{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6674", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 6674, "subject": "resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "messages": 72, "voices": 11, "first": "2014-09-20T19:58:42+00:00", "last": "2014-10-18T23:49:01+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-09-20T19:58:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I just passed over a truly old discussion which never got much attention,\nbut interests me for several reasons. I think my response to Don's post\nwas good, but it never received any further response. Don posits that\nTyphon is Sev's father (I rather think he is Silk's, though I probably\ndidn't realize that back in 2002).\n\nHere is Don't post, and below will be my answer from 2002." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Howdy y'all," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "A few posts back, someone wrote that they wished there was a Book of Typhon\nand a Book of Piaton. Well, I don't know about the second but I'm\nbeginning\nto believe that the entire Sun Cycle might be the first. I wonder if\nTyphon\n(excluding Pas) is not the best concealed major character in fiction ever.\nAnd while my reading of King Jesus pointed me in this direction (rightly or\nwrongly), I don't think it's necessary at all to my speculations. On\nwhat?\nSeverian's ancestry, to start." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Let me start by saying flat out that I don't believe that Dorcas is" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian's grandmother or that Ouen is his father. To me, that is such a\nbig red herring that we could all eat fish taco's for a month. It's always\nbothered me and I'll state the simple reason why. Incest. I cannot\nbelieve\nthat Wolfe would have his main character commit incest, knowingly or\nunknowingly, and especially without any good reason. And there is no good\nreason (unless you want to establish Severian as Antichrist, which I don't\nbelieve) for Severian to sleep with his grandmother. If she was his\nmother,\nthere's the Oedipus parallel. If his sister, there's the marriage of\nPharaoh and his Sister (and other parallels I can't think of). If his\ndaughter, there's the story of Noah. If someone can point out a\nmytho-symbolic instance of grandson-grandmother incest then I will rethink\nthis. Otherwise I will never be convinced." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Especially when there are two better alternatives which fit much more" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "snugly into Severian's mythos. There is the obvious Jesus parallel where\nJoseph/Ouen is the \"father\" (though God is the real father) and\nMary/Katharine (which means \"pure\") is the virgin/pelerine mother. There\nis\nalso the Arthurian parallel where Sir Hector is Arthur's \"father\" through\nthe intervention of Merlin/Inire? and the real father is Uther the King\n(Monarch). Either fit better than the Dorcas and Ouen alternative." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Before I get too deep into this, let me say that I have a lot of puzzle" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "pieces and a fair amount of them fit together, but I don't have a\ncomprehensive picture and I'm confused by some things. Mainly I'm confused\nby the relationship between Ymar and Severian, and because of this I'm\nunable to make the precise connection I'd like between either Ymar and\nTyphon or Severian and Typhon. That said, I'm sure there is a strong\nfamilial connection between the three and I'm equally sure that the Sun\nCycle is also a very complex dynastic novel in addition to it's other mind\nboggling functions. What I'm saying is any help would be appreciated.\n There are four things that tie Ymar to Severian strongly in my mind.\nThe first is that they are both sheltered by the Guild. The second is that\nthey both go on to be Autarch and travel to Yesod. Third is the anecdote\nabout Ymar following the dog (which I think is the real point of Severian's\nrelating it, in spite of his elaborate attempt to explicate it's meaning),\nand the fourth is in Ymar's title: the Almost Just. As in James the Just,\nbrother of Jesus. I also discovered that ymar is supposedly Hebrew for ox,\nthough I have no idea what relevance that has." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " One or both of them is Typhon's son. My reasoning for this is in the" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Tale of a Boy Called Frog. In this tale, Spring Wind/typhoon/Typhon\nfathers\ntwin sons with a princess whose father had given her over to an order of\nvirgin priestesses (hmmm?). I would add that Spring Wind is the son of\nEarly Summer and the juice of a red flower (fire? a rose? the old sun?)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"No," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I was not born as I am, or born at all, as you meant it.\" The sons are\nset adrift on a stream (the brook madregot?) One of the sons is taken in by\nwolves and sheltered by the Black Killer (the Guild?) and goes on to rule.\n\"Here is the red flower. In his name I rule.\" Severian's coat of arms\ncontains the red flower, as does the mausoleum of his boyhood. This\nimplies\nsome sort of dynastic tie between the two. And Severian's memorial stone\nin\n\"Urth\" says \"by Right the First Man of Urth\" By right of what? No one\nknows whether he's the one to bring the New Sun. Maybe it's by right of\nblood, by his tie to the Monarch." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "My problem is, is this Severian the story is talking about or is it Ymar?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Are they brothers? Are they the same person? Is one a clone of the other?\nIf Severian is this son then it seems likely that Katharine and Kypris are\none and the same. If Ymar is the son then Kypris is surely his mother. My\npet theory is that Ymar is Typhon's son and Severian is his (Ymar's) clone.\nThis allows Katharine to give a virgin birth and allows Severian to be his\nown father. This dynastic theory also meshes nicely with Greek mythology,\nwhich as Peter Green states in his introduction to Apollonius of Rhodes\nArgonautica (univ. of california press, p.22) \". . . has as background a\ncomplex genealogical web of intertwined family relationships. . .\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Whatever the answer, the one thing I am absolutely positive of is that" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dorcas is in no way an immediate member of Severian's family. Which brings\nanother question. Does he know his ancestry? (I think yes. Valeria most\nlikely told him.) If he does, why is he hiding it?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Don" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And my brilliant, but youthful, response:\n\nIn a previous post, Don asserted that he sees little need for Dorcas to be\na\nfamilial relation of Severian's. I argue that it is imperative that she be\na\nmember of his line: her love is a distorted version of motherly love that\nis\nthe most redeeming love in the text outside of divinity.\n\nI argue that, as Gene Wolfe has stated, in some small part the story of\nSeverian is the story of a man looking for love. I think that Wolfe is a\ncareful enough writer to show that these females (whatever you think of\nthem)\nare symbolic of something other than themselves. In the text, first you\nhave\nan ideal of beauty that you covet (Thea), then you have the prostitute -\nthe\neasiest form of \"love\" for a young boy to get with a little cash - that\nmirrors a desire (that mirrors another desire).\n\nThen you have a wiser, older mentor (Thecla). Then the femme fetale in the\nform of Agia - conniving, plain outside and ugly inside - then you have the\nmost redeeming love of the text - one that must be explored in the same\nsexual\nmetaphor that Wolfe uses to explore all the others - the most versatile\nform\nof love (note the changing flowers in dorcas' hair - she is the only one\nwho\ncan change her flowers if we associate Thecla with the death lillies and\nAgia\nwith the Avern) - that of the mother figure. It is a tension between\nsexual\ndesire and the need to be protected from the external environment - and\nnotice\nhow Dorcas changes Sev's perceptions of the outside world by having him\nfeel\nher up, presenting him with the archetypal symbol of safety - the breast.\nThat's pretty motherly. Then we have false vanity, teasing, and uppitiness\n(Jolenta). Later we get an exploration of adultery (Cyriaca), then an\nexploration of slavery/ bondage in the form of Pia, and perhaps one of\nbuggery\nwith little Sev. (but probably not) Finally this culminates in frigid,\nbanal\nmarriage with a haughty wench that leaves everybody feeling bad, so one\nmight\nas well go to the stars to be castrated.\n\nIn many ways, the text is an exhaustion of the possibilities of happiness\nthrough either feminine spirituality or sexuality (you've noticed all those\nevil feminine goddesses and cults lurking in the text, Don). Love, to a\nyoung\nman, might seem to be best embodied by someone in the image of his mother,\nbut\neven that should be shunned for something a bit more redemptive and\nspiritual,\nas Severian ultimately does. I think Dorcas needs to be maternal, and\nSeverian's symbolic incest is not contrary to Wolfe's intentions, for the\nthematic consistency of the book relies on all of these various roles\noffering\nnothing but a vacuous relief from lust and desire in the form of a\ngrasping,\nnew hatched chick hungry to devour the world. (At least, I think so).\n\nMarc Aramini" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-09-20T20:14:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Certainly the repose of Cilinia/Scylla in what could be Sev's mausoleum is\nat least one plausible bit of possibly coincidental evidence for Don's\nposition (for all that some people maintain it is a different mausoleum\n...)\n\nI still prefer Pia over ... Scylla ... as a sister for Sev, though, what\nwith the fish imagery of the lake people and Oannes and Sev swimming \"like\na frog\" in that scene, calling her like a sister in love to dorcas with her\nhungry mouth, being exactly his age, having a thin waist unusual for an\nautochthon and black hair, etc. Whatever - that sister talk gets old\nquickly." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:\nI just passed over a truly old discussion which never got much attention,\nbut interests me for several reasons. I think my response to Don's post\nwas good, but it never received any further response. Don posits that\nTyphon is Sev's father (I rather think he is Silk's, though I probably\ndidn't realize that back in 2002).\n\nHere is Don't post, and below will be my answer from 2002.\n > Howdy y'all," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "A few posts back, someone wrote that they wished there was a Book of\nTyphon\nand a Book of Piaton. Well, I don't know about the second but I'm\nbeginning\nto believe that the entire Sun Cycle might be the first. I wonder if\nTyphon\n(excluding Pas) is not the best concealed major character in fiction ever.\nAnd while my reading of King Jesus pointed me in this direction (rightly\nor\nwrongly), I don't think it's necessary at all to my speculations. On\nwhat?\nSeverian's ancestry, to start." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Let me start by saying flat out that I don't believe that Dorcas is\nSeverian's grandmother or that Ouen is his father. To me, that is such a\nbig red herring that we could all eat fish taco's for a month. It's\nalways\nbothered me and I'll state the simple reason why. Incest. I cannot\nbelieve\nthat Wolfe would have his main character commit incest, knowingly or\nunknowingly, and especially without any good reason. And there is no good\nreason (unless you want to establish Severian as Antichrist, which I don't\nbelieve) for Severian to sleep with his grandmother. If she was his\nmother,\nthere's the Oedipus parallel. If his sister, there's the marriage of\nPharaoh and his Sister (and other parallels I can't think of). If his\ndaughter, there's the story of Noah. If someone can point out a\nmytho-symbolic instance of grandson-grandmother incest then I will rethink\nthis. Otherwise I will never be convinced.\n Especially when there are two better alternatives which fit much more\nsnugly into Severian's mythos. There is the obvious Jesus parallel where\nJoseph/Ouen is the \"father\" (though God is the real father) and\nMary/Katharine (which means \"pure\") is the virgin/pelerine mother. There\nis\nalso the Arthurian parallel where Sir Hector is Arthur's \"father\" through\nthe intervention of Merlin/Inire? and the real father is Uther the King\n(Monarch). Either fit better than the Dorcas and Ouen alternative.\n Before I get too deep into this, let me say that I have a lot of puzzle\npieces and a fair amount of them fit together, but I don't have a\ncomprehensive picture and I'm confused by some things. Mainly I'm\nconfused\nby the relationship between Ymar and Severian, and because of this I'm\nunable to make the precise connection I'd like between either Ymar and\nTyphon or Severian and Typhon. That said, I'm sure there is a strong\nfamilial connection between the three and I'm equally sure that the Sun\nCycle is also a very complex dynastic novel in addition to it's other mind\nboggling functions. What I'm saying is any help would be appreciated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " There are four things that tie Ymar to Severian strongly in my mind.\nThe first is that they are both sheltered by the Guild. The second is\nthat\nthey both go on to be Autarch and travel to Yesod. Third is the anecdote\nabout Ymar following the dog (which I think is the real point of\nSeverian's\nrelating it, in spite of his elaborate attempt to explicate it's meaning),\nand the fourth is in Ymar's title: the Almost Just. As in James the Just,\nbrother of Jesus. I also discovered that ymar is supposedly Hebrew for\nox,\nthough I have no idea what relevance that has." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " One or both of them is Typhon's son. My reasoning for this is in the\nTale of a Boy Called Frog. In this tale, Spring Wind/typhoon/Typhon\nfathers\ntwin sons with a princess whose father had given her over to an order of\nvirgin priestesses (hmmm?). I would add that Spring Wind is the son of\nEarly Summer and the juice of a red flower (fire? a rose? the old sun?)\n\"No,\nI was not born as I am, or born at all, as you meant it.\" The sons are\nset adrift on a stream (the brook madregot?) One of the sons is taken in\nby\nwolves and sheltered by the Black Killer (the Guild?) and goes on to rule." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"Here is the red flower. In his name I rule.\" Severian's coat of arms\ncontains the red flower, as does the mausoleum of his boyhood. This\nimplies\nsome sort of dynastic tie between the two. And Severian's memorial stone\nin\n\"Urth\" says \"by Right the First Man of Urth\" By right of what? No one\nknows whether he's the one to bring the New Sun. Maybe it's by right of\nblood, by his tie to the Monarch." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "My problem is, is this Severian the story is talking about or is it Ymar?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Are they brothers? Are they the same person? Is one a clone of the\nother?\nIf Severian is this son then it seems likely that Katharine and Kypris are\none and the same. If Ymar is the son then Kypris is surely his mother." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "My\npet theory is that Ymar is Typhon's son and Severian is his (Ymar's)\nclone." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This allows Katharine to give a virgin birth and allows Severian to be his\nown father. This dynastic theory also meshes nicely with Greek mythology,\nwhich as Peter Green states in his introduction to Apollonius of Rhodes\nArgonautica (univ. of california press, p.22) \". . . has as background a\ncomplex genealogical web of intertwined family relationships. . .\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Whatever the answer, the one thing I am absolutely positive of is that\nDorcas is in no way an immediate member of Severian's family. Which\nbrings\nanother question. Does he know his ancestry? (I think yes. Valeria most\nlikely told him.) If he does, why is he hiding it?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Don" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And my brilliant, but youthful, response:\n\nIn a previous post, Don asserted that he sees little need for Dorcas to be\na\nfamilial relation of Severian's. I argue that it is imperative that she\nbe a\nmember of his line: her love is a distorted version of motherly love that\nis\nthe most redeeming love in the text outside of divinity.\n\nI argue that, as Gene Wolfe has stated, in some small part the story of\nSeverian is the story of a man looking for love. I think that Wolfe is a\ncareful enough writer to show that these females (whatever you think of\nthem)\nare symbolic of something other than themselves. In the text, first you\nhave\nan ideal of beauty that you covet (Thea), then you have the prostitute -\nthe\neasiest form of \"love\" for a young boy to get with a little cash - that\nmirrors a desire (that mirrors another desire).\n\nThen you have a wiser, older mentor (Thecla). Then the femme fetale in\nthe\nform of Agia - conniving, plain outside and ugly inside - then you have\nthe\nmost redeeming love of the text - one that must be explored in the same\nsexual\nmetaphor that Wolfe uses to explore all the others - the most versatile\nform\nof love (note the changing flowers in dorcas' hair - she is the only one\nwho\ncan change her flowers if we associate Thecla with the death lillies and\nAgia\nwith the Avern) - that of the mother figure. It is a tension between\nsexual\ndesire and the need to be protected from the external environment - and\nnotice\nhow Dorcas changes Sev's perceptions of the outside world by having him\nfeel\nher up, presenting him with the archetypal symbol of safety - the breast.\nThat's pretty motherly. Then we have false vanity, teasing, and\nuppitiness\n(Jolenta). Later we get an exploration of adultery (Cyriaca), then an\nexploration of slavery/ bondage in the form of Pia, and perhaps one of\nbuggery\nwith little Sev. (but probably not) Finally this culminates in frigid,\nbanal\nmarriage with a haughty wench that leaves everybody feeling bad, so one\nmight\nas well go to the stars to be castrated.\n\nIn many ways, the text is an exhaustion of the possibilities of happiness\nthrough either feminine spirituality or sexuality (you've noticed all\nthose\nevil feminine goddesses and cults lurking in the text, Don). Love, to a\nyoung\nman, might seem to be best embodied by someone in the image of his mother,\nbut\neven that should be shunned for something a bit more redemptive and\nspiritual,\nas Severian ultimately does. I think Dorcas needs to be maternal, and\nSeverian's symbolic incest is not contrary to Wolfe's intentions, for the\nthematic consistency of the book relies on all of these various roles\noffering\nnothing but a vacuous relief from lust and desire in the form of a\ngrasping,\nnew hatched chick hungry to devour the world. (At least, I think so).\n\nMarc Aramini" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T12:37:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I agree. Marc's position has a point, in that incest which is neither intended nor known can't " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "be much of a symbol." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I disagree. For me, what is being missed is that the incest taboo applies to human beings. But for the \n\npagan gods, incest was the norm and sexual activity outside the family, (with humans) was the\n\nmore shameful act.\n\n\nThe origin of these incestuous god myths may well derive from the incestuous dynasties which ruled\n\nthe Mediterranean empires. The principle remains the same: it is morally proper for superior beings\n\nto only mate among themselves and not with the rabble of humanity. (hence Apheta's distaste at\n\nhaving to mate with Severian).\n\n\nSeverian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once again finds himself worshipped as \n\na god.\n\n\nThe first person style of narrative is a strong temptation for the reader to put him/herself into Severian's\n\nshoes and to think \"he is like me\". Just like Severian we have all had our share of life's ups and downs and\n\nwe all sometimes think \"why me?\" when something unusual happens to us. During the course of the story\n\nSeverian never really acknowledges the constellation of god features he possesses. So it is easy for the\n\nreader to follow along and also think of Severian as a normal human, though clearly he is not.\n\n\nOedipus plucked his eyes out on finding out about his incestuous marriage to his mother. Severian seems \n\nto harbor no level of guilt which even approaches that. As I see it, Severian's incest does carry a large\n\nsymbolic burden. It, among many other things, helps establish his essential pagan godhood. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T13:13:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 2 October 2014 13:37, Lee wrote:\nThe first person style of narrative is a strong temptation for the reader\nto put him/herself into Severian's shoes and to think \"he is like me\" [...]\nSo it is easy for the reader to follow along and also think of Severian as\na normal human, though clearly he is not." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is a very important point." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T13:47:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:\nOn Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of\nhis story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he\nwill be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to\nhis superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater,\nhe can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Brad Henry", "address": "bradhenry101 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T14:04:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by\nchrist' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles\nlike severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes\ncalled 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their\nresurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so\nthat man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2\nPeter 1.3-4." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nThis is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning\nof his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he\nwill be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to\nhis superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater,\nhe can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T14:14:54+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some magical\npower belonging to himself." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:\nAnd part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by\nchrist' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles\nlike severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes\ncalled 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their\nresurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so\nthat man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2\nPeter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning\nof his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and\nhe will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to\nhis superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Brad Henry", "address": "bradhenry101 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T14:19:21+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm sure I'm late to the game on this one too, but Paul often refers to the\nfinal culmination of a christian's life as being made \"like the stars\n(suns) in the heavens\" (a traditional apocalyptic image that should not be\ntaken simply metaphorically)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled\nby christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed\nmiracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or,\nsometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in\ntheir resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man,\nso that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this\nis 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning\nof his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and\nhe will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition\nto his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T14:39:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Through faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that\nhis power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful\nagency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup\nof coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as\nis Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he\nbelieves as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled\nby christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed\nmiracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or,\nsometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in\ntheir resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man,\nso that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this\nis 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning\nof his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and\nhe will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition\nto his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T14:52:48+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in being with the\nFather\" creed - Christ is fully human and fully divine (a similar paradox\nto the whole three in one, one in three theological parsing - we aren't\ndealing with Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes\nwe are ...)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Matthew Weber wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that\nhis power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful\nagency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup\nof coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as\nis Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he\nbelieves as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled\nby christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed\nmiracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or,\nsometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in\ntheir resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man,\nso that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this\nis 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the\nbeginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and\nhe will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition\nto his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-02T15:14:26+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else.\nThat is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different\nfrom that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God.\nThat is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I\nsay dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but\nbecause of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that\nhis power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful\nagency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup\nof coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as\nis Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he\nbelieves as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled\nby christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed\nmiracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or,\nsometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in\ntheir resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man,\nso that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this\nis 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the\nbeginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and\nhe will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition\nto his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once\nagain finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-05T12:27:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST natural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in more advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading analogy. My usual way of describing \n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes. Like Severian, they were born not \n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the importance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus certainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known to perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful followers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator and who were even in possession of the \n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian channeled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself (in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would give people much of an idea about what my " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it means to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of speculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out some of the implications of my beliefs. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in being with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in three theological parsing - we aren't dealing with " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is separate from paganism or is part of a continuous \n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going on. The picture changes, depending on what \n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this Necker Cube and plays with the different \n\nperspectives in the course of his writing. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011ADB@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-06T13:23:34+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning -- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is obsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a continuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you say \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick \n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\nMarc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST natural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in more advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading analogy. My usual way of describing \n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes. Like Severian, they were born not \n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the importance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus certainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known to perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful followers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator and who were even in possession of the \n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian channeled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself (in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would give people much of an idea about what my " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it means to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of speculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out some of the implications of my beliefs. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in being with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in three theological parsing - we aren't dealing with " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is separate from paganism or is part of a continuous \n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going on. The picture changes, depending on what \n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this Necker Cube and plays with the different \n\nperspectives in the course of his writing. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T13:55:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011ADB@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore.\nNo one else pays any attention to it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \nwrote:\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning\n-- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is\nobsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a\ncontinuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you\nsay \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and\nin Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person\nbut a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and\ntransformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading\nanalogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman\nabilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance\nof his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in\nany way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known\nto perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator\nand who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself\n(in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would\ngive people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in\nbeing with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this\nNecker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011B24@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-06T14:07:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the Roman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are Gene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Marques\nSent: Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on. Non-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without necessarily being pagan.\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore. No one else pays any attention to it.\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning -- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is obsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a continuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you say \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\nMarc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST natural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in more advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading analogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes. Like Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the importance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus certainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known to perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful followers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator and who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian channeled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself (in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would give people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it means to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of speculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out some of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in being with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in three theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is separate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going on. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this Necker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T14:19:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011B24@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Probably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the fictional\nexploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level\nslightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate\nconception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The\nChangeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of specialty\nin most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of vodoo,\nwhich has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something else\nthrough it.\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to\nthe saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from\nNew Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n Interesting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the\nRoman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are\nGene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf\nOf *Ant?nio Marques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\n\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore.\nNo one else pays any attention to it.\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\n\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning\n-- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is\nobsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a\ncontinuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you\nsay \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and\nin Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] On Behalf\nOf Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net \nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person\nbut a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and\ntransformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading\nanalogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman\nabilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance\nof his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in\nany way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known\nto perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator\nand who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself\n(in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would\ngive people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in\nbeing with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this\nNecker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T14:35:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Catholic attitude to Mary is only Catholic in that Protestants defined\nthemselves against Catholics. Otherwise, it's the common or garden\nChristian attitude, from Rome to Constantinople to Nineveh or Addis Ababa\n(as so many other things that are often thought of as Catholic)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 6 October 2014 15:19, Marc Aramini wrote:\nProbably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the fictional\nexploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level\nslightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate\nconception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The\nChangeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of specialty\nin most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of vodoo,\nwhich has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something else\nthrough it.\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to\nthe saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from\nNew Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them.\n\n\nOn Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " Interesting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the\nRoman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are\nGene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio\nMarques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\n\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore.\nNo one else pays any attention to it.\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning\n-- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is\nobsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a\ncontinuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you\nsay \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and\nin Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person\nbut a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated\nand transformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading\nanalogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their\nsuperhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the\nimportance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in\nany way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known\nto perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the\nConciliator and who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself\n(in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation\nwould give people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in\nbeing with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of\nthis Necker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011B61@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-06T14:59:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Is the idea that some Catholics believe that Mary is co-redeemer with Christ a Protestant myth?\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Marques\nSent: Monday, October 06, 2014 10:35 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nThe Catholic attitude to Mary is only Catholic in that Protestants defined themselves against Catholics. Otherwise, it's the common or garden Christian attitude, from Rome to Constantinople to Nineveh or Addis Ababa (as so many other things that are often thought of as Catholic).\n\nOn 6 October 2014 15:19, Marc Aramini > wrote:\nProbably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the fictional exploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level slightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate conception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The Changeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of specialty in most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of vodoo, which has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something else through it.\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to the saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an infinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness to God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from New Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them.\n\n\nOn Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\nInteresting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the Roman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are Gene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Marques\nSent: Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on. Non-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without necessarily being pagan.\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore. No one else pays any attention to it.\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning -- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is obsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a continuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you say \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\nMarc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST natural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in more advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading analogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes. Like Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the importance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus certainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known to perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful followers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator and who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian channeled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself (in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would give people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it means to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of speculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out some of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in being with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in three theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is separate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going on. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this Necker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T15:31:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011B61@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Like any borderline idea, some theologians have entertained it at times,\nbut it has never been entertained at large, seriously or otherwise. You\ncan't really know what millions of different people think about all\nsubjects.\nNow, if you're asking what powers folk Catholics ascribe to their revered\nfigure, then all bets are off. But even the folksiest of the folkiser will\nreadily tell you that any powers the saint may have are Gods', not the\nsaint's. If anything, saint veneration goes against the concept that all\nhumans are equal (by considering that some have a attained a privileged\naccess to God), not against the concept that all power is God's." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 6 October 2014 15:59, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \nwrote:\n Is the idea that some Catholics believe that Mary is co-redeemer with\nChrist a Protestant myth?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio\nMarques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 10:35 AM\n\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nThe Catholic attitude to Mary is only Catholic in that Protestants defined\nthemselves against Catholics. Otherwise, it's the common or garden\nChristian attitude, from Rome to Constantinople to Nineveh or Addis Ababa\n(as so many other things that are often thought of as Catholic).\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 15:19, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nProbably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the fictional\nexploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\n\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level\nslightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate\nconception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The\nChangeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of specialty\nin most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of vodoo,\nwhich has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something else\nthrough it.\n\n\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to\nthe saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\n\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from\nNew Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them.\n\n\n\n\nOn Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nInteresting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the\nRoman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are\nGene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio Marques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\n\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore.\nNo one else pays any attention to it.\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \nwrote:\n\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning\n-- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is\nobsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a\ncontinuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you\nsay \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and\nin Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] On Behalf Of Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person\nbut a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and\ntransformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading\nanalogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their superhuman\nabilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance\nof his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in\nany way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known\nto perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the Conciliator\nand who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself\n(in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation would\ngive people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in\nbeing with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of this\nNecker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5432D592.7000000@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-06T17:46:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I can't argue with that. But I do think that for this eastern-mythical \ninterpretation to really work, it must fit into---and be secondary \nto---some kind of Catholic incorporating/transforming structure." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 10/2/2014 8:37 AM, Lee wrote:\nOn Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nI agree. Marc's position has a point, in that incest which is neither intended nor known can't be much of a symbol." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I disagree. For me, what is being missed is that the incest taboo applies to human beings. But for the pagan gods, incest was the norm and sexual activity outside the family, (with humans) was the more shameful act." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T17:47:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The idea that all humans are equal is a fairly recent philosophical\ndevelopment of the enlightenment and post enlightenment, not the same at\nall as the idea that all humans are inferior to the divine. A saint is not\ndamned, Mary's birth is different in character than, say, mine. Just\nbecause all humans fall short of the divine does not imply that all are\nequal. I'm not talking about predestination, as free will is vastly\nimportant to Catholic doctrine, but of the concept of equality." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nLike any borderline idea, some theologians have entertained it at times,\nbut it has never been entertained at large, seriously or otherwise. You\ncan't really know what millions of different people think about all\nsubjects.\nNow, if you're asking what powers folk Catholics ascribe to their revered\nfigure, then all bets are off. But even the folksiest of the folkiser will\nreadily tell you that any powers the saint may have are Gods', not the\nsaint's. If anything, saint veneration goes against the concept that all\nhumans are equal (by considering that some have a attained a privileged\naccess to God), not against the concept that all power is God's.\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 15:59, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\n\nProbably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the fictional\nexploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\n\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level\nslightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate\nconception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The\nChangeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of\nspecialty in most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of\nvodoo, which has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something\nelse through it.\n\n\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to\nthe saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\n\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from\nNew Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them.\n\n\n\n\nOn Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nInteresting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the\nRoman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are\nGene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio Marques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\n\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant folklore.\nNo one else pays any attention to it.\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier meaning\n-- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big city -- is\nobsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or may not be a\ncontinuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as soon as you\nsay \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and\nin Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a pagan.\n\nRick\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] On Behalf Of Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person\nbut a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated\nand transformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and misleading\nanalogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their\nsuperhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the\nimportance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in\nany way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are known\nto perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the\nConciliator and who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of himself\n(in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation\nwould give people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one in\nbeing with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are ....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of\nthis Necker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T17:54:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Antonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox theology,\nbut it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf.\nhttp://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God,\nthe Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully\nhuman: twi-natured." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nChrist the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else.\nThat is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different\nfrom that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God.\nThat is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I\nsay dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but\nbecause of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Through faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say\nthat his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more\npowerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to\nlift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is\ninherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what\nhe believes as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled\nby christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed\nmiracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or,\nsometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in\ntheir resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man,\nso that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this\nis 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 7, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the\nbeginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator\nand he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition\nto his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he\nonce again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T17:56:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Marc - Of course you are right that \"all humans are equal\" is a heretical,\nEnlightenment, idea: but it is also true that all humans are to be treated,\naccording to the Church, with full human dignity as (flawed) living images\nof God. And, as the angel says somewhere in BotNS, the difference in\ndignity between us (and between us and the angels) is as nothing between\nthe difference between us (and the angels) and God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nThe idea that all humans are equal is a fairly recent philosophical\ndevelopment of the enlightenment and post enlightenment, not the same at\nall as the idea that all humans are inferior to the divine. A saint is not\ndamned, Mary's birth is different in character than, say, mine. Just\nbecause all humans fall short of the divine does not imply that all are\nequal. I'm not talking about predestination, as free will is vastly\nimportant to Catholic doctrine, but of the concept of equality.\n\nOn Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Like any borderline idea, some theologians have entertained it at times,\nbut it has never been entertained at large, seriously or otherwise. You\ncan't really know what millions of different people think about all\nsubjects.\nNow, if you're asking what powers folk Catholics ascribe to their revered\nfigure, then all bets are off. But even the folksiest of the folkiser will\nreadily tell you that any powers the saint may have are Gods', not the\nsaint's. If anything, saint veneration goes against the concept that all\nhumans are equal (by considering that some have a attained a privileged\naccess to God), not against the concept that all power is God's.\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 15:59, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": " Is the idea that some Catholics believe that Mary is co-redeemer with\nChrist a Protestant myth?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio\nMarques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 10:35 AM\n\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nThe Catholic attitude to Mary is only Catholic in that Protestants\ndefined themselves against Catholics. Otherwise, it's the common or garden\nChristian attitude, from Rome to Constantinople to Nineveh or Addis Ababa\n(as so many other things that are often thought of as Catholic).\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 15:19, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nProbably most clearly fictionally expressed in \"Queen\" with the\nfictional exploration of an assumption. (I think that was the story).\n\n\n\nThe same as most Catholics, I am sure. Reverence and respect on a level\nslightly greater than that for the other saints. Mary's own immaculate\nconception is kind of a vital hint to when the changeling shows up in \"The\nChangeling\"\n\nThere is a superstitious nature to the Saints and their areas of\nspecialty in most catholic families. It might also show his frequent use of\nvodoo, which has taken the images of Catholicism and channelled something\nelse through it.\n\n\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered\nto the saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\n\n\nI imagine he views them much as the story of the cock and the angel from\nNew Sun, though perhaps God is not as remote to them.\n\n\n\n\nOn Monday, October 6, 2014, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nInteresting. Using that definition I can see Protestants viewing the\nRoman near-deification of Mary as being essentially polytheistic. What are\nGene Wolfe’s views on Mary?\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio Marques\n*Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 9:56 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nNot necessarily. Pagan has meant 'polytheist' from early on.\nNon-polytheists might be hereticals, infidels, whatever, without\nnecessarily being pagan.\n\nThe idea that the Roman Church is 'pagan' is part of Protestant\nfolklore. No one else pays any attention to it.\n\n\n\nOn 6 October 2014 14:23, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nThe word pagan means: neither Christian nor Jewish. (The earlier\nmeaning -- a rustic, a rude fellow, not schooled in the ways of the big\ncity -- is obsolete.) Therefore Catholics are not pagans. There may or\nmay not be a continuous progression from the pagan to the Christian, but as\nsoon as you say \"I believe in God, the Father, almighty, maker of heaven\nand earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,\" you stop being a\npagan.\n\nRick\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] On Behalf Of Lee\nSent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 8:28 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Marc Aramini: when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal\nperson but a Christ. The pagan gods are" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated\nand transformed into Christian stories" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "[such as the flood and the story of Genesis]." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I would mention that the pagan gods of earth are actually of the MOST\nnatural origin; things such as earth and sky\n\nand ocean and weather. More advanced religions serve a function only in\nmore advanced, i.e. civilized, urbanized\n\nsocieties.\n\n\nPerhaps calling Severian a pagan god was an oversimplified and\nmisleading analogy. My usual way of describing\n\nthe analogy is as a demi-god, akin to the half-breed Greco-Roman heroes.\nLike Severian, they were born not\n\nknowing their true parentage and unaware of the source of their\nsuperhuman abilities and skills." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the\nimportance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I think you are seeing a disconnect which Wolfe does not; i.e. the\nimportance of paganism to Catholicism shouldn't\n\nbe understated. The idea that Hercules serves as a prototype for Jesus\ncertainly doesn't originate with me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Antonio Marques: That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't\nin any way different from that of his disciples," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "who also performed them through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I think this is a good observation. Later Christian saints also are\nknown to perform miracles through the power of faith.\n\n In contrast to Jesus, Severian had some very devoted and faithful\nfollowers as The Concillator. He had a cult, The\n\nPelerines, who were completely devoted to the reverence of the\nConciliator and who were even in possession of the\n\nClaw. None off them appeared to have any hint of the powers Severian\nchanneled from the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Matthew Weber: Christ is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's\ncorrect to say that his power is not magical..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "... Insofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is\nwhat he believes as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On his own Catholicism, with regard to his writing, Wolfe says of\nhimself (in the Larry McCaffrey interview):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "I am a practicing Catholic, although I don't think that designation\nwould give people much of an idea about what my" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "beliefs are. People have a very limited, stereotyped view of what it\nmeans to be a Catholic......." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": ".....I certainly don't dismiss religious or other mystical forms of\nspeculation out of hand. I read it and try to make my own" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "judgments about it. And in The Book Of The New Sun I tried to work out\nsome of the implications of my beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Marc Aramini: Yes, I am quite sure Wolfe subscribes to the whole \"one\nin being with the Father\" creed - Christ is fully human" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "and fully divine (a similar paradox to the whole three in one, one in\nthree theological parsing - we aren't dealing with" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Arianism or Gnosticism in Wolfe ... oh wait, maybe sometimes we are\n....)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I think this is a good discussion. In deciding whether Catholicism is\nseparate from paganism or is part of a continuous\n\nprogression from it, I think there is sort of a Necker Cube effect going\non. The picture changes, depending on what\n\nperspective you are viewing from. My sense is that Wolfe is aware of\nthis Necker Cube and plays with the different\n\nperspectives in the course of his writing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T18:16:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes - one in being/consubstantial with God the father ( the book of the\nnew sun even goes as far as saying the increate IS the New Sun - orthodox\nas it gets)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Monday, October 6, 2014, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nAntonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox\ntheology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf.\nhttp://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God,\nthe Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully\nhuman: twi-natured.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else.\nThat is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different\nfrom that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God.\nThat is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I\nsay dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but\nbecause of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Through faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say\nthat his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more\npowerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to\nlift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is\ninherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what\nhe believes as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply\n'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have\nperformed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis'\n(or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates\nin their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became\nman, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for\nthis is 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 8, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 7, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the\nbeginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator\nand he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in\naddition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he\nonce again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<53CA8A78-40BF-4737-9F5A-3F15DB831D46@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T18:35:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l, I don't know where you're getting my presentation of Catholic/Orthodox theology from, but your 'wrong' is wrong - where exactly did I say anything about the issue you mention here? (I have said plenty about it, but not, I think, on this forum, much less 'wrong').\n\nMmmmm - could it be the way you parsed 'wasn't...because he was God'? I thought it was clear in context. I don't know how to be more clear without major rewriting. \n(For the record, my 'was' is merely because I'm referring to a specific time in the past. It has no implications outside.)\n\nNo dia 06/10/2014, ?s 18:54, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox theology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God, the Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully human: twi-natured.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nChrist the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God. That is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I say dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some magical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:\nAnd part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2 Peter 1.3-4. \n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nThis is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a Judeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in for good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many eye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead, healing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally planted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never, say, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest impression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such as the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of the New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't be understated. \n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T18:41:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<53CA8A78-40BF-4737-9F5A-3F15DB831D46@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Antonio, it was this:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God,\nnothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't\nin any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed\nthem through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "While I can see in looking back that you are not saying \"He isn't God,\" it\nsure looked to me like you were - the next line even more so:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God,\nbut because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Can you see where I might have thought \"not because he was God\" meant \"he\nwas not God?\" I could have read more carefully ... bu t I think you could\nhave written it a bit more carefully also." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques \nwrote:\nDan'l, I don't know where you're getting my presentation of\nCatholic/Orthodox theology from, but your 'wrong' is wrong - where exactly\ndid I say anything about the issue you mention here? (I have said plenty\nabout it, but not, I think, on this forum, much less 'wrong').\n\nMmmmm - could it be the way you parsed 'wasn't...because he was God'? I\nthought it was clear in context. I don't know how to be more clear without\nmajor rewriting.\n(For the record, my 'was' is merely because I'm referring to a specific\ntime in the past. It has no implications outside.)\n\nNo dia 06/10/2014, ?s 18:54, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \nescreveu:\n\nAntonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox\ntheology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf.\nhttp://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God,\nthe Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully\nhuman: twi-natured.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else.\nThat is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different\nfrom that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God.\nThat is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I\nsay dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but\nbecause of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Through faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say\nthat his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more\npowerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to\nlift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is\ninherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what\nhe believes as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "And Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some\nmagical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "And part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply\n'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have\nperformed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis'\n(or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates\nin their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became\nman, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for\nthis is 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "This is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a\nJudeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in\nfor good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many\neye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead,\nhealing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally\nplanted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never,\nsay, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest\nimpression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a\nChrist. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose\nmythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such\nas the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of\nthe New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with\nmythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works\nshouldn't be understated.\n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 8, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <\ndstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 7, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the\nbeginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator\nand he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in\naddition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe\nunderwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he\nonce again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4ECFC890-FD9A-41EE-967D-BAD5ECF01A30@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-06T19:53:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No dia 06/10/2014, ?s 19:41, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio, it was this:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God, \nnothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't\nin any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed\nthem through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "While I can see in looking back that you are not saying \"He isn't God,\" it sure looked to me like you were - the next line even more so:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God,\nbut because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Can you see where I might have thought \"not because he was God\" meant \"he was not God?\" I could have read more carefully ... bu t I think you could have written it a bit more carefully also." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think if I meant what you read I'd have to put in a parenthetical '(which he wasn't)'. You are correct in that my phrasing is suboptimal, but I don't see how to improve on it other than rewriting it all. On the other hand, the issue itself of the divinity of Christ was completely absent from my mind when I wrote that, so I wasn't trying to be cautious in regard to it. I was merely concerned with what i think is an important point about the miracles themselves. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\nDan'l, I don't know where you're getting my presentation of Catholic/Orthodox theology from, but your 'wrong' is wrong - where exactly did I say anything about the issue you mention here? (I have said plenty about it, but not, I think, on this forum, much less 'wrong').\n\nMmmmm - could it be the way you parsed 'wasn't...because he was God'? I thought it was clear in context. I don't know how to be more clear without major rewriting. \n(For the record, my 'was' is merely because I'm referring to a specific time in the past. It has no implications outside.)\n\nNo dia 06/10/2014, ?s 18:54, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Antonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox theology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God, the Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully human: twi-natured.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nChrist the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God. That is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I say dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well.\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some magical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:\nAnd part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2 Peter 1.3-4. \n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nThis is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a Judeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in for good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many eye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead, healing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally planted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never, say, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest impression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such as the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of the New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't be understated. \n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011C4B@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-07T11:58:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform miracles. At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind, and asked God why He had forsaken Him.\n\nThis is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several reason why I’m not a Christian.\n\nRick\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\nSent: Monday, October 06, 2014 2:42 PM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nAntonio, it was this:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God,\nnothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't\nin any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed\nthem through faith in God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "While I can see in looking back that you are not saying \"He isn't God,\" it sure looked to me like you were - the next line even more so:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God,\nbut because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Can you see where I might have thought \"not because he was God\" meant \"he was not God?\" I could have read more carefully ... bu t I think you could have written it a bit more carefully also.\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques > wrote:\nDan'l, I don't know where you're getting my presentation of Catholic/Orthodox theology from, but your 'wrong' is wrong - where exactly did I say anything about the issue you mention here? (I have said plenty about it, but not, I think, on this forum, much less 'wrong').\n\nMmmmm - could it be the way you parsed 'wasn't...because he was God'? I thought it was clear in context. I don't know how to be more clear without major rewriting.\n(For the record, my 'was' is merely because I'm referring to a specific time in the past. It has no implications outside.)\n\nNo dia 06/10/2014, ?s 18:54, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" > escreveu:\nAntonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox theology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God, the Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully human: twi-natured.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques > wrote:\nChrist the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God. That is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I say dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber > wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well.\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques > wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some magical power belonging to himself.\n\nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry > wrote:\nAnd part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini > wrote:\nThis is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a Judeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in for good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many eye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead, healing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally planted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never, say, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest impression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such as the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of the New Sun).\n\nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't be understated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee > wrote:\nOn Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff > wrote:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\nFor all that nature by her mother wit\nCould frame in earth.\n Edmund Spenser (1552-1599), The Faerie Queene [1590], bk. IV [1596], canto 10, st. 21\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<870B0F29-B506-4F0A-BCF9-46613156B680@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-07T13:37:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011C4B@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The point of this sub thread is precisely that according to orthodoxy Christ's ability to perform miracles was under the *human* part. The other issues you bring up are another matter. \n\nNo dia 07/10/2014, ?s 12:58, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform miracles. At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind, and asked God why He had forsaken Him.\n \nThis is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several reason why I’m not a Christian.\n \nRick\n \nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\nSent: Monday, October 06, 2014 2:42 PM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n \nAntonio, it was this:\n " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ the man performed miracles through his faith in God, \nnothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't\nin any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed\nthem through faith in God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \nWhile I can see in looking back that you are not saying \"He isn't God,\" it sure looked to me like you were - the next line even more so:\n " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God,\nbut because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \nCan you see where I might have thought \"not because he was God\" meant \"he was not God?\" I could have read more carefully ... bu t I think you could have written it a bit more carefully also.\n \n \n \nOn Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\nDan'l, I don't know where you're getting my presentation of Catholic/Orthodox theology from, but your 'wrong' is wrong - where exactly did I say anything about the issue you mention here? (I have said plenty about it, but not, I think, on this forum, much less 'wrong').\n \nMmmmm - could it be the way you parsed 'wasn't...because he was God'? I thought it was clear in context. I don't know how to be more clear without major rewriting. \n(For the record, my 'was' is merely because I'm referring to a specific time in the past. It has no implications outside.)\n\nNo dia 06/10/2014, ?s 18:54, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:\n\nAntonio, I don't know where you're getting your Catholic/Orthodox theology, but it's wrong. Both churches clearly teach (cf. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html) that Jesus Christ was God, the Son, begotten of the Father, true God from true God, but *also* fully human: twi-natured.\n \nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nChrist the man performed miracles through his faith in God, nothing else. That is, Christ's ability to perform miracles wasn't in any way different from that of his disciples, who also performed them through faith in God. That is straight, orthodox (and Orthodox), Catholic teaching, or should I say dogma. Christ wasn't able to perform miracles because he was God, but because of his faith in God. He also prayed, while we're at it!\n \nOn 2 October 2014 15:39, Matthew Weber wrote:\nThrough faith in what, Himself?\n\nChrist is a hypostasis of divinity and humanity. It's correct to say that his power is not magical (i.e. granted him by some other, more powerful agency). It is no more magical than my power to use my arm to lift a cup of coffee to my mouth so I can drink it. My power to do so is inherent, as is Christ's to perform signs.\n\nInsofar as Wolfe is an orthodox RC, it can be assumed that this is what he believes as well.\n\n\n \nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nAnd Christ performed miracles through faith, not by the use of some magical power belonging to himself.\n \nOn 2 October 2014 15:04, Brad Henry wrote:\nAnd part of catholic teaching is that saints are not simply 'controlled by christ' in their working of miracles (many saints have performed miracles like severian') but they are in the process of 'theosis' (or, sometimes called 'divination'), being made into gods, that culminates in their resurrection to immortality. It is a christian quip: \"God became man, so that man might become (a) god.\" The traditional biblical cite for this is 2 Peter 1.3-4.\n \nOn Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nThis is obvious, but for me the miracles make him pretty explicitly a Judeo-Christian wonderworker/savior with a little sin and torture thrown in for good measure (bleeding from the forehead when he sees the many eye-winged butterfly, turning water to wine, resurrecting the dead, healing, carrying a huge cross shaped torture device which is occasionally planted in the ground, being tempted by Satan almost verbatim (but never, say, transforming into an animal like a Pagan god)) - my earliest impression when I was a young boy was not that he was a normal person but a Christ. The pagan gods are the unnatural creatures in New Sun whose mythologies are incorporated and transformed into Christian stories [such as the flood and the story of Genesis]. (At least throughout The Book of the New Sun).\n \nI never fancied Sev ordinary. While clearly Wolfe loves playing with mythical creatures, the importance of his Catholicism to his works shouldn't be understated. \n\nOn Thursday, October 2, 2014, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian is a (pagan) god. He has a presentiment of it at the beginning of his story but by the end\n\nof Citadel, we are meant to understand that he was The Conciliator and he will be The New Sun.\n\n\nBy the end of Urth of the New Sun we also understand that in addition to his superhuman healing\n\npowers, he was also worshipped as Apu Punchau, he can breathe underwater, he can travel through time\n\n he is immortal (though not invulnerable), and at the very end he once again finds himself worshipped as\n\na god.\n \n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-07T13:58:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<870B0F29-B506-4F0A-BCF9-46613156B680@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Rick Norwood: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform miracles. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "and asked God why He had forsaken Him." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several reason " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "why I’m not a Christian" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful, all-knowing\n\nCreator construct every molecule of a human being and claim to not know what\n\nthat human being will do when faced with temptation?\n\n\n\nI am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I enter his worlds\n\nand try to understand them, unlike the real world, I have to become something of\n\na Christian and take leaps of faith and accept essential contradictions and otherwise\n\nbecome a bit religious. I think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a\n\nfictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important than logic and\n\nscience.\n\n\n\nFor the natural world, I think science works better." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ah. No. These words can be used subjectively but all have perfectly good " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "objective meanings. 7 x 8 = 21 is a misprision, not better than 7 x 8 = 56, not logical, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "lacking evidence, not right, and, most importantly, is wrong. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " It only seems wrong because we are all human beings with 10 fingers and primate-\n\nevolved brains. We all happen to agree on the meaning of \"7\" and \"x\". Aliens with 12 \n\nfingers and silicon brains would likely not be in agreement with us.\n\n\nMarc used a math problem because math is supposedly the \"universal\" language upon\n\nwhich we all agree. But if we really had universal access to all intelligences we would\n\nsurely find that not all agree with our human-invented math.\n\n\nMoreover, a Wolfe novel is not math. They include contradictions such as the already-cited\n\n\"Shadow Children are degenerate humans/Shadow Children are native shapeshifters\".\n\n\nAnother example is \"Yesod is in Urth's future/Yesod is in Urth's past/Yesod is outside of \n\ntime\". All three descriptions can be found in the text. I think this is a case of \"no correct \n\nanswer\". I think Wolfe is using contradiction and paradox to convey a sense of something \n\nthat our human brains are incapable of grasping." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think Lee addresses this very well. Wolfe is not a postmodernist." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I dunno. Judging by interviews, Wolfe may be a bit schizo on this point. Sometimes in \n\ninterviews he seems to suggest there are right and wrong answers to his puzzles. Other\n\ntimes he seems to acknowledge that he puts puzzles in his work for which there are no\n\ncorrect solutions (e.g. Yesod's location in time). \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-07T14:40:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Marc used a math problem\"??????????????????????????????\n\nI feel like I am arguing with myself here, where everyone misattributes who\nsaid what. At least this way I know I will surely win the argument, whether\nI am Marc, Lee, or Rick. Is something funky going on with the indent\nlevels?\n-Marc (or am I?)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Lee wrote:\nRick Norwood:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform\nmiracles." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and asked God why He had forsaken Him." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several\nreason" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "why I’m not a Christian" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,\nall-knowing\n\nCreator construct every molecule of a human being and claim to not know\nwhat\n\nthat human being will do when faced with temptation?\n\n\n\nI am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I\nenter his worlds\n\nand try to understand them, unlike the real world, I have to become\nsomething of\n\na Christian and take leaps of faith and accept essential contradictions\nand otherwise\n\nbecome a bit religious. I think that is necessary when you are trying to\nunderstand a\n\nfictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important than\nlogic and\n\nscience.\n\n\n\nFor the natural world, I think science works better." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Ah. No. These words can be used subjectively but all have perfectly good" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "objective meanings. 7 x 8 = 21 is a misprision, not better than 7 x 8 =\n56, not logical," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "lacking evidence, not right, and, most importantly, is wrong." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " It only seems wrong because we are all human beings with 10 fingers and\nprimate-\n\nevolved brains. We all happen to agree on the meaning of \"7\" and \"x\".\nAliens with 12\n\nfingers and silicon brains would likely not be in agreement with us.\n\n\nMarc used a math problem because math is supposedly the \"universal\"\nlanguage upon\n\nwhich we all agree. But if we really had universal access to all\nintelligences we would\n\nsurely find that not all agree with our human-invented math.\n\n\nMoreover, a Wolfe novel is not math. They include contradictions such as\nthe already-cited\n\n\"Shadow Children are degenerate humans/Shadow Children are native\nshapeshifters\".\n\n\nAnother example is \"Yesod is in Urth's future/Yesod is in Urth's\npast/Yesod is outside of\n\ntime\". All three descriptions can be found in the text. I think this is a\ncase of \"no correct\n\nanswer\". I think Wolfe is using contradiction and paradox to convey a\nsense of something\n\nthat our human brains are incapable of grasping." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think Lee addresses this very well. Wolfe is not a postmodernist." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I dunno. Judging by interviews, Wolfe may be a bit schizo on this point.\nSometimes in\n\ninterviews he seems to suggest there are right and wrong answers to his\npuzzles. Other\n\ntimes he seems to acknowledge that he puts puzzles in his work for which\nthere are no\n\ncorrect solutions (e.g. Yesod's location in time).\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011D1A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-07T15:00:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "First, let me apologize for getting Marc and Lee mixed up. When I read an amalgam of many posts, I sometimes get confused about who is doing what, with what, and to whom.\n\nEven though I’m not a Christian, I do respond emotionally and intellectually to the Christianity in Wolfe, and think it adds a lot to his fiction. (As it does to the fiction of Tolkien and Lewis, two more favorite authors of mine.)\n\nAliens who use a different number base is a red herring. The math is the same, independently of the language in which it is written. In any case, Wolfe writes (mostly) in English.\n\nAnd I really do think there are right and wrong interpretations of literature. As somebody said (Marc? Lee?), the ghost of Hamlet’s father is not an alien. That interpretation would be just plain wrong.\n\nRick Norwood" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-07T15:08:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011D1A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No problem. I just didn't want meaning to be confused. [And now it is\nindeed you, too, who have said that the ghost of Hamlet's father is not an\nalien, and our disjunctive posts have come full circle, three in one, one\nin three.]\nAnd the math is indeed the same, independent of the language, (as long as\nthe consciousness of the mathematician is operating in the same dimension,\nI suppose)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n First, let me apologize for getting Marc and Lee mixed up. When I read\nan amalgam of many posts, I sometimes get confused about who is doing what,\nwith what, and to whom.\n\n\n\nEven though I’m not a Christian, I do respond emotionally and\nintellectually to the Christianity in Wolfe, and think it adds a lot to his\nfiction. (As it does to the fiction of Tolkien and Lewis, two more\nfavorite authors of mine.)\n\n\n\nAliens who use a different number base is a red herring. The math is the\nsame, independently of the language in which it is written. In any case,\nWolfe writes (mostly) in English.\n\n\n\nAnd I really do think there are right and wrong interpretations of\nliterature. As somebody said (Marc? Lee?), the ghost of Hamlet’s father\nis not an alien. That interpretation would be just plain wrong.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011D47@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-07T15:27:56+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[And now it is indeed you, too, who have said that the ghost of Hamlet's father is not an alien, and our disjunctive posts have come full circle, three in one, one in three.]\n\nThou art God!\n\nRick Norwood" } ] }, { "message_id": "<19F8964C-63AE-4D92-8870-561900DF26B6@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-08T01:01:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No dia 07/10/2014, ?s 14:58, Lee escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Rick Norwood: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform miracles. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and asked God why He had forsaken Him." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several reason " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "why I’m not a Christian" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To which, of course, you're aware of solutions of various kinds. \n\nThis is disturbing. It implies that if what you conceive as logical difficulties were not present, you would find yourself a person of faith. Is that really so?\n\nI rather think that what happens is that *because* you are not a believer, *then* such tenets of religion strike you as irrational.\n\n(Tho there is the possibility that you are, in fact, religious at heart, but unable to reconcile that with your analytical mind. If that is the case, there's no need to struggle, many folks have worked out any such issues over the ages.)\n\nReligious belief is something that you either accept for yourself or you don't (you have doubts in two very different cases: 1 - you accept it but feel disheartened, 2 - you actually don't accept or don't know it at heart, but mentally you try to), and you just don't arrive at it after scientific consideration, nor abandon it after scientific consideration. No one acquires or loses faith through reason, for the very same reason that no one acquires or loses a romantic interest or a favourite dish through reason.\n\nYes, many seem to think that faith is some kind of primitive science, and, of course, if it were so then one might abandon it for scientific reasons. And no doubt there are many using their religion like some kind of science, but that's like deciding that a person has a number of good qualities because you happen to like the person. The opposite, also to be found frequently, is to decide that you like some dish because current science says it's healthy. And there are those who think they hold some sentiment dearly because they put some given work into it. All these, be they true or false, are orthogonal to the things they're supposed to be linked to.\n\nThat's not to say that belief cannot grow aided by external factors, or dwindle, but it remains fundamentally ruled by itself.\n\nBut it may be the case that what you're saying is not that you find such tenets of Christian belief illogical or otherwise, but rather aesthetically or emotionally unappealing (as opposed to rationally unappealing). That's a whole different matter. De gustibus, etc, I can only say that in that case one can't really make a judgement based on isolated bits, for the same reason you can't do it with a painting. I mean, you can, it's a free country." } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011EDE@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-08T14:08:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\n\talternative\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<19F8964C-63AE-4D92-8870-561900DF26B6@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I was raised a Christian, have read the Bible from Genesis to Revelations, and find the teachings of Christ deeply appealing. I attended Grace Fellowship Church for years, and accepted Jesus Christ as my savior. I'm still His if he wants me. I gave up Grace Fellowship for one reason (they said that every good Christian must vote for George W. Bush) and gave up Christianity for another reason (I could not make sense of it; for me to believe in a statement I must first understand what the statement means). \n\nAs for faith, according to Paul's Letter to the Romans, faith is a gift from God, and he decided before the creation who would get the gift of faith and be saved and who would not get the gift and be damned. Cannot the potter discard defective pots if He wants? Evidently I'm a defective pot.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Pedro Marques\nSent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 9:02 PM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nNo dia 07/10/2014, ?s 14:58, Lee escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Rick Norwood: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform miracles. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind, " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and asked God why He had forsaken Him." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of several reason " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "why I’m not a Christian" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To which, of course, you're aware of solutions of various kinds. \n\nThis is disturbing. It implies that if what you conceive as logical difficulties were not present, you would find yourself a person of faith. Is that really so?\n\nI rather think that what happens is that *because* you are not a believer, *then* such tenets of religion strike you as irrational.\n\n(Tho there is the possibility that you are, in fact, religious at heart, but unable to reconcile that with your analytical mind. If that is the case, there's no need to struggle, many folks have worked out any such issues over the ages.)\n\nReligious belief is something that you either accept for yourself or you don't (you have doubts in two very different cases: 1 - you accept it but feel disheartened, 2 - you actually don't accept or don't know it at heart, but mentally you try to), and you just don't arrive at it after scientific consideration, nor abandon it after scientific consideration. No one acquires or loses faith through reason, for the very same reason that no one acquires or loses a romantic interest or a favourite dish through reason.\n\nYes, many seem to think that faith is some kind of primitive science, and, of course, if it were so then one might abandon it for scientific reasons. And no doubt there are many using their religion like some kind of science, but that's like deciding that a person has a number of good qualities because you happen to like the person. The opposite, also to be found frequently, is to decide that you like some dish because current science says it's healthy. And there are those who think they hold some sentiment dearly because they put some given work into it. All these, be they true or false, are orthogonal to the things they're supposed to be linked to.\n\nThat's not to say that belief cannot grow aided by external factors, or dwindle, but it remains fundamentally ruled by itself.\n\nBut it may be the case that what you're saying is not that you find such tenets of Christian belief illogical or otherwise, but rather aesthetically or emotionally unappealing (as opposed to rationally unappealing). That's a whole different matter. De gustibus, etc, I can only say that in that case one can't really make a judgement based on isolated bits, for the same reason you can't do it with a painting. I mean, you can, it's a free country." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-08T16:28:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D011EDE@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "We're all defective pots.\n\nBased on what you say, I'd wager that you do have faith but find the\ntheology intellectually abstruse and some so called divines ethically\nquestionable. To the former I can only say that maybe, like some kind of\nreverse Wittgenstein's ladder, any durable culture has to be upheld by\nseemingly uninterpretable mysteries (at least, I know of none which\naren't). To the latter, well, I'm blessed to live in an environment where\nthe clergy are wise enough not to try to tell anyone whom to vote for (I\nhear stories, now and then, of some priest who may have done so, but\nthey've always come from people who I know never go to church)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8 October 2014 15:08, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \nwrote:\nI was raised a Christian, have read the Bible from Genesis to Revelations,\nand find the teachings of Christ deeply appealing. I attended Grace\nFellowship Church for years, and accepted Jesus Christ as my savior. I'm\nstill His if he wants me. I gave up Grace Fellowship for one reason (they\nsaid that every good Christian must vote for George W. Bush) and gave up\nChristianity for another reason (I could not make sense of it; for me to\nbelieve in a statement I must first understand what the statement means).\n\nAs for faith, according to Paul's Letter to the Romans, faith is a gift\nfrom God, and he decided before the creation who would get the gift of\nfaith and be saved and who would not get the gift and be damned. Cannot\nthe potter discard defective pots if He wants? Evidently I'm a defective\npot.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio\nPedro Marques\nSent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 9:02 PM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev\n\nNo dia 07/10/2014, ?s 14:58, Lee escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Rick Norwood:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Christ was entirely God, all powerful, all knowing, able to perform\nmiracles." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "At the same time, he was all human, there was much he did not know, and" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "much he could not do. He prayed to God, asked God to change His mind," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "and asked God why He had forsaken Him." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "This is one of the great Mysteries of Catholic dogma — and one of\nseveral reason" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "why I’m not a Christian" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "To which, of course, you're aware of solutions of various kinds.\n\nThis is disturbing. It implies that if what you conceive as logical\ndifficulties were not present, you would find yourself a person of faith.\nIs that really so?\n\nI rather think that what happens is that *because* you are not a believer,\n*then* such tenets of religion strike you as irrational.\n\n(Tho there is the possibility that you are, in fact, religious at heart,\nbut unable to reconcile that with your analytical mind. If that is the\ncase, there's no need to struggle, many folks have worked out any such\nissues over the ages.)\n\nReligious belief is something that you either accept for yourself or you\ndon't (you have doubts in two very different cases: 1 - you accept it but\nfeel disheartened, 2 - you actually don't accept or don't know it at heart,\nbut mentally you try to), and you just don't arrive at it after scientific\nconsideration, nor abandon it after scientific consideration. No one\nacquires or loses faith through reason, for the very same reason that no\none acquires or loses a romantic interest or a favourite dish through\nreason.\n\nYes, many seem to think that faith is some kind of primitive science, and,\nof course, if it were so then one might abandon it for scientific reasons.\nAnd no doubt there are many using their religion like some kind of science,\nbut that's like deciding that a person has a number of good qualities\nbecause you happen to like the person. The opposite, also to be found\nfrequently, is to decide that you like some dish because current science\nsays it's healthy. And there are those who think they hold some sentiment\ndearly because they put some given work into it. All these, be they true or\nfalse, are orthogonal to the things they're supposed to be linked to.\n\nThat's not to say that belief cannot grow aided by external factors, or\ndwindle, but it remains fundamentally ruled by itself.\n\nBut it may be the case that what you're saying is not that you find such\ntenets of Christian belief illogical or otherwise, but rather aesthetically\nor emotionally unappealing (as opposed to rationally unappealing). That's a\nwhole different matter. De gustibus, etc, I can only say that in that case\none can't really make a judgement based on isolated bits, for the same\nreason you can't do it with a painting. I mean, you can, it's a free\ncountry.\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<54368D3F.3090906@bindweed.com>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T13:27:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 06/10/2014 15:19, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nDeification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered \nto the saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to \nan infinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and \nrelative closeness to God (compared to our own existence) does not \nmake one a literal God." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Catholic Church doesn't generally fulminate about the theological \ndetails of the beliefs of the faithful. The saints - and Mary too - in \nprinciple intercede with the Lord when prayed to, rather than answering \nprayers themselves. But if somebody feels that they probably have \nauthorisation to answer some prayers on their own, nobody is preaching \nhellfire and damnation just because they got the theology wrong.\n\nI think it's fair to say there is more of a 'community of the faithful' \nethos in the Catholic Church than in many or most of the Protestant \nchurches. Bible reading, for example, is not discouraged but neither is \nit heavily encouraged, There's no element of 'every man his own \ntheologian'. A simple faith and a good life are more than sufficient.\n\n[By the way, it is my understanding that there are 'Catholics' of a \nslightly different colour in the US. I'm speaking of Roman Catholicism \nas practised in Ireland, say.]\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5436921A.5070703@bindweed.com>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T13:48:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:\nI'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful, \nall-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and \nclaim to not know what that human being will do when faced with \ntemptation?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Does He claim that?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I \nenter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real world, I \nhave to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and \naccept essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit religious. \nI think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a \nfictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important \nthan logic and science. For the natural world, I think science works \nbetter." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The same problem arises in science. As far as we know scientifically, a \nrobot with a computer brain could - and perhaps soon will - be \nmanufactured. This robot may have a determinate programming, such that \nwe can predict by simulation how he will respond to any stimulus. Yet \nwe know of no 'scientific' reason why he should not have free will just \nas much as we do.\n\n[You could put a random number generator based on quantum decisions in \nhis brain to make him sometimes unpredictable on principle. But making \nhim act erratically for no good reason hardly enhances his free will!]\n\nSee also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T14:02:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<5436921A.5070703@bindweed.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You don't need to build a robot. Humans, animals and other critters exhibit\n'will', yet to a physician they work mechanically. You think you raised\nyour arm because you wanted to? Nay, it was because some electrical current\nmoved down some nerves, leading some muscles to change their Calcium\ndynamics. NB I'm not discussing the 'mind/matter interface'; I'm keeping\nstrictly to the 'matter' side of it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9 October 2014 14:48, Gerry Quinn wrote:\n\nOn 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,\nall-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and claim to\nnot know what that human being will do when faced with temptation?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Does He claim that?\n\n I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I\nenter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real world, I have\nto become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and accept\nessential contradictions and otherwise become a bit religious. I think that\nis necessary when you are trying to understand a fictionally created world." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Intent and meaning become more important than logic and science. For the\nnatural world, I think science works better." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The same problem arises in science. As far as we know scientifically, a\nrobot with a computer brain could - and perhaps soon will - be\nmanufactured. This robot may have a determinate programming, such that we\ncan predict by simulation how he will respond to any stimulus. Yet we know\nof no 'scientific' reason why he should not have free will just as much as\nwe do.\n\n[You could put a random number generator based on quantum decisions in his\nbrain to make him sometimes unpredictable on principle. But making him act\nerratically for no good reason hardly enhances his free will!]\n\nSee also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T14:10:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<54368D3F.3090906@bindweed.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Your assessment fits my understanding of American roman Catholicism in\ngeneral (I am Catholic). The catechism has a clause that says one need\nnever have heard of Jesus to be saved, but that belief in Him is the path\nwe know to be true.\n\nI remember kids arguing with me when I was in grade school \"you worship\nMary\" and I thought it asinine. Reverence and respect and asking someone in\na position of favor to intercede on your behalf is not truly worship -\nthough it does assume that the one you address has powers and favor beyond\nyours." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thursday, October 9, 2014, Gerry Quinn wrote:\n\nOn 06/10/2014 15:19, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Deification is a Protestant over-reaction to the great respect offered to\nthe saints and Mary as intermediaries on the behalf of humanity to an\ninfinitely incomprehensible God. Reverence and awe and relative closeness\nto God (compared to our own existence) does not make one a literal God.\n\n The Catholic Church doesn't generally fulminate about the theological\ndetails of the beliefs of the faithful. The saints - and Mary too - in\nprinciple intercede with the Lord when prayed to, rather than answering\nprayers themselves. But if somebody feels that they probably have\nauthorisation to answer some prayers on their own, nobody is preaching\nhellfire and damnation just because they got the theology wrong." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think it's fair to say there is more of a 'community of the faithful'\nethos in the Catholic Church than in many or most of the Protestant\nchurches. Bible reading, for example, is not discouraged but neither is it\nheavily encouraged, There's no element of 'every man his own theologian'.\nA simple faith and a good life are more than sufficient.\n\n[By the way, it is my understanding that there are 'Catholics' of a\nslightly different colour in the US. I'm speaking of Roman Catholicism as\npractised in Ireland, say.]\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012A88@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-09T14:19:13+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<5436921A.5070703@bindweed.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I didn't find even a hint of free will in the Bible. God decided who would be damned and who would be saved before he created the universe. That doesn't leave much room for free will.\n\nOn the other hand, I once published a paper proving that action by an effort of will is at least possible, else consciousness would never have evolved. It couldn't contribute to survival and reproduction if it couldn't do anything.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Quinn\nSent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 9:48 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:\nI'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful, \nall-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and \nclaim to not know what that human being will do when faced with \ntemptation?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Does He claim that?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I \nenter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real world, I \nhave to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and \naccept essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit religious.\nI think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a \nfictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important \nthan logic and science. For the natural world, I think science works \nbetter." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The same problem arises in science. As far as we know scientifically, a robot with a computer brain could - and perhaps soon will - be manufactured. This robot may have a determinate programming, such that we can predict by simulation how he will respond to any stimulus. Yet we know of no 'scientific' reason why he should not have free will just as much as we do.\n\n[You could put a random number generator based on quantum decisions in his brain to make him sometimes unpredictable on principle. But making him act erratically for no good reason hardly enhances his free will!]\n\nSee also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "<54369969.8040901@bindweed.com>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T14:19:21+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 09/10/2014 15:02, Ant?nio Marques wrote:\nYou don't need to build a robot. Humans, animals and other critters \nexhibit 'will', yet to a physician they work mechanically. You think \nyou raised your arm because you wanted to? Nay, it was because some \nelectrical current moved down some nerves, leading some muscles to \nchange their Calcium dynamics. NB I'm not discussing the 'mind/matter \ninterface'; I'm keeping strictly to the 'matter' side of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, but it would be difficult or impossible to make predictions for a \nbiological organism. There's even wiggle room for some quantum chaos to \nwork its way up into decision making. A deterministic robot in a \nvirtual environment could be simulated exactly.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-09T16:37:48+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012A88@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Frederick, no. God did not \"decide\" who would be damned/saved; He *knew*\nwho would be damned/saved. There is a key difference. He creates beings\nwith free will, but because of omniscience and His position outside of\nTime, he knows in advance what they will do and how He will respond to\nthose actions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\nI didn't find even a hint of free will in the Bible. God decided who\nwould be damned and who would be saved before he created the universe.\nThat doesn't leave much room for free will.\n\nOn the other hand, I once published a paper proving that action by an\neffort of will is at least possible, else consciousness would never have\nevolved. It couldn't contribute to survival and reproduction if it\ncouldn't do anything.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Quinn\nSent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 9:48 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\nlineage for Sev\n\n\nOn 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,\nall-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and\nclaim to not know what that human being will do when faced with\ntemptation?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Does He claim that?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So when I\nenter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real world, I\nhave to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and\naccept essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit religious.\nI think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a\nfictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important\nthan logic and science. For the natural world, I think science works\nbetter." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The same problem arises in science. As far as we know scientifically, a\nrobot with a computer brain could - and perhaps soon will - be\nmanufactured. This robot may have a determinate programming, such that we\ncan predict by simulation how he will respond to any stimulus. Yet we know\nof no 'scientific' reason why he should not have free will just as much as\nwe do.\n\n[You could put a random number generator based on quantum decisions in his\nbrain to make him sometimes unpredictable on principle. But making him act\nerratically for no good reason hardly enhances his free will!]\n\nSee also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5437C586.7080302@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-10T11:39:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "His position outside Time also prevents his becoming terminally bored \nfrom all that omniscience, I hope." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/9/2014 12:37 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nFrederick, no. God did not \"decide\" who would be damned/saved; He \n*knew* who would be damned/saved. There is a key difference. He \ncreates beings with free will, but because of omniscience and His \nposition outside of Time, he knows in advance what they will do and \nhow He will respond to those actions.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \n> wrote:\n\n I didn't find even a hint of free will in the Bible. God decided\n who would be damned and who would be saved before he created the\n universe. That doesn't leave much room for free will.\n\n On the other hand, I once published a paper proving that action by\n an effort of will is at least possible, else consciousness would\n never have evolved. It couldn't contribute to survival and\n reproduction if it couldn't do anything.\n\n Rick Norwood\n\n -----Original Message-----\n From: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n ] On Behalf Of Gerry Quinn\n Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 9:48 AM\n To: The Urth Mailing List\n Subject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\n alternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n On 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:\n > I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,\n > all-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and\n > claim to not know what that human being will do when faced with\n > temptation?\n\n Does He claim that?\n\n > I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So\n when I\n > enter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real\n world, I\n > have to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and\n > accept essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit\n religious.\n > I think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a\n > fictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important\n > than logic and science. For the natural world, I think science works\n > better.\n\n The same problem arises in science. As far as we know\n scientifically, a robot with a computer brain could - and perhaps\n soon will - be manufactured. This robot may have a determinate\n programming, such that we can predict by simulation how he will\n respond to any stimulus. Yet we know of no 'scientific' reason\n why he should not have free will just as much as we do.\n\n [You could put a random number generator based on quantum\n decisions in his brain to make him sometimes unpredictable on\n principle. But making him act erratically for no good reason\n hardly enhances his free will!]\n\n See also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n - Gerry Quinn\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012BF0@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-10T12:06:51+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I’m aware that many people believe this. In fact, I believe it up to a point. (Our free will is very limited, maybe limited only to the power to say No to temptation.) What I said was there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that. (Desert peoples tend to believe in Kismet, not free will.)\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\nSent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 12:38 PM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012C3A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-10T13:18:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<5437C586.7080302@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If He gets bored, he can always smite a few Philistines.\n\nThere is a Psalm where God fights a dragon, and another Psalm where God sits in a pantheon of Gods, sort of like a primitive Justice League. \n\nI trust you are all familiar with the South Park pantheon which, if memory serves, consists of Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Krishna, and Aquaman. \n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of David Stockhoff\nSent: Friday, October 10, 2014 7:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nHis position outside Time also prevents his becoming terminally bored from all that omniscience, I hope." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/9/2014 12:37 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nFrederick, no. God did not \"decide\" who would be damned/saved; He\n*knew* who would be damned/saved. There is a key difference. He \ncreates beings with free will, but because of omniscience and His \nposition outside of Time, he knows in advance what they will do and \nhow He will respond to those actions.\n\nOn Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson \n> wrote:\n\n I didn't find even a hint of free will in the Bible. God decided\n who would be damned and who would be saved before he created the\n universe. That doesn't leave much room for free will.\n\n On the other hand, I once published a paper proving that action by\n an effort of will is at least possible, else consciousness would\n never have evolved. It couldn't contribute to survival and\n reproduction if it couldn't do anything.\n\n Rick Norwood\n\n -----Original Message-----\n From: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n ] On Behalf Of Gerry Quinn\n Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 9:48 AM\n To: The Urth Mailing List\n Subject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\n alternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n On 07/10/2014 14:58, Lee wrote:\n > I'd add to that the paradox of Free Will. How can an all-powerful,\n > all-knowing Creator construct every molecule of a human being and\n > claim to not know what that human being will do when faced with\n > temptation?\n\n Does He claim that?\n\n > I am not at all religious myself. But I know Gene Wolfe is. So\n when I\n > enter his worlds and try to understand them, unlike the real\n world, I\n > have to become something of a Christian and take leaps of faith and\n > accept essential contradictions and otherwise become a bit\n religious.\n > I think that is necessary when you are trying to understand a\n > fictionally created world. Intent and meaning become more important\n > than logic and science. For the natural world, I think science works\n > better.\n\n The same problem arises in science. As far as we know\n scientifically, a robot with a computer brain could - and perhaps\n soon will - be manufactured. This robot may have a determinate\n programming, such that we can predict by simulation how he will\n respond to any stimulus. Yet we know of no 'scientific' reason\n why he should not have free will just as much as we do.\n\n [You could put a random number generator based on quantum\n decisions in his brain to make him sometimes unpredictable on\n principle. But making him act erratically for no good reason\n hardly enhances his free will!]\n\n See also Newcomb's Paradox.\n\n - Gerry Quinn\n _______________________________________________\n Urth Mailing List\n To post, write urth at urth.net \n Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net\n _______________________________________________\n Urth Mailing List\n To post, write urth at urth.net \n Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net\n\n\n\n\n--\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-10T13:21:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012BF0@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Bible is big enough to have a bit of everything in it. Catholics consider that faith is what sustains the Bible, rather than the reverse, so they're happy to read everything in it in light of Matthew 22:40. (That's an important difference from other religions on the approach to Scripture. Yes, it isn't always lived up to, but you can end any argument with it.)\n\n(Being a Catholic is very different from being a Protestant when it comes to the 'ethos'. Gerry's account of what it means to be Catholic in Ireland is in line with what I know of being Catholic everywhere else. NB that Gerry, last time I heard, was not a believer in God or Church.)\n\nIn Exodus there is the part where God tells Moses He will abandon His people, because otherwise He'll become so angry at their behaviour that He'll smite them all. Moses reasons with Him not to do that. I find that throws an interesting light on the issue of free will. \n\nAnd I actually think free will is central to an understanding of God and Catholic doctrine. In that regard, have you read St Augustine's book on the issue?\n\nNo dia 10/10/2014, ?s 13:06, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I’m aware that many people believe this. In fact, I believe it up to a point. (Our free will is very limited, maybe limited only to the power to say No to temptation.) What I said was there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that. (Desert peoples tend to believe in Kismet, not free will.)\n \nRick Norwood\n \nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\nSent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 12:38 PM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012C5A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-10T13:27:28+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\n\talternative\tlineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Of course God has free will. But not Moses, as far as I can tell.\n\nI’m of course talking ideal religious philosophy. Most of the people I know couldn’t give a good god damn what the Bible says. They think the Bible is inerrant, which means that what conservative talk radio says the Bible says is inerrant, and never mind the words in the Book. On Conservapedia they have a version of a Bible with all the Liberal Lies removed. (For example, Jesus didn’t forgive the Second Thief, because He wasn’t Soft On Crime.)\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Pedro Marques\nSent: Friday, October 10, 2014 9:22 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nThe Bible is big enough to have a bit of everything in it. Catholics consider that faith is what sustains the Bible, rather than the reverse, so they're happy to read everything in it in light of Matthew 22:40. (That's an important difference from other religions on the approach to Scripture. Yes, it isn't always lived up to, but you can end any argument with it.)\n\n(Being a Catholic is very different from being a Protestant when it comes to the 'ethos'. Gerry's account of what it means to be Catholic in Ireland is in line with what I know of being Catholic everywhere else. NB that Gerry, last time I heard, was not a believer in God or Church.)\n\nIn Exodus there is the part where God tells Moses He will abandon His people, because otherwise He'll become so angry at their behaviour that He'll smite them all. Moses reasons with Him not to do that. I find that throws an interesting light on the issue of free will.\n\nAnd I actually think free will is central to an understanding of God and Catholic doctrine. In that regard, have you read St Augustine's book on the issue?\n\nNo dia 10/10/2014, ?s 13:06, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" > escreveu:\nI’m aware that many people believe this. In fact, I believe it up to a point. (Our free will is very limited, maybe limited only to the power to say No to temptation.) What I said was there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that. (Desert peoples tend to believe in Kismet, not free will.)\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\nSent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 12:38 PM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev\n\nFrederick, no. God did not \"decide\" who would be damned/saved; He *knew* who would be damned/saved. There is a key difference. He creates beings with free will, but because of omniscience and His position outside of Time, he knows in advance what they will do and how He will respond to those actions." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-10T15:23:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative\n lineage for Sev", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012C5A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Frederick - if Moses didn't have free will, he wouldn't have smote the rock\na second time..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 6:27 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n Of course God has free will. But not Moses, as far as I can tell.\n\n\n\nI’m of course talking ideal religious philosophy. Most of the people I\nknow couldn’t give a good god damn what the Bible says. They think the\nBible is inerrant, which means that what conservative talk radio says the\nBible says is inerrant, and never mind the words in the Book. On\nConservapedia they have a version of a Bible with all the Liberal Lies\nremoved. (For example, Jesus didn’t forgive the Second Thief, because He\nwasn’t Soft On Crime.)\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio\nPedro Marques\n*Sent:* Friday, October 10, 2014 9:22 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an\nalternative lineage for Sev\n\n\n\nThe Bible is big enough to have a bit of everything in it. Catholics\nconsider that faith is what sustains the Bible, rather than the reverse, so\nthey're happy to read everything in it in light of Matthew 22:40. (That's\nan important difference from other religions on the approach to Scripture.\nYes, it isn't always lived up to, but you can end any argument with it.)\n\n\n\n(Being a Catholic is very different from being a Protestant when it comes\nto the 'ethos'. Gerry's account of what it means to be Catholic in Ireland\nis in line with what I know of being Catholic everywhere else. NB that\nGerry, last time I heard, was not a believer in God or Church.)\n\n\n\nIn Exodus there is the part where God tells Moses He will abandon His\npeople, because otherwise He'll become so angry at their behaviour that\nHe'll smite them all. Moses reasons with Him not to do that. I find that\nthrows an interesting light on the issue of free will.\n\n\n\nAnd I actually think free will is central to an understanding of God and\nCatholic doctrine. In that regard, have you read St Augustine's book on the\nissue?\n\n\nNo dia 10/10/2014, ?s 13:06, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> escreveu:\n\n I’m aware that many people believe this. In fact, I believe it up to a\npoint. (Our free will is very limited, maybe limited only to the power to\nsay No to temptation.) What I said was there is nothing in the Bible to\nsuggest that. (Desert peoples tend to believe in Kismet, not free will.)\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf Of *Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\n*Sent:* Thursday, October 09, 2014 12:38 PM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<54389857.1070200@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-11T02:39:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D012C5A@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/10/2014 8:27 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nOf course God has free will. But not Moses, as far as I can tell." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I believe this is somewhat backwards. God's omnipotent, omniscient, and \neternal character exclude any process of decision or choice-making on \nHis part. He is changeless and perfect, so there is no change of mind \npossible or necessary, and being eternal this is always the case.\n\nIronically, this also means that people *do* have free will, as my \nfriend Bill Stoddard explains it:\n\n\"Now, if physical reality is essentially deterministic if each \nfundamental physical entity, based on its nature, state, and \nrelationships, is capable of only one specific next state and one \nspecific action then human mental processes are deterministic too, and \nwe don't have free will. But if physical reality is essentially \nindeterministic?if there are occasions when an entity can enter one of \ntwo or more next states, or perform one of two or more actions, and \nwhich comes next is not merely unpredictable but truly random then that \ndoesn't give us any more free will, either. Having our actions changed \nfrom time to time by the throw of a set of cosmic dice does not equate \nto our being free to choose among different actions, or to determine our \nown destiny; it amounts to our being at the mercy of chance. So in a \nphysicalistic view, genuine free will doesn't seem to make much sense. \nIt's hard even to describe what it would consist in.\n\n\"In theism, on the other hand, we have a model where God knows all of \nour actions, past, present, and future, in a single timeless instant of \ncomprehension. In effect, the entire history of the cosmos is a vast \nsimulation model that God is running except that God has infinite \ncomputational capacity and does not need time to run the simulation. But \nGod is also able to interpret the thoughts and feelings and choices that \nthe simulated particles constitute, and thus to simultaneously know the \ncosmos as a story. And as an author, God can enter into the story and \nidentify with its characters. The capacity to do so is, in Christian \nterms, the Holy Spirit. But every author has the experience of \ncharacters saying, 'No, I wouldn't do that thing, I would do the other \nthing.' And God, having complete control over the whole narrative, can \nrewrite it instantaneously to conform to our saying that rewrite it not \non the basis of physical determinism, but on the basis of the content of \nour thoughts and feelings and desires. God can, if necessary, look back \nto the big bang and adjust the place where one specific quark appears to \ngive rise to a cosmic history in which we choose salvation or damnation; \nor, if you prefer indeterminism, God can decide which random particle \nmotions will occur in our brains instant to instant for the same \npurpose. What we want miraculously but subtly changes the whole cosmos \nto enable us to be more fully the characters we are. Free will is the \ngift of the Holy Spirit.\"" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<54396A58.7010206@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-11T17:35:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<54389857.1070200@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/10/2014 10:39 PM, Jeffery Wilson clueland.com wrote:\nOn 10/10/2014 8:27 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Of course God has free will. But not Moses, as far as I can tell." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I believe this is somewhat backwards. God's omnipotent, omniscient, \nand eternal character exclude any process of decision or choice-making \non His part. He is changeless and perfect, so there is no change of \nmind possible or necessary, and being eternal this is always the case.\n\nIronically, this also means that people *do* have free will, as my \nfriend Bill Stoddard explains it:\n\n\"Now, if physical reality is essentially deterministic if each \nfundamental physical entity, based on its nature, state, and \nrelationships, is capable of only one specific next state and one \nspecific action then human mental processes are deterministic too, and \nwe don't have free will. But if physical reality is essentially \nindeterministic?if there are occasions when an entity can enter one of \ntwo or more next states, or perform one of two or more actions, and \nwhich comes next is not merely unpredictable but truly random then \nthat doesn't give us any more free will, either. Having our actions \nchanged from time to time by the throw of a set of cosmic dice does \nnot equate to our being free to choose among different actions, or to \ndetermine our own destiny; it amounts to our being at the mercy of \nchance. So in a physicalistic view, genuine free will doesn't seem to \nmake much sense. It's hard even to describe what it would consist in." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting, but crude. Human decisions are not always either \ndeterministic or random. I suppose you could make a case for either if \nyou limit the decisions under study to either crucial moral problems \n(will I kill my wife in a fit of rage? No, because I'm not insane; yes, \nbecause I'm insane) or routine, habitual decisions (should I eat that \nbag of potato chips at lunch? 40% gleefully; 40% guiltily; 20% no). But \nyou'd need a general theory to predict it, and no such theory exists. \nHowever, I happily concede that 100% free will as philosophy frames it \nis a pernicious myth, and biology presents all sorts of arguments \nagainst it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"In theism, on the other hand, we have a model where God knows all of \nour actions, past, present, and future, in a single timeless instant \nof comprehension. In effect, the entire history of the cosmos is a \nvast simulation model that God is running except that God has infinite \ncomputational capacity and does not need time to run the simulation. \nBut God is also able to interpret the thoughts and feelings and \nchoices that the simulated particles constitute, and thus to \nsimultaneously know the cosmos as a story. And as an author, God can \nenter into the story and identify with its characters. The capacity to \ndo so is, in Christian terms, the Holy Spirit. But every author has \nthe experience of characters saying, 'No, I wouldn't do that thing, I \nwould do the other thing.' And God, having complete control over the \nwhole narrative, can rewrite it instantaneously to conform to our \nsaying that rewrite it not on the basis of physical determinism, but \non the basis of the content of our thoughts and feelings and desires. \nGod can, if necessary, look back to the big bang and adjust the place \nwhere one specific quark appears to give rise to a cosmic history in \nwhich we choose salvation or damnation; or, if you prefer \nindeterminism, God can decide which random particle motions will occur \nin our brains instant to instant for the same purpose. What we want \nmiraculously but subtly changes the whole cosmos to enable us to be \nmore fully the characters we are. Free will is the gift of the Holy \nSpirit.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not only is this not an argument for free will---rather, it argues for \nsupernatural puppetry and goes to bizarre lengths to do so---it \ncompletely ignores biology (see above). Unless we're to believe God \nautomatically adjusts that too." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-11T18:00:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<54396A58.7010206@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've for the most part stayed out of this, but I wanted to bring up some\nWolfe stuff here. It seems there are several points where nature and free\nwill are vital to his narratives, and Book of the New Sun has in some way\ncreated the deterministic exegesis of Wright in Attending Dedalus, which I\nthink is fundamentally opposed to Wolfe's world view.\n\nWolfe's Pirate Freedom is the most direct exploration of Free Will in his\nwork. You have a Catholic priest engaging in naturalistic philosophy and\ncasuistry, justifying his actions through environment (you would have done\nthe same thing if you were there ...)\n. That's an extremely complicated moral element to the narrative that is\neasy to misread: sympathize with Fr. Chris too much and you are denying his\nfreedom of choice.\n\nI am sure Wolfe believes in free will and the ability to make meaningfully\ngood and meaninfully evil decisions. Fr. Chris might achieve less\nabsolution than Typhon in the grand scheme of things if he holds onto the\nidea that he never had a choice." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:35 AM, David Stockhoff \nwrote:\n\nOn 10/10/2014 10:39 PM, Jeffery Wilson clueland.com wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 10/10/2014 8:27 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Of course God has free will. But not Moses, as far as I can tell." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I believe this is somewhat backwards. God's omnipotent, omniscient, and\neternal character exclude any process of decision or choice-making on His\npart. He is changeless and perfect, so there is no change of mind possible\nor necessary, and being eternal this is always the case.\n\nIronically, this also means that people *do* have free will, as my friend\nBill Stoddard explains it:\n\n\"Now, if physical reality is essentially deterministic if each\nfundamental physical entity, based on its nature, state, and relationships,\nis capable of only one specific next state and one specific action then\nhuman mental processes are deterministic too, and we don't have free will.\nBut if physical reality is essentially indeterministic?if there are\noccasions when an entity can enter one of two or more next states, or\nperform one of two or more actions, and which comes next is not merely\nunpredictable but truly random then that doesn't give us any more free\nwill, either. Having our actions changed from time to time by the throw of\na set of cosmic dice does not equate to our being free to choose among\ndifferent actions, or to determine our own destiny; it amounts to our being\nat the mercy of chance. So in a physicalistic view, genuine free will\ndoesn't seem to make much sense. It's hard even to describe what it would\nconsist in." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Interesting, but crude. Human decisions are not always either\ndeterministic or random. I suppose you could make a case for either if you\nlimit the decisions under study to either crucial moral problems (will I\nkill my wife in a fit of rage? No, because I'm not insane; yes, because I'm\ninsane) or routine, habitual decisions (should I eat that bag of potato\nchips at lunch? 40% gleefully; 40% guiltily; 20% no). But you'd need a\ngeneral theory to predict it, and no such theory exists. However, I happily\nconcede that 100% free will as philosophy frames it is a pernicious myth,\nand biology presents all sorts of arguments against it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"In theism, on the other hand, we have a model where God knows all of our\nactions, past, present, and future, in a single timeless instant of\ncomprehension. In effect, the entire history of the cosmos is a vast\nsimulation model that God is running except that God has infinite\ncomputational capacity and does not need time to run the simulation. But\nGod is also able to interpret the thoughts and feelings and choices that\nthe simulated particles constitute, and thus to simultaneously know the\ncosmos as a story. And as an author, God can enter into the story and\nidentify with its characters. The capacity to do so is, in Christian terms,\nthe Holy Spirit. But every author has the experience of characters saying,\n'No, I wouldn't do that thing, I would do the other thing.' And God, having\ncomplete control over the whole narrative, can rewrite it instantaneously\nto conform to our saying that rewrite it not on the basis of physical\ndeterminism, but on the basis of the content of our thoughts and feelings\nand desires. God can, if necessary, look back to the big bang and adjust\nthe place where one specific quark appears to give rise to a cosmic history\nin which we choose salvation or damnation; or, if you prefer indeterminism,\nGod can decide which random particle motions will occur in our brains\ninstant to instant for the same purpose. What we want miraculously but\nsubtly changes the whole cosmos to enable us to be more fully the\ncharacters we are. Free will is the gift of the Holy Spirit.\"\n\nNot only is this not an argument for free will---rather, it argues for\nsupernatural puppetry and goes to bizarre lengths to do so---it completely\nignores biology (see above). Unless we're to believe God automatically\nadjusts that too." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<54397F22.8020801@bindweed.com>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2014-10-11T19:04:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 11/10/2014 19:00, Marc Aramini wrote:\nI've for the most part stayed out of this, but I wanted to bring up \nsome Wolfe stuff here. It seems there are several points where nature \nand free will are vital to his narratives, and Book of the New Sun \nhas in some way created the deterministic exegesis of Wright in \nAttending Dedalus, which I think is fundamentally opposed to Wolfe's \nworld view." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There's also the issue of Master Ash, who says he thinks his future is \nimprobable, but clearly his existence suggests that the future of \nSeverian's world is not cast in stone.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1a255b7d185765a8438dab0d0030a550.squirrel@webmail.prismnet.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-12T00:51:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<54396A58.7010206@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Sat, October 11, 2014 12:35, David Stockhoff wrote:\nSo in a physicalistic view, genuine free will doesn't seem to\nmake much sense. It's hard even to describe what it would consist in." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Interesting, but crude. Human decisions are not always either\ndeterministic or random." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What third options do you offer?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "What we want\nmiraculously but subtly changes the whole cosmos to enable us to be\nmore fully the characters we are. Free will is the gift of the Holy\nSpirit.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Not only is this not an argument for free will---rather, it argues for\nsupernatural puppetry and goes to bizarre lengths to do so---it\ncompletely ignores biology (see above). Unless we're to believe God\nautomatically adjusts that too." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "He adjusts everything; this is the sort of theism where nothing happens or\neven exists without God willing it the way nothing changes or appears on a\nTV screen without the raster drawing it." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-12T12:25:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<1a255b7d185765a8438dab0d0030a550.squirrel@webmail.prismnet.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff: I happily concede that 100% free will as philosophy frames it \nis a pernicious myth, and biology presents all sorts of arguments \nagainst it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Heh. I've seen the unpredictability of sub-atomic physics as an argument for free will.\n\nI don't think our behavior choices boil down to that level (biochemistry seems sufficient)\n\nbut hey, its an argument." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: I am sure Wolfe believes in free will" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think the question is the nature of it. Are there degrees? Does an ape have it? A bacterium? \n\nA rock?\n\n\nAnd from what perspective? What about God's? It is a logical fallacy to say He knew Adam and\n\nEve would eat forbidden fruit but they still had free will. If God constructed them, molecule by\n\nmolecule in such a way that they would eat the fruit. then they cannot be said to have free will.\n\n\nMarc, I didn't see that you weighed in on the question of whether God has free will. What is your\n\nopinion?\n\n\nI get the sense from Wolfe's work that he recognizes how choices become more and more restricted\n\nas one approaches godhood. Various Wolfean characters start human (or something) and \n\nas they approach godhood, become less able to make evil/human choices." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Gerry Quinn: There's also the issue of Master Ash, who says he thinks his future is \nimprobable, but clearly his existence suggests that the future of \nSeverian's world is not cast in stone." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Master Ash, for all his wisdom, is the product of one timeline. Severian eventually surpasses that.\n\nWhen Severian travels the Brook Madegot, I think the answer is revealed. This river of time only\n\nbranches as you travel forward in time, not backward. But since there are branchings, Master Ash's \n\nand The Green Man's future both exist.\n\n\nThe structure of Brook Madregot demonstrates that choices always pertain to moving forward to the \n\nfuture. The path of your past is fixed. Thus I would argue that the Increate, who can see all paths \n\nsimultaneously, is denied the \"freedom\" of choice. He can't choose a left or right path on Brook \n\nMadregot. For Him, everything just IS. \n\n\nUnlike Master Ash, The Increate can't just can't travel to the left or to the right in time (to frozen Urth or \n\nsunny Ushas). He is constantly aware of the existence of both. Perhaps the Increate actually embodies\n\n both. Somewhere in BotNS it is implied that the infinite complexity of the universe(s) IS the very substance \n\nof the Increate. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-12T12:46:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Since you asked, I do not limit God by human understanding. The Bible\ncannot circumscribe him, nor can any theology adequately describe a being\nfor which all powers are conceivable. But the very prevalent idea of\n\"God's will be done\" implies that He has one, even if it is beyond human\nunderstanding. I am obviously not an agnostic, but my words and philosophy\ncannot encapsulate the existence of such a power. The only statement I am\nwilling to make is that our universe operates under reasonable and\nseemingly consistent physical laws - if existence is an amusement, it seems\nto be operated with, overall, reliable rules. If God desires free will, He\ncan certainly have it, if desire is even applicable in describing Him or\nHis motivations." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:25 AM, Lee wrote:\nDavid Stockhoff: I happily concede that 100% free will as philosophy\nframes it\nis a pernicious myth, and biology presents all sorts of arguments\nagainst it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Heh. I've seen the unpredictability of sub-atomic physics as an argument\nfor free will.\n\nI don't think our behavior choices boil down to that level (biochemistry\nseems sufficient)\n\nbut hey, its an argument." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini: I am sure Wolfe believes in free will" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think the question is the nature of it. Are there degrees? Does an ape\nhave it? A bacterium?\n\nA rock?\n\n\nAnd from what perspective? What about God's? It is a logical fallacy to\nsay He knew Adam and\n\nEve would eat forbidden fruit but they still had free will. If God\nconstructed them, molecule by\n\nmolecule in such a way that they would eat the fruit. then they cannot be\nsaid to have free will.\n\n\nMarc, I didn't see that you weighed in on the question of whether God has\nfree will. What is your\n\nopinion?\n\n\nI get the sense from Wolfe's work that he recognizes how choices become\nmore and more restricted\n\nas one approaches godhood. Various Wolfean characters start human (or\nsomething) and\n\nas they approach godhood, become less able to make evil/human choices." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Gerry Quinn: There's also the issue of Master Ash, who says he thinks his\nfuture is\nimprobable, but clearly his existence suggests that the future of\nSeverian's world is not cast in stone." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Master Ash, for all his wisdom, is the product of one timeline. Severian\neventually surpasses that.\n\nWhen Severian travels the Brook Madegot, I think the answer is revealed.\nThis river of time only\n\nbranches as you travel forward in time, not backward. But since there are\nbranchings, Master Ash's\n\nand The Green Man's future both exist.\n\n\nThe structure of Brook Madregot demonstrates that choices always pertain\nto moving forward to the\n\nfuture. The path of your past is fixed. Thus I would argue that the\nIncreate, who can see all paths\n\nsimultaneously, is denied the \"freedom\" of choice. He can't choose a left\nor right path on Brook\n\nMadregot. For Him, everything just IS.\n\n\nUnlike Master Ash, The Increate can't just can't travel to the left or to\nthe right in time (to frozen Urth or\n\nsunny Ushas). He is constantly aware of the existence of both. Perhaps\nthe Increate actually embodies\n\n both. Somewhere in BotNS it is implied that the infinite complexity of\nthe universe(s) IS the very substance\n\nof the Increate.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<543AA9B3.3010804@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-12T16:17:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<1a255b7d185765a8438dab0d0030a550.squirrel@webmail.prismnet.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/11/2014 8:51 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote:\nOn Sat, October 11, 2014 12:35, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "So in a physicalistic view, genuine free will doesn't seem to\nmake much sense. It's hard even to describe what it would consist in." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Interesting, but crude. Human decisions are not always either\ndeterministic or random." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "What third options do you offer?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, the whole range in between seems pretty huge. Especially in \ndecisions that are not binary." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "What we want\nmiraculously but subtly changes the whole cosmos to enable us to be\nmore fully the characters we are. Free will is the gift of the Holy\nSpirit.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Not only is this not an argument for free will---rather, it argues for\nsupernatural puppetry and goes to bizarre lengths to do so---it\ncompletely ignores biology (see above). Unless we're to believe God\nautomatically adjusts that too." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "He adjusts everything; this is the sort of theism where nothing happens or\neven exists without God willing it the way nothing changes or appears on a\nTV screen without the raster drawing it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "OK, but I don't recall the laws of chemistry changing. Then again, I \nsuppose I wouldn't.\n\nRegardless of one's position on this, it's certainly relevant to Wolfe, \nespecially the \"instantaneous simulation\" bit." } ] }, { "message_id": "<543AAB5B.1000501@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-12T16:24:59+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/12/2014 8:25 AM, Lee wrote:\nUnlike Master Ash, The Increate can't just can't travel to the left or \nto the right in time (to frozen Urth or sunny Ushas). He is constantly \naware of the existence of both. Perhaps the Increate actually embodies \nboth. Somewhere in BotNS it is implied that the infinite complexity of \nthe universe(s) IS the very substance of the Increate." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Indeed, since the Increate was not created, not to mention existing \n(apparently) outside any dimensional space, he/it has no chance of \nvariability whatsoever, not even controlled.\n\nCreation = chance." } ] }, { "message_id": "<543F4F7E.1060608@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-16T04:54:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/12/2014 7:25 AM, Lee wrote:\nThe structure of Brook Madregot demonstrates that choices always pertain to moving forward to the\n\nfuture. The path of your past is fixed. Thus I would argue that the Increate, who can see all paths\n\nsimultaneously, is denied the \"freedom\" of choice. He can't choose a left or right path on Brook\n\nMadregot. For Him, everything just IS." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think rather the Increate need not take a direction because He wills \nthe directions into being, and is already omnipresent along all the \ndirections thusly created.\n\nHowever, Severian, Tzadkerbell, and the Green Man each turn to face into \nthe past, so they may make choices that branch into the past as that is \nwhere their personal futures lie. Master Ash pointedly does not enjoy \nthis privilege, and vanishes when Severian tries to force it on him." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5440B9C5.2000506@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T06:40:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<543F4F7E.1060608@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/16/2014 2:20 PM, Lee wrote:\nI don't think so. Severian only sees one path as he travels Brook Madregot to the\n\npast. It only branches when he reverses direction and travels to the future." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Branching is not the only form of choice for Sev.\n\nJuturna enunciates his choice of direction in URTH XLVIII: \"Juturna \npointed like a village woman directing some lost traveler, her hands and \narms extending in directions I had not seen until she indicated them. \n'That way the future, this way the past. '\"\n\nTzadkerbell explicitly points out in URTH XL that Sev has a choice about \nhow far to travel along the brook Madregot, and when to start walking \naway from it.\n\nThe green man says he runs up and down the Corridors of Time looking for \na time to help Severian, so that's him using reverse time travel to \nretrace his steps and access other branches previously ruled out.\n\nSo while there are multiple futures branching from a single past, that \npast still has many ages and many lands in each. Our Severian doesn't \nexplore too many of them, but that'a probably why he's our Severian and \nnot young Tzadkiel's Severian, or one of the coffin Severians. He can \nchoose from several branches when moving forward, but most all people \nhave that privilege from the Increate." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T12:00:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<5440B9C5.2000506@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jeffrey Wilson: Branching is not the only form of choice for Sev." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Agreed. Severian chooses to take seven steps backward (upstream to the past)\n\non Brook Madregot. But the brook does not have any branchings in this direction\n\nimplying that there are not multiple pasts for Severian, only multiple futures." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The green man says he runs up and down the Corridors of Time looking for \na time to help Severian, so that's him using reverse time travel to \nretrace his steps and access other branches previously ruled out." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am not sure this is so. As the Green Man moves to the past he may be exploring\n\nonly one pathway of time and just trying to find the right spot (5 steps? seven steps?)\n\non that single line to help Severian. It is my opinion that the Green Man probably\n\ncouldn't explore the Ragnarok future. I think he can only travel on the line from\n\nfar-future Ushas back to Urth, not other branchings." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"Juturna pointed like a village woman directing some lost traveler, her hands and \narms extending in directions I had not seen until she indicated them. \n'That way the future, this way the past. '\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This may be an example of a character who can explore multiple branchings of both\n\nthe past and future. I suspect Tzadkiel can also do this. These are superhuman beings\n\nwho perhaps can explore time more flexibly than human beings.\n\n\nTzadkiel compares Severian, as a human, to a pawn. I take the chessboard to be the symbol\n\nfor time. Humans (normally) like a pawn on a chessboard, can only move forward and one\n\nspace at a time.\n\n\nThe Green Man and, eventually Severian can move backward and forward in time in more than\n\none step. But they are both human and thus perhaps still limited in their movement through\n\ntime compared to superhumans like Juturna and Tzadkiel. I think they can only travel a single\n\npathway while multiple pathways may be open to angels, they being closer to God (who has\n\naccess to all possible timelines, past and future) and plural beings.\n\n\n(I think that Severian is best described as a human-derived demi-god and the Green Man also,\n\ngiven the mystical associations of his name http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Man) \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<54412CF4.80104@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T14:51:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/17/2014 7:00 AM, Lee wrote:\nThis may be an example of a character who can explore multiple branchings of both\n\nthe past and future. I suspect Tzadkiel can also do this. These are superhuman beings\n\nwho perhaps can explore time more flexibly than human beings." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tzadkiel admits to it access of the numerous futures and pasts of his \npurview and articulates a bit of his use of them on a couple of \noccasions, so, yes." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The Green Man and, eventually Severian can move backward and forward in time in more than\n\none step. But they are both human and thus perhaps still limited in their movement through\n\ntime compared to superhumans like Juturna and Tzadkiel. I think they can only travel a single\n\npathway while multiple pathways may be open to angels, they being closer to God (who has\n\naccess to all possible timelines, past and future) and plural beings." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Negative, Severian clearly takes multiple paths in the person of the \n\"other\" Severians. Of course, this may quality Severian as a plural being." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1413558582.69242.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-17T15:09:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<54412CF4.80104@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Tzadkiel compares Severian, as a human, to a pawn. I take the chessboard to be the symbol\n\nfor time. Humans (normally) like a pawn on a chessboard, can only move forward and one\n\nspace at a time.\" \n\n\nThat's a handy analogy, if not a complete system. There do seem to be essential limitations on all the time-traveling characters. One may imagine knights, rooks vs bishops, and of course queens. Even pawns can capture en passant.On the other hand, no chess pieces travel only backward as do Ossipago et al. \n\n\nKnights are especially prominent (Jonas) and yet especially limited. Which best represents the Green Man? \n\n\nNote that kings are basically important pawns that can move backward as well as castle." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday, October 17, 2014 10:52 AM, Jeffery Wilson clueland.com wrote:\n\n\nOn 10/17/2014 7:00 AM, Lee wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This may be an example of a character who can explore multiple branchings of both\n\nthe past and future. I suspect Tzadkiel can also do this. These are superhuman beings\n\nwho perhaps can explore time more flexibly than human beings." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Tzadkiel admits to it access of the numerous futures and pasts of his \npurview and articulates a bit of his use of them on a couple of \noccasions, so, yes." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The Green Man and, eventually Severian can move backward and forward in time in more than\n\none step. But they are both human and thus perhaps still limited in their movement through\n\ntime compared to superhumans like Juturna and Tzadkiel. I think they can only travel a single\n\npathway while multiple pathways may be open to angels, they being closer to God (who has\n\naccess to all possible timelines, past and future) and plural beings." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Negative, Severian clearly takes multiple paths in the person of the \n\"other\" Severians. Of course, this may quality Severian as a plural being.\n\n\n-- \nJeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T15:38:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<1413558582.69242.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jeffrey Wilson: Tzadkiel admits to it access of the numerous futures and pasts of his \npurview and articulates a bit of his use of them on a couple of \noccasions, so, yes" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Okay, yes agreed on that.\n\n\nWorth noting that Tzadkiel is a plural being with multiple iterations. But we know (I think) \n\nthat the tinker bell version is cut off and does not share any consciousness or memory with \n\nthe bigger, source Tzadkiel." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Negative, Severian clearly takes multiple paths in the person of the \n\"other\" Severians. Of course, this may quality Severian as a plural being." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, yes, when I speak of \"Severian\" I am only referring to the narrator of BotNS,\n\nwho does not seem to share any consciousness or memory with other versions of\n\nhimself.\n\n\nPerhaps there is some unseen larger being who is the \"source\" of all the Severians.\n\nAnd perhaps this source being is capable of exploring multiple branching pathways\n\nof the past as well as the future.\n\n\nBut from the perspective of the narrator of BotNS, it seems to me that he, personally,\n\ncan only see branchings of timelines as he moves to the future, not as he moves to \n\nthe past. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T15:56:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \"Tzadkiel compares Severian, as a human, to a pawn. I take the chessboard to be the symbol\nfor time. Humans (normally) like a pawn on a chessboard, can only move forward and one\nspace at a time.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That's a handy analogy, if not a complete system. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, I think Wolfe meant it only as a rough starting point. I've made some of the extrapolations\n\nyou make myself but you raise some interesting questions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "There do seem to be essential limitations on all the time-traveling characters. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Except for The Increate? (who may not be a \"character\" and probably doesn't need to \"travel\" \n\nbeing in all places and all times simultaneously)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "One may imagine knights, rooks vs bishops, and of course queens. Even pawns can capture " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "en passant. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be brought back as a more powerful\n\npiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returns\n\nfrom Yesod." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On the other hand, no chess pieces travel only backward as do Ossipago et al. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "True although it has been argued that B, F and O must travel forward in time at least long enough\n\nto converse with Severian and watch a play, etc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Knights are especially prominent (Jonas) and yet especially limited. Which best represents the " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Green Man? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As per my discussion with Jeffrery, I see The Green Man as a rook (without horizontal abilities), \n\nable to make unlimited moves up and down one timeline (Urth to Ushas) but not able to explore\n\nalternate realities, like Ragnarok. I think this in part because The Green Man is intent on \"helping\"\n\nSeverian. Doesn't the concept of \"helping\" become superfluous if you can explore various timelines\n\nin which any outcome can happen?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Note that kings are basically important pawns that can move backward as well as castle." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hm, that's a toughie. Maybe Severian is most like a King, at least before he reaches Yesod. He\n\ncan move a space backward or forward in time when he does his healing trick with the Claw.\n\nAnd he being replaced by an Eidolon is sort of like castling. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<1413563197.64910.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-17T16:26:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "One may imagine knights, rooks vs bishops, and of course queens. Even pawns can capture " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "en passant. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be brought back as a more powerful\n\npiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returns\n\nfrom Yesod.\n\n---Good one. Except he's almost more like a queen, at least after he becomes a god (see below)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Knights are especially prominent (Jonas) and yet especially limited. Which best represents the " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Green Man? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As per my discussion with Jeffrery, I see The Green Man as a rook (without horizontal abilities), \n\nable to make unlimited moves up and down one timeline (Urth to Ushas) but not able to explore\n\nalternate realities, like Ragnarok. I think this in part because The Green Man is intent on \"helping\"\n\nSeverian. \n\n\n---Works for me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Note that kings are basically important pawns that can move backward as well as castle." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hm, that's a toughie. Maybe Severian is most like a King, at least before he reaches Yesod. He\n\ncan move a space backward or forward in time when he does his healing trick with the Claw.\n\n\n---He already has become Autarch, which is a mundane sort of king, weaker than a queen. But almost from the beginning, he can move backward as you say, even before he elevates again after his apotheosis.\n\nFunny how this turns some basic assumptions on their heads. A medieval king was a \"temporal\" power, bound by time, while popes were a sort of spiritual emperor. Severian is also a creature of time (only the Increate is not) but is not bound by it.\n\n\n_______________________________________________" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday, October 17, 2014 12:09 PM, Lee wrote:\n\n\n\n\"Tzadkiel compares Severian, as a human, to a pawn. I take the chessboard to be the symbol\nfor time. Humans (normally) like a pawn on a chessboard, can only move forward and one\nspace at a time.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "David Stockhoff: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "That's a handy analogy, if not a complete system. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Yes, I think Wolfe meant it only as a rough starting point. I've made some of the extrapolations\n\nyou make myself but you raise some interesting questions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "There do seem to be essential limitations on all the time-traveling characters. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Except for The Increate? (who may not be a \"character\" and probably doesn't need to \"travel\" \n\nbeing in all places and all times simultaneously)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "One may imagine knights, rooks vs bishops, and of course queens. Even pawns can capture " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "en passant. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be brought back as a more powerful\n\npiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returns\n\nfrom Yesod." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On the other hand, no chess pieces travel only backward as do Ossipago et al. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "True although it has been argued that B, F and O must travel forward in time at least long enough\n\nto converse with Severian and watch a play, etc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Knights are especially prominent (Jonas) and yet especially limited. Which best represents the " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Green Man? " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "As per my discussion with Jeffrery, I see The Green Man as a rook (without horizontal abilities), \n\nable to make unlimited moves up and down one timeline (Urth to Ushas) but not able to explore\n\nalternate realities, like Ragnarok. I think this in part because The Green Man is intent on \"helping\"\n\nSeverian. Doesn't the concept of \"helping\" become superfluous if you can explore various timelines\n\nin which any outcome can happen?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Note that kings are basically important pawns that can move backward as well as castle." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hm, that's a toughie. Maybe Severian is most like a King, at least before he reaches Yesod. He\n\ncan move a space backward or forward in time when he does his healing trick with the Claw.\n\nAnd he being replaced by an Eidolon is sort of like castling. \n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Robert Pirkola", "address": "rpirkola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T18:22:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "<1413563197.64910.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Lee said: \"Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be brought back as a more powerfulpiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returnsfrom Yesod.\"\nHe has made such an analogy at least one other time, in \"To the Seventh\", which also contains this interesting passage that has a whiff of recent topics: \"Outside its sides that were not sidesthe universe was a point of matter vastly heavy, and a vastness beyond the reach of mathematicsin which matter was so rare that it could truthfully said not to exist.\" (*Strange Travelers*, Torpaperback, pg. 132). \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T18:29:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Theism Supports Free Will Better than Materialism Does", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "An interesting quote.\n\nWe may, I think, assume that Wolfe (like me) assumes that the laws of\narithmetic as we know them do not apply in infinities; after all, under the\nright circumstances 1=3 and 3=1.\n\nBut I'm not sure that this settles the idea that there is/is not a place\nwhere maths and logic don't apply. At most this suggests that different\nmaths may apply in different circumstances, just as Euclidean geometry and\nRiemannian geometry both produce useful pictures of reality." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Robert Pirkola \nwrote:\nLee said: \"Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be\nbrought back as a more powerful\n\n\npiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returns\n\nfrom Yesod.\"\n\n\nHe has made such an analogy at least one other time, in \"To the Seventh\", which also contains\n\nthis interesting passage that has a whiff of recent topics: \"Outside its sides that were not sides\n\nthe universe was a point of matter vastly heavy, and a vastness beyond the reach of mathematics\n\nin which matter was so rare that it could truthfully said not to exist.\" (*Strange Travelers*, Tor\n\npaperback, pg. 132).\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4AC8159E-960D-4408-AA18-53EB4D76AE6A@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T20:44:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Urth as chess", "in_reply_to": "<1413563197.64910.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is an example of a subthread which ought to have had its subject changed. So that folks who dozed off long ago might become interested again. " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-18T19:18:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Imaginary logic", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Can someone more math-enjoying than me take up the challenge to build a system based on (A => B) & (A & ~B) — Could some insight come out of the thing?\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 19:29, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "An interesting quote. \n\nWe may, I think, assume that Wolfe (like me) assumes that the laws of arithmetic as we know them do not apply in infinities; after all, under the right circumstances 1=3 and 3=1.\n\nBut I'm not sure that this settles the idea that there is/is not a place where maths and logic don't apply. At most this suggests that different maths may apply in different circumstances, just as Euclidean geometry and Riemannian geometry both produce useful pictures of reality.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Robert Pirkola wrote:\nLee said: \"Plus, if a pawn makes it to the end of the board, they can be brought back as a more powerful\n\npiece. I think Wolfe intends this analogy for Severian (The Conciliator/New Sun) after he returns\n\nfrom Yesod.\"\n\nHe has made such an analogy at least one other time, in \"To the Seventh\", which also contains \nthis interesting passage that has a whiff of recent topics: \"Outside its sides that were not sides\nthe universe was a point of matter vastly heavy, and a vastness beyond the reach of mathematics\nin which matter was so rare that it could truthfully said not to exist.\" (*Strange Travelers*, Tor\npaperback, pg. 132).\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5442FC6D.2020101@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-18T23:49:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Imaginary logic", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/18/2014 2:18 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\nCan someone more math-enjoying than me take up the challenge to build a\nsystem based on (A => B) & (A & ~B) — Could some insight come out of the\nthing?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, rewriting A=>B as ~A V B gives\n\n(~A V B) & (A & ~B)\n\nwhich is not satisfiable because the right group requires A to be true \nand B to be false, but the left requires either A to be false or B to be \ntrue. This expression is thus false for all possible combinations of \nvalues for A & B, so it can be used to imply anything, but since the \nproposition is always false, the consequent can be false or true without \ngiving any useful information:\n\nhttp://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55617.html" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] } ] }