Nancy Gish wrote: > > but using it to > evangelize is, I deeply believe, inappropriate. It is becoming an > offense. > Nancy > I don't know whether it is an offense or not, but it is certainly becoming a good reason not to open William's posts (or at least read beyond the first line or two). A sampling of them, however, offers a glimpse into the ways in which beliefs can be compulsive. I think one of the reasons I have never been able to take much 17th c. religious verse in more than small quantities is that this compulsion often characterizes it. (Herbert, Donne's specifically religious verse, Crahaw, Vaughn.) I rather prefer Jonson, Milton, Rochester from that century. I have, for example, found admirable Milton's inability to finish "The Passion." Carrol P.S. John Crowe Ransom has an amusing anecdote in reference to his days at Cambridge (or Oxford -- I don't rembmer which). At a debate or something like that a member of the Conservative Club announced that he was a Conservative and therefore [read _had to_] believed in X, Y, or Z. Ransom said he was happy at not being compelled to believe X or Y.