Day 9 (DDRD 2,647) January 28, 2025
Read to page 155.
Forgot to post some VITAL information about that Latin translation of The City of God:
Mmm-hmm.
And in today's reading:
I'M not going to say it...but I'm THINKing it.
Whilst posting both of these goofy pictures, it hit me how much I like writing this shit. So if you're still out there, thanks for reading it.
Get this:
"For just as the demons cannot possess any but those whom they have deceived with guile, so also men in princely office, not indeed being just, but like demons, have persuaded the people in the name of religion to receive as true those things which they themselves knew to be false ; in this way, as it were, binding them more firmly in civil society, so that they might in like manner possess them as subjects. But who that was weak and learned could escape the deceits of both the princes of the state and the demons?" (140)
I'm not sure what's meant by that last sentence. Only the weak and learned can escape from etc.? Or weak and learned cannot escape etc.? Either way (or another way I'm not seeing), I don't understand why the weak and learned are grouped together.
Hmmm. https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/august.html anyone?
[XXXII] Dicit etiam de generationibus deorum magis ad poetas quam ad physicos fuisse populos inclinatos, et ideo et sexum et generationes deorum maiores suos, id est ueteres credidisse Romanos et eorum constituisse coniugia. Quod utique non aliam ob causam factum uidetur, nisi quia hominum uelut prudentium et sapientium negotium fuit populum in religionibus fallere et in eo ipso non solum colere, sed imitari etiam daemones, quibus maxima est fallendi cupiditas. Sicut enim daemones nisi eos, quos fallendo deceperint, possidere non possunt, sic et homines principes, non sane iusti, sed daemonum similes, ea, quae uana esse nouerant, religionis nomine populis tamquam uera suadebant, hoc modo eos ciuili societati uelut aptius alligantes, quo similiter subditos possiderent. Quis autem infirmus et indoctus euaderet simul fallaces et principes ciuitatis et daemones?
Which, according to Google Translate, means
[32] He also says of the generations of the gods that the peoples were more inclined to poets than to scientists, and therefore both the sex and the generations of the gods were their elders, that is, the ancients believed in the Romans and formed their spouses. This certainly seems to have been done for no other reason, than because it was the business of the prudent and wise men to deceive the people in their religions, and in it not only to worship, but also to imitate the demons, who have the greatest desire to deceive. For just as demons can only possess those whom they have deceived by deception, so also the leaders of men, not of course just, but like demons, those things which they knew to be vain, they persuaded the people as true in the name of religion, in this way binding them more fitly to civil society. by which they would possess the subjects in the same way. But who, weak and uneducated, would flee at the same time from the deceivers and the leaders of the city and the demons?
I'm not at all sure that that helped, but it was kind of fun doing.
Seneca says, "The fates do lead the man that follows willing ; / But the man that is unwilling, him they drag." (151)
Day 10 (DDRD 2,648) January 29, 2025
Read to page 175.
Uh oh.
"...the Jews were most righteously given as a trophy to the glory of the Romans ; for we see that these Romans, who rested on earthly glory, and sought to obtain it by virtues, such as they were, conquered those who, in their great depravity, slew and rejected the giver of true glory, and of the eternal city." (171)
That is some serious anti-Semitic bullshit. I don't even know where to start with this. But even if it is an "if his time" perspective, I don't care. I expect more...a lot more...from an intelligent human being. This is the kind of thing which makes me want to throw the book across the room and be done with it. But I'm going to grit my teeth and try to soldier on.
And here's another bit of vileness for today: "Thus also the durations of wars are determined by Him as He may see meet, according to His righteous will, and pleasure, and mercy, to afflict or to console the human race...." (175)
Howling asshole of evil! How can anyone believe that a benevolent God acts in such a hideous way? I'm thinking about the thousands of innocent children who have died in Gaza in the past year and a half. According to Augustine, God let that happen--didn't end the war He didn't think the Palestinians had learned their lesson yet? That is so seriously fucked up that I can't say anything more about it.
Today has not been a good reading day.
Day 11 (DDRD 2,649) January 30, 2025
Read to page 195.
"...it is very easy for a man to seem to himself to have answered arguments, when he has only been unwilling to be silent. For what is more loquacious than vanity? And though it be able, if it like, to shout more loudly than the truth, it is not, for all that, more powerful than the truth." (181)
Last night I was chatting with my #1☀ and told him I was reading thus book. I struggled to sum up what I'd read and to predict what I'd be moving into, but didn't feel that my summary was very coherent, so I went online and found this:
"The City of God, philosophucal treatise vindicating Christianity, written by the medieval philosopher St. Augustine as De civitate Dei contra paganos (Concerning the City of God Against the Pagans) about 413–426 ce. A masterpiece of Western culture, The City of God was written in response to pagan claims that the sack of Rome by barbarians in 410 was one of the consequences of the abolition of pagan worship by Christian emperors. Augustine responded by asserting, to the contrary, that Christianity saved the city from complete destruction and that Rome’s fall was the result of internal moral decay. He further outlined his vision of two societies, that of the elect (“The City of God”) and that of the damned (“The City of Man”). These “cities” are symbolic embodiments of the two spiritual powers—faith and unbelief—that have contended with each other since the fall of the angels. They are inextricably intermingled on this earth and will remain so until time’s end. Augustine also developed his theological interpretation of human history, which he perceives as linear and predestined, beginning with the Creation and ending with the Second Coming of Christ. At this work’s heart is a powerful contrarian vision of human life, one which accepts the place of disaster, death, and disappointment while holding out hope of a better life to come, a hope that in turn eases and gives direction to life in this world."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-City-of-God
THAT'S how you wave a towel, you schmuck! *
Meanwhile....
"...malign spirits, who with wonderful slyness and secretness suggest to the thoughts of the impious, and sometimes openly present to their understandings, noxious opinions, by which the human mind grows more and more foolish, and becomes unable to accept adapt itself to and abide in the immutable and eternal truth, and seek to confirm these opinions by every kind of fallacious attestation in their power." (188)
It's like St. Augustine was reporting on FOX "News." Further proof that we've made little or no progress in the past couple if thousand years.
* See https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/2xvefp/no_matter_what_this_husband_did_in_bed_his_wife/
Day 12 (DDRD 2,650) January 31, 2025
Read to page 215.
I thought this was kind of funny: "...Priapus, too, is there, a male to excess, upon whose immense and most unsightly member the newly-married bride is commanded to sit, according to the most honourable and most religious custom of matrons...." (199 - 200)
And here's an interesting bit of hypocrisy (or, 8f you prefer, doublethink): after talking about how some worshippers castrate themselves or cut themselves elsewhere, St. Augustine says, "... gods who who wish to be worshipped in this fashion should be worshipped in none." (202) Hmm. I seem to recall a story about a man named Abraham and his son, Isaac.
Also, this: "...the multitude of the insane is the defense of their sanity." (202)
Day 13 (DDRD 2,651) February 1, 2025
Read to page 223 and had to stop for a breather. I hate to say it, but I'm getting pretty tired if this discussion of Roman gods. I get it that St. Augustine us writing to an audience that is still in the early stages if dealing with the conflux (and -flicts) between Roman mythology and Christianity, but for fuck's sake, the point was made about a hundred pages ago. I am ready to move on, man. I would hate to quit another book, but thus us starting to feel like a waste of time...and at my age (and precarious state if health), there's no time to waste. I'm going to take a little break and see if I can come back and push myself to 235. 😔
It took me until 8:34 to get to page 235.
And it was no fucking fun.
Here are two questions which I think sum up this section: "...why do they worship Altor? ...Wherefore do they worship Rusor?" (230)
The answer, of course, is...who gives a rat's ass?
This shit just goes on and on, naming obscure God after obscure god. To what purpose? Well...to prove that these gods should not be worshipped. Fair point, I suppose, but I got that at least a hundred pages ago.
Day 14 (DDRD 2,652) February 2, 2025
Read to page 255.
I came very close to throwing in the towel this morning. I just couldn't face another round of Proving Obscure Roman Gods Are Inferior to the Christian God. But then I thought, "I'm almost at the end of Book VII. What if Book VIII takes a different direction?" So I skipped ahead and started reading on Book VIII. And? No Roman gods. We'd moved on to Socrates and Plato and the rest of the boys from Luckenbach, Texas. I read a couple of pages just to make sure, and lo and behold 👼, it was actually interesting. So with a deep sigh I went back and finished off Book VII and proceeded to Book VIII feeling as if I'd just had a majestical shit after a week's worth of constipation.
Ahhhh.
More news as it happens.
Day 15 (DDRD 2,653) February 3, 2025
Read to page 275.
Here's an interesting translation of the first lines of Genesis: "In the beginning God made the heaven and earth. And the earth was invisible, and without order; and darkness was over the abyss...." (256) Say what? "Invisible"? And what " abyss" are we talking about here? More information, please.
After some brief swipes Plato's way, St. A is slowly drifting back into Roman gods territory. I'm less than ecstatic about that.
Day 16 (DDRD 2,654) February 4, 2025
Read to page 295.
I had barely started reading this morning when I ran into something interesting. Carlos is talking about angels, and amongst other things says, "we cannot see them with the eyes of our flesh." (276) The implication us that we have (at least potentially) access to eyes which are not "of the flesh." (How else could angels be seen...as they are throughout the Old Testament and even a bit in the New?) This is the same thing that don Juan is constantly saying to Carlos Castaneda in Journey to Ixtlan (highly recommended!). Don Juan also differentiates between looking and seeing, with looking being his word for flesh eyeing and seeing the word for accessing a spiritual vision. (Carlos struggles mightily to access this vision, and fails repeatedly.)
A little later St. Augustine says that fellowship with angels "is only prevented when we, in the impurity of our hearts, mind earthly things." (276) This, too, reminds me if don Juan, as he tells Carlos to leave behind earthly things so that he can become "a man of wisdom."
You know, I bought this book for $1 at Goodwill. And though I've found it frustrating to the point of wanting to quit at times (and still might quit, though that becomes less likely with every turn of a page), I still have to appreciate the fact that in a world where a comic book, which can be read in about fifteen minutes, costs between $3.99 and $6.99, a buck for almost 900 pages of the thoughts of a wise man is amazingly cheap. Not to mention that it will take about 47 hours and 41 minutes to read. That's 🎆 4 the 💸.
Day 17 (DDRD 2,655) February 5, 2025
Read to page 315. Tough haul today.
Y'know, this book is reminding me of Summa Theologica. It's better written, but still it advances its arguments primarily by quoting Biblical and literary sources. Which, if course, Proves nothing.
About, my brains!
Meanwhile, not even two pages in this morning and I put this book down and picked up The Lone Wolf #4: Desert Stalker by Mike Barry (Barry Malzberg).
Ahhh. That's more like it.
Took a few hours... About ten of them...but I finally got back to St. Augustine. Thought this was interesting:
First Augustine quotes from Psalm 16: "I have said to the Lord, Thou art my God: for Thou needest not my goodness." Then he goes on to say (deep breath), "We must believe, then, that God has no need, not only of cattle, or any other earthly and material thing, but even of man's righteousness, and that whatever right worship is paid to God profits not Him, but man. For no man would say he did a benefit to a fountain by drinking, or to the light by seeing. And the fact that the ancient church offered animal sacrifices, which the people of God now-a-days reads of without imitating, proves nothing else than this, that those sacrifices signified the things which we do for the purpose of drawing near to God, and inducing our neighbour to do the same. A sacrifice, therefore, is the visible sacrament or sacred sign of an invisible sacrifice. Hence that penitent in the psalm, or it may be the Psalmist himself, entreating God to be merciful to his sins, says, 'If Thou desiredst sacrifice, I would give it: Thou delightest not in whole burnt-offerings. The sacrifice of God is a broken heart: a heart contrite and humble God will not despise.' Observe how, in the very words in which he is expressing God's refusal of sacrifice, he shows that God requires sacrifice. He does not desire the sacrifice of a slaughtered beast, but He desires the sacrifice of a contrite heart. Thus, that sacrifice which he says God does not wish, is the symbol of the sacrifice which God does wish. God does not wish sacrifices in the sense in which foolish people think He wishes them, viz. to gratify His own pleasure." (308)
To me, the message is that people do what they think God wants, and if their desire is guileless, then the sacrifice is acceptable. As people evolve, however, their concept if what God wants changes, and becomes closer to what God does want.
It also occurs to me that even though there are similarities between this book and Aquinas's Summa Theologica, this book is less irritating because it does not pretend to be philosophy. It is essentially a summary and commentary upon Biblical readings.
That still doesn't mean I've got it in me to read 600 more pages, but it does seem at least possible at this point.
Day 18 (DDRD 2,656) February 6, 2025
Read to page 335.
In speaking of the world as created by God, St. Augustine says, "Although, therefore, the standing miracle of this visible world is little thought of, because always before us, yet, when we arouse ourselves to contemplate it, it is a greater miracle than the rarest and most unheard of marvels." (318)
"Little thought of because always before us." That reminds me of Chekhov's story "In Exile," wherein a Nan newly arrived to a Russian prison camp is told my a long time resudent, "You'll get used to it." As humans, we become jaded so quickly. Even the beauty of this world becomes background noise. I think that is one of the reasons children and special needs people can be so charming. They don't...or haven't yet, at least...succumb to the cynical vision of dulled perceptions. They haven't gotten used to it. se
And here's a passage which actually makes me love St. Augustine a little bit: "For as the sound which communicates the thought conceived in the silence of the mind is not the thought itself, so the form by which God, invisible in his own nature, became visible, was not God himself. Nevertheless it is He Himself who is seen under that form, as that thought itself is heard in the sound of the voice : and the patriarchs recognised that, though the bodily form was not God, they saw the invisible God." (318)
The expression, with the extended metaphor of thought as the form of God, is quite lovely. And the idea that God manifests His presence in a form which is apprehendable to the frail and limited human mind is an important one, I think...similar to the comments above reference sacrifices. It could also go a long way toward reconciling such apparent contradictions as the vengeful and angry God of the Old Testament and the gentle and benevolent God of the New Testament: it isn't a change in God's nature, but a change in the human mind's ability to perceive. Could we expect the newly Christianized Anglo-Saxon tribes to accept a meek shepherd as their Savior? Of course not. The idea is ridiculous. So they are given a mighty thewed warrior named Beowulf as their vision of the Savior. A good plan...though the danger is that more modern minds don't understand the function of the representation, and thus decry the God without seeing that it is a vision of God for a specific group of people at a specific time.
End of sermon.
Day 19 (DDRD 2,657) February 7, 2025
Read to page 355.
I find it interesting how often there is crossover between The City of God and the don Juan books I've been reading. For instance, don Juan often chastises, Carlos Castaneda for looking but not seeing and hearing but not hearing. In The City of God, St. Augustine says (of God), "For He speaks to that part of man which is better than all else that is in him, and than which God Himself alone is better." (346) Augustine also notes that to hear god, one must be "prepared to hear with the mind rather than with the body." Voila.
Day 20 (DDRD 2,658) February 8, 2025
Read to page 375.
Timed my reading today: it takes me about 2 minutes and 15 seconds to read a page. So that means 20 pages takes about 45 minutes.
On page 373 there's a reference to gravity. Umm...what? The City of God was published in 426A.D....about 1200 years before Newton.
Hmmm. Here's the line: "If we were stones, or waves, or wind, or flame, or anything of that kind, we should want, indeed, both sensation and life, yet should possess a kind of attraction towards our own proper position and natural order. For the specific gravity of bodies is, as it were, their love, whether they are carried downwards by their weight, or upwards by their levity." So obviously the translator took some liberties and veered into anachronism, right? Well, let's see.
The original Latin says:
"Si essemus lapides, vel fluctus, vel ventus, vel flamma, vel quidvis tale, sine ullo sensu vel vita, non tamen careremus quasi quibusdam locis et ordine nostro. Est enim ac si affectiones corporum sunt momenta gravium, sive deorsum gravitate sive sursum cum levitate inclinent."
And Google translate makes this of that:
"If we were stones, or waves, or wind, or flame, or anything of the sort, without any sense or life, yet we would not lack, as it were, some of our places and order. For it is as if the affections of bodies are the moments of weights, whether they lean downwards with heaviness or upwards with lightness."
No gravity. No anachronism. Bad translator. And there's twenty minutes of my life gone.
But I liked it.
As for this book...I'm still not sure if I'll be finishing it. Getting pretty close to the halfway point (in 171 pages), though, and once I crest that hill its a lock. 😗
Day 21 (DDRD 2,659) February 9, 2025
Read to page 395.
Lots of talk about sin being that which is contrary to God's will, which points out what I think is the greatest problem with Christianity: when it comes down to it, it says that we are given free will, but if we use it in any way that is contrary to God's will, it's a sin and we'll be punished for it. So how is that free will? "You can do anything you want as long as it's what I want." Yeah. That's a problem.
Hey, look:
St. Augustine invented The Multiverse! And with a side order of The New Gods!
Day 22 (DDRD 2,660) February 10, 2025
Read to page 400...but I'm just not feeling it. Might be, at least in part, the backwash of a pretty wretched yesterday, but it might also be that I'm finally fed up with this tedious dissertation. Think I'll read some more Desert Stalker and try to reignite my bibliophilia.
Read quite a bit of Desert Stalker, by the way. It's good trash. Going to try to finish it up later.
In other news, here's a Modigliani portrait of Blaise Cendrars:
 |
| Public Domain |
Apparently, they were big buddies.
I know this...and about the Modigliani portrait, because I read about them in the preliminary material in
Complete Poems by Blaise Cendrars (Ron Padgett (Translator):
'Cause I started reading it. Might be my DDR as of tomorrow morning.
Read to page xx today, which I think covers me for today's reading goal.
Day 23 (DDRD 2,661) February 11, 2025
Read to page NOPE. But I did finish Desert Killer, Which was a fun little bit of "men's adventure" trash, and knocked back 20 page of Collected Poems, which now becomes my DDR. And I don't think ill be coming back for the 500 pages of The City of God.
