Re: [mythsoc] Re: Landscape With Dragons revisited
- View SourceThanks Jef; that explained the distinction very well. Appreciate your
taking the time to clarify this point for me.
P.S.: By the way, I shd have noted that O'Brien makes several
favorable references to Chesterton, whom he quotes respectfully,
though he doesn't discuss his fantasy. He doesn't address Charles
Williams at all, but then Williams' novels aren't targeted for young
readers so maybe he felt they were outside his scope. I'm curious
what he would make of Ruth Nichols' A WALK OUT OF THIS WORLD, but it
didn't even make the reading lists. On a closer look, I do see some
fantasy authors for children got listed: Lofting, Milne, Potter, a
little Yolen, Barrie, Lawson, McCloskey, White (E.B.). Nesbit is
listed but only for a non-fantasy title.
On Sep 5, 2006, at 10:54 AM, jef.murray wrote:
> Roman Catholics cannot, by definition, be called fundamentalist.
> This is simply because Catholicism, unlike Christian fundamentalism,
> does not insist that all truth is contained in scripture. In
> Catholicism, there is ongoing revelation through the teachings of the
> church (e.g., encyclicals and other documents approved by the church
> Magesterium) and through the writings and teaching of saints
> throughout the ages. The Catholic world looks for understanding of
> complex situations through prayer and discernment. And its
> understanding of God's revelations to man can and does change over
> time, albeit generally in nuance, not in the basic tenets of the
> Fundamentalism, by contrast, insists that the truth of all
> experience must be filtered through a fixed set of writings, and that
> these writings are, in themselves, infallible. There are Christian
> fundamentalists, and I believe that all of these are Protestant in
> some form or fashion. There are also fundamentalist Muslims. And, for
> all practical purposes, that term might be applied to any religion
> that has a fixed and unchanging canon of scripture and that does not
> believe in any authority outside of that scripture.
> I would agree with you that Michael O'Brien's positions might seem
> somewhat like those of many fundamentalist Christians. However, to the
> secular world, an orthodox Catholic can appear to be radically
> conservative on some issues (e.g., abortion), while being
> simulataneously radically liberal on others (e.g., being against the
> war in Iraq, and being intolerant of societal poverty and inequality).
> This "strange" balance is what defines Catholicism, as G.K. Chesterton
> was fond of pointing out.
> I hope some of this helps....
- View SourceHello fellows:
I've been off-list for some time. One reason is that
I've been looking after an early Mythopoeic personage,
Jon Lackey. He was the producer of the "Greater
Trumps" masque that was mounted at
the second Mythcon in 1971. He had been in ill health
for much of this previous year.
I'm sorry to report that he passed away on February
26th of cancer.
He was an enormous influence on my life, as well as
many others. He was involved with the very
first campaign to produce a film of "Rings" in 1957.
A major contributor to the SCA, LASFS, a tutor and
mentor to many, RenFair performer, artist, sculptor,
costumer, composer, and so much more.
Please pass this information on to anyone who might
have known him, and have them contact me
as regards a planned memorial.
Bonnie S. Callahan