"the Slothropite heresy" (Re: Religion

[jbor]

----------
>From: 
>

> What kind of Christian was W. Slothrop?

He was a Christian who preached a somewhat more compassionate and democratic
form of Christianity than that which prevailed amongst the political regime
of that time, and who was thus regarded as a "heretic" by the Elect in
"Massachussetts Bay Colony" (i.e. the "inherently undemocratic" nation-state
wherein "the rulers [had] create[d] the church they need[ed]".)

> Very good. That gives me encouragement. All that fancy
> foot work to refute my point. My point is simple.
> I was speaking to the "route back." And here the text
> says, " It seems to Tyrone Slothrop that there might be
> a route back..." 556
>
> It seems to Tyrone, not to Tom.

    Could he have been the fork in the road American never took, the
    singular point she jumped the wrong way from? Suppose the Slothropite
    heresy had had the time to consolidate and prosper? Might there have
    been fewer crimes in the name of Jesus, and more mercy in the name of
    Judas Iscariot? (556.14)

The three questions here are not so easily assigned as Slothrop's mistaken
contemplations around the issue. Against the contention that Pynchon's texts
are somehow vilifications of Christianity -- which is pretty much a
non-issue as both David and Paul have commented -- or accusations that
anyone else here is engaging in religion vilification of any kind -- which
is a load of horse doody imo -- it is important to also acknowledge that the
inherent critique (given explicit voice in the third of the rhetorical
questions cited above) of Christianity in its political manifestations is
one which is endorsed in the text and, by inference, by the author as well.
Simple as that.

best