[jallanite]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

No thanks, Jallanite. I'm not involved in this thread to win a debate. I'm interested in an exchange ideas, hoping to learn something. Let me know when you're interested in that.

I am interested in that. How dare I ask questions when I think you are wrong? Perhaps it is you who aren’t interested.

Originally Posted by Draugohtar

I refer you again to my earlier posting. I never speak of Allegory, period, thus I will disregard your commentary re: this issue, later.

You posted: “It's just not an allegory.” Perhaps I was misreading the word just.

It's irrelevant whether the Third Age is or is not a Christian world. The question is whether the the underlying 'truth' of existence in Tolkien's fictional universe, is fundamentally Christian. The answer appears to be yes.

True enough, when are talking only about what is left over when you are telling a story which supposedly takes place long before Jesus was born. I am not being sarcastic here. The Forty-two negative confessions found in pagan Egyptian mythology might also serve instead of Christian teaching. See http://www.wheeloftheyear.com/refere...Confession.htm . Or the tao which originated in China. Many Christian commentators talk as if Christian morality is different from pagan morality, but similarities are usually more noticeable than differences. The same is true about Islam.

Is this ignoring similarities in religious teaching between religions just religious bigotry?

Your reasoning escapes me, Tolkien spends every quote you have referred us to affirming the fundamentally Catholic nature of the work, and yet you simply assert to the contrary? Further you can't 'reclaim' people's philosophies for 'common morality,' when they themselves do not root their beliefs, expressed in literature, there.

You reasoning escapes me. The only quotation where Tolkien confirms in words the “fundamentally Catholic nature of the work” is one where you leave out Tolkien’s statement immediately following which in my view distorts what Tolkien means. Tolkien does not repeat this anywhere else though you claim he does. Your last sentence here doesn’t make sense to me either logically or grammatically. Unless you mean that no-one except Roman Catholics are moral and believe the true religion.

Rhod the Red has given this thread some excellent quotations which include one where Tolkien contrasts “the freedom of the reader” with “the purposed domination of the author”.

I'm sure you are, and yet we cannot escape the fact that Tolkien, whilst avoiding allegory at every turn, wrote a 'fundamentally Catholic' work. It's that simple my friend.

You repeat and repeat and repeat ad nauseum the first part of Tolkien’s statement and ignore the second part entirely which in my view it is hard to see as anything but dishonest. I agree that The Lord of the Rings is intended as and by most definitions is a Christian work and even intended by Tolkien to be a Roman Catholic work. I also see why some fundamentalist Christians feel differently and why some who themselves believe a similar morality to that which appears in the book but are not Christians also feel differently. I can also see why some Roman Catholics might disagree with Tolkien’s belief that his work was fundamentally Roman Catholic and believe that it contradicted Roman Catholic teaching. Some did, and their comments and Tolkien’s responses appear in Letters.

You then use the Galadriel/Virgin Mary example. I don't find this very interesting. The truth is as the author states, I don't see why this requires further discussion. Those attempting to read beyond this explicit explanation, are on a futile quest, we can all agree.

But many purported Christian commentators don’t agree. Many bring in Christ figures, as you did.

The interesting question would then be why the resurrection featured in the LOTR is so very different from these other mythologies you refer to?

Most storied resurrection are different from each other. Of course Gandalf’s resurrection is also different. What important differences do you see that I cannot find parallels to in folklore or mythology? I doubt I can find any that is exactly the same. Why would this be so interesting?

Of course Tolkien would never write a figure as an allegory of Christ. You clearly struggle to understand the Christ figure concept.

Not at all. Socrates might be considered to be a Christ figure, or Krishna, or even Muḥammad, or Apollonius of Tyana. The minimum needed to be a Christ figure in a book is to be like Jesus in some way. In Thomas Mann’s Joseph and his Brothers the Pharoah Akhnaton is a Christ figure. In the Arthurian tales Galahad is to some extent a Christ figure. In Chrétien de Troyes’ Lancelot, it is Lancelot, the adulterous lover of Queen Guenevere, who is played as a metaphorical Christ figure much to the puzzlement of readers, including myself.

I am not struggling at all. Why do you imagine I am?

As for Beren and Luthien - not everyone is a Christ figure. I don't believe I claimed: everyone in Tolkien's work is a Christ figure. I would also argue their resurrection is fundamentally different from that of Gandalf. Gandalf's is due to the direct intervention of Eru; B and L are via the limited intervention of the Valar.

My intent was to indicate that those who see Gandalf as a Christ figure because he is resurrected should perhaps at least indicate why they don’t also consider Beren and Lúthien similarly. After all, Beren and Lúthien harrowed Hell and defeated (temporarily) the Dark Lord. Your explanation of the difference seems forced to me. You apparently have some criteria by which you can distinguish absolutely who is a Christ figure and who is not. I see no such firm line, and think it not at all important to draw a firm line in this matter.

Christ figures may be recognized by those who wish to recognize them even in non-Christian works. They don’t indicate anything unless the author deliberately makes a parallel to Christ as Thomas Mann does.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Tolkien's Arda is without doubt theistic, as many here have noted, but in order to be Christian, there must be a parallel to Jesus Christ.

Not so, unless you define any work telling a story that takes place before Jesus’ supposed resurrection as non-Christian without a parallel, for example John Milton’s Paradise Lost. But to call that non-Christian would be absurd considering all the references to the future Christ that appear.

Christ figures need not be exactly like Christ as you seem to expect and may be found if one looks for them in non-Christian works as well as Christian works. But usually commentators use terms like dying god over Christ figure when it is the death of a god which is being considered. A god who comes back to life used to be commonly called a corn king, when James Frazer’s The Golden Bough was still popular. Or what some might well call a Christ figure others may call a teacher or sage.

Christianity in The Lord of the Rings is more subtle than identifying an exact or even an approximate Christ figure. It is that the world as presented follows Christian rules. In which case, if Christianity is true, then the rules it follows, outside of the obvious fantasy elements, must also be true. If Christian worldview is not true, well, it still makes for a good story, especially when set in a supposed time in which religion is almost non-existent but morality is congruent with Christian morality (and with similar pagan teaching of course).

Tolkien thought that readers would perhaps realize that The Lord of the Rings was written by a Christian and was surprised when some even deduced it was written by a Roman Catholic. What these readers spotted was Christian and Roman Catholic influences on Tolkien’s writings. That alone would not prove that Tolkien was a Roman Catholic. The same has been spotted in the writings of James Joyce who was once a Roman Catholic and possibly still was.

The Christianity of The Lord of the Rings is something like the Christianity of C. S. Lewis’ Till We Have Faces set long before the birth of Christ in which all the characters are pagans and remain pagans. But Lewis saw the philosophy that underlay this book as Christian.

Originally Posted by Pervinca Took

I've heard "Beowulf" described as a very Christian work in which Christ is never named.

Beowulf seems to me to be an excellent example of a work that is recognized as Christian despite the lack of any mention of Jesus and the lack of any Christ figure. Although it would not surprise me that some has tried to interpret Beowulf himself as a Christ figure.

Tolkien said in one of his letters that he would not dare to write more directly about God or Christ than he had done, and he disliked allegory, so there is no equivalent, say, of Simon in "Lord of the Flies" or Aslan in the Narnia books. But I don't think that stops it from being a Christian work, just because it is "absorbed into the symbolism" rather than being more overt.

Exactly. One may also note that others besides Tolkien and other Roman Catholics and other Christians share a similar morality and that other religions share and have shared similar beliefs.

Originally Posted by Draugohtar

My argument is that you have at least 3 Christ figures ie characters who share some significant parellels with Christ.

And I have listed many more. Even in the Bible there are Jeremiah and other prophets. I am at a loss why characters who in some way parallel Jesus make any work a Christian work.