I seem to remember from lkessons long past that
some forms of deterministic protestantism readthat
receiving wealth was a sign of having been chosen by God.
Apparently that fuelled a lot of the renaissance commerce
in northern Europe. I'm not altogether sure how
valid a reading that is, but it could help to understand
some modern Christian attitudes.

Cheers,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Gray
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 2004-Nov-03 10:17 AM
Subject: Eliot's Anglicanism -- was Re: (OT) US Elections: Allustions to
'christianity'

--- Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

  Any
> reading of what Jesus said seems to suggest that
> neither Bush nor many
> of his followers have a clue about loving their
> neighbor or caring for
> the least of us or eschewing wealth.

The idea of eschewing wealth is not universal in
Christianity. In particular, it is not universally
accepted in Protestantism or the faith of the Church
of England, which Elliot took up. There is a strong
millenarian tendency in Anglicanism. Followers believe
that by supporting their families and creating a more
prosperous world, they are doing God's work and loving
their neighbour. In doing so, they are creating God's
kingdom in this world.

This is certainly the type of Anglicanism that I was
brought up in. It was the aspect of the faith that
differentiated it from Roman Catholicism.


I have wondered how this aspect of Anglicanism fits
with Eliot's view of the world.




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com