(urth) Wolfean theologies

Thu Feb 5 07:14:32 PST 2009

my very small tangent did have to do with BotNS, in that people are  
arguing about the Severian Christ issue as if there is one  
understanding of Christ, so I pointed out that even the dominant  
understanding of Christ is considered Heresy by some. It wasn't way  
off topic. IMO, it was not "No good reason at all".  Look at the title  
of the thread. "Wolfean Theologies"  well isn't Wolfe Catholic?  can't  
I talk about Catholicism? Sorry if what I have to say isn't peaches  
and cream.

Matt,
Win? Lose? what are you talking about?  I made some, uh, "idiotic  
assertions" and people were offended that I expressed what I felt.
I certainly don't care to argue about what any of us here believe, but  
discussing different interpretations of texts, Wolfe's or those that  
informed Wolfe, are FAIR GAME.  I'm not presenting myself as better  
than any Catholics here. I made a critique about an institution's  
problems. Can't I?  I'll obviously try to refrain since people think  
I'm talking about THEM when I'm talking about an institutional church  
decision made in the 12th century.
I'd challenge anyone to dig through my messages and find something  
negative I said about Catholic Worshipers. I don't think it happened.

Tim,
Cleanliness IS next to Godliness.
pick up the hanky.

~Son

On Feb 5, 2009, at 3:57 AM, Matt Teel wrote:

> Amen to that, Chris.
>
> I am full of responses to your idiotic assertions, witz, but I'm  
> going to resist, because this conversation has little-if-anything to  
> do with GENE WOLFE.  If that makes you feel like you won the  
> argument, great.  If it makes you feel like you lost, then console  
> yourself with how broad-minded and inquisitive you are (and how  
> narrow-minded and thin-skinned those Catholics are) and let's get on  
> with the interpretation of this man's life work.
>
> Matt Teel
>
> --- On Thu, 2/5/09, Chris P <rasputin_ at hotmail.com> wrote:
> From: Chris P <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) Wolfean theologies
> To: urth at lists.urth.net
> Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 7:37 AM
>
> "Priest rapists", your mother, her drinking habits, and Satanists  
> are - as far as I can tell - immaterial to Wolfe's work.
>
> I'm sure some people probably were offended by what you said. But  
> others probably checked their email, browsed through messages on the  
> list and wondered "why are we talking about priest rapists?" And the  
> answer, as near as I can tell, is "No good reason at all."  
> Digressions happen, but when they're presented in a way that's  
> deliberately designed to an angry (and equally pointless) response  
> for everyone else to read through, it's just trolling.
>
> -- "When small men begin to cast big shadows, it means that the sun  
> is about to set." -- Lin Yutang
>
>
>
> > From: sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org
> > To: urth at lists.urth.net
> > Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 23:14:37 -0800
> > Subject: Re: (urth) Wolfean theologies
> >
> > sorry I've got some critical things to say about your momma.
> > It ain't like she's innocent.
> > *resists yo mama joke*
> > No one complained when I bagged on Scientific Materialism.
> > and "Foul Mouth Whore" is insulting language, which I did not use.
> > I suggested that one error perhaps led to some real problems.
> > Just as my mother's drinking led to her neglect of her children and
> > herself.
> > I think the Catholic Church has real, big time issues. sorry if it
> > offends y'all, but how long can you talk about doctrinal differences
> > between sect's interpretations without stepping on some toes?
> >
> > I'm trying to be thoughtful about my comments, knowing that there  
> are
> > bound to be a lot of Catholics here, as Wolfe is a self-proclaimed
> > "Catholic Writer". I don't think Wolfe's writing is at all orthodox
> > though. I dug the situation with Quetzal because the idea of a  
> vampire
> > at the top of the church is EXACTLY what I've felt about the Pope my
> > ENTIRE life. Fucking Literally. Should I not say that here because
> > some of you are down with the Pope? Surely you all have tougher skin
> > than that. Sorry, if your faith or church can't withstand some tough
> > questions, what is it worth?
> >
> > I think Satanists are selfish idiots. anyone offended?
> >
> > ~Son
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 4, 2009, at 8:35 PM, Matthew King wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Son of Witz <sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org
> > > > wrote:
> > >> I'm not harshing on Catholics,
> > >> I'm harshing on the Catholic Church.
> > >
> > > Son, if I may call you that, this is akin to declaring, "I'm not
> > > saying you're a son of a bitch, just that your mother is a
> > > foul-mouthed whore."
> > >
> > >> Like I might bag on Iran without
> > >> offense to Iranians
> > >
> > > Most of the rest of the inhabitants of the world have not yet
> > > convinced themselves that they are wholly unconcerned with the  
> fate
> > > and reputation of their communities. I submit that you would meet
> > > much the same reaction in badmouthing Iran to Persians.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Urth Mailing List
> > > To post, write urth at urth.net
> > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Urth Mailing List
> > To post, write urth at urth.net
> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
> Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. See  
> how it works.
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net