Sells,

Golgotha in literature:

Given you haven't replied I assume you might not have understood the content:

Sydney Cartons last thoughts and footsteps:

"I see the lives for which I lay down my life, peaceful, useful, prosperous and happy, in that England which I shall see no more. I see Her with a child upon her bosom, who bears my name. I see her father, aged and bent, but otherwise restored, and faithful to all men in his healing office, and at peace. I see the good old man, so long their friend, in ten years' time enriching them with all he has, and passing tranquilly to his reward."

"I see that I hold a sanctuary in their hearts, and in the hearts of their descendants, generations hence. I see her, an old woman, weeping for me on the anniversary of this day. I see her and her husband, their course done, lying side by side in their last earthly bed, and I know that each was not more honoured and held sacred in the other's soul, than I was in the souls of both."

"I see that child who lay upon her bosom and who bore my name, a man winning his way up in that path of life which once was mine. I see him winning it so well, that my name is made illustrious there by the light of his. I see the blots I threw upon it, faded away. I see him, foremost of just judges and honoured men, bringing a boy of my name, with a forehead that I know and golden hair, to this place -- then fair to look upon, with not a trace of this day's disfigurement -- and I hear him tell the child my story, with a tender and a faltering voice.

"It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known." - Charles Dickens

- Peter, Sydney Carton is sacraficing his life for others. Moving to a Humanist.

Charles,

"I see that child who lay upon her bosom..." [sic whom lays upon...?] A single verb for a single noun and whom for the preposition, "upon"?

With my poor typing should I say a thing? Is there an English expert out there?

Sells,

I put in a fair amount of effort to help you, but you seem to be rude too reply.

Sells,

Of John Locke:

"Virtutes si quas habuit, minores sane quam sibi laudi duceret tibi in exemplum proponeret; vita una sepeliantur." [1704?, author unknown]

Of Austen's Clergy:

"The place of the church in Austen’s novels is the place allotted to it by the aforementioned laicisation in that the clergy represented seem no different from ordinary men."

Of course they wre ordinary men in ordinary higher-class settings. We, even you, are ordinary: Sorry to tell you. As are other men/women:

[Of] Man over men
He [God] made not the lord, such title to himself
Reserving, fumsn left from human free - Milton [Paradise Lost, vi, p.64]

But was it paradise lost or do we now have free will gained and the potenial for equality?

Austen's small power distance between her young suitors, and in reality pprobably dotty old churchmen, and the laity; helped the epilogue the Enlightment succeed, Sells; and provided the foundation for real progress.

Surely, secular humanism, "without" its feigned authorities and extra-ordinary know-all preachers give greater say to the laity, most of whom wish to simply live good lives, have friends and bring-up families; and, not go on religious/political wars to kill and torture their fellow creatures; as have Christians have done for millennia.

The more "ordinary" the minister the better. Let him care for his pepole in need and thumb his bishop. The ordinary British minister has been a "blessing [excuse my language].

Of Sells,

Particularly on the Jane Austen comments, I feel I need the courtesy of your reply: Or is that beneath you? Me be so ordinary and a Associate Deacon so high?

My comments are researched. I don't, hit, rubbish and run.

You could learn a lot aboout OLO debate from George and Philo.

I really wonder if Sells just posts sermons here, and lacks the spirit of OLO debate.

He rearely comments on his own posts, yet seems to have time research his stuff.

If he is an academic and double posting the same work, UWA would me most unimpressed. Of course, I do not make that accusation, but I do see some smoke.

I have withheld work from a conference paper when invited, as not compromise a journal article to be written a year down the track, after data are in. Likeweise I asked permision to use a table I produced for OTEN/SBS TV to use in a journal [to fourteen countries]. It would have made it passed, if I cheated, as I was on the editorial board.

Sells,

If you are double-using you need a written release from the Church the intellectual property owner [not the local minister] and must acknowledge the earlier publication in OLO.

If all contributions here are original, then, what I say is babble and you produce good work. Yet, you don't debate opponents, which is the whole idea of OLO.

I put two hours into the Austen, I think it would be reasonable to reply

What is up with you Sells do you totally lack courtesy?

Sells,

Unless, you are on holiday, caught at work or facing a crisis, it would seem you just like your name in print and totally unwilling to act in accordance with the real spirit of OLO. Dabating one's opinions. You preach and don't discuss.