Nancy Gish wrote:
> One might add that "living a religion"--whatever that may mean for 
> Christians, since we all know many profess and pronounce while acting 
> in ways that would presumably appall Jesus--is not a requirement for 
> understanding, experiencing, or fully appreciating poetry. 

     I don't myself know that that is true or untrue. How do you know 
that to "fully appreciate" poetry does not require "living a religion"? 
The circuitry of that sentence is one whose wiring I'd like to see 
revealed. Not because I believe the opposite to be true; I don't. But 
I'm interested to know the underpinning of such a statement, if there is 
any. How, specifically,  can you tell when someone is fully appreciating 

> If that were true, none of us could read any poetry except that which 
> affirmed our own religion or sense of the g

   No, you're changing the terms. Surely "reading poetry" is not the 
same as "fully appreciating" poetry. Surely there are degrees.

> It would be a pretty impoverished world.
    That remains to be seen.

Ken A