Character interactions continue. In Ys, Gratillonius' legionaries settle in Warriors' House. Christian Budic seeks the church in the former temple of Mars in the Forum. Divine interactions also continue. Budic meets the Christian minister, Eucherius, who, to our surprise, is in conversation with his friend, Queen Bodilis, who is now a wife to Budic's centurion. Eucherius instructs Budic to pay civil, not religious, respect to the Queen who is also a priestess.
Eucherius' ecclesiastical superiors have sent him to a city of "obstinate pagans." (p. 174) Some Christians think that we are obstinate, not that we honestly disagree with them. This is no basis for mutual respect.
11 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Well, if you don't like "obstinate," then substitute "persistent" for that word. And, to be frank, I find polytheism too ridiculous to take seriously. Again, I'm reminded of that Roman in THE GOLDEN SLAVE who disdainfully dismissed the Olympians as "those children."
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Do you really have to waste time ridiculing hard polytheism? A much more formidable opponent is philosophical atheism which can be accompanied by soft polytheism.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And philosophical atheism is also unconvincing. Philosophical arguments in favor of a God is at least as convincing, IMO. And neither, alone, can ever decisively resolve the question.
And I take hard polytheism more seriously than the soft kind, which is only a pretense.
So, yes, I take a "hard" line on these issues.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Atheism is unconvincing to you. Theistic arguments are at least as convincing as something that is unconvincing?
It is not a pretence to acknowledge that imagination is necessary for humanity and that gods, along with other fictional characters, are an important part of our imagination. We would not be who or what we are without them.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
What I tried, too hastily, to say is that some find atheistic or theistic philosophical arguments convincing, and thus disagree with one another.
I am finding your comments about soft paganism confusing. I thought you yourself commented about knowing people who practiced what LOOKED like worship of pagan gods--but, if pressed--did not truly believe in them.
Of course I agree "...imagination is necessary for humanity and that gods, along with other fictional characters, are an important part of our imagination. We would not be who or what we are without them." We see Anderson doing that in THE BROKEN SWORD, HROLF KRAKI'S SAGA, WAR OF THE GODS, etc.
Writers of fantasies or historical fiction can have, in the former, characters who were pagan gods like Odin (in the latter there could be characters who believed in such gods).
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Pagan rituals are dramatic performances. Greek drama grew out of religious ritual. I have participated in rituals without believing that the gods literally existed. Sceptics could and can do this. It is Christians who insist on correct (non-heretical) belief and on the recitation of a creed which means that I cannot participate fully in their ceremonies although, of course, most of us unite socially by attending weddings and funerals of friends and colleagues irrespective of religious tradition.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Yes, drama and plays, ultimately, had their origins in religious rites, but I don't think that was the point here.
Of course guests and well wishers can attend the weddings/funerals of friends without needing to participate in rites based on doctrines they disbelieve in. But I don't think mere attendance at, say, a Hindu wedding has to mean practicing soft paganism. Or, likewise, attending a Christian baptism, wedding, funeral.
I thought, just now, of Socrates insistence on an exact defining of terms and premises, to avoid confusion and misunderstanding.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: everybody's deep beliefs feel "right" and "natural" to them.
You avoid a lot of useless controversy if you realize that human beings reason and evidence -back- from their beliefs rather than -to- them, generally speaking.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, even tho I believe Christianity to be literally true.
I agree, as well, with your second comment. I would add that many Christians believe sources like the Scriptures, the Fathers, traditional teachings of the Church, etc., to be evidence leading to their beliefs, rather than back to them.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Attending a Hindu wedding does not have to mean practicing soft paganism but some of us have attended Wiccan ceremonies that did mean that.
Paul.
Sean,
The sources that you cite are statements of belief, not proofs of it. Would you definitely have converted to Christianity, and more specifically to Catholicism, if you had not been fetched up in that belief?
Paul.
Post a Comment