RELIGION, SCIENCE and POETRY

[D. Allan]

Religion, Science and Poetry

“THE FUTURE of poetry is immense, because in poetry, where it is worthy of its high destinies, our race, as time goes on, will find an ever surer and surer stay. There is not a creed which is not shaken, not an accredited dogma which is not shown to be questionable, not a received tradition which does not threaten to dissolve. Our religion has materialized itself in the fact, in the supposed fact; it has attached its emotion to the fact, and now the fact is failing it. But for poetry the idea is everything; the rest is a world of illusion, of divine illusion. Poetry attaches its emotion to the idea; the idea is the fact.

The strongest part of our religion to-day is its unconscious poetry.”

– Matthew Arnold, The Study of Poetry

Mr. Arnold believes the power of religion is undermined as ‘fact’ is insisted upon as religion’s meaning, and ‘idea’ is given a secondary place (if not ignored completely.) The most obvious example of this in the conservative Christian world is an insistence upon a literal understanding of the Genesis creation stories. Must the truly religious person of today abandon conventional religions (which depend on arid facts for an illusory strength and thereby lose the real strength of ideas) and seek religious strength instead in poetry?

“Without poetry,” Mr. Arnold writes, “ our science will appear incomplete; and most of what now passes with us for religion and philosophy will be replaced by poetry.”

[David Koot]

'Arid' facts? Indeed. Religion which is NOT based on facts is superstition. Your post could indeed be understood--although such is not your intention, I trust--as a call to return to the 'Age of Faith' (aka the Dark Ages) and such superstitions as were prevalent during that unfortunate era. I am reminded, after reading your post, of Winston's annoyance with certain historians who persisted in faithfulness to the 'facts,' because they interfered with one of his cherished beliefs (in the Arthurian legend). So, enjoy your poetry. I will stick with the accuracy of the facts.

Cheers.

[Dr. Shane]

The books of Job, Psalms and Song of Solomon are great poetry and packed full of profitable doctrines for Christians to use.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

'Arid' facts? Indeed. Religion which is NOT based on facts is superstition. Your post could indeed be understood--although such is not your intention, I trust--as a call to return to the 'Age of Faith' (aka the Dark Ages) and such superstitions as were prevalent during that unfortunate era. I am reminded, after reading your post, of Winston's annoyance with certain historians who persisted in faithfulness to the 'facts,' because they interfered with one of his cherished beliefs (in the Arthurian legend). So, enjoy your poetry. I will stick with the accuracy of the facts

Well, Dave, you trust rightly Let's by all means avoid a return to the Dark Ages and 'superstition.' In fact, it appears to this observer that religion still cherishes some superstitions (it just pronounces them to be facts.)

[D. Allan]

Quote:

The books of Job, Psalms and Song of Solomon are great poetry and packed full of profitable doctrines for Christians to use.

Revelations is of a different type of poetry.

Let's not forget Ecclesiastes.

Isaiah has some of the most poetic language in the Bible.

Would the parables of Jesus qualify as poetry?

[D. Allan]

It intrigues me that Mr. Arnold has wiped out the Science - Religion dichotomy by the neat addition of Poetry and producing instead a trinity.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit:

Science, Religion and Poetry.

I don't think as Mr. Arnold states that Poetry will displace religion.

Rather, the three do work together as a trinity; one does not exist without the other two.

[David Koot]

Well, 'poetry' is not empirical or rational. So long as one's 'poetry' does not do violence to the facts, I suppose it is acceptable.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Not forgetting that poetry may be found visually, as well.

For instance, the cascade of binaries in Matrix.

[jasd]

>>Father, Son and Holy Spirit:

Science, Religion and Poetry.<<

Or the movement inherent in the three folded loaves of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; or their sequential unfolding and then the return to the one in the middle for breaking...

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

[jasd]

>>I trust--as a call to return to the 'Age of Faith' (aka the Dark Ages) and such superstitions as were prevalent during that unfortunate era.<<

Unfortunate indeed. The Dark Ages were precipitated by meteor showers that induced severe climate anomalies, that is,

the Summers were too cold and too short to provide sustenance for the general populations of earth. Great famine and pestilent diseases arose decimating entire regions... it was this that was the incipient reason for the Dark Ages.

We can be thankful should there have been anything at all of European civilization saved for posterity.

[David Koot]

Nein, herr hauptmann. By 'Dark Ages' (referred to as the 'Age of Faith' by some wistful Catholics is meant the following, per 'Wikipedia':

"In historiography, the term Dark Ages or Dark Age most commonly refers to the European Early Middle Ages, the period encompassing (roughly) 476 to 1000. This concept of a dark age was created by the Italian scholar Francesco Petrarca and was originally intended as a sweeping criticism of the character of Late Latin literature. Later historians expanded the term to include not only the lack of Latin literature, but also a lack of contemporary written history and material cultural achievements in general. Popular culture has further expanded on the term as a vehicle to depict the Middle Ages as a time of backwardness, extending its pejorative use and expanding its scope."

Of course, the papacy reigned supreme, and retained its hold upon an ignorant and barbarous people by resort to fear and superstition.

[jasd]

>>…per 'Wikipedia':<<

No need to ‘apologize’ for Wikipedia I will often recourse to Wikipedia myself. I appreciate input regardless the source.

>>"In historiography, the term Dark Ages or Dark Age most commonly refers to the European Early Middle Ages, the period encompassing (roughly) 476 to 1000. This concept of a dark age was created by the Italian scholar Francesco Petrarca (1304 – 1374 which translates to approx a 1K years after the fact) and was originally intended as a sweeping criticism of the character of Late Latin literature. Later historians expanded the term to include not only the lack of Latin literature (wonder why!), but also a lack of contemporary written history and material cultural achievements in general. Popular culture has further expanded on the term as a vehicle to depict the Middle Ages as a time of backwardness, extending its pejorative use and expanding its scope."<< [ed.jasd: underline and paraphrastic added]

Yes, that is a parochial view; however, when I read the writings of certain Protesting .orgs I do so with the understanding that there is a sub rosa message (having encountered the thema so often), that is, the Dark Ages was born of the Universal church and tandem that – their catechistic pathways led to a general age of ignorance – ie, Dark Ages. To wit,

the following…

>>Of course, the papacy reigned supreme, and retained its hold upon an ignorant and barbarous people by resort to fear and superstition.<<

That said, it is a fact that coincident with the time frame given above (Wikipedian), and actually preceding it, there are the historical records (though not widely nor readily disseminated…) that provide evidence of the meteoric impacts which caused the famines, pestilences, and the resulting Dark Ages -- papacy, notwithstanding.

Umm, D. Allan, sorry for the detour – I’m parked.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

No need to ‘apologize’ for Wikipedia

I use Wikipedia too but it is not authoritative and has been known to be wrong especially regarding political and other controversial issues because people go in and change information to how they want others to believe.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

Umm, D. Allan, sorry for the detour – I’m parked.

No need to apologize for the detour - it was interesting sight-seeing.

Quote:

Well, 'poetry' is not empirical or rational. So long as one's 'poetry' does not do violence to the facts, I suppose it is acceptable. -D.Koot

Poetry may not be empirical - neither is religion -. I'm not so sure that it is irrational - in fact (if there is such a thing ), it tends toward the suprarational. It always tends toward the truth. If poetry is false it is bad poetry and not even to be considered poetry. Even when it appears to be irrational, such as in Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky it is actually uncovering truth. Jabberwocky does it by satirizing certain pretentious or sentimental ballads.

Superstition has even less to do with poetry than 'facts.' Facts and poetry are not in conflict. Superstition and poetry are.

The deeper concept in Mr. Arnolds statement is probably that of the opposition of 'fact' and 'idea.' - it is 'idea' that gives meaning to 'fact.' Idea=logos? Poetry is aligned with 'logos.'

Is that clear? ... :-)

[D. Allan]

.poetry is that which lends a higher meaning to (arid) facts.

[D. Allan]

"A Poet is as much to say as a maker. And our English name well conformes with the Greek word: for of poiyin to make, they call a maker Poeta. Such as (by way of resemblance and reuerently) we may say of God: who without any trauell to his diuine imagination, made all the world of nought, nor also by any paterne or mould as the Platonicks with their Ideas do phantastically suppose. Euen so the very Poet makes and contriues out of his owne braine both the verse and matter of his poeme, and not by any foreine copie or example, as doth the translator, who therefore may well be sayd a versifier, but not a Poet. The premises considered, it giueth to the name and profession no smal dignitie and preheminence, aboue all other artificers, Scientificke or Mechanicall. And neuerthelesse without any repugnancie at all, a Poet may in some sort be said a follower or imitator, because he can expresse the true and liuely of euery thing is set before him, and which he taketh in hand to describe: and so in that respect is both a maker and a counterfaitor: and Poesie an art not only of making, but also of imitation. And this science in his perfection, can not grow, but by some diuine instinct, the Platonicks call it furor: or by excellencie of nature and complexion: or by great subtiltie of the spirits & wit or by much experience and obseruation of the world,...."

-Puttenham, George, The Arte of English Poesie (1569)