# Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all



## sb70012

“Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest.”
 
_Source: English Literary Prose, John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress (1628-1688)_ 
It’s a story about the battle between an evil dragon and a Christine.

What does the red sentence mean?

Many thanks in advance.


----------



## perpend

When I read it without googling myself to death, I read it as:

On the inside, you desire to be vain, in everything you say and do.


----------



## sb70012

Thanks a million dear *Perpend*.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

sb70012 said:


> “Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest.”
> 
> _Source: English Literary Prose, John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress (1628-1688)_
> It’s a story about the battle between an evil dragon and a Christine.
> 
> What does the red sentence mean?
> 
> Many thanks in advance.


It means* Deep down, you are very proud of everything that you say and do*.

Pride is a deadly sin, and Bunyan takes deadly sins very seriously.


----------



## sb70012

Thanks a million dear *Thomas Tompion*.
It was useful.


----------



## perpend

Just for the thread record, Thomas, you are equating "vain-glory" with "pride"?


----------



## sb70012

I found it's meaning off the dictionaries:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vainglory
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vainglory
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vainglory

1. Ostentatious display.
2. Boastful, unwarranted pride in one's accomplishments or qualities.
3. Excessive elation or pride over one's own achievements, abilities, etc.; boastful vanity. 
4. Excessive or ostentatious pride especially in one's achievements.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

perpend said:


> Just for the thread record, Thomas, you are equating "vain-glory" with "pride"?


Don't forget that _inwardly_, Perpend.


----------



## Andygc

perpend said:


> Just for the thread record, Thomas, you are equating "vain-glory" with "pride"?


Given that is what it means - from the OED 





> Glory that is vain, empty, or worthless; inordinate or unwarranted  pride in one's accomplishments or qualities; disposition or tendency to  exalt oneself unduly; idle boasting or vaunting.


From the WordReference dictionary





> *vainglory* /ˌveɪnˈɡlɔːrɪ/  n
> 
> boastfulness or vanity
> ostentation


The sentence certainly does not mean _On the inside, you desire to be vain_.

Cross-posted with sb70012 - there is a dictionary here, which is usually a good place to start.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I think it might mean that all that you say and do reveals your pride.  

A bit hangs on the force of *in *in the sentence.


----------



## wandle

This page gives more context:


> *Christian*: "Wherein, O Apollyon, have I been unfaithful to him?"
> *Apollyon*: "Thou didst faint at first setting out ... thou did sinfully sleep... thou art inwardly desirous of vain glory in all that thou sayest and doest"


Christian (the pilgrim) is asking Apollyon (the god of this world, i.e. the temporal world) in what way he (Christian) has been unfaithful to Christ. Apollyon tells him that among other things he has been desirous of vainglory in all his words and deeds.

This means that while Christian has been talking and acting like a true follower of Christ, nevertheless all the time his real inner motive was to win glory for himself. The word 'vain' basically means 'empty'. Thus 'vainglory' is empty glory. This has a particular significance in Christianity. 

The Christian doctrine is that only God is entitled to glory. It is only God who is the source of good and it is only to Him that praise is due. Therefore the only true motive for a Christian is to do God's will and to advance His glory. Anything that promotes the glory of the individual (empty glory) is sinful, because it amounts to saying that you have earned reward or praise through your own merits. 

According to Christianity, we humans can never do anything good through our own merits. We can condemn ourselves by our own wrongdoing, but we cannot save ourselves by our own right conduct. Whatever good we do comes only by the grace of God. It is God's grace alone that can save us. 

Something good can only be done by the grace of God acting through us when we have submitted ourselves to His will. (This is comparable to the doctrine of Islam - a word which means 'submission' - whereby the individual sees himself acting as God's agent). 

Consequently, to act for the motive of your own glory is tantamount to rejecting God's will. That was the sin of pride which led to the fall of Lucifer (Satan). The same point is made by T.S. Eliot in _Murder in the Cathedral_: _'The last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason'_.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Heaven protect us from thinking that 'Christianity' has a single view on these issues.

 Bunyan was a protestant, of a very particular kind.


----------



## Andygc

> The sentence certainly does not mean _On the inside, you desire to be vain_.


*Sorry, that was wrong*. 

I think that you need to read the surrounding text. Apollyon is confronting Christian and as part of his attempt to overcome him he is belittling him by accusing him of a series of faults. Those are, in essence, examples of his weakness in the face of difficulties. This final fault is that Christian is actually a boastful coward. Milton use of _inwardly desirous_ implies that Christian wants to be vainglorious, but I don't think that is how we would phrase it in modern English - I doubt that the subconscious mind was considered in the same way in 1667 as it is in 2013.

While I've been thinking and writing, wandle has covered the point more fluently, so I shall leave it here.


----------



## sb70012

Now I am confused. Would you please in one sentence tell me the exact meaning?


----------



## wandle

sb70012 said:


> Now I am confused. Would you please in one sentence tell me the exact meaning?


_Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest._
This means:
_In all your words and actions, your real inner motive is your desire to win glory for yourself._

In post 11, I have explained the reason why Christianity considers it sinful to desire glory for yourself (called 'vainglory'), according to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church in which I was brought up.


----------



## sb70012

Hello dear *Wandle*,

Thanks for answering. Ok now I got it. But what about the dictionary links which I posted? They all say it refers to self pride. Can't we say that it refers to self pride as well?


----------



## wandle

We are dealing here with the Christian term 'vainglory', which means 'empty glory'. 
In Christian doctrine, this means any glory other than God's glory (no one but God is entitled to glory).

Having said that, seeking your own glory is in Christianity closely connected (or perhaps identical) with self-pride.


----------



## sb70012

Ok thanks so much dear *Wandle*.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

We should obviously be very careful of giving a Roman Catholic interpretation to a Protestant text.


----------



## wandle

It seems to me that in this case the doctrine is the same as far as the above explanation of the text goes.


----------



## perpend

Hear, hear. Agree with Thomas. (#19)


----------



## wandle

I believe the explanation in post 11 is standard doctrine and common to the mainstream Christian traditions, Roman Catholic, Protestant and Eastern Orthodox.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I was trying, probably too gently, to disabuse you of this belief.


----------



## Andygc

Please can we keep to the language question rather than straying off into a theological debate? Unless, of course, it is essential to explain the meaning of the text.


----------



## wandle

The concept of vainglory (empty glory) is based on the idea that only God is entitled to glory.
That is so because in the Christian scheme, which Bunyan is expounding, God is the only source of goodness.
Any glory that we seek for ourselves is empty because it is unmerited. It will not lead to salvation, but to perdition.

_Pilgrim's Progress_ is a religious text with a proselytising aim and can only be understood in that light.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Thank you, Andy.  I couldn't agree more.  Here's the text:

“Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest.”

I've put forward two possible translations into modern English:

1.  Deep down, you are very proud of everything that you say and do.

2.  All that you say and do reveals your pride.  

_All that you say and do_ takes a very different role in the two interpretations.  I wonder which people prefer, or if someone has an alternative.


----------



## velisarius

_when thou talkest of thy Journey, and of what thou hast heard, and seen, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest or doest.
_
I think wandle expresses it well in #11:

"while Christian has been talking and acting like a true follower of Christ, nevertheless all the time his real inner motive was to win glory for himself."


----------



## gramman

As others have noted, and is so often the case, this excerpt is best understood in context. Apollyon is attempting to undermine Christian's faith. The journey is long and difficult. Human nature leads us to take pride in our endurance and ability to overcome obstacles. But Christian argues that "he Prince whom I serve and honor is                         merciful, and ready to forgive" these shortcomings. This infuriates Apollyon.


----------



## perpend

I agree with wandle. Were I to put it another way, I'd say: _You are consumed by the desire to be vain._


----------



## Thomas Tompion

It's odd to me that people should continue to avoid the issue of 'in all that thous sayest or doest'.

Is it a symptom of Christian's vanity or the thing of which he is proud?  I hope nobody will say it's both.

It could be something else, of course.


----------



## velisarius

The way I read it is :"The way you have recounted your Journey reveals your real motivation for what you have said and done, which is to be praised by others." I'm not sure whether I've answered your question, Mr. T.T.


----------



## perpend

I think it's saying that the way you go about life projects vainglory in everything you say and do.

Note to self: God, I have to get an audience with Francis. Mon Dieu.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

velisarius said:


> The way I read it is :"The way you have recounted your Journey reveals your real motivation for what you have said and done, which is to be praised by others." I'm not sure if I've answered your question, Mr. T.T.


Here's the text:

“Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest.”

If the real motive for what he has said and done is vain-glory, then his actions are symptoms, aren't they? They show his inner feelings. I think you have answered my question.

Turn round the sentence - “In all that thou sayest and doest, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory”: does that seem to alter the meaning at all?


----------



## perpend

#33. I said both versions three times with three Hail Mary's.

The meaning remains the same, in my humble opinion.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Thank you, Perpend.  Then that means that you probably don't see* in all that thou sayest and doest* as modifying *vain-glory* - ie. we aren't talking about *pride in what you do*.

That may be right.  I think it's quite a difficult question.


----------



## velisarius

I don't think the meaning is altered, but my head is spinning from the effort; today is the day of rest and I must watch this interesting discussion from the sidelines.


----------



## gramman

Christian asks Apollyon, "Wherein have I been unfaithful to him?" Apollyon answers with five charges, alleging that Christian:

fainted at first setting out on his journey 
attempted wrong ways to be rid of his burden 
sinfully slept, and thereby lost his "certificate" to enter the Celestial City 
nearly turned back at the sight of the lions 
_and when thou talkest of thy journey, and of what thou hast heard and seen, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou savest or doest._ 
It seems to me that Apollyon is criticising Christian for *the way he describes the journey*, claiming that his recounting lacks sufficient humility. I don't think there is any general accusation of prideful, outspoken conceit directed at Christian. It's possible of course, that my view is obstructed by the high cliffs surrounding the Canyon of Confusion I sometimes inhabit.


----------



## gramman

On what may be a narrow point:





velisarius said:


> The way I read it is :"The way you have recounted your Journey reveals your real motivation for what you have said and done, which is to be praised by others."


I don't think the issue of motivation is necessarily present. Christian may have had proper motives in undertaking the journey, but still have behaved improperly in his recounting.


----------



## Loob

Thomas Tompion said:


> Here's the text:
> 
> “Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest.”
> 
> If the real motive for what he has said and done is vain-glory, then his actions are symptoms, aren't they? They show his inner feelings. I think you have answered my question.
> 
> Turn round the sentence - “In all that thou sayest and doest, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory”: does that seem to alter the meaning at all?


I see your point, TT: do we parse the sentence as:
Thou art inwardly desirous of {vain-glory in all that thou sayest and doest}. 
or as 
Thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory {... in all that thou sayest and doest}.
?

I'm not sure it's 100% relevant, but in a French translation I found, the sentence was given as  (re-translation mine) _In all your words and deeds, you secretly aspire to self-glorification_.  So one translator, at least, parses the original as in the green version rather than the blue one.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Thank you, Loob.  That's interesting.

I wondered, of course, how you read it yourself.


----------



## Loob

You're a hard taskmaster, MrT!

If put up against a wall and forced to choose, then I'd probably opt for the French translator's version: _In all your words and deeds, you secretly aspire to self-glorification_.

Which is similar to wandle's (post 15) suggestion:





wandle said:


> [_..._] _In all your words and actions, your real inner motive is your desire to win glory for yourself._[...]


----------



## wandle

gramman said:


> It seems to me that Apollyon is criticising Christian for *the way he describes the journey*, claiming that his recounting lacks sufficient humility. I don't think there is any general accusation of prideful, outspoken conceit directed at Christian.


However, Christian's journey is nothing other than an allegory of the life of a Christian believer.
What Christian says about his journey is vital, because it reveals the significance and meaning which he places upon all that he has done in his life. 

Compare Christ's parable of the two men praying in the Temple. Christ declares that the man who openly recites the performance of  his religious obligations has failed, because he glories in it. The man who beats his breast, hides in a corner and confesses his unworthiness, he is the one who is justified in God's eyes.

The issue of motive is the key to this. What counts is not just outward performance, but inward intention. Both men fulfilled their religious observance, but one gloried in doing so, the other humbly recognised his own unworthiness.

Apollyon is telling Christian that his recital of how he endured great trials and still persevered does him no credit because his inner motive is his own glory.


----------



## natkretep

There was a question about _vain glory_ earlier up in the thread. This is a standard term found in the older translations of the Bible (so rendered in Galatians 5:26 in the Wycliffe translation [' be we not made covetous of* vain glory*, stirring each other to wrath, or having envy each to other'], the 1599 Geneva Bible, the 1611 Authorised Version [spelt as one or two words]) - and therefore a familiar term for Bunyan. Newer translations from the last century use 'self-conceited' or (most often) just 'conceited'. (Thus, 'Let us not become *conceited*, provoking and envying each other', New International Version.) I think we might therefore be investing too much in the term, and perhaps the accusation is that Christian is secretly proud of all that he has achieved ('in all that thou sayest and doest').

And of course pride should have no place if salvation is by grace (through God's favour rather than merited), as wandle says.


----------



## gramman

>>What Christian says about his journey … reveals the   significance and meaning which he places upon all that he has done in   his life.

Does it? Suppose a man lives a righteous life with proper motivation (to  serve God). At its end, he takes (sinful) pride in his having done so.  Does this somehow indicate that he was never properly motivated during  all the years of his life? It seems to me this is a separate and narrow  issue.

>>Apollyon is telling Christian that his recital of how he endured  great  trials and still persevered does him no credit because his inner  motive  is his own glory.

Are you saying that his endurance and perseverance are  
without value because of his perhaps prideful recounting? 

Anyway, my head is beginning to spin as well. It just seems to me, all  theological considerations aside, that Apollyon is finding fault in  Christian's description of his adversity and not claiming that he was  motivated by a desire for glory throughout the journey.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

That's the other view, if I've understood you correctly, Gramman, that the inner motivation is his pride in all that he does.  Thank you for putting it.

Many strict protestants would hold that pride had nothing to do with salvation.  You are either one of the elect or not; nothing you do here can make any difference to what happens to 'you' hereafter.

Of course if you were one of the elect you'd probably not be a very proud person, would you?


----------



## wandle

Motive is decisive for the validity, in Christian terms, of any act: and thus for the acts of a lifetime.

Christ, through the parable of the prayers in the Temple, says that, even when performing religious observances, if you are acting for the sake of your own merit or glory, then you are not justified in God's eyes: in other words, your outwardly religious actions are really tending to your own damnation.

Apollyon is telling Christian that _in all he says and does_ he is really motivated by glory for himself. Thus Apollyon's point is that even though Christian has gone through all the apparently faithful and good actions he has described, nevertheless, because Christian's motive in all those actions was (so Apollyon says) a selfish one, it follows that those very actions are leading him to damnation.


----------



## gramman

>>Apollyon is telling Christian that _in all he says and does_ [through all the apparently faithful and good actions he has described], he is really motivated by glory for himself. 

Forgive me if it seems like I'm stuck on the Ridge of Repetition, but as has noted in this thread many times, the quote is:





> _when thou talkest of thy journey, and of what thou hast heard and seen, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou savest or doest_


I can't see where there is any accusation of conceit directed at Christian's actions apart from his recounting.


----------



## wandle

> when thou talkest of thy journey, and of what thou hast heard and seen,



Apollyon is referring to the subject matter which Christian has been talking about.
The subject matter of Christian's talk consisted of (a) his journey and (b) what he had heard and seen.
In distinguishing (a) the journey from (b) what he had heard and seen, Apollyon is referring to what Christian has done during that journey as well as to what he has heard and seen.
In other words, Christian has given an account of both his actions and his experiences during the course of that journey.

Thus Apollyon is saying: 'The account you have given of your actions and experiences shows that in all those actions and experiences, you have been motivated by the desire for your own glory'.

In other words, I do not read 'when thou talkest' as a literal time reference meaning 'at the time when you talk', but in the definitional sense meaning 'in regard to what you say'.

If it had a literal time sense, what would be the point of the word 'doest'? That is referring to what he has done (and is doing) on the journey.


----------



## gramman

It seems to me this is a fairly narrow point and one that may not be worth pursuing further, but I just don't see it that way.

Where can a distinction be drawn between, on one hand, Christian's recounting of the journey, and on the other, what he heard and saw during it? I suppose you could point to any descriptions he may have offered that relate to what he smelled, tasted, and felt, but I'm guessing that's not your meaning. I think Apollyon is just trying to be clear: He's not so much referring broadly to the journey, but rather to Christian's experience of it (what he heard and saw).

when thou *talkest*:

*of* thy journey 
and *of* what thou hast heard and seen
 
All reference is to Christian's talking/recounting. I don't see where you can find that Apollyon is claiming that Christian was seeking self-glorification or being prideful in his actions during the journey.

I should note that I'm not contending that Christian did not behave pridefully during the journey, for example in running out ahead of Faithful. I'm just saying that in this particular excerpt, I don't find Apollyon accusing him of seeking vainglory _during_ the journey. 

I found this document interesting: Christian's Pride and Impatience, a PDF from a Scottish Baptist church.

Finally, on a personal note, let me say that this thread has proven to be of great value to me in leading me to consider the nature of pride and humility. I've always thought of humility as one of my strengths. In my experience, people are often blind to their shortcomings in areas in which they typically do well. I feel I can now see out onto a new vista, one that could be described as The Big Humility. Focus on loving others (serving God) and things will work out. Strip yourself of pride and you become more powerful because you're not wasting time and energy on falsehoods. Importantly, this insight seems to be leading me to move beyond a sort of intellectual acceptance of spirituality to a more, ah, _spiritual_ one. If I'm gonna believe in these things, I figure I should feel _good_ about it. ☺


----------



## sb70012

Thanks every body.


----------



## wandle

gramman said:


> All reference is to Christian's talking/recounting. I don't see where you can find that Apollyon is claiming that Christian was seeking self-glorification or being prideful in his actions during the journey.





> ' ... thou art inwardly desirous of vainglory in all that thou sayest and doest.'


_'All that thou sayest and *doest*'_ shows that Apollyon is referring to Christian's actions as well as his words.
Those actions can only be what he has done (and is doing) on his journey. 

The expression 'when thou talkest of thy journey' does not, in my view, mean 'at the time when you are speaking about your journey'. It means 'in regard to what you say about your journey'. It is just specifying the subject of Apollyon's statement, not referring to any particular time.

The journey is an allegory of the life of a Christian believer. Apollyon's criticism is a very radical one, aimed at the entire conduct of every believer throughout his or her life. The insidious trap which a believer can fall into, even if he or she carries out all the tasks that face a follower of Christ, is that they may feel that they have done well and earned some merit by living their life in that way. If they make that mistake, it means their real motive all the time was vainglory: glory for themselves, not God.


----------



## lucas-sp

wandle said:


> _'All that thou sayest and *doest*'_ shows that Apollyon is referring to Christian's actions as well as his words.
> Those actions can only be what he has done (and is doing) on his journey.


Now, I'm not an expert on English literature of this period. But my sense is that the sentence is, in fact:





> _when thou talkest of thy journey, and of what thou hast heard and seen, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest or doest_


To me, that sounds like "when you're telling your story (your story about where you went and things you talked about and saw), everything you say and do reveals that your secret motivation is your pride."

To narrate a story about oneself is not only to _say_ something, but to _do_ something. Narration is an action, a "doing." And it makes sense to think of "the way Christian tries to present himself" as not only something he's saying, but something he's _doing_ - trying to win the accolades of his listeners. If his motives are secretly egotistical, if he wants to win fame and glory by telling his story, then he's certainly _trying to do something_ simply by talking about his journey.

I confess I'm confused because I don't know what Apollyon is referring to when he says "when thou talkest of thy journey." Is he referring to some story Christian has recently told in the text? Is he referring to something Christian has said in his discussion with Apollyon (I looked at this for a while, but I couldn't find anything)? Or is he referring to the text of _The Pilgrim's Progress_ itself?

Basically, I see wandle's point, but I think the charge would be more leveled at Christian's act of _publishing_ or _publicizing_ his redemptive journey. I tend to read it as not only saying that his actions in the past were designed to win accolades for himself, but more importantly accusing him of improper motives for _talking about_ those actions: he doesn't want to help out other pilgrims, but instead he wants to present himself as a model pilgrim worthy of praise and devotion.

But I can't answer the question, and I don't think we can either, until we can figure out what Apollyon is talking about when he says "when thou talkest of thy journey."

That being said, both readings are possible if we have to restrict ourselves to this little fragment; however, I think the _rhetorical_ accusation (that Christian's self-narration is actually egocentric sophistry) is the most probable reading. It's very in keeping with the time period.


----------



## gramman

I suppose we should just agree to disagree, wandle, as I don't think either of us will change our view.





> and when thou talkest of thy journey, and of what thou hast heard and seen, thou art inwardly desirous of vain-glory in all that thou sayest or doest.


If your interpretation were correct, the statement would arguably be something like, "what you say about your journey *indicates that you are* desirous of vainglory in all you say and do." You say the "when thou talkest of thy journey" element is simply "specifying the subject of Apollyon's statement, not referring to any particular time." What's the difference? The subject is "when you talk about the journey." Isn't that a reference to a particular action/time?





> _All that thou sayest and *doest*'_ shows that Apollyon is referring to Christian's actions as well as his words. Those actions can only be what he has done (and is doing) on his journey.


Or they can be what he does when he discusses the journey — _when thou talkest of thy journey_.

In another part of the journey, Christian comes upon Formalist and Hypocrisy, residents of the town of Vain-Glory. He admonishes them for their efforts to reach Mount Zion by climbing over a wall. It could be argued that this is evidence of his being aware of and rejecting vainglory.

One commentator (Dr. Barry E. Horner of BunyanMinistries.org) describes Apollyon's criticism of Christian's recounting this way:





> He failed to acknowledge that his progress thus far was wholly due to his Prince. Rather, he congratulated himself for his accumulated attainments. — Christian Enters into Battle with Apollyon


Does this indicate that Christian sought glory in his actions during the journey, or rather that he was prideful in his view of having overcome obstacles?

In the end, and I suppose the WRF staff is hoping we'll get there soon  , lucas-sp may well have provided the best answer: it's hard to tell what Apollyon meant. I just spoke to Dr Horner on the phone (and invited him to view this thread) and he seemed to take that same position.


----------



## wandle

'All that thou sayest and doest': if this is a reference merely  to Christian's behaviour in recounting his journey, then 'what thou doest' becomes pointless. What are we to think that Apollyon is referring to by the word 'doest? It cannot refer to Christian's speech.  Are we to suppose that Apollyon is blaming Christian for engaging in vainglorious hand movements while speaking?  No: if the criticism were directed at nothing other than Christian's narration as such,  the text would have to be simply 'what thou sayest'.

The distinction between actions and words is basic in Christian moral teaching and it is standard in that context to include both in discussion of an individual's conduct. That is why Bunyan has Apollyon say 'all that thou sayest and doest': this is to show that the target of his criticism is all the outwardly observable behaviour of Christian. The point of the criticism is that beneath all the seemingly creditable things that Christian says and does during his journey (real meaning: his life), there lies a selfish inner motive: his desire for personal glory.

This as already mentioned constitutes a very radical and serious challenge to the believer who lives a life of outward Christian observance. It says that even a lifetime of consistently performing such observance is no guarantee of salvation. On the contrary, if it is done for the motive of personal glory, it will lead to perdition (or, returning to the allegory, it proves that Christian's true allegiance is to Apollyon, not to the Prince he claims to follow).

This radical challenge is the whole point of Apollyon's criticism, as Christian recognises in the answer that he gives, which is to the effect that he has admitted his own failings to God and trusts to His forgiveness. This brings home to the reader that essential element of the Christian calling: that he must recognise his own unworthiness and trust entirely to the grace of God.


----------



## PaulQ

natkretep said:


> There was a question about _vain glory_ earlier up in the thread. [...] Newer translations from the last century use 'self-conceited' or (most often) just 'conceited'. (Thus, 'Let us not become *conceited*, provoking and envying each other', New International Version.) I think we might therefore be investing too much in the term, and perhaps the accusation is that Christian is secretly proud of all that he has achieved ('in all that thou sayest and doest')


OED vainglory





> 1.a. Glory that is vain, empty, or worthless; inordinate or unwarranted pride in one's accomplishments or qualities; disposition or tendency to exalt oneself unduly; idle boasting or vaunting.


This falls short of the NIV's "Conceit" (another poor translation) which does not appear in the thesaurus as a synonym of vainglory: 

OED 





> conceit: 6. An overweening opinion of oneself; overestimation of one's own qualities, personal vanity or pride; conceitedness. App. short for 5b [ of oneself, or one's qualities.]  or for self-conceit n.



In modern terms, I would put vainglory beyond conceit and striding confidently to hubris.


----------



## natkretep

Yes, but _vainglory_ is not a term that is current in English. (Similarly we don't quite talk about _glorying _about something today.) It's a rendering of the Greek, but it could very well have rendered 'empty pride' (and this is represented in the second part of the OED definition). My point is that because _vainglory_ is not current and sticks out more, we read much more into it today.


----------



## wandle

'Vainglory' has a specific sense in Christian doctrine, as explained earlier, and that is the sense in which Bunyan uses it.


----------



## PaulQ

Could you explain how this differs from the OED's definition given that all but one of the examples are from Christian writings? 





> 1535   G. Joye _Apol. Tindale_ (Arb.) 22   For he that doth a thing secretly,..how seketh he vaynglory?


----------



## wandle

It does not in any way conflict with the OED's definition: it is simply more specific.


----------



## sb70012

Thank you very much.


----------

