![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
likethebeerRegardless of the length of my UU post yesterday, I neglected to actually write about Sunday's service1 at the First Unitarian Society.
I have an odd intellectual relationship w/the services. I think part of my reaction is b/c I was a child when I last went to church and was incapable of contextualizing the larger issues that priests brought up during sermons. This time around, I find myself taking from sermons those things that I think can help me in my personal life, which is what I figure this is, in part, about. Well, especially when the minister's are dealing w/personal issues.
Sunday, however, the main minister went off on a couple of things. One was the use of humor/the ridiculous in organized religion. Specifically, his take on what works in terms of humor, and what ultimately distracts from the lessons that can be learned in using the ridiculous, when it doesn't have a greater purpose. In this case, I could see where he was going, but I don't really know if I fully agree w/him. Well, it wasn't that so much, it was more that I don't really care about "the availability of chocolate chalices through the UUA inspired one or more congregations to incorporate these edibles into the Sunday liturgy." That crossed the line for Mike. Yep, he was preeety pissed about that.
But the 2nd thing he broached was regarding the observation of millenialist, literalist Pxians. I think he made some pretty good points regarding his feelings on this. UUs try to be tolerant of other religions, so criticizing extremist Pxians is something I'm uncomfortable with.2 He zeroed in on this tendency, and I think was making another foré into his attack of extremism in any form. I think his thoughts on the matter are that there comes a point where you must put aside over-arching relativism and state that select reading of the bible/koran and that armeggedon & rapture fascination (and, of course, the rapture isn't in the bible) is ultimately futile and takes away from some of the greater lessons available in these select religious texts.
In a way, it was a little disturbing listening to this. Not overwhelmingly so, but it is as I first stated--my memories of religious services did not include priests bringing in the outer world. On the other hand, I was sort of exhilerated by it. It showed some balls, I guess, and I appreciate that. Now what I can do w/it, I have no idea. Arguing w/extremists with logic doesn't have a really great track record of succeeding.
And, of course, what I've written in the last 3 paragraphs have more to do w/my take on the minister than they do on the issues. Well, my feelings about extremist religious believers are not unknown to myself, or to mda, since we have talked about them at length. But I find it interesting that I have been analyzing the minister, instead of how this made me feel. Perhaps this is b/c I still stand outside this religion, no matter how much I get from it.3 And I think I like that.
1 I feel the need to state that I still have a problem with the words: service, church, sermon, & minister. Oh, and religion. That word was used a few times on Sunday, and I *did* roll my eyes. I guess it's the intersection between 'religion' and 'faith.' Then again, what do I have faith in? I have no idea. That's why the UUs appeal to me.
2 Does this mean I'm UU? Not yet. I still often refer to them as them, not "us" or "we". I think, rather, that I feel this way, and it seems to go along w/basic UU precepts.
3 Do I get a lot from it? Yeah, I do. I just have a reticence on bringing it up.
I have an odd intellectual relationship w/the services. I think part of my reaction is b/c I was a child when I last went to church and was incapable of contextualizing the larger issues that priests brought up during sermons. This time around, I find myself taking from sermons those things that I think can help me in my personal life, which is what I figure this is, in part, about. Well, especially when the minister's are dealing w/personal issues.
Sunday, however, the main minister went off on a couple of things. One was the use of humor/the ridiculous in organized religion. Specifically, his take on what works in terms of humor, and what ultimately distracts from the lessons that can be learned in using the ridiculous, when it doesn't have a greater purpose. In this case, I could see where he was going, but I don't really know if I fully agree w/him. Well, it wasn't that so much, it was more that I don't really care about "the availability of chocolate chalices through the UUA inspired one or more congregations to incorporate these edibles into the Sunday liturgy." That crossed the line for Mike. Yep, he was preeety pissed about that.
But the 2nd thing he broached was regarding the observation of millenialist, literalist Pxians. I think he made some pretty good points regarding his feelings on this. UUs try to be tolerant of other religions, so criticizing extremist Pxians is something I'm uncomfortable with.2 He zeroed in on this tendency, and I think was making another foré into his attack of extremism in any form. I think his thoughts on the matter are that there comes a point where you must put aside over-arching relativism and state that select reading of the bible/koran and that armeggedon & rapture fascination (and, of course, the rapture isn't in the bible) is ultimately futile and takes away from some of the greater lessons available in these select religious texts.
In a way, it was a little disturbing listening to this. Not overwhelmingly so, but it is as I first stated--my memories of religious services did not include priests bringing in the outer world. On the other hand, I was sort of exhilerated by it. It showed some balls, I guess, and I appreciate that. Now what I can do w/it, I have no idea. Arguing w/extremists with logic doesn't have a really great track record of succeeding.
And, of course, what I've written in the last 3 paragraphs have more to do w/my take on the minister than they do on the issues. Well, my feelings about extremist religious believers are not unknown to myself, or to mda, since we have talked about them at length. But I find it interesting that I have been analyzing the minister, instead of how this made me feel. Perhaps this is b/c I still stand outside this religion, no matter how much I get from it.3 And I think I like that.
1 I feel the need to state that I still have a problem with the words: service, church, sermon, & minister. Oh, and religion. That word was used a few times on Sunday, and I *did* roll my eyes. I guess it's the intersection between 'religion' and 'faith.' Then again, what do I have faith in? I have no idea. That's why the UUs appeal to me.
2 Does this mean I'm UU? Not yet. I still often refer to them as them, not "us" or "we". I think, rather, that I feel this way, and it seems to go along w/basic UU precepts.
3 Do I get a lot from it? Yeah, I do. I just have a reticence on bringing it up.
