Vade retro, splitters of the holy mother church

Clio should be

maybe Justinian or voltaire
>
>
>

> (OP)

>greatest work of literature since Homer
Whoa there bud, it's good, but there are multiple other works between then and now, the middle ages housing many of them.

There certainly are, if there weren't then the statement would be "first work of literature since Homer," not "greatest work of literature since Homer."

Are you seriously going to try to say that works like
>Beowulf
>Das Nibelungenlied
>Parzival
>La Morte D'Arthur
>La Chanson de Roland
>the Aenied
>the plays of Sophocles
>the Consolation of Philosophy
>the Seafarer
>the Wanderer
>the Dream of the Rood

Can't even possibly compare to the Iliad and the Odyssey?

Yes.

And La Morte D'Arthur was written a while after the Divine Comedy, by the way.

ignore the cuckolick he just likes to come and shit up any religious thread

Why would I shill for the Divine Comedy when Dante puts Orthodox Christians in the eighth circle of hell?

I figured the dates would be off on a couple of those, I'm glad I didn't include Canterbury Tales in there.

I think it's closed minded to say that though, Beowulf and Das Nibelungenlied are far better atmospheric and narrative works than the Divine Comedy, without having half of the authorial hangups (since we don't know who wrote either of them)

The Divine Comedy is simply superior poetry.

The pseud you're replying to didn't know this because he hasn't actually read it.

It's funny to me how so many people conclude that Dante was opposed to the Catholic Church simply because he made some criticisms and had esoteric knowledge.

>dinky rhymes better poetry than alliterative verse

Italian rhymes much, much more easily than English. Extending rhyming sounds gimmicky in English, but in Italian it's unobstructive.

*unobtrusive

Salvation by faith alone sounds like a fucking cosmic horror story.

kekekekekek fucking do it.

>insulting English rhyming

Listen please
youtube.com/watch?v=BIQDPJIUvhY

I forgot to add that it doesn't sound gimmicky with Chaucer. Even though English wasn't used for rhyming poetry before Chaucer (Chaucer being inspired by Italian poetry), Middle English is still much more accommodating to rhyme than Early Modern English or Modern English

A: Gilbert and Sullivan is accompanied by music.
B: The works have visual elements, instead of being completely narrated in rhyme.
C: The works are operettas, they're meant to be light, often humorous works that you complete in a sitting. The rhyming detracting from their seriousness is beneficial.

>gilbert and sullivan is accompanied by music

The words were written first and are always more prominent in Gilbert and Sullivan, find the libretto online and you can read it for yourself to see how well the rhyming works.

>Works have visual elements
youtube.com/watch?v=ahaTyws0a48

No video here.

Also the rhyming doesn't detract at all from the seriousness of this song or many of the songs in Yeoman of the Guard, and was written in a way that would be more about showing the beauty of the English language intentionally by Gilbert (mostly because Sullivan was growing tired of writing comic works.)

I will concede that this is a spectacular example and that Gilbert was nothing short of a poetic genius, as well as that lots of other English works have trouble catching up to this standard.

>The words were written first and are always more prominent in Gilbert and Sullivan, find the libretto online and you can read it for yourself to see how well the rhyming works.
Each song is an independent piece, it's not three hundred pages of rhyming narration. And no, Gilbert and Sullivan would *not* work purely as a book that you read.

>Also the rhyming doesn't detract at all from the seriousness of this song or many of the songs in Yeoman of the Guard, and was written in a way that would be more about showing the beauty of the English language intentionally by Gilbert (mostly because Sullivan was growing tired of writing comic works.)
And it's not three hundred pages long or meant to be enjoyed without music. It's meant to be enjoyed with actors and music and costumes and friends. It can work as a song too, but if you choose to abstract it purely as poetry, you aren't going to be able to get lyrics worth three hundred pages of quiet reading, thus the rhyme in this fashion would not work *extended* (a key work I used).

There's literally no point in arguing with Constantine about his point. His position is rooted in his continued fetishization of everything medieval. To Constantine the basis of his opinions is not their own merit, but in his insistence that everything was better in the middle ages.

In short, he's completely irrational.

What are you talking about, my favorite English literature is Shakespeare.

If he thought everything was better in the middle ages he would agree that Beowulf and Das Nibelungenlied were on par with the Iliad though

>backpeddling

Everything you do is a fetishization of older days, especially the medieval. Your preference for middle english, your choice of politics, your taste in artwork, even your beliefs (see how you defend Orthodoxy on the grounds of it never having accepted any element of modernism). You're as easy to read as a picture book, and lead the most thoroughly unexamined life I've ever seen.

I prefer Middle English to Modern English for good reason. That doesn't mean there was any craftsman of Middle English who could match Shakespeare.

>he's

>I prefer Middle English to Modern English for good reason.

Yes, because you're in love with the middle ages.

Because

A: The spelling wasn't perverted yet.
B: It rhymes more easily
C: The pronunciation of vowels is lighter and not as jarring (ah for a and ee for y).
D: The syntax is much more flexible.
E: Grammatical case in pronoun is expressed be form instead of position.
F: The diphtongs that Modern English doesn't have (such as "gh" and "th"--in modern English, the first is silent, and the latter is always þ).

>protestantism confirmed for true NEET faith

Like 90% of cucklics believe in salvation through belief alone and calavanism preaches predestination in addition to works. There's not even a theological divide any more its just a sect of christanity opposed to the catholic church that just recently tried to cover up massive child molestation

right on, protestant bro!

Underrated

PARADISE LOST
I would do the acrostics thing but moot won't let me.

>works
>justification

I think you mean sanctification brah. This is why luther called james a "book of straw" because of the books heavy emphasis on living a God pleasing life/faith without works is dead.

This is libertinism case and point. The whole "I can do whatever I want but it's cook cause I'm a Christian" ideology mean you aren't actually a christian.

This is how I know you've never read Walther's Law and Gospel.

Reminder that protestants literally aren't Christians.

Reminder that Catholics are literally pagans

>the latter is always 'thorn'
WRONG YOU TRANNY
the 'th' diphthong is both voiced (like in 'the') and unvoiced (like in 'thigh')

>Believe bible is divinely inspired.
>Remove seven books because they contradict my head canon.
>Lead millions to damnation because you wanted some pussy.

Disgusting.

All works are a result of God's grace not to get God's grace.

>being pedantic
Neither is the Middle English 'th',Goth is pronounced like "[Got hi]m'

Considering it says faith without works is dead in the Bible itself, that's a pretty shit argument.

"Got" would of course be pronounced like "goat" back then.