Wednesday, September 21, 2022

What are the English Hobbit Names?


First of all, some of the readers of JRRT may know that none of the Hobbits in the original Westron (Shire dialect or not) is named what he's named in the pages of Lord of the Rings. Adûnaic is a language that to us would sound Oriental, and Westron is descended from it.

Tolkien has himself sufficiently analysed Samwise and Hamfast as "halfwit" and "stay-at-home" and some may recall that Frodo is - I would say a comprommise between the Latin and Danish forms of - Frotho or Frode, a king of Denmark or two kings of Denmark, the single or the second of which lived in the time of Caesar Augustus, the single or first of which hosted the grand-step-son of Odin and found out he was no god.

But what about Fredegar / Fatty, Peregrin / Pippin, Meriadoc / Merry?

If Frotho is a name from Gesta Danorum by Saxo Grammaticus and Frode from its Danish translation, there is also a Gesta Francorum, an older book, of which the main author is St. Gregory of Tours, but which continues into the times past where he left off, and that written by Fredegar of Tours. I am not sure whether Fredegar is a learned construct or a saint, but that is where Fredegar comes from. Fatty obviously needs no explanation, after he had been in certain dungeons, with lean diet, "Fatty no more" ...

Pippin is also a nearly self explanatory word, it is English for Apple-Seed, and perhaps Pippin is named like Sam Gamgee is acting somewhat in the vein of Johnny Appleseed. And his taste for beer matches Johnny Appleseed's affinity for cider and applejock. But what about Peregrin? There is a St. Peregrino Laziosi who was a cancer patient, is patron saint of cancer patients, and is probably the most known Servite Saint after the Seven Founders (most famous of whom is St. Alexius Falconieri). As St. Peregrine was healed from a cancer or infection in the leg just the last night before a leg amputation, he lived on to 85. Some learned men have said that that is a very fabulous age for the Middle Ages (though St. Alessio died at 109 or 110 years, born in 1200 and died in February 1310).

St. Merri or older spelling Merry is in Latin Meredicus - he was a hermit and abbot who died on Aug. 29th (decapitation of St. John) in AD 700. Obviously, as Tolkien points out, Merry was chosen as nickname because of the meaning "merry" but this doesn't preclude that he had seen or heard of the saint. If he found his distaste for the French by a hit-and-run car accident in Paris, he would probably have been able to see the Church of Saint-Merri.

Despite the fact Merry is used as nickname for Meriadoc, this is not a version of Medericus. A king and a saint are involved:

Conan Meriadoc, semi-mythical king of Brittany in Gaul
Meriasek, Breton saint, patron of Camborne


as the wiki said./HGL

PS : Happy Hobbit Day, Tolkien Fans!

Monday, September 19, 2022

Clumsy Salvaging of a Website


Here is a page that WebArchive saved:

https://web.archive.org/web/20051027013227/http://weisse-rose-stiftung.de/fkt_standard.php?aktion=cs&ma=cs&c_id=mamura&topic=033&mod=2&page=1&lang=de

But, when it came to the places where the text says "Weiter ..." it shows nothing.

So, most of the text of the site is lost.

Fortunately, the historic documents are still extant (as far as I know) and a similar site can be remade.

I can't do it, since I do not have access to the documents.

Someone else can./HGL

Friday, September 9, 2022

TOF Spot Has Some Tips on Writing


Scrivening :
1: It Came from Schenectady

2: Entitlement
3: Another Fine Mess
4: Getting Info Out of the Dumps
5: Embodiment
6: Just One Dang Thing After Another
7: Who was that Character I Saw You With Last Night?

Since TheOFloinn has written in September and therefore is still alive, and since he has not resumed this series since May, it is probably something like complete./HGL

Tuesday, September 6, 2022

Un peu davantage sur CSL et ses leçons de culture


Répliques Assorties : Certains mots n'éclairent pas l'esprit : exemple "paralittérature" · Φιλολoγικά / Philologica : Un peu davantage sur CSL et ses leçons de culture

Le soir que j'avais écrit mon refus de respecter un démarcage entre "littérature" et "paralittérature" je vois quelqu'un avec un T-shirt qui disait :

NEVER GROW UP


En principe, ça pourrait être une coïncidence fortuite, voir un acte de la Providence. En statistiques, ça m'arrive un peu trop pour que j'y crois.

CSL avait un jour à s'occuper de la question de gens qui trouvaient enfantile de lire des contes de fées. Il remarquait que pour un adolescent, c'est assez utile de se sentir concerné par sa maturation mais pour un adulte, ce ne l'est plus. Et n'ayant pas à prouver qu'on est adulte, on est libre à lire les contes de fées qu'on veut. Quelqu'un en Suède (ne sachant peut-être pas la source) à voulu répliquer que "Puttes äventyr i blåbärsskogen" ne se lit pas très bien par un adulte. J'avais cru que c'était un livre pour enfants sur une simple cueillette de myrtilles, sans plus. Intéressant pour un garçon de cinq, même pas trop pour quelqu'un de neuf. Erreur. Le livre est par Elsa Beskow, le genre d'écrivaine dont un personnage peut donner le nom pour un café, et il met en scène des thématiques comme un lutin bienfaisant et la diminution du garçon en lutin. Ou plutôt, en taille de lutin.

Le Suédois en question devrait donc être un cas de ce que CSL considérait comme des adolscents attardés.

Présumons encore que celui qui portait le T-shirt m'avait visé, même si ça ne se laisse pas prouver (de mes observations). Il pourrait donc l'avoir fait parce que CSL est surtout connu pour Le Monde de Narnia, et ceci depuis les films de Walden média. Lire CSL serait donc, selon l'idéologie qu'il fustige, enfantile. Déjà, le premier livre qu'il écrit dans la série, il le dédie à une filleule, s'excuse pour avoir attendu trop longtemps, elle est déjà trop grande pour les contes de fées, mais ajoute qu'un jour viendra qu'elle sera suffisamment grande pour recommencer de les lire. Donc, déjà là, c'est mal visé.

Mais en plus, si CSL valorisait lui-même les sept chroniques de Narnia plus que son autre œuvre, celle-ci ne se limitait pas à livres pour enfants. Il y a ces sept livres, pour enfants, il y a sept autre livres à taille de roman, pour adultes, ou huit si on compte le roman épistolaire sur la prière, il y a deux livre d'autobiographie non fictionnelle, avant et après sa femme, il y a des grands essais et il y a de collections de petits essais. Et comme il remarquait dans un des chroniques de Narnia, "je n'ai jamais entendu parler de quelqu'un qui veut lire les rédactions" - en anglais, on dit "essay" que ce soit un essai qu'on a choisi d'écrire sur un thème qu'on tient au cœur ou que ce soit une rédaction où le prof à laissé le choix entre certains thèmes. Mais ses essais, à lui, ça se lit.

Alors, comment a-t-il approché l'écriture pour des enfants? Il l'a évoqué dans un contexte où on avait posé la question à partir de sa réussite sur les sept chroniques de Narnia.

Il y a selon lui, trois manières d'écrire pour enfants.

Un pédagogue peut avoir l'ambition de faire passer une leçon à un certain tranche d'âge. Il s'informe chez des professionnels quel est le leçon que cette tranche d'âge nécessite, il étudie ce qui est écrit pour cette tranche d'âge, il se met à la tâche. CSL considère cette manière comme vouée à produire des médiocrités, et en plus, même si quelqu'un pourrait faire quelque chose de bien dedans, lui, il ne le pourrait pas.

Un auteur peut être l'ami d'un enfant concret. J. M. Barrie (si je ne me trompe pas) avait échangé avec un garçon de manière d'élargir et d'encore élargir une histoire, jusqu'à ce qu'elle devienne assez longue. A. A. Milne basait Christopher Robin sur son propre fils, Christopher Robin Milne. Rien de tel non plus pour CSL, même s'il trouvait la méthode largément supérieur à d'écrire pour des enfants théorisés.

Il y a, selon lui, encore une manière. On peut écrire un récit pour enfants* parce que le récit pour enfants et la forme qui correspond la mieux à ce qu'on a à dire. Genre comme un poëte peut écrire une sonnette ou un compositeur une sonate parce que c'est ce qui correspond à son intention artistique. Car, le récit pour enfants est une forme spécifique avec ses limitations et donc aussi ses potentialités très spécifiques. Pas de sexe, on n'est pas là pour corrompre. Pas d'analyse psychologique très poussée. Aventure prime sur dialogue ou description.

Et tel était son cas. Certains méprisent ce genre de forme parce que le manque de sexe ne serait bon que pour les pré-ados, ou parce que l'analyse psychologique doit être incisive. CSL n'était pas d'accord avec ça, moi non plus. Je pense vraiment pouvoir réussir ma nuit de noces, si on ne continue pas à me harceler, sans de lire D. H. Lawrence. Et je suis encore davantage sûr que les analyses trop incisives donnent une vision de la vie trop noire. CSL est un homme qui m'a donné sa culture. Et des hommes qui la veulent remplacer avec la leur, c'est la mauvaise fortune de ma vie.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Zacharie
et mon anniversaire
6.IX.2022

* En VO, il ne s'agit pas de "children's book" mais de "children's story" ...

Monday, August 29, 2022

More than One Brand of Fascism


Wrangel - or What's Right With Fascism · Jasenovac - or what is wrong with "Fascism" · More than One Brand of Fascism

Between Austrian members of NSDAP and Austrian members of the Austro-Fascist Régime, a coalition between the Christian Social Party and the Heimwehr, who killed Bettauer?

Maximilian Hugo Bettauer* (18 August 1872 – 26 March 1925) was a prolific Austrian writer and journalist, who was murdered by a [??] follower on account of his opposition to antisemitism. He was well known in his lifetime; many of his books were bestsellers and in the 1920s a number were made into films, most notably Die freudlose Gasse (The Joyless Street, directed by Georg Wilhelm Pabst, 1925), which dealt with prostitution, and Die Stadt ohne Juden (The City Without Jews, directed by Hans Karl Breslauer, 1924), a satire against antisemitism.


I have omitted the party designation.

The Nazis branded Bettauer* a "Red poet" and "corruptor of youth", and an Austrian party member published a series of articles calling for "radical self help" and "lynch justice against all polluters of our people".[3] On 10 March 1925, a dental technician named Otto Rothstock shot Bettauer several times.[3] He was taken to hospital in Vienna with serious injuries and died on 26 March 1925. He was cremated at Feuerhalle Simmering, where also his ashes are buried.


Seems some of both wanted people like Bettauer lynched. On the one side THE Nazis, on the other side ONE member OF the "Austrian Party" - here a misnomer for back then Christian Social party, of which Austrian Party is a post-War successor. But what was the loyalty of Otto Rothstock?

As a young member of various different political parties, Rothstock** was enraged by Bettauer's newspapers that he claimed to be pornographic. On March 10, 1925, Rothstock entered Bettauer's office and shot him five times at point-blank range. Hugo Bettauer died on March 26, 1925, from his wounds.

At his trial, Rothstock justified what he had done as necessary to save European culture from the menace of degeneration. His lawyer, Walter Riehl, (himself a National Socialist functionary) argued that his client was guilty but insane, with which the jury agreed. However, within twenty months Rothstock was released as “cured” from a mental hospital.[3] A fair amount of money was collected from the general public for him.[4]

Rothstock was an unrepentant Nazi. In a 1977 interview on the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, Rothstock reportedly boasted of Bettauer's "extinction".[5]


In other words, the killer was a National Socialist.

Heinrich Schenker died 1935, under Austrofascism. His widow Jeannette died 1945, under National Socialism. How did each die?

Schenker*** died on 14 January 1935, age 66 at 2 AM, the cause of death listed as diabetes and arteriosclerosis. He was buried on 17 January at the Wiener Zentralfriedhof, Gate 4, Group 3, Series 4, number 8.[55] The inscription on his grave reads: "Hier ruht, der die Seele der Musik vernommen, ihre Gesetze im Sinne der Großen verkündet wie Keiner vor ihm" (Here lies he who examined and revealed the laws concerning the soul of music like none other before him).

Jeanette Schenker stayed in Vienna after the Anschluss. She was rescued twice from the Nazis before being arrested and transported on 29 June 1942. She died in Theresienstadt on 8 January 1945.[56]


I think it is pretty safe to say, Austrofascism was lots healthier for Jews than National Socialism was.

But which one of them did Jews like better?

In einem Brief an seinen° Schüler Felix-Eberhard von Cube begrüßte er am 14. Mai 1933 den politischen Aufstieg Hitlers als Zeichen einer kulturellen Umkehr.


In a letter to the pupil Felix-Eberhard von Cube, on the 14th of May 1933, he saluted the political rise of Hitler as a sign for a cultural revolution.

On the other hand, the one occasion in which Austrofascists on a larger scale got "physical" with Jews were fistfights where Heimwehr punched Jews for insulting the memory of Dollfuss. So, Jews had insulted Dollfuss, so probably were not as fond of Austrofascism.

And as for doctors ...

"Nach einer wochenlangen Medienkampagne gegen Bettauer schoss der 21-jährige Zahntechniker Otto Rothstock"
"On 10 March 1925, a dental technician named Otto Rothstock shot Bettauer several times."

Or the tombstone of Hans Tita Probst in Graz:

New blog on the kid : I thank the Cemetery of Graz
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2014/01/i-thank-cemetery-of-graz.html


Please note, I did not thank the cemetary of Graz most for honouring the probable last wishes of HTP, but - here is my reason:

Thanks to this, it may at last be known outside Austria too that this man, who has a Swastika and not any Cross on his grave, whose headstone features no Cross even for the date of his death (and no star for the date of his birth, just "24.3.1897 - 27.7.1934", no star and no cross), who died in the July Putsch of 1934, who was a comrade thus with the other Nazi who killed Dollfuss, who was an SA Sturmbannführer, and who was called Hans Tita Probst, was a Medical Doctor and thus likely to have been in life an Atheist or Pantheist, but at least no Catholic Christian. Unless there was a cross above the piece shown in the picture. Even so, it is likely as with Georges Lemaître he was getting more of his worldview from non-Christian, non-Catholic sources than from orthodoxly Catholic ones.

In Austria, Nazis were progressives, precisely like Social Democrats. Austrofaschists were Reactionaries.

As a Reactionary Austrofaschist, I am thankful it be known that Hans Tita Probst, Sturmbannführer and Medical Doctor, was shot by Austrofaschist either police or military or Heimwehr. Thanks for proving I am not a Nazi! Es war sehr schön, es hat mich sehr gefreut!


Unfortunately, the article I linked to in 2014, is down. You will have to trust my honesty as to not have invented the parts I now cite, and my judgement as to not have extrapolated Hans Tita Probst as being medical doctor for no reason at all.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Decapitation of St. John the Baptist
29.VIII.2022

PS, as I mentioned medical personnel, how about this, here:

Schenker's*** father was a doctor who had been allowed to settle in Wiśniowczyk, a village of only 1,759 inhabitants, according to the 1869 census.


* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Bettauer

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Rothstock

*** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Schenker

° https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Schenker

Friday, August 12, 2022

Three are the things, I thought of in Tolkien lore


Well, actually lots more than three things as per my entire life, but these three lately, from my rereading of LotR.

1) Apparent double plot hole - but just apparent.

Let's take four scenes, which do not quite seem to add up, at a certain glance:

a) In Lothlorien, when leaving, the company are given cloaks, with the fairly obvious impression it is one per person, not more.
b) When Sam and Frodo leave, one of them says to destroy the boats, and the other says to leave one for themselves.
c) When Boromir is "buried", both cloaks are used to make him a bier and a boat (not leaking) to get him downstreams the river, hoping his corpse makes it to Gondor.
d) When the three runners, an elf and a dwarf and a man, make a certain pause, their elven cloaks are mentioned.

Now, this is the kind of thing that an editor would spot as plot holes and badger Tolkien to change, if they were of the modern kind that Jenna Moreci loves. And they would certainly not have allowed him plurals like "elves" and "dwarves" or an adjective like "elven" or a sentence like "helms too they chose" ... and as back then conlanging was not a thing, they might have cut down text blocks in Quenya or Sindarin very drastically. But back to the plot hole. One on which the editors would have concluded "why the epic burial scene - that's where the contradictions cluster!"

The most glaring part is the boats, and I can frankly find no better explanation than Frodo or Sam saying they were going to make holes and yet not doing that, and Tolkien forgetting to mention they changed their mind or forgot in the hurry.

Leaves the cloaks. I had thought of the fact, all of the company already had other cloaks before arriving in Lorien, so, they used the other cloaks for Boromir's burial. But the more obvious solution is, they didn't leave the cloaks with Boromir in the boat, except his own, they took them off the bier once the burial was done, and back onto their backs.

One use of Tolkien fandom is obviously a training ground for apologetics in the face of supposed Bible contradictions.

2) Between Middle-Earth and Narnia ...

I once made a list of 40 parallels between Tolkien and CSL, specifically Narnia. It included Etten Moors and Ettinsmoor, it included giants throwing stones for fun, and the travelleRRRs being a lot safer if they had been aiming at them, and quite a lot more.

Here are two. That the Wood between the Worlds owes something to Lothlorien, is pretty obvious - it may even have been on my list of fourty, one which I have long since lost.

But consider what would have happened to Galadriel if she had taken the ring - I'm sure I missed this one : it's Jadis. Galadriel even is kind of a giant, compared to Aragorn and Boromir ... Jadis is specified as being 7 foot tall (English feet). And Jadis is, three times over, "Galadriel, but having taken the ring" ... the last and most obvious time being when she stole an apple of immortality, but before that, in the world of Charn, she was so at least twice over, both when acquiring a secret and when using it - the secret of the Deplorable Word.

3) What is Tom Bombadil again ...?

Precisely as the (sometimes dreaded) Susan-fiction is the big fanfic in Narnia related fanfics, so what Tom Bombadil is, is arguably the great fan debate.

Now, let's start with a clue outside the lore of Middleearth, but close to Tolkien. Some guys have figured, The Green Knight was what was considered by anthropologists of religion a genius loci or some such stuff, and that Tom Bombadil was the same type of not quite defined in Christian theology supernatural. I am not denying that. Or the inlore idea he (like Ungoliant) could be parts of the music taking bodily shape (he for music of good ainur, Ungoliant for Melkor's discords) ... but there is another point.

The shapeshifter Beorn was very close to a genius loci too. See his relation to the Carrock.

And there are more parallels. There are hospitalities that are so simply earthy they are mundane. Bilbo's to the dwarves, Merry's and Fatty's to the three from Hobbiton, Farmer Maggott's and Butterbur's to the hobbits ... then there are those that are, if not elven, at least elfin, though in an earthy manner, in as much contrast with Rivendell or Lorien as Farmer Maggott to that of King Theoden. And there are two of these, Beorn and Tom Bombadil. I am now going to suggest, that as much as the bear was Beorn's "totem" so Tom Bombadil had another animal, whether or not he was shapeshifter or even mortal (Beorn had died before the main action of LotR, Tom Bombadil seems immortal).

There is an animal that can have its fur described by sometimes "yellow boots" and sometimes "blue coat" ... it doesn't wear hats, but on the head something can tickle like a feather. And the soles of what it has instead of feet certainly feel like leather.

It has different sounds, but one of them is a somewhat earthy, not at all aetheric, "song" which can send listeners to sleep.

It can bring the loved ones gifts that are decidedly not to normal human tastes. Confer how Tom Bombadil brings waterlilies - that means nenuphars, a flower bigger than most, but a small part of a plant, most of which is wet and muddy if you take it from one pond to another alive - the big leaves that lie on the water are wet on the lower side and the root of each is a yard long or more, reaching down to the muddy bottom of a pond.

The animal is decidedly "master" - if it jumps, it's not likely to land stumbling. But also prefers a territory with fixed limits and even witdrawing into limits even more fixed. Also known for great agility, like Tom and Goldberry show when serving. It is also known for being more casual than faithfully attached - it's perhaps from fidelity to Goldberry that he refrains from shapeshifting.

It is good at surviving getting wet but doesn't opt for the experience, and that is very harmonious with what Adventures of Tom Bombadil tells us, and at least two of the three animals he teases there are animals that this animal would also tease.

And Tom Bombadil is decidedly the happiest couple with Goldberry, even the happiest as an individual - as well as longlived - take an animal with a folklore reputation for longevity (veterinarians need not agree) and where in one language, its name is nearly homophonous with happy ...

On top of that, a poem about the animal says each individual has three names - a practical name (I think Tom is mentioned) and a bombastic name (Bombadil is not mentioned, but clearly fits styles like Quaxo), and a secret name (we don't get Tom Bombadil's secret name, because it is secret).

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Claire of Assisi
12.VIII.2022

PS - I had forgotten a third earthy-elfin hospitality that was not elven in Tolkien's sense : how Merry and Pippin are received by Treebeard and Quickbeam in Fangorn. So, Beorn to bears, Treebeard to trees, Tom Bombadil to x - or else x just was an inspiration for his character ...

Thursday, August 11, 2022

Do We Need Other Editors?


I on and off listen to Jenna Moreci, and the last video I heard, she displayed some lack of culture on part of the editors she knows.

Let's take a less big deal first, just to warm us up. She denies that an author can honestly and competently arrive at his book being more than one genre. She claims those who think so are taking everything rather than the basic plotline into account.

However, cross-over genres exist. Fantasy, for instance, is a recent cross-over between modern novel and romance / epic. Especially in the stages where supernatural elements were added for fun, rather than because they were believed to be historical (in this sense, closer to certain Arthuriana than to Homer, for instance).

If you decided to make a novel sized and novel style managed version of Camaralzaman, would you define it as fantasy, because the love interest is a Jinn, or as a love story, because what he does with the Jinn is fall in love with her? I'd go for both. Similar observations can be made about the European stories where the bride is not completely human ...

But, to the main point, and I am doing a detour, by 9th City District of Vienna, Alsergrund. There is a certain stair that is called Strudlhofstiege there. It is a monumental stair. Now, imagine a very modern architect, imagine he was building some time in the 70's (a fairly low ebb for architectonic beauty), but he was building a stair on a fairly broad hillside. He replicated the general form of Strudlhofstiege, but exchanged every detail that was harmonious for something more of a broken harmony, and on top of that painted the whole shebang in rainbow colours. Could he claim to have completed a piece of monumental architecture? Yes. It has nothing to do with whether he succeeded in making it beautiful or even deliberately tried to make it ugly. It is not a totally utilitarian stair, but one with bigger and more symmetric arrangements than a stair actually needs to allow people to get up and down. Hence, it is a monumental stair, he is a monumental architect. However ugly he managed to deprave this genre of architecture in this case.

Some may guess where this is going.

Jenna Moreci (it's not just a private person, it's a published author, THE SAVIOR'S CHAMPION, THE SAVIOR'S SISTER, soon upcoming, THE SAVIOR'S ARMY) took an example (again, not a private conversation, but a public video on advice on how to become a published author, or in this case more how not to spoil your chances), and this example was a man who considered his works as being similar to Homer and Beowulf. She found two faults. A, claiming to be an "epic" writer is self praise, so totally arrogant, B, if the claim is anywhere near true, the genre is dead.

I'll deal with both, and first A.

What does it take for a narrative poem to be in the ballpark of Homer and Beowulf?

  • 1) It should be written in self-similar, variedly repeating, verses, of a sufficient number - the Odyssey is over 12 000 hexameters long and Beowulf is, while much shorter, at least 1/4 of that, but counted in Anglo-Saxon verse (3182 long verses*) - each versification, like the Sloka and the Catafractic verse, being capable of lots of variation, while still being recognisable, as you are doing a specific thing to the speech rhythm;
  • 2) It should describe recurring characters and situations in recurring formulas (the genre was originally meant for oral recitation, and while bis repitita placent, they also stick into memory better);
  • 3) It should, whether the ending be happy or horrible for the character of sympathy, deal with people high up like royalty and with serious situations, like such occurring at war, at voyages among dangers, possibly monsters, and with murderous intrigues, and it should kill off someone horribly, at least a baddy);
  • 4) It should have a unity of action that allows for a diversity of episodes, contrasting with the main action (if it just features the main action, it's an epyllion);
  • 5) It should avoid psychoanalysis, except perhaps at a level that can be easily comprehended in terms of supernatural influences (the setting should also be pre-modern or at least an archaic setting within the modern world).


If all these requirements are met, yes, it can very arguably be an epic. It can very arguably be close to Homer, close to Virgil or close to Beowulf.

And it can still be bad. There are several reasons why a project to make an epic could fail:

  • 1) author is more steeped in another genre than the epic (note, Tolkien and CSL never actually tried writing full length epics, they preferred the fantasy novel, which is another genre, perhaps because they were aware of ultimately owing more to George McDonald and to William Morris than to Homer and the anonymous Beowulf poet) and it shows too much;
  • 2) author takes a theme that doesn't really fit epic poetry, like a too recent war still arousing partisan passions;
  • 3) author takes a theme that is at least at a tension with epic poetry and prefers doing justice to the theme over doing so to the genre;
  • 4) author has no sense of rhythm, and only counts syllables, not even noting where the mid-line pause should be;
  • 5) author starts off well, and from the first parts of the story, by the time he reaches the end he is in a time pinch and rushing the narrative into bare outlines.


Or the setting could be a specific historic one which he hasn't at all mastered, like he is giving Vikings helmets with horns on them - and everyone who knows Viking helmets will bite their tongue over reciting a passage where he considers a Viking has a horned helmet.

Or he is trying to do away with history as a basis - that's more Romance than Epic.

Or he's too goodnatured to do the obligatory dastard really well. Yes, both Homeric epics, the one by Virgil, and Beowulf feature some major dastards, and Mahabharata and Ramayana are no exception.

So, claiming it is "like Homer and Beowulf" doesn't mean claiming it is good as they are good, it is just the description of the genre. Precisely as the modern architect who mistreated the Strudlhofstiege as a model for sth very non-baroque, has the right to call it monumental architecture, without that being self praise.

The other claim was, it is a dead genre. Verse drama, verse romance (usually rhymed and with shorter lines than the epic) and verse epic are indeed what one could call "non-current" forms. Verse drama was recently revived in French, by an author loving Catafractic verses, and dealing with the Second Siege of Vienna. I'm not sure whether it has or ever will be performed. But it is there in print.

Now, just because a form is non-current, one cannot conclude it is dead. If a form was current two years ago, and suffered 4 flops and no success since then, yes, in that case the form may be for the moment not just non-current, but dead as a doornail. An inept author or two or three just beat it to death. But for non-current forms to be revived is rather a kind of staple in the history of literature, drama, music and related, even architecture and sculpture. Heard of the Renaissance?

So, there are some culturally challenged people that Jenna Moreci is adressing as editors. I'm not saying her editors need to go, just, we need other ones. Fortunately, in a free society, becoming an editor does not require a specific licence from the ministry of culture, it requires the licence from your town to open an enterprise.

If you are interested, you can be the next editor tomorrow ... and if you don't know whom you would edit, try asking Jenna about the guy who described the genre of his work as close to Homer and to Beowulf.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
St. Clare of Assisi
11.VIII.2022

* It can be noted, Tolkien actually didn't quite class Beowulf as an epic, but more like an elegy - a poem of grief or mourning. The shortness may have contributed.

Saturday, August 6, 2022

If "The First Resurrection" is spiritual and from AD 33, is all of Apocalypse 20 true?


War of 14 a Rehearsal for Harmageddon? · Do Macron and Merkel Know the History of World War I? · If "The First Resurrection" is spiritual and from AD 33, is all of Apocalypse 20 true?

And I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit, and a great chain in his hand.

Until He assumed His human nature, any appearance of Him, as when He had a boxing match with Jacob, and finished calling him Israel because he had "fought with God" - the key we are told is in Christ's hand and I do not know what the chain is.

And he laid hold on the dragon the old serpent, which is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.

Before Calvary, the dragon could offer Him all kingdoms, before Assumption, He could say He had all power in Heaven and on Earth.

The Earth's rightful spiritual king has already ended the power of Satan to usurp the earthly kingdom. However, this is not quite still the case the last 3 and 1/2 before He returns.

And he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should no more seduce the nations, till the thousand years be finished. And after that, he must be loosed a little time.

Romans didn't get worse in religion after AD 33, Jews didn't end up worse than the Pharisee generation Jesus had to oppose, and one nation after another, first a few thousand Jews making the Church grow from a club to a nation, then Romans in 313, Armenians a bit earlier, and a chain reaction of nation conversions after that means Satan had much less power than after Babel, when he introduced idolatry.

And I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

The endtimes beast and its image could be morally identical to lots of other seductions of powers, by which evil rulers before the Antichrist will have tried to give Satan back some of the power he lost.

Also, we could be talking of some OT saints who had been martyred before Satan was bound, like when he made some powerful Jews too certain Isaiah was a false prophet - or too certain they could bear a true prophet even less. Back then, Satan had "full powers" and equal or greater to when he gets loosed "at the end of the thousand years"

But if this is "a stretch", (meaning too much of one) the alternative is, the Millennium is upcoming, the ones on the thrones are bodily resurrected.

The rest of the dead lived not, till the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

1) The rest of those who died didn't really live, didn't enjoy reigning in Heaven, before the thousand years were over - the martyrs could include all saints, and the hesitation to accept non-martyr saints was very probably reasoned from this one - the rest endure rather than enjoy, even if they are not damned, namely in Purgatory;
2) the martyrs could in fact include all saints and all faithful departed - except the part that stay in Purgatory up to the general resurrection, and then go to Heaven, after the thousand years. Not only do non-martyr saints, but also uncanoniseable ones that spend a few days in Purgatory share the essential dignity of the martyrs, and therefore when the non-canonisables leave Purgatory they are added to this number - the rest of the dead refer then to very sad cases who will "remain in Purgatory to the end of time" (one of them c. 105 + years ago, from the Fatima region, forget which of the seer children asked Our Lady, and also the damned, who will not really be living even after their bodies are permanently raised;
3) or, again, if this is too much of a stretch, the Millennium could be upcoming.

Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ; and shall reign with him a thousand years.

This verse was totally the go to point for St. Augustine arguing we are in the Millennium, not waiting for it.

First death bodily, second death (a few seconds later? or however long it takes before God judges!) damnation.

Obviously as long as a man is in a state of grace, he is not going to be damned, and if he dies in a state of grace, he cannot get damned.

Reigning with Christ, like souls of martyrs under the altar of heaven, are doing now.

And when the thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go forth, and seduce the nations, which are over the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, and shall gather them together to battle, the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Some might argue the process of seduction here described began in AD 1033 when Normans and Byzantines quarrelled over Sicily, Byzantines believing they could hire people to do hard, bloody things that take a lot of getting used to before you do them well and that not leaving them unscathed, and yet not pay them, because they had enjoyed the honour of fighting for the Basileus and for Christendom. If so, the process of the loosing of Satan is slow, and still ongoing, and I am seeing both results of it and efforts to make it worse.

Gog and Magog at the four corners of dry land (Eretz in Hebrew is called the same as Eretz meaning earth - when you are welling to make statements like "the earth floats on the waters" you are telling us how dry land looks from the sea and limiting "earth" to just dry land and considering big seas as "outer space" ... a comprehensible terminology, if not the common one), very definitely was not yet in 1033. In our times there are some ethnic entities that can be described as existing in (beginning from North East corner, clockwise for them that look at the map) 1) Kamchatka, 2) Singapore-Sydney or Hobart, 3) Cape Horn or the more inhabited nearby lands in the South tip of Chile and Argentina, 4) and facing 1: Alaska. These groups are: 1) Whites, 2) Indo-Europeans, Yamnaya heritage, 3) Russians, 4) Anglo-Saxons or Germanics, 5) Ashkenazi Jews.

It is certain from another passage Jews will be at the four corners, namely where conversions are coming from, Apocalypse 7. Will converted Jews be Israelites and unconverted Christianity haters Magog? Or will they just be neighbours of and misunderstood or overpampered abetters or pseudo-abetters for some other nation doing the persecution inwards from the corners?

Unconverted Jews are besieging Christians and Muslims in East Jerusalem.

This verse is a fairly overwhelming argument that yes, the Millennium began in 33, because we see signs of its end!

The 3 and a 1/2 years could well be what Magog seduction is the general preparation of.

So, this verse is definitely compatible with us being not waiting for Millennium, but for general resurrection and judgement.

And they came upon the breadth of the earth,

The ethnicities described are not just present at Kamchatka, Hobart, Cape Horn and Alaska, but many other parts of the inhabited lands as well. A place where all are lacking could be termed wilderness. This process has gone on - if St. Augustine read well - since Columbus. Part of its meaning was of course Apocalypse 7 (understanding original inhabitants of Alaska as spiritual Israelites, once converted), but part of its outcome is what follows:

and encompassed the camp of the saints,

Don't you say so, Calvin! And Gustav Wasa, some Swedish Catholics have felt very encompassed since you! Guess St. Thomas More felt very uncomfortable a few weeks in the vicinity of Henry VIII.

And Voltaire, what atrocities have they not committed in your name!

Darwin, some clear non-Magogians felt both encompassed and naked since you changed the view one had on them.

Marx, falsifier of social justice, Brecht, falsifier of King Solomon's judgement ... some of your readers are clearly encompassing ... for instance Catholics.

and the beloved city.

Well, yes, East Jerusalem has had this feeling since ... 1947, 48? Perhaps 67?

And there came down fire from God out of heaven, and devoured them; and the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire and brimstone, where both the beast And the false prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Not happened yet, but since close to previous chapter content, again a point for St. Augustine. SHALL BE. If this came 1000 years after these two were cast there, it might have been "were already" for "shall" - but for those disagreeing with St. Augustine, it could be a clumsy Greek translation of the Hebrew "imperfect" which is "past continuous, present continuous, future continuous" in main clauses and in subsidiare ones takes on added nuances of "contemporary action, subsequent action" and the meaning would have been that Hell wasn't over yet for those two guys.

And I saw a great white throne, and one sitting upon it, from whose face the earth and heaven fled away, and there was no place found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing in the presence of the throne, and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and hell gave up their dead that were in them; and they were judged every one according to their works. And hell and death were cast into the pool of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the pool of fire.

All of this is equally true whether the "end of the thousand years" comes at or 1000 years after the "end of the 1260 days" - whether the general judgement coincides with the second coming (St. Augustine) or arrives 1000 years later. But it is also a truth to ponder - not just to use as probe between Augustine and Justin.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Transfiguration of Christ
6.VIII.2022

Friday, July 29, 2022

Jasenovac - or what is wrong with "Fascism"


Wrangel - or What's Right With Fascism · Jasenovac - or what is wrong with "Fascism" · More than One Brand of Fascism

To many in the West, the word Fascism refers to a movement rejecting both Marxist revolutions and Capitalistic laissez-faire with exploitation, and usually excluding Social Demcracy which can also be so described, but which has some Marxist roots and therefore also agendas, like Feminism.

In this sense, I am a Fascist, and, as said, count Wrangel as one of the earliest.

However, in Eastern Europe, the word is used in another way. It basically means in former Communist countries "Hitler and his allies" and the focus is on walking over extant frontiers during World War II and also human rights violations.

I think, the word used this way should be replaced by the phrase "Hitler and his allies" - but I am not holding my breath for Serbs to replace Ustasha as "allies of Hitler" (or directly Ustasha) rather than simply as "Fascists" or for Poles to concede that Pilsudski's later years were a fairly typical Fascism (the way I and some in the West use the word) when they have so many neighbours using the word in a very different way.

In World War II, Francisco Franco was not an ally of Hitler. He was not an ally of the Ustasha. But usually he is termed Fascist dictator. And Dollfuss was killed, Schuschnigg was made captive on Hitler's orders or with his approval. Yet, they are called Austrofascists.

I think three of the Fascisms actually went bad, all three allied in World War II : Hitler's, Mussolini's and the Ustasha. I obviously appreciate that Tudjman preferred Franco over the Ustasha. Hitler's NSDAP went bad basically when it started, it was as obsessed with race as New England secularised Puritans (Lovecraft is a good story-teller, according to some, but would not make a good politician). Mussolini went from good to bad about when he changed preferences for Austrofascism into preferences for Hitler - which was after a fairly good first 15 years or so. And Ustasha went bad pretty quickly after getting to power - the Independent state was founded in 1941 6th of April and Jasenovac opened in August same year. So, of the three which went bad, only the Italian one had been good before.

When it comes to Pétain, I am not sure he ever wanted simply to save Jews, but he actually did so, because he did want the Free Zone to be, well, free ... and then in 1942, he was forced to start the Laval government, which was bad. What do you expect of someone a puppet régime of Hitler, once he starts shortening the strings? In my teens and twenties, I put Mussolini here too, I thought he only went bad with the Salò Republic (when he was a puppet régime), but, unfortunately, letting Schuschnigg down in 1938 and issuing the Carta della Razza in 1937, perhaps endorsing the use of gas against Ethiopian civilians even earlier, no, not quite good in the end on his own either. But he had been better before - giving the Church back some of its rights, ending the Communist revolutionary moves of Biennio Rosso, forcing factory owners to pay properly and not to overwork workers ... he started out at the very least OK.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Olaf's day
29.VII.2022

Wednesday, July 20, 2022

Ian N. Mills (Duke University) Wrote on Pagan Readers of Christian Literature


Fascinating reading. Did you know scholars had fairly long followed a stray remark by Tertullian (counterposed by one other remark of his) to prove Pagans didn't read the Bible?

A few other scholars had started to answer that actually NT books have quite a few apologetic features (which would be useless if authors - Ian Mills may be thinking of successive co-authors, I'd disagree, but such also would have written before Constantine, ex hypothesi, and still have to be counting on being read by non-Christians). Ian Mills adds the testimony of six men - among whom Sts Clement the Stromatist and Justin stick out to me, and then also Tatian in connection with a recent dialogue - who converted after reading. It's not until page 16/27 on the pdf that I find something I find a need to disagree with:

"There is no doubt that all the autobiographic narratives so far recounted reflect an unrealistically intellectualized account of Christian conversion."


Why?

If the point is, not all conversions are primarily intellectual adventures, I'd agree. But that's not to the point. The six people who did convert in this manner would be a drop in the sea against lots who converted for other reasons, perhaps. But the character of the study Ian Mills undertook, namely finding ex-pagans who became Christians on reading, would concentrate precisely this part of the conversions overall to his study. Girls who found Jesus on the Cross more romantic than a fat man of fifty selected by her father who needs the money and thinks he can push her because he's pagan, and suddenly finds out that as Christian 12 year old Barbara or Lucy disagrees would for instance clearly be outside this study. People plagued by a dissonance between a longing for purity and an ability to extract themselves from a non-wife lover's arms until hearing a bishop tell stories of saints, and having come to study under that bishop only for his rhetoric skills, equally. A friendly man to the poor who was chasing and saw a Cross and a Crucified between two antlers of a deer is also not quite the object of ...

Pagan Readers of Christian Scripture: The Role of Books in Early Autobiographical Conversion Narratives
Ian N Mills
https://www.academia.edu/40840640/Pagan_Readers_of_Christian_Scripture_The_Role_of_Books_in_Early_Autobiographical_Conversion_Narratives


... which is what I am now reading.

Some more examples who did read Bible parts before converting and did write autobiographies might be there, but they mainly converted for some other reason, and so left it out. The exact autobiography type which is the most likely to contain a prolonged (and therefore unambiguous) reference to reading Bible parts prior to converting, is that of a man converting for that kind of reason. It's the autobiography of the "intellectual convert" - of which I am at least around half of the importance, or probably even more, one.

So, up to page 16 out of 27, I have no objection to his study. Only on, this one I dealt with, is the first.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Elias of Mount Carmel
20.VII.2022

Friday, July 15, 2022

Did Catholic Authorities Oppose the Lightning Rod?


Screws from Late Middle Ages · Did Catholic Authorities Oppose the Lightning Rod?

It is easy to find general, sweeping statements, that Benjamin Franklin's lightning rod was opposed by religious authorities of some kind.

Here is one with some specifics:

ESD Journal : Franklin's Unholy Lightning Rod
Written by Al Seckel and John Edwards, 1984 / included November 25, 2002
http://www.esdjournal.com/articles/franklin/franklinrod.htm


I quote:

In America, Rev. Thomas Prince, pastor of Old South Church, blamed Franklin's invention of the lightning rod for causing the Massachusetts earthquake of 1755.


Who is this Thomas Prince?

Town Name - It is safe to say that the residents of Princeton have not been familiar with the character, social standing and even greatness of the Rev. Thomas Prince whose name the town bears, and who was in many respects a remarkable man.


Princeton Historical Society : Reverend Thomas Prince
https://sites.google.com/a/princetonmahistory.org/phs/people-groups/early-history/reverend-thomas-prince


If you scroll down a bit, you will find a statement matching that on the ESD Journal.

And, since the statement on Rev. Thomas Prince in either article omitted his precise religious affiliation, Anglican, Calvinist or other, the wikipedia page assigns him to the First Great Awakening and makes him an associate of George Whitefield.

And it seems Old South was a Presbyterian Church (not an Anglican or Episcopalian one).

Back to first link. It seems the writers Al Seckel and John Edwards at least tried to imply local opposition to lightning rods on the part of Catholic clergy.

In Austria, the Church of Rosenburg was struck so frequently and with such loss of life that the peasants feared to attend services. Several times the spire had to be rebuilt. It was not until 1778, 26 years after Franklin's discovery, that church authorities finally permitted a rod to be attached. Then all trouble ceased.

A typical case was the tower of St. Mark's in Venice. In spite of the angel at its summit, the bells consecrated to ward off devils and witches in the air, the holy relics in the church below, and the Processions in the adjacent square, the tower was frequently damaged or destroyed by lightning. It was not until 1766 that a lightning rod was placed upon it-and the tower has never been struck since.

Had the ecclesiastics of the Church of San Nazaro in Brecia given in to repeated urgings to install a lightning rod, they might have averted a terrible catastrophe. The Republic of Venice had stored in the vaults of this church several thousand pounds of gunpowder. In 1767, 17 years after Franklin's discovery, no rod having been placed on the church, it was struck by lightning and the gunpowder exploded. One-sixth of the city was destroyed and over 3,000 lives were lost because the priests refused to install the "heretical rod."


I have however not seen any Catholic clergyman given by name and text as opposing the lightning rod. Also, both for Rosenburg and St. Mark's there is no clear indication that the lightning rod was known prior to instalment.

And I have seen one counterexample:

Carl Gustaf Tessin var svensk minister i Wien i två omgångar; 1725 och 1735-36. I dennes dagbok står att läsa ”i Sankt Steffens (Stefansdomen) torn i Wien går från öfversta spetsen utföre genom kyrkohvalfvet och ner i jorden en tjock ståltråd, ditsatt för flere hundrade år sedan i afsigt att ditleda blixtstrålen, som ock oftast sker, då han löper längs tråden.”[2]


https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Åskledare

This means: Carl Gustaf (Charles Gustavus) Tessin was Swedish minister to Vienna twice over; 1725 and 1735-36. In his diary one can read "in Sient Steffen's tower in Vienna, from the uppermost top down through the Church vault and down into the Earth a thick steel whire goes, added several centuries agao in the intent of leading the lightning, as is also often the case, as it leaps along the wire."

The footnote 2 attributes this to Tessin, Carl Gustaf (1824). Carl Gustaf Tessins dagbok : 1757 - if I get this right, it means, in 1757, after Tessin heard of Franklin's invention, he recalled (or at worst pretended to recall) a similar invention already in place since centuries (that is, since the Renaissance or Middle Ages) in the Cathedral tower of Vienna, where he had been a few decades earlier.

If this is true, the lightning rod was in fact not invented by Franklin, only reinvented by him, and had been invented, at least locally, in Vienna, among those benighted Catholics that I was born among ...

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Henry I, Emperor and Confessor
15.VII.2022

Sancti Henrici Primi, Imperatoris Romanorum et Confessoris, cujus dies natalis tertio Idus mensis hujus recensetur.

PS, do read the comments!

Sunday, July 3, 2022

Some Things Did Become Better in the Seventies


Abolition of the Ugly laws.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugly_law

The repeals of ugly laws followed soon after the passage of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and its Section 504, and the 1990 passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act further stopped any possibility of a recreation of ugly laws.


1973 and 1990 did improve some./HGL

Monday, June 27, 2022

The Age of Rebecca when marrying


Here is a video:

Defending Jesus' Resurrection (LIVE with Dr. Jonathan McLatchie, 8:00pm ET)
19th June 2022 | Acts17Apologetics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuhtkkBRnmg&t=1680s


Here is an image from the video:



My responses:

28:00 I don't think Rebecca was three, but both sacrifice of Isaac and birth of Rebecca are in Genesis 22.

Whoever came up with this (and it may have been some Talmudic Jew) was probably overdoing the "chronological order" within the text.

[20] After these things, it was told Abraham that Melcha also had borne children to Nachor his brother.

What follows is a retrospect.

But Isaac in fact was 36 or 37 at this time - at most. We are not told if any time passes before chapter 23, he was 36 or 37 when Sarah died. Or if any time passes between 23 and 24. Ah, wait, Isaac was 40 when he married: Who when he was forty years old, took to wife Rebecca the daughter of Bathuel the Syrian of Mesopotamia, sister to Laban. (Gen 25:20).

It would in fact be a bit hard for a three year old girl to draw water from a well in a pitcher (Genesis 24:45).

However, given that neither Jacob nor Esau had trisomy 21, I don't think Rebecca was 40 when giving birth to them (OK, at that age, the risk is 1 %, still 99 % to go), and Rebecca could very well have been 13 when married (33 when finally giving birth)./HGL

Wednesday, June 22, 2022

La "trinité" des Sarrasins dans le Chant de Roland


Le Chant de Roland est parfois cité comme très islamophobe et en plus ignorant de l'Islam, parce que les Sarrasins jurent "par Mahomet, Apollon et Termagant" ...

C'est élémentaire, Mahomet demandait pas d'être adoré, il demandait qu'on adorât (à la manière qu'il précisa) Allah, celui du Coran (certains le considèrent comme "philosophiquement comme et personnellement non comme le vrai Dieu" ce que je considère correct). Et non pas une quelconque "trinité," y compris une "trinité" où lui serait le principale.

Or, le Chant de Roland ne prétend pas d'être une analyse ou de contenir des analyses sérieuses en islamologie du point de vue chrétien.

Je pense au contraire, que le poëte a voulu donner une analyse sociologique de la réligiosité d'une société islamique.

"Mahomet" résume donc Islam.

"Apollon" résume plutôt la science et encore aussi la superstition - par exemple astrologique. Qu'elle existait dans la société islamique est visible dans le fait que le Barbier Bavard (semble manquer en la version d'Antoine Galland, je l'ai lu dans la traduction suédoise par Nils Holmberg qui choisit une cinquantaine des 170 de la traduction de Joseph-Charles Mardrus. Une des délais que le barbier donne au jeune homme contre sa visite chez la belle dame est, de faire l'horoscope avant de le raser (la chose pour laquelle il avait été convoqué à la maison du jeune homme).*

Et "Tervagant" - c'est mystérieux, voir l'article "Tervagant" sur la wikipédie. Une autre possibilité évoquée par l'article est que :

Les auteurs médiévaux catholiques distinguaient ainsi les Musulmans avec Mahomet, les Byzantins schismatiques avec Apollyon, et les Arméniens schismatiques avec Tervagan


Ce qui rendrait mon hypothèse un peu superflue, ceci est attribué à M. S. David-Beg, « Le mot Tervagan dans les chansons de geste », Revue des études arméniennes, 1922, p. 65-83 ...

Ce que l'article ne mentionne pas est qu'il pourrait s'agir d'un nom d'un vent du désert ... qui pourrait faire référence à par exemple violence ou habitudes de razzous esclavagistes. Là, j'ai une mémoire d'une forme avec m, Termagant, utilisé en anglais. Langue dans laquelle "Termagant" veut aussi dire Mégère. Serait-ce aussi un phénomène "adoré" par la société musulmane? Ou serait-ce là un clin d'oeil plutôt ironique?/HGL

* Identifié en français : Le Livre des milles nuits et une nuit/Tome 02/Histoire du jeune homme boiteux
https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Le_Livre_des_milles_nuits_et_une_nuit/Tome_02/Histoire_du_jeune_homme_boiteux

Monday, June 6, 2022

Les ecclésiologies protestantes


Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Les ecclésiologies protestantes · New blog on the kid : Henri de Fersan et Jean Terrien n'ont pas corrigé

Je ne vais pas entrer dans les ecclésiologies à propos la pastorale, mais à propos la connexion (ou prétendument telle) entre l'église d'une ou autre confession et celle des apôtres.

Amateurisme des réformateurs

Il paraît que Genève cherchait de la connexion avec Byzance. Il y a jusqu'à présent encore des gens qui s'en reclament. Jusqu'à ce que des Byzantins actuels aient à dénoncer la réaction protestante à Cyrille Loucaris. Non, il a juste encouragé la prise de distance vis-à-vis l'ancienne Rome. Il n'a pas abandonné les sept sacraments, la présence réelle, la messe (ou liturgie divine) comme sacrifice du Calvaire présent sous l'acte présente. Mais à Genève, on a cru autrement et ça a été repris à Cantorbéry.

Genève n'a pas juste idéalisé mais aussi coopté les Vaudois - depuis au moins 1559:

L'influence de Calvin à Genève s'exerce aussi dans des domaines plus positifs. L'initiation du peuple à la bonne doctrine nécessite un enseignement soigneux : en 1559, Calvin convainc le Conseil de créer une académie, dont il confiera la direction au Vaudois Pierre Viret. Cette académie deviendra bientôt un centre intellectuel de premier rang et recevra des étudiants de toute l'Europe, séminaire actif de diffusion de la doctrine genevoise au moment où la Contre-Réforme catholique, issue du Concile de Trente, menacera dans ses racines la nouvelle foi.


Calvin et le calvinisme - Clio.fr
https://www.clio.fr/BIBLIOTHEQUE/pdf/pdf_calvin_et_le_calvinisme.pdf


Il va aussi essayer de coopter, très tardivement, Pape St. Grégoire I. Pour lui, le premier pape d'être Antéchrist était son successeur assez proche Boniface III.

Luther de son côté coopte les Hussites (qu'on appelle plus tard Moraviens), tout en leur déconseillant de prendre d'ordinations d'évêques catholiques en tant que calixtins et (tardivement) le moine St. Bernard de Clairvaux.

Si les Hussites et les Vaudois restent attachés à la Réforme (ou à deux Réformes différentes), ils ne mènent pas très loin en arrière, et on sera assez tôt obligé d'admettre que Grégoire I et Bernard de Clairvaux n'auraient pas accepté la Réforme. Ce qui nous mène à la deuxième (pas dernière) ecclésiologie protestante. Le réformisme.

Réformisme

Quelque part, on le voit déjà chez Luther et, sinon Calvin, au moins son successeur Bèze. On admet que, tout en affirmant que la Réforme produit une église purifiée et donc meilleure pour le salut, l'Église catholique aurait été un endroit possible pour se sauver, au moins avant cette Réforme, et ce n'est qu'après l'œuvre des réformateurs qu'on ait un devoir de se démarquer du Catholicisme romain, du Papisme, de manière, non orthodoxe mais protestante.

Comme si un léfévriste avait dit "le Novus Ordo était bon, tant que Monseigneur n'avait pas restauré l'accès au Vetus Ordo" - ce qui est un contresens, vu que Monseigneur avait continué la Messe de son ordination - et ceci valable pour des siècles en arrière, vu que les Protestants (tous, par définition, sauf ceux qui se défendent de ce sobriquet en tant que "Catholiques" - genre Anglo-Catholiques et leurs homologues suédois et luthériens) prétendent que le sacrifice de la messe était un "Novus Ordo" venu plus tard que les Apôtres.

Luther aime imaginer que son ami Érasme ait pu se sauver, malgré de continuer la Messe, en tant que sacrifice, et Bèze admet devant St. François de Sales (ce qui les Calvinistes nieraient peut-être comme mensonge propagandiste) que l'Église catholique est l'Église mère, et on a pu et peut encore s'y sauver. À quoi St. François répond avec la question, "pourquoi donc la Réforme avec les désordres qui se sont ajoutées dans la vie civile et paroissiale?" et Bèze "pour mieux se sauver."

Ceci est donc l'ecclésiologie des Luthériens, Anglicanes, Calvinistes, peut-être pas mal d'autres. Pour répondre à la question de St. François de Sales des historiens protestants ont prétendu que le Catholicisme produisait des pires désordres que les Réformes, ce que j'ai cru et ne crois plus (mes exemples étaient l'Inquisition et les Indulgences, prétendument vendues). À l'époque, ce n'était pas juste une pseudo-histoire, on a aussi attaqué:

  • les ordres mendiants comme otieux
  • l'encouragement à l'aumône comme encourageant une mendicité d'otieux
  • le célibat (de plus en plus on va viser des prétendus débordements comme typiques et inévitables, là ça devient de la pseudo-histoire)
  • la désobéisance aux parents (Sts François et Claire avaient choisi la vie religieuse sans que les pères avaient consenti, et St. Thomas s'était entêté de prendre un ordre mendiant plutôt que les bénédictins, comme le père aurait à la limite trouvé davantage acceptable)
  • la désobéissance aux maris (les mères de Sts François et Thomas prennent leur parti contre le mari)
  • l'insolence des dépendants (p. ex. droits des apprentis et des compagnons de devoir en fonction des règles des jurandes, qui étaient indirectement quasi-syndicales)
  • la désobéissance aux rois (Romains ch. 13 figure longtemps sur la liste des reproches aux Catholiques, c'est moins à la mode à partir de 1945), par exemple le cas historique de Henri IV humilié par son sujet civil le pape à Canossa, ou le cas d'actualité, à l'époque, quand les Catholiques refusent d'obéir aux dispositifs de leurs rois à propos sacrements ou prèches.


Une autre solution était de dire qu'on se sauve par appartenance à l'Église invisible, et non pas par appartenance à l'Église visible, d'où la possibilité pour les Catholiques d'antan ou en Espagne de se sauver. Ainsi par exemple Luther.

Mais essentiellement, ça revient à dire "en 1400, on pouvait se sauver en affirmant que Jésus avait institué 7 sacrements et l'eucharistie comme un sacrifice, mais en 1550 on est obligé que croire les sacrements 2 ou 3* et l'eucharistie comme non-sacrifice" ce qui est assez peu logique et en dépit d'un matracage intense de gouvernements, académies, sociétés protestantes conduit pas mal de Protestants à retourner à l'Église catholique.

Vu que le Calvinisme commence une surenchère pour se débarasser des trucs catholiques ("abus papistes") et que ce-ci relativise la nécessité de cette surenchère, on va tôt ou tard arriver à une autre ecclésiologie protestante. Elle va faire fortune dans des petites sectes. Et on vient au Restaurationnisme, que j'ai tenu à expliquer, puisque Henri de Fersan (? - non, voir mise à jour n bas) dans les pages de Rivarol avait attribué le Restaurationnisme à un "Messianisme juif."

Restaurationnisme

Alors, les Restaurationnistes sont, parfois, des sectes honnis par les autres Protestants, telles les T. de J. et les Mormons, parfois des sectes à peu près comme les autres, telles les Churches of God. D'abord "homonymie" :

Restorationism or Christian primitivism is the belief that a purer form of Christianity should be restored by believers using the early church as a model.

Restorationism can also refer to:


Alors, ça veut dire, "restaurationnisme ou primitivisme chrétien est la pensée que les Croyants devraient restaurer une plus pure forme du Christianisme par biais de l'Église primitive. Restaurationnisme peut aussi se référer à :"

[Je vais ajouter des nombres:]

1) the Stone–Campbell Restoration Movement, Christian primitivism from the 1840s onward in North America and Britain


Un exemple spécifique du sens général.

2) the British New Church Movement, British Christian primitivism of the 1960s onward


Un autre exemple spécifique du sens général.

3) Christian restorationism, a 19th-century movement promoting restoration of Jews to the Holy land, which later became known as Christian Zionism


Ici on a effectivement affaire à quelque chose qui a un rapport étroit avec le Sionisme : "restaurationnisme chrétien, une mouvance du XIXe S. qui promeut la 'restauration' des Juifs à la Terre Sainte, ce qu'on appelle plus tard le Sionisme chrétien."

4) Universal restoration, Greek apocatastasis, the "restoration of all things" mentioned in Acts, and most closely associated with Origen of Alexandria (184/185 – 253/254) and Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395)


Ni ni, populaire chez le pasteur et écrivain George McDonald et chez pas mal de modernistes, aussi (de manière modifiée?) chez Hans Urs von Balthasar et Robert Barron : "restauration universelle, en grec apocastasis, la 'restauration de toutes les choses' mentionnée dans les Actes des Apôtres ..." (chapitre 3, verset 21) "... et le plus proche associé avec Origène d'Alexandrie (184/185 - 253/254) et Grégoire de Nysse (c. 335 - c. 395)"

5) The formative Universalist Church of America's Restorationist faction of the 1820s, which insisted on a period of purgatory for some souls


L'église universaliste d'Amérique, en train de se former dans les années 1820's avait une faction restaurationniste qui insista que certains âmes doivent avoir une période du purgatoire (et George McDonald était d'accord, largément, c'est grâce à son disciple - partiel, avec réserves, mais autoproclamé avec enthousiasme - C. S. Lewis que j'arrive à accepter le Purgatoire environ un an avant ma décision de me convertir).

6) Restoration (Latter Day Saints), the process in the 1820s with which the Latter-day Saint movement started; also at times used as a synonym for the movement itself
7) Restoration Branches, are Latter Day Saint independent organizations separate from the Community of Christ (at the time of separation in the 1980s known as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) over rejected changes made in 1984 church's conference


Les deux sens se réfère au Mormonisme, a, 6) le processus selon lequel Joseph Smith aurait été le Moyen choisi de Dieu de restaurer l'Église primitive, b, 7) des "branches" de cette restauration, qui rejettent le Mormonisme "normal" au propos d'un "aggiornamento" en 1984.

Le sens principal est apparenté aux sens 1, 2, 6 et 7 dans la page d'homonymie. Et le lien vers ce sens principal donne une liste impressionnante de sectes protestantes qui au lieu d'être réformistes sont restaurationnistes.**

Il convient de dire que ma mère ayant été de l'Armée du Salut avait une ecclésiologie réformiste : "William Booth avait succession apostolique depuis John Wesley, John Wesley depuis Martin Luther, et Martin Luther de l'Église catholique" tandis que mon père ayant été Adventiste de 7e jour en avait une restaurationniste - ma grand-mère maternelle (chez qui on vivait, ma mère et encore un peu plus tard moi) m'a même demandé de ne pas notifier la grand-mère paternelle de ma conversion à cause de ça.

Et le grand hic avec cette théorie est, comment est-ce qu'elle carre avec Mathieu 28:20, avec une promesse pour "tous les jours jusqu’à la fin du monde"? On ne restaure que le perdu, et ceci implique que la vérité ne peut se perdre davantage que moins que 48 h (si on prend les dates comme référence on peut imaginer la vérité perdue après 0:01 ce matin et elle doit alors être restauré avant 23:59 demain matin, pour être présente les deux jours, qui sont, bien évidemment, parmi ces "tous les jours" qu'évoque Notre Seigneur. Ici, pas mal laisseraient tomber le Protestantisme, mais voici quelques die-hards:

Continuité baptiste

Ceci est un retour à l'historiographie très amateuriste et approximative (mais au carré) des Réformateurs.

On résume (contrairement à Luther et Calvin) la vérité que le Papisme avait caché pas mal comme "baptême des adultes" et mélange pèle-mèle des sectes ayant recusé le baptême des enfants (avec ou sans baptême des adultes), l'ayant différé (Donatistes, pour motif de diffidence vis-à-vis l'absolution), et des époques missionnaires quand bien entendu pas mal d'adultes prennent la foi et se font baptiser, et encore d'autres dissidences vis-à-vis le Catholicisme romain (les moines irlandais, les Culdees, qui en abnégation se mettaient des tierces de nuits, quatre heures, en eau froide de fleuves, et qui n'acceptaient pas le calendrier du Pape de leur époque). Et comme Hitler et Lénine et Marx et Billy Graham pour certains sont "tous illuministes" - ainsi, pour eux, tous ces exemples relève de la vraie continuité chrétienne à partir des apôtres.

Irréprochable vis-à-vis Mt 28:20, si historiquement vrai. Seulement, historiquement simplement très clairement pas vrai.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Lundi de Pentecôte
6.VI.2022

Mise à jour : non, ce n'était pas Henri de Fersan, c'était Jean Terrien.

* Luther ajoute la confession à baptême et eucharistie, Calvin ne retient que ces deux.
** L'article français sur Sionisme chrétien fait, hélas, un faux raccourci entre le sens 3 et le sens "général" dans ce paragraphe qui est une contrevérité:

Aux xviiie et xixe siècles, un courant chrétien proto-sioniste s'installa progressivement au cœur de l'Angleterre : le restaurationnisme3. Un certain nombre de théologiens et de penseurs s'en sont faits les hérauts, à l'image de Thomas Newton (1704-1782), évêque de Bristol, ou de Anthony Ashley Cooper (1801-1885), comte de Shaftesbury.


Parce que, si ce proto-sionisme s'appelle "restaurationnisme" aussi, le lien est vers la liste des ecclésiologies du primitivisme chrétien. Celui-ci étant beaucoup plus important que le proto-sionisme, ceci donne une fausse impression que la chrétienté anglo-saxonne et protestante serait essentiellement surtout sioniste.

Wednesday, June 1, 2022

Apostolic Creed - Late Antiquity vs Cicero


I will not pretend that the Apostolic Creed was not by the Apostles. I will however say, it is possible the translation to Latin came after an original Greek text.

DELPHINA ROSE ART : Apostles’ Creed (Credo in Deum) — Gregorian Chant
https://delphinaroseart.com/apostles-creed-latin-gregorian-chant-credo-deum/


Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae, et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum, qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine, passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus, descendit ad infernos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis, ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis, inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos. Credo in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem, vitam aeternam. Amen.

The above is how someone in possibly Late Antiquity set the words in Latin in a way that was stylistically setting the tone for Medieval Latin.

Imagine someone with a perfect Ciceronian Latin, like Pliny the Younger, had had a bit more curiosity than speaking of "horrible" or "criminal superstition" and had come across this text.

Credunt deum esse Patrem et omnium rerum potentem, creasse caelum necnon terram. Credunt et Eum habere Filium unicum, Iesum ton Christon, quem Domini loco habent et quem credunt conceptum de Spiritu sancto, natum e Maria quae virgo remanet, passum Pontio Pilato procuratore in cruce, mortuum et sepultum, in Haden descensum ... dicunt eum tertia die post mortem resurrexisse a mortuis, postea ascensum ad caelos, ubi sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis dum inde veniat ad vivos et mortuos iudicandos. Credunt sanctum esse Spiritum ex quo conceptus Filius et sanctam et ecclesian quem constituunt, et se ipsos sanctos quorum communio est ipsa ecclesia, se vel eam habere potestatem ad remittenda peccata, et coram iudicio Iesu et caro omnium resurgere debere et aeternaliter vivere. Quo dicto, hebraico vocabulo dicunt "amen".

Caesar's prose would be closer to the actual text, and even closer if he had come to believe it and stated it "from the inside" ... but not identic. "Inde venturus iudicare" would at least be "ut iudicet" and probably also rather "dum inde veniat" as I put it, connecting to "sedet" : He will cease to sit up there, when He comes down here to judge the living and the dead in the valley of Josaphat./HGL

Thursday, May 12, 2022

Eliphaz is Back


Some people have claimed, Job was a "narcissist" and God put him on a cure against this disorder.

If his "narcissism" was not damnining him (and it seems it wasn't, see God's words to Satan in chapter one) and if it wasn't plaguing the life of his family and friends (the sons and daughters seem to have had a good time before dying and his friends seem free to speak their mind to him) it would seem this procedure involved a cure worse than the disease.

The idea that "narcissism" = "vanity" = "pride" = "sin" doesn't take into account that sins differ between venial and mortal. Venials don't damn.

So, was Job a sinner?

In chapter 4 we have a discourse from Eliphaz, and now we can see the comment from Haydock after it:

[12] Now there was a word spoken to me in private, and my ears by stealth as it were received the veins of its whisper. [13] In the horror of a vision by night, when deep sleep is wont to hold men, [14] Fear seized upon me, and trembling, and all my bones were affrighted: [15] And when a spirit passed before me, the hair of my flesh stood up.

[16] There stood one whose countenance I knew not, an image before my eyes, and I heard the voice as it were of a gentle wind: [17] Shall man be justified in comparison of God, or shall a man be more pure than his maker?

Ver. 12. Private. Heretics pretend such obscure visions, rather to get credit than to edify others. S. Greg. v. 18. W. --- Many suppose that Eliphaz was guilty of feigning: but the greatest part think that he had truly seen a vision, but did not draw the proper conclusion from it. C. --- Prot. "Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof." H.

Ver. 13. The horror. Heb. "thoughts," while I considered the cause of thy distress. C.

Ver. 15. Spirit: angel, or gentle breeze. C.

Ver. 16. And I. Prot. "there was silence, and I heard a voice." Marg. "a still voice." Sept. "But I heard a breeze and a voice." H.

Ver. 17. Maker. It is thought that these were the words of the angel. If God punish without cause, may not the sufferer esteem himself the better of the two? You must therefore be guilty. C. --- Job would never dispute; but God was infinitely more pure than man, who may nevertheless be free from grievous sins. W. --- The highest angel has nothing but what he has received from God, in comparison with whom he is still as a mere nothing. But this does not prove that Job was a criminal, or that he pretended to arrogate to himself any excellence, independent of the giver of all good gifts. He did not assert that he was impeccable: yet, with God's grace, he might be innocent. C.


So, the theory God was curing a narcissist and that that one was Job can be laid to rest. How about God was using Job to cure a toxic narcissist and that one was Eliphaz, instead?

And after the Lord had spoken these words to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Themanite: My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends, because you have not spoken the thing that is right before me, as my servant Job hath.

No wrath kindled against Job. But Job did penance? Yes, even in dust and ashes. But if you ask me, for a venial sin in relation to God, which nevertheless had been toxic to himself. Doubting - if only in secret - that God would deliver him.

The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God. ... I have spoken unwisely.

He confessed with his lips, I know my deliverer liveth. But his heart whispered, where is God now?

No, not a case of narcissism.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
third day after St. Job
12.V.2022

Friday, May 6, 2022

The Real Crime of Tyndale : Justification without Intending Subsequent Works


Takeaways : he wasn't finally burnt for translating the Bible, and leaving the harlot is not leaving Roman Catholicism. Quora question and exhchange below my answer.

Q
Did the Catholic Church burn William Tyndale at the stake? What crime did he commit?
https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Catholic-Church-burn-William-Tyndale-at-the-stake-What-crime-did-he-commit/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1


Hans-Georg Lundahl
Catholic convert, reading many Catechisms
Answered Feb 9, 2021
Theories:

  • He translated the Bible to English;
  • He translated “presbyteros” as “elder” instead of “priest” in the Bible;
  • something else.


His Bible, with faults in translation, like those noted and alas defended by Kathleen Neuen, was not the cause of his burning, but of his exile from England;

Once he was taken before the Spanish Inquisition in Netherlands, he was in fact tried and executed for something else, namely, how he interpreted Romans 3.

His Inquisitor Jacobus Latomus had a correspondence with him, and we know from his preserved answers that Romans 3 was the key issue.

EDIT : it is Latomus’ answers to Tyndale that are preserved.

Nate Van Mack
6.V.2022
Catholic Church wanted power over the masses, Tyndale translating the Bible into English would give them all the info to see how far off the church had gone from the truth. They didn't want that so they premeditated his murder, him as well as countless others in wars etc Catholic organization is the most corrupt on the planet for centuries. They have no unity. Complete opposite of Jesus who taught to love others. That's why Rev 18:4,5 says;

And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. 5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind

God will completely annihilate all false religion very soon that have brought reproach on his holy name JEHOVAH, YHWH TETRAGRAMMETON

Hans-Georg Lundahl
6.V.2022
"Catholic Church wanted power over the masses,"

Christ's Church should want power over the masses. See Matthew 28 "teach YE all nations".

This was usually not opposed to but went hand in hand with encouraging if secondary at least extant translations to the vernacular languages.

Like in Belgium, back then [Spanish] Netherlands where Tyndale was burned, there was a Catholic Bible translation, like Delftse Bijbel of the Vulgate OT excluding the Psalms, and from John Scutkens Historiebijbel, they had also printed Gospels and Epistles.

As said, Tyndale fled from England due to translating into vernacular, which could have landed him in trouble with the English Inquisition (decided by the Parliament in 1401), but he was burned in a country where the Catholic Church did support or very recently had supported Bible translations, and where translating the Bible was not in itself a charge of heresy : in the then Spanish possession of the Netherlands.

"Tyndale translating the Bible into English"

Was an offense in England, but not in Belgium.

"would give them all the info to see how far off the church had gone from the truth."

Yeah, English peasants were generally so well educated overall, that just giving them a printed Bible was going to reveal things to them, even without comment! Not.

Also, the Bible contains proof that "the Church had gone from the Truth" : also NOT. On the contrary, according to Matthew 28, She cannot. See "all days".

As for getting out of a certain harlot, whatever the identity of the harlot is, it is NOT the Catholic Church as historically known, and leaving the harlot is NOT joining Protestantism, which in its Puritan and most Anticatholic form is simply one of the four leopard heads.

A Seven Headed Beast ...

Please note, the seven heads being seven kings means there are individual people in the appropriate part of the end times, but the kings having kingdoms, and religion and politics being intertwined (both on Christ's and on Antichrist's side), the identifications I gave would be fairly good. If I were to join you, I would apostasise and be joining a leopard beast, in one of its four heads. That I will not do.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
6.V.2022
If you or yours were to come to see the truth, I think a safer place to convert to Catholicism would be with this guy:

The Pope Speaks - Vatican in Exile

than with these guys:

Members - Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops


It seems I published this on the wrong blog, should have been Assorted Retorts. Obviously, the subject matter as such is here too, but the format goes to the other one.

Thursday, May 5, 2022

Lincoln Family : Premodern Lifespans


Here is the Lincoln Family
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_family


Footnote 11 Grzyb, Frank L. (2013). Hidden History of Rhode Island and the Civil War. The History Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-62619-231-7.

I will impose two limitations on the material given by the wiki.

1) only premodern, that is for US, none born after the civil war
2) consistent ancestor bias, there are a different statistics if you include children who died too early to become parents (including a married couple dying early) and one cannot do that up to the president, so I am not doing it after either.

Samuel Lincoln
(1622–1690)
Martha Lyford
(1623–1693)[11]

Mordecai Lincoln
(1657–1727)
Sarah Jones
(1660–1702)[11]

Mordecai Lincoln
1686–1736)
Hannah Salter
(1692–1727)[11]

John Lincoln
(1716–1788)
Rebecca Flowers
(1720–1806)[11]

Abraham Lincoln
(1744–1786)
Bathsheba Herring
(1750–1836)[11]

Thomas Lincoln
(1778–1851)
Nancy Hanks
(1784–1818)

Abraham Lincoln
(1809–1865)
Mary Todd Lincoln
1818–1882)

Robert Todd Lincoln
(1843–1926)
Mary Eunice Harlan
(1846–1937)

42 50 56 68 70 72 73 83
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
34 35 42 64 70 86 86 91

Men from 42 to 83, with median 69.
Women from 34 to 91, with median 67.

34 35 42 42 50 56 64 68 70 70 72 73 83 86 86 91
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Both sexes 34 to 91, with median 69. Lower quartile 46, higher quartile 78./HGL

Wednesday, April 13, 2022

"Why a C. S. Lewis Bible?"


Well, if you want absolute orthodoxy, not the best choice - but for modern (post-1950) study Bibles, it's also far from the worst.

I just noted there exists such a thing as a C. S. Lewis Bible:

The C. S. Lewis Bible*
1st of Nov. 2021 | Bible Buying Guide
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQQkQhDwQOw


There are three introductory essays about C. S. Lewis and this study Bible project, and the first is by his son Douglas Gresham.

The second paragraph is a very good answer. It's a good choice because C. S. Lewis while a good Bible scholar in fact was too humble to think of himself as a Bible scholar, citing only sentences 2 to 4 of it:

This is the case of the understanding of a man who never regarded himself as a theologian, but always regarded himself as as rank amateur in such matters, and yet is now, more than forty-five** years after his death, regarded as one of the leading theologians of his day. This is a man who never presented himself as any kind of psychologist*** and yet is now thought of as a man who understood human thinking and humanity better than any other writer of his time. This is a man who never imagined himself to be a biblical scholar and yet a man who read and memorised a chapter of the Bible every single day.°


Now, the first paragraph would be misleading if applied to the Haydock Bible.

It seems to me that many annotated Bibles are exercises in one man, or one committee of men, presenting their own wisdom and the results of their own biblical studies to the public at large, and while I ascribe to them the very best motives in the world, there still seems to me to be a touch of arrogance attached to such an endeavour. After all, what is being said is "I/We have studied the Bible for years and I/we have achieved such wisdom therefrom that you need to read my/our comments in order to understand the Bible as deeply and as well as I/we do, which is of vital importance for you to do."


Why is this not a valid criticism of the Haydock Bible? To be fair to Douglas Gresham, he never said (here at least) he was thinking of the Haydock Bible. But still, why does this not apply to it?

First of all, a bishop exposing the Bible is acting on God's command. If he is a bishop of the Catholic Church that is. It's a bit like why L'Histoire d'une âme is not conceited on part of St. Therèse Martin : she didn't chose to write it, she was ordered to, by her Carmelite prioress°° who represented to her the bishop of Lisieux, who represented in the see of Lisieux the authority of God the Father, like a priest represents that of God the Son, like a deacon that of God the Holy Ghost.

Similarily, when a bishop like Witham or Challoner (often cited in the Haydock comment) for instance comments on the Gospel to counter Protestant misrepresentation of it - Witham on John 4:23 for instance:

Ver. 23. Now is the time approaching, when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth, without being confined to any one temple or place; and chiefly in spirit, without such a multitude of sacrifices and ceremonies as even the Jews now practise. Such adorers God himself (who is a pure spirit) desires, which they shall be taught by the Messias. Wi. ...


... he is not presenting his understanding as his own, but as a gift of God, like St. Paul told St. Timothy: That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work. (II Tim 3:17) Since, you see, a bishop is a "man of God" (like St. Timothy was).

Now, George Leo Haydock was not a bishop. But he cited on occasion bishops Witham (as here) or Challoner (who is also regularly cited in the Douay Rheims, which he revised) and saints who were bishops (like St. John Chrysostom) or saints who were not bishops (like St. Thomas Aquinas) or bishops who were not saints (he does on occasion cite Jansenius, a work of whom was condemned by the Pope after his death). He even applied a non-saint and non-bishop's work to the pages, since more than one passage of Genesis and Exodus is supplemented with the Ussher year (given both as Anno Mundi and as BC). However, he does also give his own comments. Here is a good one:

Concerning the transactions of these early times, parents would no doubt be careful to instruct their children, by word of mouth, before any of the Scriptures were written; and Moses might derive much information from the same source, as a very few persons formed the chain of tradition, when they lived so many hundred years. Adam would converse with Mathusalem, who knew Sem, as the latter lived in the days of Abram. Isaac, Joseph, and Amram, the father of Moses, were contemporaries: so that seven persons might keep up the memory of things which had happened 2500 years before. But to entitle these accounts to absolute authority, the inspiration of God intervenes; and thus we are convinced, that no word of sacred writers can be questioned. H.


It's the last words he added as comment on Genesis 3. From same chapter in the C. S. Lewis Bible, I saw a disaster:

We do not know how many of these creatures God made, nor how long they remained in the Paradisal state. ...


Yes, we do. Trent, Session V, makes it clear that the sin we all bear the consequences of was committed by one man, precisely as St. Paul also made clear, so we have a Bible text telling us, God created exactly two of these creatures. And we know they fell before they conceived Cain.

I am an ex of those who took C. S. Lewis as the utmost orthodoxy, I am now a Catholic. And I am very glad this allows me to be unabashedly a Fundie.

However, Haydock had, like Homer, moments of nodding:

It is not material whether the sun turn round the earth, or the contrary. H.


From the Josue 10:12 comment. Yes, it is, since the words "Move not, O sun, toward Gabaon, nor thou, O moon, toward the valley of Ajalon," are not simple narrative, where a phenomenal language could be used, but the words of a miracle worker, where he must be assumed to adress the entity that shall miraculously change normal natural behaviour.

But I am thankful I had C. S. Lewis rather than John Shelby Spong and rather than an Adventist as a teacher about orthodoxy before I turned to Catholicism for it. There are worse examples of praeparatio evangelica.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Wednesday of Holy Week
13.IV.2022

* I watch the video with French automated translation, impossible to get rid of, but suppose the title "La revue biblique de C. S. Lewis" means "The C. S. Lewis Bible" or perhaps "The C. S. Lewis Study Bible".
** 1963 + 45 < 2008 or early 2009, which would be when the first edition is from.
*** Certain people would differ : if you ditch Freud (as he did), you obviously think you are a better expert in psychology than Freud, they would say. I judge that after how they deal with me.
° He may not have used the "Apocrypha section" when doing so, but if he did, this would land him at 1184 days with lectio continua, as that is the number of chapters in a Catholic Bible. 3.24 years. He probably started over again, time after time and used different languages (King James, Vulgate, LXX with Greek NT) - as far as I know, Hebrew was not among his languages, Latin and Greek most certainly were.
°° I think Carmelites are a mendicant order and as such have no abbotts or abbesses.