This is my application of James 3:1-12. First, I had to interpret the culture of the passage and the passage itself. In this, I tried to step outside my own culture, interpret it, and then try to impose the principles in the passage onto my culture. I wrote it for a class.
~
My personal native culture places a strong emphasis on accomplishing personal success without sacrificing time to enjoy life’s pleasures. The people with whom I associate are generally at least middle class, have some political understanding, often share my religious beliefs, and have successful careers in a variety of professional arenas. Those who do not share my racial background often still share similar assimilation into American culture consisting of TV, sports, music, and movies while also maintaining firm views about which elements of this culture are best and worst. Most have fairly well-defined political views, too.
My culture enjoys a candid criticism of someone in politics, religion, society, or even family, who is bothersome or annoying.
In the case of James 3:1-12, James instructs Christians, both those who want to speak to the church and those who don’t, to reflect on the purity of their speech, particularly with reference to other people. Most of his instruction may seem agreeable to most people in my culture, but an outsider might notice a lot of incongruity between James’ commands and the speech patterns of many in my culture.
In my culture, a well-put complaint garners praise and agreement. On Facebook and in person, my friends and I often register our observations about other people. Now, most often, these are thankful, but sometimes, we bring up the mistakes of others in a critical or mocking way. These criticisms function as a type of ethical catharsis. We all feel like we have high standards and people’s mistakes that fall short should be reproved or at least announced. Doing this validates who we are, the choices we have made, and the goals we have for our future.
As long as the person we criticize isn’t a dear friend or associate of ours (or as long as we keep their name anonymous if they are), few in my culture would be personally shocked or offended by hearing or reading a rant against someone else (especially someone in the public realm). Moreover, if the person complaining did so humorously enough, others would praise and agree with him or her. The more profound and adept the complaint is, the more praise will follow. And the more successful a person is, the more likely people in my culture will readily accept the harsh critique of someone of whom the person does not approve.
James’ approach to speech would challenge this aspect of my culture. He does not tolerate a person blessing God and cursing people made in his image. While few of my friends and associates would go so far as to verbalize a desire to send someone to hell, the absence of any corresponding comments to moderate or balance their critique essentially defines the person by their flawed action. My culture often fails to admit that even seriously flawed people are made in God’s image. Moreover, they often ignore their own deep-seated personal shortcomings.
James’ admonition to examine everything one says as to whether it reflects back on one’s spiritual identity would lead to a great amount of verbal redaction if people in my culture were to fully obey it. If a person sees a flaw in someone else, the Christian response would more often entail a prayer on that person’s behalf or a private exhortation rather than a public rant.
Furthermore, if someone wants to be a church teacher, especially as a vocation, they must demonstrate a level of self-censorship not often practiced in my culture. It would serve a person well to elicit the views of other people, who could offer constructive criticism or advice to that person, on how well that person controls their tongue. It would also serve a congregation well to pay as much attention to a young person’s ability to control their speech as their ability to teach before commending that person to pursue a career in a church leadership position. It is not merely a person’s knowledge or ability to discern ideas that makes them spiritual, but their ability to know and discern their own motives, speech, and conduct.
