Inferno, Canto 11 with Dr. Jenny Howell
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- Dr. Jenny Howell of Baylor University introduces us to Canto 11 of Dante's Inferno.
100 Days of Dante is brought to you by Baylor University in collaboration with the Torrey Honors College at Biola University, University of Dallas, Templeton Honors College at Eastern University, the Gonzaga-in-Florence Program and Gonzaga University, and Whitworth University, with support from the M.J. Murdock Trust. To learn more about our project, and read with us, visit 100daysofdante...
Wow, again! This is the first time I am reading Dante/Divine Comedy and it is really eye opening. Loved this episode.
I'm enjoying this series. There's always something new to me. In this video, the professor says art is the child of nature - hence, our human labour is the child of God. If we don't work for our living, we deprive God of children. Children of art, I guess. Or maybe children of nature who refuse to be children as regards art. Does this seem correct?
It sounds like dante would have strong opinions on the modern economy
Fantastic
Canto 11: While waiting for the stench arising from the lower depths to attenuate, Virgil instructs Dante on the metaphorical geography of Hell. There is a triad relationship between Self and Other (Neighbor) and with God. Damage to any paired bond of love is called Sin. This breakage can be repaired only through God’s forgiveness, once Self has repented and is willing for metanoia to occur. Shades seeking this repair undergo purification in Purgatory. Those who remain unrepentant and unchangeable choose a level in Hell for punishment. Humans, like animals, may choose to be violent (bestial); these sinners self-locate to one of three Rounds in Circle 7, according to sins of violence against neighbor(s), against self, and/or against God. Humans, alone, are capable of trust. A sin against trust is Fraud or Maliciousness. If the sin is against one who has no real reason to trust another, the sin is a Simple Fraud and is punished in one of the ten Bolgia or Pits of Circle 8. A sin against one who has a reason to trust another is a Compound Fraud, punishable in Circle 9, having four sub-levels (treachery against kin, against country, against hospitality and against benefactors.) While sins of violence and treachery are punished beyond the walls of the City of Dis, sinners who merely lost self-control of an appetite find themselves in Upper Hell. Humans, following exile from Eden, are required to work so that their resources may reproduce. Money is not alive; however if it accrues interest, it appears to be alive and reproducible. Taking part in such false-ungodly-reproducibility is sinful usury!
Pppp
Thank you for that explanation. I found this Canto difficult to understand at first.
Yet another stellar lecture in this series. So incredibly well done. I feel compelled to ask, however, where is she? The room in which she is speaking is beautiful!
Almost looks like a library (books along the wall)
Armstrong Browning Library at Baylor!
Have a totally different impression orf it. Far from the best. Willl these people please sit down.
@@katywest I think I need to apply to be a student at Baylor.
Bardwell Reading Room at the Armstrong Browning Library
I think there is a long tradition in Catholic theology against usury, and perhaps why Jews were moneylenders, because Catholics were not allowed? I would love it if some knowledgeable person commented on this.
OK if usery is so bad, why did the master say in Luke 19:23: "Why then did you not deposit my money in the bank, and upon my return I could have collected it with interest?"
Please answer this if anyone has insight!
I've always been taught that usury was the charging of an interest rate that was a hardship to the borrower. Like what we see today in Title Loan or Payday Lenders. We do see the speaker mention that he is a harsh man ..."So you knew that I am a harsh man, withdrawing what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow?" The story in Luke was a parable that used a human concept they were familiar with to explain a spiritual concept.
@@darryhoward4079 Thank you!
I’m no biblical scholar, but consider: a single verse cannot be interpreted on its own, but should be viewed in the light of verses before and after it. In the narrative, the nobleman had left resources to three servants. Two of them were good husbandmen and, using these resources wisely, aided in their growth. They were rewarded accordingly. The third servant was merely lazy and hid the resource he was given. The nobleman did not approve of sloth; for him even the illicit use of resources would be better! In fact, he gave the lazy man’s resource to the other two! Doing something, even if it is not right, may be better than doing nothing!
@@patcamerino5456 Thank you Pat!
I agree it's confusing, and it's baffled me for a while, but I finally think I have a solution that makes sense to me. The lesson of this parable is summed up by our phrase that to whom much is given, much is expected. I think in this instance it means that those of us who are given the gift of charisma or great intelligence or great wealth or whatever but who fail to use that gift to glorify and lead people to God , but instead simply hide it, are not doing God's will.
"Food justice"? That's not a thing.
Of course there is! Lots of examples of food injustice exist , and so food justice would look at that. In Mississippi for example, Robert F. Kennedy observed kwashiorkor in the delta regions among largely African Americans, because of the insufficiency of food protein in the diet. In some places, perhaps Africa, where native people's or residents were sustaining themselves with a variety of food stuffs grown or farmed on a small scale at a local level, corporate agricultural interests took over the land and planted acres and acres of mono-typical crops, like peanuts, instead. Self sustainability was destroyed and dependency on corporate structures replaced it. Look at the poor health status of Native Americans which has resulted from their reliance on government commodities after their self sustainability was destroyed. The diabetes rate soared. Also, in the U.S. there are food deserts where people do not live near to any store large enough to supply fresh vegetables, so they reply on cheap fattening foods of low nutritional quality, thus leading to health disparities. This is just off the top of my head, but I am sure countless other examples exist.
It most certainly is. To say such a thing, you must never have gone hungry.
@Linda Strawn It seems to me that if you were genuinely curious - or worried - about the intersections of these areas of study, you could contact the professor and ask her. As you admit, you don't understand. It's easy enough to find out, if you're genuinely interested. But I somehow doubt you are.
I didn't know it was either hah, but I just researched it and it makes sense. I agree that the name is very misleading and quite comical!