Cultural Myopia (America, churches, catholic, Christianity, Christian)

MidnightBlue · #1 07-06-2007, 12:28 PM

On another thread, James the Persian wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by James the Persian

Please could you cease the ludicrous over-generalisations? It wasn't 'the Christian Europeans' who were doing these things, it was westerners. The eastern Church didn't persecute scientists, never lost the learning of the Greeks and never burnt people at the stake. A huge amount of 'Islamic' science is actually that of the Christian easterners they conquered. (...)

For a forum with members scattered across the world, the cultural myopia, when it comes to Christianity, at RF is quite unbelievable.

I've just come across a striking example of that kind of myopia. In a story on the New 7 Wonders of the World, ABC News reports:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABC News

The list prompted irritation in Italy, where leading Roman Catholic newspaper Avvenire criticized the lack of Christian sites among the contenders.

NO CHRISTIAN SITES

"How is it possible that 2,000 years of great Christian civilization -- for many centuries the civilization full stop -- have not managed to produce a single 'wonder'?" Avvenire said in an editorial.

How is it possible that Avvenire can fail to recognize either the Great Church of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul or St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow as a Christian site? If it's Catholic sites they yearn for, what about the statue of Christ the Redeemer in South America?

What's wrong with this picture?

MaddLlama · #2 07-06-2007, 01:03 PM

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Rome, and the fall of Rome tends to outshine the Byzantine Empire? Not because one is more important than the other, but that it's just a more/less popular topic for historians?

I'm not really sure.

lilithu · #3 07-08-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

How is it possible that Avvenire can fail to recognize either the Great Church of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul or St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow as a Christian site? If it's Catholic sites they yearn for, what about the statue of Christ the Redeemer in South America?

God only knows.

It sounds like instead of "Christian," what they really want is Western European?

I love the statue of Christ the Redeemer.

James the Persian · #4 07-09-2007, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

On another thread, James the Persian wrote:

I've just come across a striking example of that kind of myopia. In a story on the New 7 Wonders of the World, ABC News reports:

How is it possible that Avvenire can fail to recognize either the Great Church of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul or St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow as a Christian site? If it's Catholic sites they yearn for, what about the statue of Christ the Redeemer in South America?

What's wrong with this picture?

Well, of course, I understand why we're omitted (after all we are worse than heretics as far as Rome is concerned - we're schismatics), but that only explains St. Basil's. Haghia Sophia is the common heritage of both churches even though it remained with us when they decided to go their own way. As for the Christ the Redeemer statue, I have no idea how they could possibly have missed that one. Perhaps what they are basically trying to say is 'Why isn't St. Peter's on the list?'.

I'm shocked, to be honest, to see such nonsense being published by Roman Catholics - they usually have a few people who know better, but never mind.

James

eudaimonia · #5 07-09-2007, 12:51 AM

I'm not particularly happy about the results of the new "Seven Wonders". Why wasn't the Statue of Liberty accepted as one? Surely that is more of a wonder than the statue of Christ the Redeemer? It seems that it wasn't favored mainly due to political reaction against the U.S., instead of any objective standards.

I don't think this should ever have been a public poll. This should have been left up to knowledgable experts who could have judged these candidates for wonders using some sort of educated criteria. The public will tend to vote based on familiarity and sympathies, including religious and cultural sympathies.

eudaimonia,

Mark

lilithu · #6 07-09-2007, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudaimonia

I'm not particularly happy about the results of the new "Seven Wonders". Why wasn't the Statue of Liberty accepted as one? Surely that is more of a wonder than the statue of Christ the Redeemer?

Not in my view, and I LOVE the Statue of Liberty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudaimonia

It seems that it wasn't favored mainly due to political reaction against the U.S., instead of any objective standards.

The Eiffel Tower didn't make it either. Come to think of it, France is also where the Statue of Liberty was made. Maybe there's an anti-French bias.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudaimonia

I don't think this should ever have been a public poll. This should have been left up to knowledgable experts who could have judged these candidates for wonders using some sort of educated criteria. The public will tend to vote based on familiarity and sympathies, including religious and cultural sympathies.

Dude, I think you're taking this thing way too seriously.

Did you guys see the picture of people celebrating outside the Taj Mahal? That's great!

eudaimonia · #7 07-09-2007, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilithu

Not in my view, and I LOVE the Statue of Liberty.

Is there any objective reason why the statue of Christ the Redeemer is a greater accomplishment than the Statue of Liberty? Was there some greater genius required to construct Christ the Redeemer? If stone statues may count as Wonders, I'd much prefer Michelangelo's Statue of David, which seems to have captured a much greater artistic genius.

Quote:

Dude, I think you're taking this thing way too seriously.

Possibly! There are some things I like to take seriously. I'd like to take this as seriously as the Internet poll people were advertizing. It certainly seemed that they were taking it seriously. But they don't seem to be taking this seriously after all, based on their methods.

eudaimonia,

Mark

Ozzie · #8 07-09-2007, 05:11 AM

[quote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudaimonia

I don't think this should ever have been a public poll. This should have been left up to knowledgable experts who could have judged these candidates for wonders using some sort of educated criteria. The public will tend to vote based on familiarity and sympathies, including religious and cultural sympathies.

"Knowledgable experts" would never limit themselves in an arbitrary way to naming 7 wonders of the world. And the public would loose interest very quickly if it wasn't limited to that number. It has been long demonstrated that the limit of short term memory in humans is confined to 7 plus or minus 2 chunks of information.

Oz