Re: [Goanet] The History-Maker and the Historian
i missed "nOT" and the line shuoukd read, "lSFX MAY HAVE nOT personally presided over it..." I said "progenitor" because SFX suggested it to be firced in Goa. St. Dominic is the brain behind the Inquisition. I now remember the book's name, Goa: Continuity and Change, edited by Prof Narendra Wagle and George Coelho. Wagle was Head of South Asian Dept, UoT, and Coelho was, I belueve, attached ti the BpNaval Hospital in Washington, DC Eugene Correia --- On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:09 AM Eugene Correia wrote: > Gilbert deserves to have his say. His views can be debated. > Teo was not polemically against SFX, but in the light of the Inquisition > SFX is seen as the progenitor of thus sorry chapter in Christianity. SFX > may have personally presided over it, but the Jesuits were resonsible. > I heard David Higgs soeak at the conference organized at tge University Of > Toronto y IGO and UoT, undrr Prof. Narendra Wagle. I spoke to tge Prof. and > he showed me a book on the Inquisition that was lublished just prior to the > convention. He has an essay in the book ( forgets its name and I have it > but have to look for it) that folliwed, edited by Wagle and George. > If you have followed Teo, he was troubled by its vast massacre of Goans, > since the Hindus and Muslims, were Goans after all. No wonder, the Hindhs > in particular often resort to the evil of Inquisition and blamed the Goa > church for its implementation. > AK Priorlar may be biased, but he's instrumebtal in fanning the flames of > hatred for the Church. Teo looked sr it from a socio-religious issue. > > Eugene > > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Feb 25, 2019, at 6:51 PM, Roland Francis > wrote: > > > > Gilbert has indulged in a ‘Shoot The Messenger’ exercise by confusing > the roles of those who have created history and those who critically > analyze what has been recorded by others. In comparing Francis Xavier with > Teotónio DeSouza and even imagining them duking it out man-to-man in some > imaginary place we all go to when we die, Gilbert has let his imagination > run wild. > > > > In addition, Gilbert seems to have lionized the actions of SFX (because > he was ordained a saint by some crazy Pope of the time of which there were > plenty no doubt) and going by the results of Xavier’s actions that he sees > today, little caring about how they were achieved. A case of ends justify > the means. > > > > I doubt our ancestors converted to Catholicism in the thousands with the > presence, some words and the wave of a magic wand by Xavier. > > To anyone who assumes this was achieved without manipulation, coercion > or reward that amounted to taking advantage of vulnerable people, I say > dream on. > > > > I do not imply that other zealous rulers and their fanatical followers > and minions (in fact Francis brought with himself more power than the local > Portuguese ruler would have had) whether Mussalman or Hindu, did not do the > same thing. All I am saying is that Gilbert found himself a Roman Catholic > without definitively knowing how his ancestors converted. And converted > they must have been. > > > > He assumes they went to some prayer meeting where they heard pleasing > words and decided to change their way of life. Teotonio says they converted > due to some nasty things that resulted from Xavier. > > > > I am more inclined logically and critically to follow Teotónio’s line of > thinking. > > > > > > Gilbert Lawrence wrote: > > “As I have written before, Teo's account of the Catholic Church, Jesuits > and SFX would be read as an account of a divorced man who is writing about > his ex-wife family. These issues some of us raised with Teo over the last > few years, with no clarification. Some may think this is writing about a > person who cannot defend himself. Yet, that is precisely what Teo does to > St. Francis Xavier, his work and writings. Perhaps now both of them can > square it out themselves mano -o- mano. Yet one person sacrificed and > endured for Jesus. While the other pontificated about Him. I am only > talking about Teo the historian and his work which will be quoted > extensively.” > > > > Roland Francis > > 416-453-3371 > > >
[Goanet] The History-Maker and the Historian
How silly of me to equate the History-Maker with the Historian! Yet to get to the point, there is nothing wrong in being divorced or leaving employment or a relation under difficult circumstances. But a prudent person would not talk about the former or related situation - positively or negatively unless absolutely needed. If for academic or other reasons one recounts or writes anything related, then rules of "full disclosure" would require the author to be upfront and disclose the existence and nature of the relation. The existence of a relation may be positive like a research grant or paid invitation to speak or paid travel expenses or anything that could influence the opinion of the author. It is for the listeners or readers to make that judgment of the influence the relation may have on the contents. Most important the author has to be upfront candid, which in itself speaks volumes. Regards, GL
Re: [Goanet] The History-Maker and the Historian
Gilbert deserves to have his say. His views can be debated. Teo was not polemically against SFX, but in the light of the Inquisition SFX is seen as the progenitor of thus sorry chapter in Christianity. SFX may have personally presided over it, but the Jesuits were resonsible. I heard David Higgs soeak at the conference organized at tge University Of Toronto y IGO and UoT, undrr Prof. Narendra Wagle. I spoke to tge Prof. and he showed me a book on the Inquisition that was lublished just prior to the convention. He has an essay in the book ( forgets its name and I have it but have to look for it) that folliwed, edited by Wagle and George. If you have followed Teo, he was troubled by its vast massacre of Goans, since the Hindus and Muslims, were Goans after all. No wonder, the Hindhs in particular often resort to the evil of Inquisition and blamed the Goa church for its implementation. AK Priorlar may be biased, but he's instrumebtal in fanning the flames of hatred for the Church. Teo looked sr it from a socio-religious issue. Eugene Sent from my iPad > On Feb 25, 2019, at 6:51 PM, Roland Francis wrote: > > Gilbert has indulged in a ‘Shoot The Messenger’ exercise by confusing the > roles of those who have created history and those who critically analyze what > has been recorded by others. In comparing Francis Xavier with Teotónio > DeSouza and even imagining them duking it out man-to-man in some imaginary > place we all go to when we die, Gilbert has let his imagination run wild. > > In addition, Gilbert seems to have lionized the actions of SFX (because he > was ordained a saint by some crazy Pope of the time of which there were > plenty no doubt) and going by the results of Xavier’s actions that he sees > today, little caring about how they were achieved. A case of ends justify the > means. > > I doubt our ancestors converted to Catholicism in the thousands with the > presence, some words and the wave of a magic wand by Xavier. > To anyone who assumes this was achieved without manipulation, coercion or > reward that amounted to taking advantage of vulnerable people, I say dream on. > > I do not imply that other zealous rulers and their fanatical followers and > minions (in fact Francis brought with himself more power than the local > Portuguese ruler would have had) whether Mussalman or Hindu, did not do the > same thing. All I am saying is that Gilbert found himself a Roman Catholic > without definitively knowing how his ancestors converted. And converted they > must have been. > > He assumes they went to some prayer meeting where they heard pleasing words > and decided to change their way of life. Teotonio says they converted due to > some nasty things that resulted from Xavier. > > I am more inclined logically and critically to follow Teotónio’s line of > thinking. > > > Gilbert Lawrence wrote: > “As I have written before, Teo's account of the Catholic Church, Jesuits and > SFX would be read as an account of a divorced man who is writing about his > ex-wife family. These issues some of us raised with Teo over the last few > years, with no clarification. Some may think this is writing about a person > who cannot defend himself. Yet, that is precisely what Teo does to St. > Francis Xavier, his work and writings. Perhaps now both of them can square > it out themselves mano -o- mano. Yet one person sacrificed and endured for > Jesus. While the other pontificated about Him. I am only talking about Teo > the historian and his work which will be quoted extensively.” > > Roland Francis > 416-453-3371 >
[Goanet] The History-Maker and the Historian
Gilbert has indulged in a ‘Shoot The Messenger’ exercise by confusing the roles of those who have created history and those who critically analyze what has been recorded by others. In comparing Francis Xavier with Teotónio DeSouza and even imagining them duking it out man-to-man in some imaginary place we all go to when we die, Gilbert has let his imagination run wild. In addition, Gilbert seems to have lionized the actions of SFX (because he was ordained a saint by some crazy Pope of the time of which there were plenty no doubt) and going by the results of Xavier’s actions that he sees today, little caring about how they were achieved. A case of ends justify the means. I doubt our ancestors converted to Catholicism in the thousands with the presence, some words and the wave of a magic wand by Xavier. To anyone who assumes this was achieved without manipulation, coercion or reward that amounted to taking advantage of vulnerable people, I say dream on. I do not imply that other zealous rulers and their fanatical followers and minions (in fact Francis brought with himself more power than the local Portuguese ruler would have had) whether Mussalman or Hindu, did not do the same thing. All I am saying is that Gilbert found himself a Roman Catholic without definitively knowing how his ancestors converted. And converted they must have been. He assumes they went to some prayer meeting where they heard pleasing words and decided to change their way of life. Teotonio says they converted due to some nasty things that resulted from Xavier. I am more inclined logically and critically to follow Teotónio’s line of thinking. Gilbert Lawrence wrote: “As I have written before, Teo's account of the Catholic Church, Jesuits and SFX would be read as an account of a divorced man who is writing about his ex-wife family. These issues some of us raised with Teo over the last few years, with no clarification. Some may think this is writing about a person who cannot defend himself. Yet, that is precisely what Teo does to St. Francis Xavier, his work and writings. Perhaps now both of them can square it out themselves mano -o- mano. Yet one person sacrificed and endured for Jesus. While the other pontificated about Him. I am only talking about Teo the historian and his work which will be quoted extensively.” Roland Francis 416-453-3371
