MDDM Ch. 5: "an act of Him"

[Paul Mackin]

The Trinity is an article of faith for Anglicans,  isn't it? Quakers don't
explicitly reject it like the Unitarians but don't have doctirnes (or
clergy) at all

So Mason's "a common Belief among your people" is slightly puzzling
(especially given the initial cap) because it can't very accurately refer to
theological beliefs, unless Mason may not know all that much about Quakers.

Also what does Coal-Mining have to do with anything? Only thing one might
think is that it's very dark in coal mines, only allowing for the INNER
light.

Reminds me of that Bette Davis movie where her Welch coal-mining pupil
writes in his essay: Even though I walk in the dark I will still know that
the corn is green.


        P.


Original Message -----
From: "Michel Ryckx" <michel.ryckx at freebel.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 6:34 AM
Subject: Re: MDDM Ch. 5: "an act of Him"


> jbor's explanation makes sense; but, though a bit late to stumble in on
this
> one: may there not be an other explanation?
>
> The Roman catholics have a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost.  I do not know
how
> the Church of England thinks about that; and what do the Quakers say about
that
> topic?  If the Anglicans hold the same view on the Trinity, then "which
one tha'
> mean" on 43.5 would be: which of the three, father, son of holy ghost.  It
would
> be logical given the " . . . a common belief among your people? at 42.7
>
> Michel
> (I'll start MDMD(5) tonight --Greenwich Time here--, if there are no
> objections.)
>
> jbor wrote:
>
> > My reading of the opening misunderstanding (42) between M & D in the
chapter
> > is that it is not over the word "Him", but the word "act". Mason says
that
> > it was "an act of Him so strange, His purposes unknown", meaning of
course
> > an act of "God", to which Dixon replies "I'm not sure which one tha
mean",
> > meaning he isn't sure which "act" Dixon is referring to (i.e. the order
to
> > sail, the attack, the retreat etc). If Dixon were referring to the "Him"
> > then he wouldn't have used the pronoun "one" in his reply, surely? And,
it
> > fits in much better with Mason's wry rejoinder to Dixon's observation at
> > chapter's close about lightning not striking twice.
>
> [snip]
>