Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nihil who wrote (68298)	12/23/1999 8:18:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 108807

I think that the essay is fair enough on the question of the distortion presented by the play, particularly making More a martyr to conscience in a modern sense. There are things that trouble me. For example, the author does not understand the issues in the Reformation very well, and confuses the Lutheran doctrine on the Eucharist (consubstantiation, which still presumes the mystical transformation of the elements) with the Calvinist doctrine (which held the Eucharist to be no more than the outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace). Similarly, to a person of faith and supporter of reform, the horror of schism is not something that should be passed off lightly. Lutherans were not adherents of a different religion, they were Christian, and bent on destroying Christian unity, a sin against charity. As a practical man, More would also have seen the likely consequences of such division, in the endless round of persecutions and civil wars that ensued. Even from a secular standpoint, if one admires Machiavelli, there was reason to head it off at the beginning, for the long term good. In any event, thank you for an interesting read, one that I will give more thought to......