1. Comments on "James wondering whether poverty is ennobling, debasing, or irrelevant to the life of the spirit, and about whether society's material progress is a promise or a threat to that life." (Jesse's quote re: James essay, "What Makes a Life Significant.")...
Our affluent society is definitely a threat to the "religious" mind........as Jesus said, "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” - Matthew 19:24. This was in reply to the rich young ruler who inquired of him - his specific problem was attachment to his possessions, a distraction from his true spiritual life.
Some religious traditions emphasize this more than others. There is definitely a place for occasional fasting (from food, sex, or money) described in the New Testament. Hardship focuses the mind like almost nothing else. But this can be taken too far too. In the book of Proverbs it says:
"...give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that is needful for me, lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, “Who is the Lord?” or lest I be poor, and steal, and profane the name of my God." - Proverbs 30:8-9
...and Jesus also says: "For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon’; the Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.” Apparently, people were trying to discredit both of them by trying to find fault in their habits, but in fact this was just an avoidance tactic...they didn't like the words of these prophets regardless of whether they fasted or not.
2. Jesse's question: "..James asks what it means to assign attributes to "the universe." Is there anything meaningful we can say about the world as a whole, or does it only make sense to talk about specific parts of it? These are relevant questions for James's thinking about religion, which he describes in this week's Varieties reading as man's attitude toward "the divine," which he in turn describes as a force or entity that encompasses everything....Can one be religious without believing in an all-embracing unity?"
...an interesting question (will address definition of "religion" below)...in Judaism, (Islam, I think?) and Christianity, the concept of the divine is of an invisible Spirit and Mind that existed before creation and is the Author of creation. Hence the "force or entity that encompasses everything." A beautiful flower or animal or human or piece of music might so dramatically impact us that it feels religious, but all these things are parts of the creation, they all originated in the mind of the Creator who alone is worthy be worshipped as a god.
3. I was (pleasantly, from my perspective) surprised by Lecture 2 and James' definition of religion. It is more narrow than I was expecting, perhaps. His "gods" are to be "first in being and power" and have the last word of truth. Religion requires a serious state of mind (as opposed to a flippant, "devil-may-care" attitude). Grumbling and complaint are not welcomed. Tragedy can be purging of sins. Solemn, serious, tender. "Hearty" acceptance of the universe, joyful serving. "The Christian God is to be loved." We are to submit to the Eternal Good. "Infinitely passionate." "...adds to life an enchantment which is not rationally deduced."
All of the above is true of Christianity, but I'm not sure if it is all true of other religions as well...probably Judaism and Islam, but what about polytheisms? And will he be including Buddhism as "religion"? He mentions "Buddhist pessimism" (and Emersonian optimism!).
Hope I haven't written too much, this is all quite interesting.
Ruth