[ Home | Contents | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Qureshi
Date: 11/2/99
Time: 11:33:48 AM
Remote Name: 130.68.51.65
Eco does represent the corruption of the church through his writing. The talk of the riches is truly nonsense. It doesn't seem right when the monks talk about materialistic thing as opposed to spreading the message of God. D'Anneaux says that "Christ is a mortal man, from the moment of conception, was owner of all earthly goods." Therefore there should be no reason for the monks to discuss this subject to any extent. The monks are putting too much emphasis on materialistic things. It seems as though that the monks are denying the fact that Christ was a simple man and that is why he lived in poverty. Eco does represent the corruption of the church through his writing. The talk of the riches is truly nonsense. It doesn't seem right when the monks talk about materialistic thing as opposed to spreading the message of God. D'Anneaux says that "Christ is a mortal man, from the moment of conception, was owner of all earthly goods." Therefore there should be no reason for the monks to discuss this subject to any extent. The monks are putting too much emphasis on materialistic things. It seems as though that the monks are denying the fact that Christ was a simple man and that is why he lived in poverty. Eco does represent the corruption of the church through his writing. The talk of the riches is truly nonsense. It doesn't seem right when the monks talk about materialistic thing as opposed to spreading the message of God. D'Anneaux says that "Christ is a mortal man, from the moment of conception, was owner of all earthly goods." Therefore there should be no reason for the monks to discuss this subject to any extent. The monks are putting too much emphasis on materialistic things. It seems as though that the monks are denying the fact that Christ was a simple man and that is why he lived in poverty.