italian word.

Hmm. So many possibilities. Pomodoro?

[smallcleanrat]

Legumes are fruit.

Qué?

C'est vrai.

Here's a clue. It's an Italian word.

Hmm. So many possibilities. Pomodoro?

Oh, I missed the clue.

Fagiolini?

[downer]

We have a winner!

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

We have a winner!

Maybe I missed something- I had a long day. Was it 'bean' or 'tomato?'

[downer]

The Amazon Astro personal robot seems like a joke. It doesn't even roll a joint for you.

[Anselm]

We have a winner!

Maybe I missed something- I had a long day. Was it 'bean' or 'tomato?'

La Eggplanta

[downer]

We have a winner!

Maybe I missed something- I had a long day. Was it 'bean' or 'tomato?'

The funny thing was that someone posted the right answer, I replied, and then their post disappeared. Maybe an admin intervened, or maybe it was the Gods themselves.

[mamselle]

Or it was a Boojum...they do lurk here from time to time....

My truly random thought....I was about to take a nap, and it popped into my head unbidden...

And please do note, it's an observation and not a judgment (i.e., I know there are other sides to the discussion).

One of the underlying differences between the (here, primarily Christian) churches that are supporting idiots, and urging unsustainable behaviors, and generally creating division and unrest in certain quarters of the populace, and those that don't do those things, or seem more muted in their disruptiveness, is the use of a lectionary, or planned set of readings, to encourage a broader awareness of the multivalent views, voices, ideas, and stated expectations in the Scriptural canon.*

This has long historic roots, but within some 15th/16th/17th c. Reforming (continental) and later,  Dissenting (Old England) groups, it was felt that a truly capable preacher would not just read, say, Augustine's homily on St. Stephen on Dec 26, or Gregory the Great's on St. Mary Magdalene, but would know Scriptural and Patristic sources well enough to write and deliver their own preachments on these topics.

The set lectionary did indeed emphasize some ideas and omit others, but at least it took those who listened and preached through a fairly wide swath of readings and ideas in both the Hebrew and Christian testaments.

The more recent, 'modern' (3-year) lectionary (in part forwarded by the ICET and others, in part harmonized to a modified RC cycle) at least takes the listeners/preachers through all 3 synoptic gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk, one each year, with Jn fitted in where possible) and the Psalms, and the Prophets, and all the other materials, with an effort at highlighting or juxtaposing related verses (some oppositional, others resonant), etc.

It's a bit messy, then, but more comprehensive, and more challenging: you have to confront the "hard readings" and unsavory moments without flinching, and try to understand--and teach others--how they might function in the life of faith.

Not using a lectionary, or creating a "sermon series" of ones own, is valued in the (not pejorative but liturgically descriptive) "low" churches, whose preachments range widely from very good to cookie-cutter rants not far distant from the uninformed reading of an "expert" homily by an online hack--or a long-decessed ecclesiastical authority.

There may well be exceptions, as I said, but I've sat under both homiletic systems, and while I also like "free worship" structures, I have noticed the tendency among non-liturgical ministers to preach, re-preach, and re-re-re-repreach on just a clutch of favorite verses or causes, or favoring their own personal line on an issue, then cherry-picking verses to support it...

Perhaps this is a bit like the p-hack currently under discussion elsewhere?**

Dunno.

But it seemed both random and pertinent...

M.

________

*There may be some parallels in other faith systems, I can't comment on those with as much understanding, so I'll leave that to those who can; I'm pretty sure that the other Abrahamic systems have these variations, too, but less clear how they play out, for example.

** Also of note, the lectionary and a set hermeneutic around it can also become fossilized and rendered inflexible in the hands of less well-trained clergy in the "higher" (RC, Lutheran Episcopalian, et al) congregations, but there at least some checks and balances in the form of bishopric oversight and intervention as needed.

[sinenomine]

Unrelated to above...

Pretty much the only time I ever regret my choice to live alone is when I'm trying to fold sheets.

[secundem_artem]

Or it was a Boojum...they do lurk here from time to time....

My truly random thought....I was about to take a nap, and it popped into my head unbidden...

And please do note, it's an observation and not a judgment (i.e., I know there are other sides to the discussion).

One of the underlying differences between the (here, primarily Christian) churches that are supporting idiots, and urging unsustainable behaviors, and generally creating division and unrest in certain quarters of the populace, and those that don't do those things, or seem more muted in their disruptiveness, is the use of a lectionary, or planned set of readings, to encourage a broader awareness of the multivalent views, voices, ideas, and stated expectations in the Scriptural canon.*

This has long historic roots, but within some 15th/16th/17th c. Reforming (continental) and later,  Dissenting (Old England) groups, it was felt that a truly capable preacher would not just read, say, Augustine's homily on St. Stephen on Dec 26, or Gregory the Great's on St. Mary Magdalene, but would know Scriptural and Patristic sources well enough to write and deliver their own preachments on these topics.

The set lectionary did indeed emphasize some ideas and omit others, but at least it took those who listened and preached through a fairly wide swath of readings and ideas in both the Hebrew and Christian testaments.

The more recent, 'modern' (3-year) lectionary (in part forwarded by the ICET and others, in part harmonized to a modified RC cycle) at least takes the listeners/preachers through all 3 synoptic gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk, one each year, with Jn fitted in where possible) and the Psalms, and the Prophets, and all the other materials, with an effort at highlighting or juxtaposing related verses (some oppositional, others resonant), etc.

It's a bit messy, then, but more comprehensive, and more challenging: you have to confront the "hard readings" and unsavory moments without flinching, and try to understand--and teach others--how they might function in the life of faith.

Not using a lectionary, or creating a "sermon series" of ones own, is valued in the (not pejorative but liturgically descriptive) "low" churches, whose preachments range widely from very good to cookie-cutter rants not far distant from the uninformed reading of an "expert" homily by an online hack--or a long-decessed ecclesiastical authority.

There may well be exceptions, as I said, but I've sat under both homiletic systems, and while I also like "free worship" structures, I have noticed the tendency among non-liturgical ministers to preach, re-preach, and re-re-re-repreach on just a clutch of favorite verses or causes, or favoring their own personal line on an issue, then cherry-picking verses to support it...

Perhaps this is a bit like the p-hack currently under discussion elsewhere?**

Dunno.

But it seemed both random and pertinent...

M.

________

*There may be some parallels in other faith systems, I can't comment on those with as much understanding, so I'll leave that to those who can; I'm pretty sure that the other Abrahamic systems have these variations, too, but less clear how they play out, for example.

** Also of note, the lectionary and a set hermeneutic around it can also become fossilized and rendered inflexible in the hands of less well-trained clergy in the "higher" (RC, Lutheran Episcopalian, et al) congregations, but there at least some checks and balances in the form of bishopric oversight and intervention as needed.

Alternative to this wall of abstruse exegesis.

Some Christian clergy (Catholics & mainline Protestants) are quite well educated.  Such clergy are less like to be dogmatically anti-scientific, anti-mask, anti-vax etc.  Doctoral degrees from legitimate institutions of higher learning are not unusual.

The problem clergy (and we gots no shortage of these idiots) are graduates of "The Kollege of the Hola Bobble (Night School Edition)" and go out to start The Church of Bob or whatever.  They are basically idiots who live in a fear based world where everything is a sin, everything is a threat, the rapture is just around the corner, and magical thinking rules the day.

[mamselle]

Ummm..."abstruse exegesis" isn't quite accurate.

I'm not doing exegetical analysis when I consider a set of liturgical structures and cross-compare them with the examples I see them potentially produce.

And I exist strongly rooted within the world of clerical variety you describe, and I'm unwilling to characterize any of them quite so broadly.

Some of those same individuals stay up for hours with sick parishioners, try hard to work with whatever limited training they were able to afford to write a sermon that reaches the people in their charge, and wrestle with supporting others through issues some of us never have to face.

I do agree there are charlatans--as there are in academia and other professions--and I've dealt with some of those, too.

But I'm looking for more nuanced causes for a particular issue, rather than the general disparagement offered, and I do think the difference between a disciplined requirement for a variety of readings informs the less well-educated individuals precisely because it helps them see the need to go outside their comfort level and preach the single narrative line that needs to be preached with a more textured understanding of the truth of life.

To some degree, we might be concerned with some of the same things, but I took my time developing the thought precisely because I wanted to avoid being too broadly-based or inaccurate in my assessment of what I think is a systemic issue--as is the fact that more theological schools are closing because more churches are not requiring a completed M. Div. to make a pulpit hire.

M.

[mahagonny]

New fora thread: forumites I'm not missing, followed by detailed reasons.

[aside]

I probably was not missed, but that's likely because no one noticed or cared that I was gone.

[mahagonny]

Why do Supreme Court Justices even comment to the press at all in their spare time? Isn't this a new thing? They should be like umpires at a baseball game. They should go to work, do their job, and go home. They're already hired. They don't need to explain themselves, and they certainly shouldn't be using the job to have a voice in the public dialogue. They need to discourage people from seeking them out for side comments.

[downer]

I am struck that most students graduating from high school aparently have not even a basic understanding of what modern physics says about the nature of matter.

Maybe it doesn't matter. They can still hold down jobs and reproduce. Still, it's no surprise they hold so many supernatural beliefs. I guess it was ever thus.