Print

Print


Semantics, it may be, CR, but do think 'Anglo-Catholic' relates to the
Anglican (High) Church, which is a Protestant one (albeit barely !)  whilst
'Catholic' on its own usually implies (in a religion and belief context)
the Church of Rome.


On 5 July 2013 19:10, Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thanks, David. But wasn't Eliot an 'anglo-catholic' by his own admission?
> An Anglican form of Catholicism?
>
> Well, here is a brief excerpt from a review of Barry Spurr's 'Anglo-Catholic
> in Religion': T.S. Eliot and Christianity:
>
> // Spurr points out, largely on the basis of evidence from the
> correspondence with Mary Trevelyan, that Eliot's involvements with the
> discussions at St Anne's Soho, the Christian News-Letter, the Christian
> Frontier Council and the Moot are not to be read as indicating uncritical
> agreement with those projects. 'He was at one with them, theologically,
> insofar as they could be seen to be Catholic; but he was generally
> dissociated from their political leanings.'
>
> http://www.clsg.org/Glass23TSE_web.pdf
>
> Regards,
>   CR
>
>   ------------------------------
> David Boyd <[log in to unmask]> wrote
>
> "....his conversion to Catholicism."
>
> I hope not too pedantic to observe that this is not so. It was High Church
> Anglicanism to which Eliot converted, and there's a fundamental difference,
> mainly relating to that fellow in the Vatican, to whom Eliot was polite but
> not exactly reverential.
>
> Barry Spurr's recent book explains at length.
>
> regards,
>
> David
> - who's off to Little Gidding Festival, Sunday: if anyone on here going
> too, please do holler.
>
>
> On 5 July 2013 17:33, Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Permit me, apropos the subject, to share a modified version of the preface
> I wrote for my book on Eliot's early poetry:
>
> // The various attempts to find the fundamental axioms behind both good
> literature and good life, said Eliot, are among the most interesting
> experiments of criticism in our time.* And in 'Religion and Literature'
> (1935), he did not hold back to say that "literary criticism should be
> completed by criticism from a definite ethical and theological standpoint."
> The present book is a continuation of efforts in that direction. It unfolds
> layer after layer of Eliot's early poetry, specifically Prufrock 1917 and Poems
> 1920, to discover that it is here, for the first time perhaps, that the
> aesthetics of poetry has so subtly been wedded to the absolutes of a
> religious belief.
>
> The book is a concerted attempt to counter the widely prevalent but
> patently mistaken notion of Eliot's early poetry as something apart from
> his later poetry. For, despite the apparent differences between the two
> poetic modes, the leitmotif of Eliot's poetry, both early and later,
> remains the poet's desperate spiritual quest. In the early poetry what one
> envisages is that in the framework of symbolist aesthetics which commits
> the poet to the notion of impersonality, there is a constant personal
> struggle of the poet with his inner demons and, through this struggle, the
> poet works out a personal idiom, and a vision, with a spiritual orientation
> which finally culminates in his conversion to Catholicism. //
> (*I'm sorry I don't have the source at hand.)
>
> Well, so much has since been written on Eliot's early poetry that is in
> consonance with my views
> (written in 2001).
>
> Thanks,
>   CR
>
>
>
>
>
>
>