Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [evforum] Girard and violence

Expand Messages
  • James Rovira
    It is possible that Mr. Jones has a definition of victim in mind that includes the following characteristics: A victim suffers against his will. If we accept
    Message 1 of 17 , Sep 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      It is possible that Mr. Jones has a definition of victim in mind that
      includes the following characteristics:

      A victim suffers against his will.

      If we accept this as one part of victimhood, since Christ did not suffer
      against his will, Christ was not a victim.

      I think this is a good qualification on the definition of victim for broad
      sociological comment, but I don't know that it's quite right within context.

      The question, within the context of this discussion, is this: Does Girard
      define a victim in such a way that the victim suffers against his will?

      I haven't read much Girard, and it's been about four years, but I don't
      recall him emphasizing this in his description of the victim. It seems like
      a Girardian victim has to be alike enough to the community to resemble a
      member, but different enough from the community to be isolated from it and
      driven out. The victim is therefore the "somewhat different." This could
      be a king or a beggar. I don't recall that willingness or unwillingness is
      a factor, but it didn't seem to be emphasized.

      Jim R


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Owen Jones
      Mr. Sill raises some legitimate issues, IMHO. I do not wish to make an ontological claim here. What I am referring to is the experience on the part of the
      Message 2 of 17 , Sep 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Mr. Sill raises some legitimate issues, IMHO.

        I do not wish to make an "ontological" claim here. What I am referring to is the experience on the part of the believer. Certainly the meaning of sacrificial victim is transfigured in Christ's passion, as the believer becomes one with His suffering. While most Christian apologists will point to Christ's uniqueness as Son of God, the real distinction is experiential, that the believer in Christ goes through a dramatic change in perspective regarding suffering. He no longer sees himself as victim. As an anecdotal example, I am currently "counselling" a 51 year old man who is, on e might say, locked in his own suffering. He has been treated very badly in his mind and is in a state of constant mental and spiritual turmoil because he demands to know what it all means. He is prejudiced against anything that smacks of religion. All BS he says. His philosophical perspective is that of John Paul Sartre and other nihilist thinkers, although he has simply
        absorbed this from the cultural ambience. He is quite bright, understands that his mind is getting in the way of his happiness, and is willling to consider the possibility of divine help, but has an a priori intellectual objection to virtually every possible way out. He realizes that there is a problem with his feelings of victimhood, but simply won't let go of it, because he fears that to let go of that, he would be giving up his identity -- his very existence. At this point, he is totally resistant to the experience of pathos as the common bond of humanity. As a counter-point, we could point to Solzhenitsyn's account of his conversion in Gulag II, or the Diary of Etty Hillesum, or many individual accounts of the transformation that takes place when a person redefines his own suffering and no longer sees himself as victim.

        In fairness, it could be that Mr. Girard is relatively unconcerned, for purposes of his analysis, whether or not the one who suffers sees himself as a victim. He is trying to explain the motivation behind pathological violence which imposes sacrificial victimhood on others. But from my perspective, this still leaves too many questions unaddressed, and constitutes a theological misreading of the Passion.

        As for East vs. West, I'm not trying to be an apologist so much as to point out that there are sources other than Latin medievalism that point us, frankly, in other directions and perspectives. When we say Christian, we have to be careful as to what that means. We can't simply rely on the traditionally Western/Latin schema as the last word on the subject, even though it is culturally dominant for us in the "West.". Christian intellectual history doesn't go from St. Paul to Augustine to Aquinas to Luther, with a little Ambrose thrown in. If, for example, there can be a revival of classical noesis through a rediscovery of the classical sources, primarily Plato and Aristotle, then it seems to me that there is much also to be gained by a better familiarity with Eastern Christian sources. If nothing else, the tonality is much different than post-schism Latin Western sources.

        But my major point, which is speculative to be sure, but I think more consistent with Voegelin's perspective, is that pathological violence, crowd violence, state-sponsored violence (as opposed to your average thuggery -- but maybe even there as well) is primarily motivated by a disordered desire for perfection, harmony, unity, universality, etc. A disordered psyche, in the dominant intellectual environment, is therefore incapable of understanding the distinction between Castro's Cuba and a Christian monastery. Or, more likely, the distinction is that Castro's monastery is pure, whereas a monastery imposes an artificial truth on its members by coercion and oppression.

        Yet both are motivated by a desire for perfection, perfect harmony, etc. Therefore, I don't understand at this point how the "desire for mimetic rivalry" can stand as a universal motive for pathological violence. There is something deeper going on.

        chip sills <chipsills@...> wrote:
        Colleagues--

        I hesitate to respond, because I wonder whether the areas of my concern are
        completely within the realm of this listserve. But here goes.

        As is not unusual, Mr Jones presents a wealth of insight and outlook in a
        short compass. I do not wish to respond at this time about what I take to
        main thread of his discussion, which is the work of Girard, but instead wish
        to propose certain objections concerning his discussion of the topic that
        "Christ is not a victim". I seriously doubt Orthodox theologians would
        support this exaggeration.

        True, popular convert-apologists like Frederika Mathews-Greene (and Mr Jones
        himself?) often stress the difference in emphasis between Western and
        Eastern traditions regarding this and other questions. But the scriptural
        and traditional (in both Eastern and Western traditions, I believe) support
        for "Christ the Victim" is frankly undeniable. In Isaiah, we have the
        "suffering servant" motif prefiguring Christ's sacrifice. In Matthew,
        Christ frequently fortells his Passion in terms that make "victim" seem a
        wholly appropriate description. Then there is the description of the
        Passion itself.
        In Mark ditto. In Luke, the foreshadowing of victimhood is less prominent,
        but still present in context, and the Passion is clearly set forth. In
        John, ditto. Also, Caiaphas specifically speaks of Jesus as a victim
        offered on behalf of the Jewish people as a whole.

        I presume all this is familiar to Mr. Jones. So, the question becomes, why
        deny it? If the point is to say that Christ is also victor as well as
        victim, well, of course. But to deny the passion is incompatible with any
        orthodox (big or little "o") Christian faith. Again, what is the point?

        Regards, CFS

        >From: Owen Jones <metaxyreality@...>
        >Reply-To: evforum@yahoogroups.com
        >To: evforum@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [evforum] Girard and violence
        >Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
        >
        >I've always been a bit skeptical of Girard, but I confess it is a
        >second-hand knowledge. I took every course that Robert Casillo taught at
        >U of M, and he can't go five minutes without talking about Girard, and all
        >of his literary analysis is grounded in Girard's theories regarding
        >sacrifice, to the point that it struck me as a kind of fundamentalism. At
        >least on Casillo's part.
        >
        > At any rate, from what I've learned from Voegelin, I am a bit skeptical
        >at what sounds like a psychologization of religion. And the term
        >"innocent victim" seems to me to miss the mark, since Christ is not a
        >victim. That is as important a point as the fact that he is innocent. He
        >is not a victim. So the Christian who suffers injustice for no good
        >reason has the grace to become Christ-like, not just because he is
        >innocent, but, just as importantly, he can no longer claim victim status.
        >He is the victor, as was Christ. The true victim is the one inflicting
        >the suffering on the innocent who is deluded into thinking he has won the
        >"rivalry." Perhaps I am oversimplifying, or that Gerard deals with these
        >objections already.
        >
        > But then I ran across this quote that seems very puzzling. Not wishing
        >to put too much stock in a quote that may be taken out of context,
        >nevertheless, perhaps it is revealing of someone who has an essentially
        >progressivist bias. Not in the conventional left-right terminology, but
        >rather in the Voegelinian sense.
        >
        > "In the Western countries the divergence in incomes continues to
        >grow greatly and we are heading for explosive reactions. I'm not
        >talking about the third world. What we await after the attacks [of
        >9/11] is of course a renewed ideology, a more rational one
        >of liberalism and progress."
        >
        > One problem is that it is a factually problematic statement. Much
        >empirical data has developed on the issue of income disparity, and wealth
        >disparity in so-called capitalist societies. The feeling that the rich
        >are getting richer and the poor getting poorer may be a widespread
        >feeling, but it is not supported by the relevant data, at least not in the
        >U.S. The disparities were far more noticeable when America was still a
        >nascent industrial country with some very small percentage of financiers
        >and industrialists, with the vast majority living off of farming and
        >relatively little cash income. Today, virtually everyone is part of a
        >cash economy, and an equity economy, much of that equity being held in
        >trust by government (many trillions of dollars held in trust in the form
        >of entitlement programs -- and this equity is never included in the
        >poverty statistics.) And poverty statistics since the 1996 welfare reform
        >show a startling drop in child and family
        > poverty, the most significant down trend in 50 years.
        >
        > As for the theory, it is odd that he would on the one hand critique the
        >myth of capitalism's faith in competition, while at the same time arguing
        >that we need a more rational, liberal and progressive ideology as a model,
        >when capitalism comes out of a rational/liberal progressive model. And
        >while some of the more Darwinist advocates of the free-market, as well as
        >Darwinists on the left, did in fact believe that the poor were somehow
        >necessary sacrificial victims in a competitive economy, I see no serious
        >free market economist today who believes that or argues that. Just the
        >opposite. The existence of an underclass in a free market economy is seen
        >as a tragedy due to external limitations to competition resulting from
        >failed government programs and a failed educational system that drags down
        >everyone. While socialists argue that the reason for intergenerational
        >poverty is that we have not tried enough socialism, the free market
        >advocates who claim that
        > persistent poverty is the result of a lack rather than a surfeit of free
        >competition have the data on their side.
        >
        > The theory at least is that those who are the most successful in a
        >competitive economy actually want a more successful, educated workforce
        >because they believe that will make them more successful and that everyone
        >will benefit from the creation of wealth. That wealth creation does not
        >require victims, just the opposite. Also, the myth of a seething
        >underclass that is on the verge of violent revolt is a kind of romantic
        >ideology in its own right. The problem of group violence in American
        >history is associated with massive waves of immigration, and the clash of
        >rising expectations vs. social realities. But as immigrants and
        >minorities begin to move up the economic ladder, and this happens
        >dramatically in America, the seething anger becomes limited to those who
        >get degrees in the social sciences.
        >
        > Another observation, tentative at best. Girard I think refers to the
        >eucharist as a way of ritualizing sacrifice without the violence. But
        >there is a considerable difference between eucharistic doctrine in the
        >Western, Latin (post schism) tradition and the Eastern Orthodox doctrine.
        >In the East, Christ is not being sacrificed ritually in the eucharist. It
        >is referred to as a rational sacrifice, but is the rational sacrifice of
        >the faithful, not a ritual re-enactment of Christ's sacrifice on the
        >Cross.
        >
        > This, of course, has little or nothing to do with Mr. Bellinger's topic
        >at hand. But I do think that some thought should be taken to the meaning
        >of the New Testament when it says that the Kingdom shall be taken in
        >violence. I think one could possibly take Girard and turn him on his
        >head, and argue that pathological violence is the outgrowth of a utopian
        >desire for peace, or a reification if you will of the desire for peace and
        >a kind of universal human harmony, rather than a desire for mimetic
        >rivalry. We see this in the odd foreign policy pronouncements in the U.S.
        >in which we supposedly fight wars for the purpose of peace, a "lasting
        >peace," or similar drivel. As a bit of an aside, I think one must take
        >into account the writings of Robert Ardrey, who stands Darwin on his head.
        > While still a biological evolutionist, he claims that the behavior of
        >species suggests that the desire for cooperation, and the willingness to
        >sacrifice for the greater good, is
        > a much more powerful, built-in evolutionary mechanism than the desire
        >for rivalry. Again, the one who sacrifices is not a victim.
        >
        > This is not to discount Girard's contribution to the role of myth in
        >motivation. But I am a little concerned that the study of myth then
        >becomes a substitute ideology. Voegelin's analysis of myth is sustained
        >by his understanding of the tension of existence, and a respect for just
        >how far the analysis can go without an attempt to overcome that tension.
        >With great philosophical restraint, he refuses to analyze the myth of the
        >burning bush, because he says it would destroy the compact experience that
        >it contains. It is simply not subject to an historical/existential or
        >comparative analysis without destroying its "content" so to speak. If I
        >understand him correctly.
        >
        > The Fathers interpret it typologically and to some extent allegorically
        >at times, a method Voegelin also critiques, but what better analogy than
        >this from Origen: God is a consuming fire and according to our inner
        >disposition, he either illuminates or burns.
        >
        > This points to the requirement I think of any philosophical
        >anthropology to engage not only in theory but the importance of praxis in
        >any equation. In some sense, pathological violence is theoria sans
        >praxis. Oversimplification? Perhaps. But try it on for size.
        >
        > Comments?
        >
        > Owen Jones
        >
        >
        >---------------------------------
        > All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done
        >faster.
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >






        ---------------------------------
        Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Roberto Buffagni
        Mr Owen Jones wrote: As an anecdotal example, I am currently counselling a 51 year old man who is, on e might say, locked in his own suffering. He has
        Message 3 of 17 , Sep 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Mr Owen Jones wrote:
          " As an anecdotal example, I am currently "counselling" a 51 year old man
          who is, on e might say, locked in his own suffering. He has been treated
          very badly in his mind and is in a state of constant mental and spiritual
          turmoil because he demands to know what it all means. He is prejudiced
          against anything that smacks of religion. All BS he says. His
          philosophical perspective is that of John Paul Sartre and other nihilist
          thinkers, although he has simply absorbed this from the cultural ambience.
          He is quite bright, understands that his mind is getting in the way of his
          happiness, and is willling to consider the possibility of divine help, but
          has an a priori intellectual objection to virtually every possible way out.
          He realizes that there is a problem with his feelings of victimhood, but
          simply won't let go of it, because he fears that to let go of that, he
          would be giving up his identity -- his very existence. At this point, he
          is totally resistant to the experience of pathos as the common bond of
          humanity. As a counter-point, we could point to Solzhenitsyn's account of
          his conversion in Gulag II, or the Diary of Etty Hillesum, or many
          individual accounts of the transformation that takes place when a person
          redefines his own suffering and no longer sees himself as victim. "

          If I didn't misunderstand him, here Mr. Jones is not talking about
          victimhood: he is talking about resentment, "ressentiment".
          Christ is a victim indeed, because He is both an innocent unjustly
          condemned, and (in His accusers' mind) a simple, expendable pawn in a
          political and religious game: "it's better that a single man die, and all
          the people be saved".
          But Christ accepts His death, and bears no resentment both to His
          executioners, and to the Father.
          Usually, resentment stems out of our deeply ingrained feeling that We, King
          of the Universe and Center of the World, to Whom every perfect blessing and
          celestial happiness is rightly due and should be promptly delivered, have
          suffered a real or imagined injustice, humiliation, degradation, over which
          we brood, and brood, and brood, until we succeed in putting all the blame on
          somebody else: mom, wife, society, jews, islamofascists, communism,
          capitalism, God (existence and/or inexistence of - ), etc.
          To cut a long story short, we feel resentment when we think that life
          degrades us from the state of perfection and integrity which we feel to be
          our natural condition. That's because perfect blessing and celestial
          happiness are (justly) the necessary pattern and the real form of all our
          desires.
          But, alas! In reality (i.e., in religious language, after the Fall) we are
          NOT King of the Universe, nor Center of the World: we are such just in our
          imagination(in our false Eden, i.e. in our manmade Hell). Only Christ really
          was King of the Universe & Center of the World, which is materially proved
          by His paradoxical behaviour: humility, forgiveness, acceptation of fear,
          suffering, loneliness, lack of meaning, failure, death: a paradoxical
          behaviour which entails Resurrection and Glory.
          I am no Girard specialist; but if I do not remember badly, his first
          original book, "Mensonge romantique et verité romanesque" (an astounding
          piece of literary criticism, and the real beginning of his personal
          conversion, both religious and intellectual) speaks just about this
          transformation: from resentment for the fall from imaginary perfection (la
          "mensonge romantique") to the achievement of humility, acceptation, and
          truth (la "verité romanesque"); studying it through the works of some
          novelists. Masterful, and deeply troubling, is his analysis of the
          intellectual, literary and spiritual transfiguration of Marcel Proust, from
          his juvenile "Jean Santeuil", to his major work, la "Recherche du temps
          perdu".
          Cordialmente, RB
        • Owen Jones
          well, the perspective shifts back and forth between the accuser and the suffering servant here -- in Mr. Buffagni s post. I am beginning to see a little
          Message 4 of 17 , Sep 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            well, the perspective shifts back and forth between the accuser and the suffering servant here -- in Mr. Buffagni's post. I am beginning to see a little more of Girard's perspective from some additional reading, and I think he agrees that from the new Christian perspective, Christ is not a victim. This is a monumental shift in the history of consciousness, according to Girard, with justification.

            And of course the theory is that, prior to Christ, violence had always been ritualized through religion as a way of preventing it from running wild. Thus, violence was always a religious phenom. After Christ, there is no more need for ritual violence to propitiate God or to vicariously experience God's violence, or to make violent sacrifice of an innocent victim. The Christian turns his back on violence. It is no longer a necessary component of religion. Do I have that right?
            Roberto Buffagni <roberto.buffagni@...> wrote: Mr Owen Jones wrote:

            If I didn't misunderstand him, here Mr. Jones is not talking about
            victimhood: he is talking about resentment, "ressentiment".
            Christ is a victim indeed, because He is both an innocent unjustly
            condemned, and (in His accusers' mind) a simple, expendable pawn in a
            political and religious game: "it's better that a single man die, and all
            the people be saved".
            But Christ accepts His death, and bears no resentment both to His
            executioners, and to the Father.









            ---------------------------------
            Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Roberto Buffagni
            Mr Jones wrote: And of course the theory is that, prior to Christ, violence had always been ritualized through religion as a way of preventing it from running
            Message 5 of 17 , Sep 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Mr Jones wrote:
              "And of course the theory is that, prior to Christ, violence had always
              been ritualized through religion as a way of preventing it from running
              wild. Thus, violence was always a religious phenom. After Christ, there
              is no more need for ritual violence to propitiate God or to vicariously
              experience God's violence, or to make violent sacrifice of an innocent
              victim. The Christian turns his back on violence. It is no longer a
              necessary component of religion. Do I have that right? "

              I think that in Girard's vision, after Christ the very mechanics of
              "sacrificial religions", i.e. the religions founded on the ritual killing of
              a victim (a "bouc émissaire") which gives back peace to the troubled
              community, begins to get out of order. It works smoothly until it is, at
              least partly, unconscious. When Christ, who is undeniably innocent, is put
              to death, and when the Gospels spell "from the rooftops" His innocence, the
              game is over. Which does not mean that we stop looking for, and finding,
              "boucs émissaires". On the contrary: while in the context of sacrificial
              religion a single "bouc émissaire" can be enough to quench the conflicting
              desires and to bring back serenity, in our post-Christian context, where the
              sacrificial mechanism is stunted because it has become at least partly
              self-conscious, the number of sacrificial victims skyrockets; and we have
              the mass murders perpetrated in the name of nazism, communism, democracy,
              etc.
              Cordialmente. RB
            • Owen Jones
              Voegelin is the source for me of the Marxist faith in blood intoxication and the requirement for the Proletariat to constitute a blood sacrifice on the altar
              Message 6 of 17 , Sep 3, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Voegelin is the source for me of the Marxist faith in blood intoxication and the requirement for the Proletariat to constitute a blood sacrifice on the altar of revolution.

                What I am still having trouble with is the claim that mimetic rivalry is the overwhelming constant motivation. Or that there is anything necessarily all that new in Girard on the subject of desire that we don't find in the Patristic tradition (although there is nothing wrong with new wine in old skins).

                And while I don't expect every thinker to pass a Voegelin test, it strikes me that Voegelin is more on the mark in his analysis of psychic disorders on a mass scale. On the other hand, no question that Girard brings the concrete Christian (catholic) experience to bear in a way that Voegelin did not or could not have done.

                Roberto Buffagni <roberto.buffagni@...> wrote: Mr Jones wrote:
                "And of course the theory is that, prior to Christ, violence had always
                been ritualized through religion as a way of preventing it from running
                wild. Thus, violence was always a religious phenom. After Christ, there
                is no more need for ritual violence to propitiate God or to vicariously
                experience God's violence, or to make violent sacrifice of an innocent
                victim. The Christian turns his back on violence. It is no longer a
                necessary component of religion. Do I have that right? "

                I think that in Girard's vision, after Christ the very mechanics of
                "sacrificial religions", i.e. the religions founded on the ritual killing of
                a victim (a "bouc émissaire") which gives back peace to the troubled
                community, begins to get out of order. It works smoothly until it is, at
                least partly, unconscious. When Christ, who is undeniably innocent, is put
                to death, and when the Gospels spell "from the rooftops" His innocence, the
                game is over. Which does not mean that we stop looking for, and finding,
                "boucs émissaires". On the contrary: while in the context of sacrificial
                religion a single "bouc émissaire" can be enough to quench the conflicting
                desires and to bring back serenity, in our post-Christian context, where the
                sacrificial mechanism is stunted because it has become at least partly
                self-conscious, the number of sacrificial victims skyrockets; and we have
                the mass murders perpetrated in the name of nazism, communism, democracy,
                etc.
                Cordialmente. RB






                ---------------------------------
                Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • James Rovira
                I don t think Girard says that violence is always a religious phenomenon, at least not consistently. This would demonstrate a lack of basic common sense. In
                Message 7 of 17 , Sep 3, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  I don't think Girard says that violence is always a religious phenomenon, at
                  least not consistently. This would demonstrate a lack of basic common
                  sense. In at least one example he uses, more credibly, sexual rivalry
                  between two men for a woman as a concrete example. If one kills the other,
                  the dead man's tribe, in turn, has to retaliate against the living man,
                  whose family has to retaliate, and so on in a deadly cycle. Religion and
                  the victim step in to keep this series of increasingly retributive violence
                  from escalating into the complete destruction of the community--this excess
                  violence is instead directed toward a victim who has the characteristics I
                  described before.

                  I'm thinking, in particular, of his argument in _Violence and the Sacred_.

                  Yes, it's incomplete, as are all explanations, including Voegelin's.

                  Jim R


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Roberto Buffagni
                  Mr. Jones wrote: Voegelin is the source for me of the Marxist faith in blood intoxication and the requirement for the Proletariat to constitute a blood
                  Message 8 of 17 , Sep 3, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Mr. Jones wrote:
                    "Voegelin is the source for me of the Marxist faith in blood intoxication
                    and the requirement for the Proletariat to constitute a blood sacrifice on
                    the altar of revolution.

                    What I am still having trouble with is the claim that mimetic rivalry is
                    the overwhelming constant motivation. Or that there is anything
                    necessarily all that new in Girard on the subject of desire that we don't
                    find in the Patristic tradition (although there is nothing wrong with new
                    wine in old skins).

                    And while I don't expect every thinker to pass a Voegelin test, it
                    strikes me that Voegelin is more on the mark in his analysis of psychic
                    disorders on a mass scale. On the other hand, no question that Girard
                    brings the concrete Christian (catholic) experience to bear in a way that
                    Voegelin did not or could not have done. "
                    Premise: any serious evaluation of Girard's work is way out of my
                    competence.
                    I find it fascinating, and somehow a modern myth, strangely clad in
                    scientific language (the unique language which the moderns really can
                    trust), trying to narrate the very origin of human nature, and God's
                    self-revelation to mankind.
                    I have absolutely no idea about its plausibility. Its impressive scale
                    reminds me of an old anecdote about General Charles de Gaulle. A day, the
                    General was saluted by a crowd, among which he spotted a little man holding
                    a placard, bearing the following slogan: " Mort aux imbéciles! " , " Death
                    to idiots ! ". The General commented: "Vaste programme!" "Huge program!".
                    But it gets right to the sorest point of our civilization: it tries to
                    explain thoroughly why any legitimacy, and consistently any legitimate
                    authority, have totally vanished, whatever is tried to prop it up.
                    If I didn't misunderstand him, Girard's point is that any historical and
                    cultural legitimacy finds its roots in sacrificial religions; and that the
                    slow, but unstoppable revelation "of things hidden since the foundation of
                    the world" which began with the passion of Christ and the proclamation of
                    the Gospel, is making all sacrificial religions, and their atheistic avatars
                    (nazism, communism, new world order, etc.) collapse, crumble, and
                    disintegrate among bloody, paradoxical, pharcical convulsions.
                    Is it true?
                  • Owen Jones
                    You are too kind. It is actually my ADHD! chip sills wrote: Colleagues-- I hesitate to respond, because I wonder whether the areas of
                    Message 9 of 17 , Sep 19, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      You are too kind. It is actually my ADHD!

                      chip sills <chipsills@...> wrote:
                      Colleagues--

                      I hesitate to respond, because I wonder whether the areas of my concern are
                      completely within the realm of this listserve. But here goes.

                      As is not unusual, Mr Jones presents a wealth of insight and outlook in a
                      short compass.









                      ---------------------------------
                      How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Martin Pagnan
                      Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of Conversations with Eric Voegelin that was published by the Thomas More Institute? Does someone know if
                      Message 10 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations with
                        Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?

                        Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                        be found elsewhere?

                        Thank you.


                        --
                        No virus found in this outgoing message.
                        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                        Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.15.3/562 - Release Date: 12/1/2006 1:12 PM
                      • Rhydon Jackson
                        They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume. Rhydon Jackson ... Subject: [evforum] Document search From: Martin Pagnan To:
                        Message 11 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume.

                          Rhydon Jackson

                          -------- Original Message --------
                          Subject: [evforum] Document search
                          From: Martin Pagnan <mmpagnan@...>
                          To: evforum@yahoogroups.com
                          Date: 12/1/2006 9:44 PM

                          > Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations with
                          > Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?
                          >
                          > Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                          > be found elsewhere?
                          >
                          > Thank you.
                          >
                          >
                        • Jack D Elliott
                          ... there is also the one conversation, in search of the ground, which appars in CW 11:224-251 jack
                          Message 12 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Rhydon Jackson wrote:

                            > They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume.
                            >

                            there is also the one conversation, "in search of the ground," which
                            appars in CW 11:224-251

                            jack

                            >
                            > > Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations with
                            > > Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?
                            > >
                            > > Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                            > > be found elsewhere?
                            > >
                            > > Thank you.
                            > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • Martin Pagnan
                            There are conversations with EV recorded in various places. I still wonder if someone bought the book Conversations with Eric Voegelin before it went out of
                            Message 13 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              There are conversations with EV recorded in various places. I still
                              wonder if someone bought the book 'Conversations with Eric Voegelin'
                              before it went out of print. Amazon shows it as having been published in
                              1980 and as currently unavailable. Who knows if there was not a wee
                              tidbit of insight recorded in that publication that we Voegelinians
                              might find significant.

                              Jack D Elliott wrote:
                              > On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Rhydon Jackson wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              >> They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume.
                              >>
                              >>
                              >
                              > there is also the one conversation, "in search of the ground," which
                              > appars in CW 11:224-251
                              >
                              > jack
                              >
                              >
                              >>> Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations with
                              >>> Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?
                              >>>
                              >>> Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                              >>> be found elsewhere?
                              >>>
                              >>> Thank you.
                              >>>
                              >>>
                              >>>
                              >
                              >
                              > In consideratione creaturarum non est vana
                              > et peritura curiositas exercenda; sed gradus
                              > ad immortalia et semper manentia faciendus.
                              > ---St Augustine De vera religione
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • G Ellis Sandoz
                              As Mr. Elliot indicated: that text is is reprinted in CW vol. 33--and In Search of the Ground is in CW vol. 11. More than a wee bit of insight for Mr.
                              Message 14 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                As Mr. Elliot indicated: that text is is reprinted in CW vol. 33--and "In
                                Search of the Ground" is in CW vol. 11. More than a wee bit of insight for
                                Mr. Pagnan and all other interested readers.

                                Ellis Sandoz






                                Martin Pagnan <mmpagnan@...>@yahoogroups.com on 12/04/2006 05:24:58
                                PM

                                Please respond to evforum@yahoogroups.com

                                Sent by: evforum@yahoogroups.com


                                To: evforum@yahoogroups.com
                                cc: (bcc: G Ellis Sandoz/esandoz/LSU)

                                Subject: Re: [evforum] Document search

                                There are conversations with EV recorded in various places. I still
                                wonder if someone bought the book 'Conversations with Eric Voegelin'
                                before it went out of print. Amazon shows it as having been published in
                                1980 and as currently unavailable. Who knows if there was not a wee
                                tidbit of insight recorded in that publication that we Voegelinians
                                might find significant.

                                Jack D Elliott wrote:
                                > On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Rhydon Jackson wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                >> They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume.
                                >>
                                >>
                                >
                                > there is also the one conversation, "in search of the ground," which
                                > appars in CW 11:224-251
                                >
                                > jack
                                >
                                >
                                >>> Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations
                                with
                                >>> Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?
                                >>>
                                >>> Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                                >>> be found elsewhere?
                                >>>
                                >>> Thank you.
                                >>>
                                >>>
                                >>>
                                >
                                >
                                > In consideratione creaturarum non est vana
                                > et peritura curiositas exercenda; sed gradus
                                > ad immortalia et semper manentia faciendus.
                                > ---St Augustine De vera religione
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Martin Pagnan
                                Ellis, Thanks. At least I know that I haven t missed anything. I was panicking at the thought. Phew! I can sleep in peace tonight. ... [Non-text portions of
                                Message 15 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Ellis,
                                  Thanks. At least I know that I haven't missed anything. I was panicking
                                  at the thought. Phew! I can sleep in peace tonight.

                                  G Ellis Sandoz wrote:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > As Mr. Elliot indicated: that text is is reprinted in CW vol. 33--and "In
                                  > Search of the Ground" is in CW vol. 11. More than a wee bit of insight for
                                  > Mr. Pagnan and all other interested readers.
                                  >
                                  > Ellis Sandoz
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Martin Pagnan <mmpagnan@...>@yahoogroups.com on 12/04/2006 05:24:58
                                  > PM
                                  >
                                  > Please respond to evforum@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  > Sent by: evforum@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > To: evforum@yahoogroups.com
                                  > cc: (bcc: G Ellis Sandoz/esandoz/LSU)
                                  >
                                  > Subject: Re: [evforum] Document search
                                  >
                                  > There are conversations with EV recorded in various places. I still
                                  > wonder if someone bought the book 'Conversations with Eric Voegelin'
                                  > before it went out of print. Amazon shows it as having been published in
                                  > 1980 and as currently unavailable. Who knows if there was not a wee
                                  > tidbit of insight recorded in that publication that we Voegelinians
                                  > might find significant.
                                  >
                                  > Jack D Elliott wrote:
                                  >
                                  >> On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Rhydon Jackson wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>> They are included in CW 33. A very helpful volume.
                                  >>>
                                  >>>
                                  >>>
                                  >> there is also the one conversation, "in search of the ground," which
                                  >> appars in CW 11:224-251
                                  >>
                                  >> jack
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>>> Does someone on evforum know how to obtain a copy of 'Conversations
                                  >>>>
                                  > with
                                  >
                                  >>>> Eric Voegelin' that was published by the Thomas More Institute?
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>> Does someone know if the content differs or is identical to what might
                                  >>>> be found elsewhere?
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>> Thank you.
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>>
                                  >> In consideratione creaturarum non est vana
                                  >> et peritura curiositas exercenda; sed gradus
                                  >> ad immortalia et semper manentia faciendus.
                                  >> ---St Augustine De vera religione
                                  >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >>
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > In consideratione creaturarum non est vana
                                  > et peritura curiositas exercenda; sed gradus
                                  > ad immortalia et semper manentia faciendus.
                                  > �St Augustine De vera religione
                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.