XPost: alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox   
   From: hayesmstw@hotmail.com   
      
   On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:54:23 GMT, "Michael E Craney"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   >"Steve Hayes"  wrote in message   
   >news:412f7085.185600020@news.saix.net...   
   >> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:57:43 GMT, "Michael E Craney"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >There;s a gaping hole in this "logic", that being that the classic story   
   >of   
   >> >St. George has no theological implications. Does (T)radition truly   
   >include   
   >> >nontheological stories such as this, or is this simply a folktale? Many   
   >> >would say no, that the story is *not* properly included in (T)radition,   
   >> >which reders your conclusion incorrect.   
   >>   
   >> The story of St George and the dragon has lots of theological   
   >implications,   
   >> which may account for why it is so widespread and so popular.   
   >   
   >   
   >Allow me to clarify. It has theological implications, but does it establish   
   >any unique theology without which Orthodoxy would, as the critic claims,   
   >"change?"   
      
   No, I don't think it does that. The theological implications of the story and   
   the ikon can be found elsewhere, but I think that in the story and the ikon of   
   St George they are brought together in a concentrated way, which I think is   
   worth examining, which is why I moved it to a new thread, because the   
   discussion of St George had got somewhat detatched from the discussion of the   
   Dormition.   
      
   "learner" approaches this from the point of view of Western modernity. But   
   modernity, premodernity and postmodernity are just three ways of looking at   
   the same thing. In fact postmodernity, or at least some varieties of it,   
   affirms the validity of different ways of looking at it. And one of the things   
   we need to acknowledge is that the Bible is a thoroughly premodern book. When   
   moderns read the Bible, it is an exercise in crosscultural communication. They   
   are reading a book that comes from a different culture, from a worldview that   
   is different in many ways. Both Orthodoxy and postmodernity allow one to   
   switch viewpoints, while Western theology rarely allows this.   
      
   Demonization.   
            Source: Anderson 1990:256.   
       "An experience that a premodern person might have understood   
     as possession by an evil spirit might be understood by a   
     modern psychoanalytic patient as more mischief from the Id,   
     and might be understood by a postmodern individual as a   
     subpersonality making itself heard - might even, if you want   
     to get really postmodern about it, be recognized as all   
     three."   
      
   How, I wonder, does "learner" interpret the biblical story of Aaron's rod   
   (Exodus 7:8-13)?   
      
   Faced with an incident like that, the modernist missionary responds by   
   building a school to teach the locals the scientific worldview, in which   
   sticks don't turn into snakes. That, in effect, is how many Western   
   missionaries have dealt with African witchcraft, and it hasn't been very   
   effective.   
      
   An Anglican author, Charles Williams, writes in his novel "The place of the   
   lion" something that perhaps approaches closer to an Orthodox view:   
      
   Wisdom! Let us attend!   
      
   Aaron's rod - Place of the Lion.   
            Source: Williams 1952:51.   
       Aaron's rod turned into a snake. Anthony Durrant asks if   
     what Dora Wilmot saw was Aaron's Rod. "I think the magicians   
     of Pharoah may have seen Miss Wilmot's snake," Mr Foster said,   
     "and all their shapely wisdom have been swallowed by it, as   
     the butterflies of the fields were taken into that butterfly   
     this afternoon."   
      
   So what does the Bible have to say about dragons? And how does one interpret   
   them?   
      
   The main things the Bible says about dragons are in the Revelation of St John   
   the Theologian, chapters 12 & 13, where there is an unholy trinity that is a   
   parody of the Holy Trinity.   
      
   The unholy trinity is composed of the dragon, the monster from the sea and the   
   monster from the land. The dragon delegates his power to the monster from the   
   sea, and the monster from the land causes everyone to woship the monster from   
   the sea.   
      
   It doesn't take much ingenuity to see that, whatever else they may mean, the   
   monster from the sea represents political power, and the monster from the land   
   represents religious power in support of political power. What St John   
   probably had in mind most imediately as he wrote was the political power of   
   the Roman Empire and the religious power that supported iot - the religion of   
   Emperor worship, which was causing such problems to Christians at the time.   
      
   How does this work out in the legend of St George?   
      
   There are many variants, many different stories attached to the life of St   
   George, but basically there are two main incidents in his life that are known   
   and transmitted:   
      
   1) He is the Great Martyr.   
      
   Why? He was probably a Roman soldier at the time of Diocletian, the author of   
   one of the greatest persecutions of Christians. It is said that he tore down   
   the imperial decree ordering the persecution of Christians, and for this he   
   was condemned to be burnt alive. Destroying government property, defying state   
   authority and all that.   
      
   2) He killed a dragon and thereby rescued a princess from death   
      
   This incident took place earlier in his life, but we do not know for certain   
   where it took place. His cult was originally centred on Lydda in Palestine (is   
   that Lod in present-day Israel?). From there it was taken by the crusaders to   
   England, though he was known in England before that. It is also known in   
   India, where he is very big, and in Russia likewise. There are several English   
   variants of the legend, but by then it was already several hundred years old,   
   so they no doubt took many different forms, and perhaps borrowed elements from   
   the story of Perseus's slaying of Medusa.   
      
   But if one takes the bare bones of the story, the geography of which is vague,   
   there is a community that worships a dragon, and the cult includes human   
   sacrifice. The daughter of the king is about to be sacrificed when St George   
   turns up, kills the dragon, and converts the community to Christ.   
      
   This fits in with some communities that have worshipped crocodiles, or used   
   crocodiles as totems. And it is not hard to see that the cult is part of the   
   worship of the state, so that the king and his family are both rulers and   
   prisoners. In fact it could be an instance of what is described in Rev 12-13.   
      
   So, reduced to its bare esentials:   
      
   Round 1 - St George kills the dragon   
      
   Round 2 - The dragon kills St George   
      
   Round 3 - Kings and emperors may come and go, but the ruler of all is Jesus   
   Christ who reigns for ever and ever, King of kings and Lord of lords.   
      
   A modern Anglican synaxarion says, "the whole Church can recognise him as one   
   of the long line of Christian witnesses who have protested against the dragon   
   of totalitarian government."   
      
   That's OK as far as it goes, though it's a bit bathetic when compared with the   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)