Who says what in this post?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: T. S. Eliot Discussion forum. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Materer, Timothy J.
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 9:12 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: E's Religion: reply to P
> Concerning passages below, there is nothing pragmatic in this first, late
> He's a long way from his Harvard years. On the other hand, a faith that
> only by waiting for some kind of confirmation is not incompatible with
> Concerning the second, I think it's a case of logic taking us to an aporia
> faith can resolve.
> Kirsch needs to study Eliot a bit more.
> "I said to my soul, be still, and wait without hope
> For hope would be hope for the wrong thing; wait without love
> For love would be love of the wrong thing; there is yet faith
> But the faith and the love and the hope are all in the waiting.
> Wait without thought, for you are not ready for thought:
> So the darkness shall be the light, and the stillness the dancing."
> That is the thought of a pragmatist?
> I would say there a stunning absence of any idea of the roll
of faith in
> all this, as if logic alone is the determining factor. What a person
thinks and what
> a person accepts on faith are different things.