When sensation is what moves you; the want for gratification will consume you.
The problem with religion has always been that it creates a separate ruleset that supersedes a person’s moral behavior to the point that the nefariously minded could weaponize its usage. Rules are always relative as to how the perspective person perceived them and if they even follow rules to begin with. When people let religions and/or other ideologies supersede their own personal moral standings; they leave themselves vulnerable to mental, spiritual, and even physical attacks from predators unknowingly. While one pastor can be well respected and loved; that same pastor can permit predators to oversee children and some of the most vulnerable people in a simple fellow-ship without as much as a single vetting process or meeting to even know what the possible damage could be. The reason for this wildcard of potential danger from the pulpit is that per religious admission; there is no real vetting process other than the religious doctrine which could be taken far out of context into validating whatever notion the speaker is trying to pitch.
Many parishioners are regular class people with the only difference being that they tend to an essential function of the church and/or ministry. This little info is used as enough data to conclude that a person is a good or “OK” person in America; however, this information is far too little detail to get any context into anything about the person themselves. Being that people operate in layers it may be difficult to know what a person means. A person only means what they intend; never wjhat they reason.
What exact details gives context into a person from knowing of they’re a parishioner
How do you see things?
- Their perspective of;
- Their God
Some religions ascribe to a belief-set that demonizes politics down to the very topic whereas their members are afraid to even speak of politics in conversation at all. These parishioner may or may not feel obliged to engage into any politics what-so-ever; yet, even ministries persist of a large religious body that functions and behaves nearly identical to everything seen in politics from voting to campaigning and debates. Their independent view of religious figures, other parishioners, clergy, and politicians give a little insight into who they are a bit.
Knowing someone’s political stance shows you a bit of who they are regardless of good or bad and vice-versa. Most people that engage into politics accept some form of bad for the promise of a slightly better overall result understanding the risks. People that don’t engage in politics and yet participate are usually won over by their religious and/or non-political stances.
The most telling detail about them is their view of “The right way.” What they tell people is the correct way; the ways they comfortably exhibit in contrast to how they correct others; and if they believe it is OK for their superior to bend the rules.
What is the right way to you?
- What is their “right way”
- Do they correct others for not living by this way
- Do they live by this way
- Do they believe others should live this way
- Do they believe it is OK for their superiors to not live by said “right way” or deviate
- Do they believe it is OK for themselves or children to deviate or not live by this way.
One of the patterns I have noticed being both in and out of ministry and politics was the propensity to willfully “do wrong” or “sin” in loyalty to another parishioner and/or higher authority figure in a large populace against their proposed “law.” This simple disregard of law; when viewed using a larger scope of time context, shows us patterns of behavior that are induced by said “loyalty to parishioners/authority” from otherwise nefarious organizations politically; even in ministries that demonize politics. The absolute existence of corruption is within the reigns of these loyalties.
Where exactly does ethics come into play with such mystified context?
Ethics have no place in religion without it being at the center of the lessons. Anything else being the center rather God, spirits, or even the devil will be left up to interpretation which is highly mutable and can be weaponized as a tool of Ultimate Evil. When a person uses their own logic to reason and discern what is right from wrong rather than the spirits; the implications are that they themselves are responsible rather than their God. The existential threat as well as reality of it all is that depending on how much percentage of the pastor’s message is given to sensationalism; a congregation of unknowing are left open as empty canvasses to be given an impression of what, and how to be or think when that same desire for that feeling of sensationalism is triggered by someone or something else. This is why it is important that ethics rule first and religion and loyalty second; not the other way around.