Francis Berger's Blog, page 33
February 5, 2024
Easy to Reside in the City of Lust
A little addendum on the topic of lust...
“There’s a constant struggle inside each and every one of us. Part of us strives for high things. Good things. Another part of us is tempted by low things. Vulgar things. It’s as if there are two cities within us – a city of love and a city of lust.
People oscillate between the two cities their whole lives because it is not easy to live purely in the city of love. It is, however, very easy to reside purely in the city of lust. And I’m not only referring to sex. There is more to lust than that.”
Reinhardt paused for a moment and looked at the pigeon on the lamppost. He quickly realized it was not a pigeon at all, but a dove. He watched it take off from the lamppost and flap away past the buildings around the corner. He smiled and decided to wrap up the conversation.
“I want you to live in the right city. Don’t become a slave to earthly desires. Focus on higher things. Find your purpose in life. Be your true self. You asked God to put you here for a reason. Discover what that reason is. And if and when you step into the city of lust – because you will from time to time – acknowledge your misstep.
Be repentant. Learn from the experience and work to return to the city of love – to your true purpose; your real self. Do you understand?”
“There’s a constant struggle inside each and every one of us. Part of us strives for high things. Good things. Another part of us is tempted by low things. Vulgar things. It’s as if there are two cities within us – a city of love and a city of lust.
People oscillate between the two cities their whole lives because it is not easy to live purely in the city of love. It is, however, very easy to reside purely in the city of lust. And I’m not only referring to sex. There is more to lust than that.”
Reinhardt paused for a moment and looked at the pigeon on the lamppost. He quickly realized it was not a pigeon at all, but a dove. He watched it take off from the lamppost and flap away past the buildings around the corner. He smiled and decided to wrap up the conversation.
“I want you to live in the right city. Don’t become a slave to earthly desires. Focus on higher things. Find your purpose in life. Be your true self. You asked God to put you here for a reason. Discover what that reason is. And if and when you step into the city of lust – because you will from time to time – acknowledge your misstep.
Be repentant. Learn from the experience and work to return to the city of love – to your true purpose; your real self. Do you understand?”
February 4, 2024
The Society of the Crossed Keys is Real???!!!
Anyone who has seen Wes Anderson’s 2014 film The Grand Budapest Hotel is sure to recall the somewhat secretive and close-knit network of hotel concierges known as The Society of the Crossed Keys. 
Among the members of this illustrious and influential organization is the suave Monsieur Gustav H. — concierge of an exclusive mountainside resort known as The Grand Budapest Hotel — who boasts of his uncanny ability to secure virtually anything his guests desire all at a moment’s notice.In the clip below, Gustav H. calls upon his front dest brothers-in-uniform to help him escape from a bind. Well, it turns out that there is a Society of the Crossed Keys in real life as well:
The Les Clefs d’Or is the professional union of concierges. They have more than 4,000 members in 80 countries and 530 places in the world. The roots of the organisation date back to 1929. However, the institution was officially founded only in 1952 in France. It is a nonprofit organisation resting on two pillars: service and friendship.
See their logo below. Note the crossed keys!
Fittingly enough, a concierge in Budapest (the city, not the Grand Hotel) has just been awarded the "golden keys":Réka Tóth will represent Hungary in the international organisation Tóth got the Golden Key since she has years of concierge experience, completed several tests and proved that she can provide the highest quality service imaginable in every situation.
As a result, she can pin the key on her uniform, which guests can easily recognise. The applications are evaluated by the relevant committee of the Les Clefs d’Or. That is followed by an interview. Afterwards, the committee decides who to give the key to.
Réka Tóth graduated from Budapest’s Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE) and Budapest Business University (BGE). During her career, she strengthened the realm of the InterContinental and Sofitel.
I'm sure Ms. Tóth will be more than happy to put her vast networking skills to use should you ever require front row aisle seats for a first night at the Opera Toscana on one day's notice or a corner table at Chez Dominique on a Thursday.
February 3, 2024
Spirit is the Expense of Lust; Repentance Offers Recompense
In a recent post called
Spiritual Survival in the Sexual Marketplace
, Adam Piggott soundly repudiates a manosphere blogger whose profound philosophy of life boils down to the following, easy-to-remember motto: you need to screw as many people as possible to have any worth and thus be happy.
Piggot’s refutation of Mr. Screw-Everything-You-Can-While-You-Can-To-Prove-You-Are-a-Man is thoroughly solid in its brevity and requires no additional help from me.
If anything, Piggott’s post served to remind me of just how utterly pernicious the sin of lust, particularly the sin of unrepented — nay, more than that, celebrated, endorsed, promoted, lauded — lust can be.
In his piece, Piggott confesses that lust has been and is his own bugbear. I must add that lust has been and is my own bugbear, to the point that working through it required the writing of a novel.
Anyhow...
Piggott’s juxtaposition of spiritual survival and sexual marketplace in the post title lucidly strikes at the core of the matter. In its essence, lust is a spiritual challenge. People who allow themselves to be consumed by lust inevitably pay for it with spirit. This applies to everyone; even those who fundamentally reject the reality of spirit and sin.
The manosphere blogger whom Piggott renounces squarely resides in the camp that rejects the reality of spirit. Individuals in this camp not only refuse to recognize lust as a sin, but they also go to great lengths to extol the virtues of lust and doll up their justifications with all sorts of evolutionary assumptions that culminate in terms like sexual marketplace.
Sexual marketplace. Pause to contemplate the term for a moment and then ask yourself how a person who uses such terminology and lives his life according to it regards himself and his fellow human beings.
I’ll share my thoughts via a short excerpt taken from the "bugbear" novel I mentioned above:
Béla scowled. “If pleasure is all we have left then what’s the point of it all?”
“That’s precisely it! There is no point to it all!” Verge stepped out from behind the table and pointed his finger at Béla in an accusatory fashion. “Pleasure is all we have because pleasure is all we deserve. Pleasure is meaning. Death is a lack of meaning. There is nothing else in between.”
“If pleasure is the only meaning, then we are not fully human.”
“Exactly! For centuries we wholeheartedly believed we were part of divine creation. We based our entire existence around the core of this belief. Well, I have news for you, dear chap – that belief is no longer valid. It has been stolen from us by the same people who fight for social justice and struggle against the tyranny of oppression. It is they who have reduced us to the level of animals. We are objects – commodities to be bought and sold. The quicker you accept that imposed truth, the happier you’ll be!”
Béla was aghast. He stared at his friend in disbelief. “These women we film and photograph are more than just objects.”
“Are they? Do you remember the names of the girls we were with last night?”
The only answer Béla could provide was a blank stare.
“Precisely!” Verge snickered. “And you have the audacity to lecture me about objectification!”
“You can’t believe the women who work for us are just objects.”
“I do,” Verge said firmly. “I must.”
“That’s hateful.”
“I don’t hate, my good man, but I don’t delude myself with love either. When it comes to people, I merely tolerate or enjoy.”
The two characters in the scene above represent two disparate positions regarding lust. On the one hand, the protagonist Béla is slowly becoming aware of the vast spiritual implications of his lust-fuelled life and is inching his way toward repentance.
On the other hand, you have Anthony Vergil, who has jettisoned the reality of spirit in favor of "the imposed truth" of material and carnal pleasures and now regards himself and everyone else as mere objects, commodities to be bought and sold.
Here's the thing. Everyone has or will succumb to the sin of lust at some point in life, particularly when young. Like all sin, lust plays a major role in spiritual learning. With that in mind, succumbing to the sin of lust is not the core issue—non-repentance is.
Some people may struggle against lust their entire lives — and lose!
Nonetheless, the spiritual survival in Piggott's title resides in repentance. Repentance is the antidote to dishonesty and denial. It is the spiritual declaration that you see the thing for what it is, even if/when you struggle to avoid it.
Non-repentance or, worse, celebratory endorsement of lust as a high virtue signifies the beginning of spiritual atrophy and death — a proclamation that you willingly and actively choose a life of self-distraction, self-delusion, objectification, hedonism, etc.
All sins come at the expense of spirit , and very few have captured the expense of spirit lust demands as well as Shakespeare did in Sonnet 129:
Th' expense of spirit in a waste of shame
Is lust in action ; and till action, lust
Is perjured, murd'rous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust,
Enjoyed no sooner but despisèd straight,
Past reason hunted; and, no sooner had
Past reason hated as a swallowed bait
On purpose laid to make the taker mad;
Mad in pursuit and in possession so,
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme;
A bliss in proof and proved, a very woe;
Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream.
All this the world well knows; yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
Lust not only consumes; it also possesses.
People who willingly and actively endorse the “heaven” that lust promises as desirable, noble, and virtuous are not only consumed, they are possessed.
Lust extracts a spiritual price. Only repentance can recompense the expense.
Piggot’s refutation of Mr. Screw-Everything-You-Can-While-You-Can-To-Prove-You-Are-a-Man is thoroughly solid in its brevity and requires no additional help from me.
If anything, Piggott’s post served to remind me of just how utterly pernicious the sin of lust, particularly the sin of unrepented — nay, more than that, celebrated, endorsed, promoted, lauded — lust can be.
In his piece, Piggott confesses that lust has been and is his own bugbear. I must add that lust has been and is my own bugbear, to the point that working through it required the writing of a novel.
Anyhow...
Piggott’s juxtaposition of spiritual survival and sexual marketplace in the post title lucidly strikes at the core of the matter. In its essence, lust is a spiritual challenge. People who allow themselves to be consumed by lust inevitably pay for it with spirit. This applies to everyone; even those who fundamentally reject the reality of spirit and sin.
The manosphere blogger whom Piggott renounces squarely resides in the camp that rejects the reality of spirit. Individuals in this camp not only refuse to recognize lust as a sin, but they also go to great lengths to extol the virtues of lust and doll up their justifications with all sorts of evolutionary assumptions that culminate in terms like sexual marketplace.
Sexual marketplace. Pause to contemplate the term for a moment and then ask yourself how a person who uses such terminology and lives his life according to it regards himself and his fellow human beings.
I’ll share my thoughts via a short excerpt taken from the "bugbear" novel I mentioned above:
Béla scowled. “If pleasure is all we have left then what’s the point of it all?”
“That’s precisely it! There is no point to it all!” Verge stepped out from behind the table and pointed his finger at Béla in an accusatory fashion. “Pleasure is all we have because pleasure is all we deserve. Pleasure is meaning. Death is a lack of meaning. There is nothing else in between.”
“If pleasure is the only meaning, then we are not fully human.”
“Exactly! For centuries we wholeheartedly believed we were part of divine creation. We based our entire existence around the core of this belief. Well, I have news for you, dear chap – that belief is no longer valid. It has been stolen from us by the same people who fight for social justice and struggle against the tyranny of oppression. It is they who have reduced us to the level of animals. We are objects – commodities to be bought and sold. The quicker you accept that imposed truth, the happier you’ll be!”
Béla was aghast. He stared at his friend in disbelief. “These women we film and photograph are more than just objects.”
“Are they? Do you remember the names of the girls we were with last night?”
The only answer Béla could provide was a blank stare.
“Precisely!” Verge snickered. “And you have the audacity to lecture me about objectification!”
“You can’t believe the women who work for us are just objects.”
“I do,” Verge said firmly. “I must.”
“That’s hateful.”
“I don’t hate, my good man, but I don’t delude myself with love either. When it comes to people, I merely tolerate or enjoy.”
The two characters in the scene above represent two disparate positions regarding lust. On the one hand, the protagonist Béla is slowly becoming aware of the vast spiritual implications of his lust-fuelled life and is inching his way toward repentance.
On the other hand, you have Anthony Vergil, who has jettisoned the reality of spirit in favor of "the imposed truth" of material and carnal pleasures and now regards himself and everyone else as mere objects, commodities to be bought and sold.
Here's the thing. Everyone has or will succumb to the sin of lust at some point in life, particularly when young. Like all sin, lust plays a major role in spiritual learning. With that in mind, succumbing to the sin of lust is not the core issue—non-repentance is.
Some people may struggle against lust their entire lives — and lose!
Nonetheless, the spiritual survival in Piggott's title resides in repentance. Repentance is the antidote to dishonesty and denial. It is the spiritual declaration that you see the thing for what it is, even if/when you struggle to avoid it.
Non-repentance or, worse, celebratory endorsement of lust as a high virtue signifies the beginning of spiritual atrophy and death — a proclamation that you willingly and actively choose a life of self-distraction, self-delusion, objectification, hedonism, etc.
All sins come at the expense of spirit , and very few have captured the expense of spirit lust demands as well as Shakespeare did in Sonnet 129:
Th' expense of spirit in a waste of shame
Is lust in action ; and till action, lust
Is perjured, murd'rous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust,
Enjoyed no sooner but despisèd straight,
Past reason hunted; and, no sooner had
Past reason hated as a swallowed bait
On purpose laid to make the taker mad;
Mad in pursuit and in possession so,
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme;
A bliss in proof and proved, a very woe;
Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream.
All this the world well knows; yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
Lust not only consumes; it also possesses.
People who willingly and actively endorse the “heaven” that lust promises as desirable, noble, and virtuous are not only consumed, they are possessed.
Lust extracts a spiritual price. Only repentance can recompense the expense.
Some Positive Goal We Don't See
Dr. Charlton’s post today about This Sorathic World contained a deep and valid insight concerning the intentionally engineered, self-inflicted death spiral the West is in:
The worst of it is not so much that this catastrophe cannot be prevented (it probably cannot - because destruction is so much easier than creation, and humans are so easily corrupted); as that people are unaware of what is being done.
Indeed, much worse - people of The West nearly all deny that this purposively destructive evil exists, and is dominant.
The excerpt above reminded me of a recent conversation with a senior manager of a local factory that produces sandblasters and related industrial equipment. Although the plant he oversees is a component of a global company, it more or less serves as a subsidiary of a much larger production facility in Germany.
The senior manager began the conversation by expressing grave concerns about the glaringly self-destructive policies guiding German industry and then went on to highlight several examples of bafflingly disastrous actions German companies have embarked upon in the past two or three years, all of which have been ruinous to their bottom lines and harmful to the European economy as a whole.
“Do you think the Germans are intentionally sabotaging themselves?" I asked. "What I mean is, do they understand the destructive nature of the policies they are implementing?”
The manager cocked his head slightly, “Well, sure. How could they not?” He waved his hand dismissively and added, “But there has to be some long-term positive goal behind it — something we don’t see. This is Germany, after all, and in the end, I trust the Germans know what they are doing.”
I have had many similar conversations with similarly-situated individuals over the past year or so, and that belief in some invisible, long-term positive goal was a feature in nearly all of them.
The worst of it is not so much that this catastrophe cannot be prevented (it probably cannot - because destruction is so much easier than creation, and humans are so easily corrupted); as that people are unaware of what is being done.
Indeed, much worse - people of The West nearly all deny that this purposively destructive evil exists, and is dominant.
The excerpt above reminded me of a recent conversation with a senior manager of a local factory that produces sandblasters and related industrial equipment. Although the plant he oversees is a component of a global company, it more or less serves as a subsidiary of a much larger production facility in Germany.
The senior manager began the conversation by expressing grave concerns about the glaringly self-destructive policies guiding German industry and then went on to highlight several examples of bafflingly disastrous actions German companies have embarked upon in the past two or three years, all of which have been ruinous to their bottom lines and harmful to the European economy as a whole.
“Do you think the Germans are intentionally sabotaging themselves?" I asked. "What I mean is, do they understand the destructive nature of the policies they are implementing?”
The manager cocked his head slightly, “Well, sure. How could they not?” He waved his hand dismissively and added, “But there has to be some long-term positive goal behind it — something we don’t see. This is Germany, after all, and in the end, I trust the Germans know what they are doing.”
I have had many similar conversations with similarly-situated individuals over the past year or so, and that belief in some invisible, long-term positive goal was a feature in nearly all of them.
February 1, 2024
Christianity and The Religion of the Spirit
In The Divine and The Human, Nikolai Berdyaev presents his case concerning the future of Christianity. He anticipates “the possibility of new revelation and a new spiritual epoch” and terms it “the religion of the Spirit”, which he regards as “not at all a new religion, distinct from Christianity, but rather the fulfillment and completion of the Christian revelation, bringing it to a true universality.”
Though he anticipates the development, he is quick to admit that we do not yet have this religion of the Spirit replete with its new revelation, mostly because the revelation “depends upon man's creative activity as well. It is not to be understood as only a new revelation of God to man: it is also the revelation of man to God.”
Berdyaev’s vision for the further development of Christianity “presupposes a radical change and a new orientation in human consciousness”, a “revolution of consciousness” that “will include higher achievements of spirituality.” Berdyaev defines this radical change of consciousness as a sign of “man's maturity, leaving behind him his childhood and adolescence....”
In the religion of the Spirit, the religion of freedom, everything will appear in a new light: there will be neither authority nor reward: the nightmare of a legalistic conception of Christianity and of eternal punishment will finally disappear. It will be founded, not upon judgment and recompense, but on creative development and transfiguration, on likeness to God.
In a nutshell, Berdyaev presents the religion of the Spirit as the fulfillment of Christianity, not as a replacement for Christianity; however, he does maintain that in a “certain sense, we may say that Christianity is ending and that we may expect a renaissance only from the religion of the Holy Spirit...”
The Divine and The Human appeared in 1947, shortly after the Second War. The “new orientation of human consciousness” Berdyaev expected has not appeared in the 77 years since his ideas on the matter were published, casting a long shadow of doubt on his contemplations concerning the further development of Christianity.
Of course, Berdyaev was not entirely optimistic about his expectations, at least in the short term.
The process of the decomposition of the cosmos ... is nearing its end. {but} least of all does this mean an optimistic concept of the destiny of history. The discovery of light does not mean a denial of darkness. On the contrary: before the advent of the epoch of Spirit man will have to pass through deepened shadow, through the epoch of night.
Berdyaev offers no clues as to how long this epoch of night would last, but I think it is safe to say that we remain firmly in its grips. Perhaps it is more accurate to say we are nearing or have reached the darkest point of this epoch of the night. Berdayev would likely concur. In Truth and Revelation, which appeared six years after The Divine and The Human, he notes, “I am not at all an optimist. Rather I am inclined to think that we are entering an epoch of darkness and of vast destruction.”
With this in mind, it becomes clear that the religion of the Spirit might be on the other side of this epoch of darkness and vast destruction. At the same time, the radical change in consciousness Berdyaev anticipates would have to begin in the dark and destructive epoch to bring the epoch to an end.
As much as I value Berdyaev’s ideas concerning the further development of Christianity and human consciousness, I find that I presently have little use for his “grand scheme of things” and prophetic perspective, much of which is grounded in his firm assumptions concerning the Second Coming and his distinctly Russian focus on the communal/collective/societal aspects of Christianity.
Nevertheless, I believe Berdyaev is pointing in the right direction regarding human consciousness and what individual Christians should concentrate on in this epoch of darkness and vast destruction.
In a post from earlier this week, Dr. Charlton argues that if Christianity is a society, a structure of authority, a group of people, or even a future situation or state that we should be working towards (such as Berdyaev’s third epoch or religion of the Spirit), then Christianity is finished. Dr. Charlton ends his post with the following assertion:
Unless you or I can be a real and full Christian here-and-now, starting with ourselves as we are, in this situation; and not depending upon any other people or authority to instruct, validate, or cooperate-with us - then there is, and shall be, no Christianity.
And unless we acknowledge this independence, and therefore take total and personal responsibility for ourselves Being Christian Now - then sooner or later we will Not be a Christian.
(Whatever we decide to call ourselves.)
This echoes Berdyaev’s point that “in a certain sense we may say that Christianity is ending.” Christians can no longer solely and passively rely on conventional Christian externals to guide them as they journey through this epoch of darkness and destruction. Something more is needed, and this involves personal responsibility.
Although I hold reservations concerning the minutiae of Berdyaev’s religion of the Holy Spirit, I am very drawn to the connection between the Holy Spirit and the shift of consciousness he foresees, which reminds me of a lucid comment Wm Jas Tychoneveich made on this blog:
"The ultimate spiritual authority is the Holy Ghost speaking to each believer's mind and heart, and all other authorities are downstream from that."
The new revelation of the Spirit Berdyaev expected has not appeared on the horizon, primarily because we have not taken total and personal responsibility for ourselves being Christian. We are not hearing the Holy Spirit as it speaks to our minds and hearts.
Most of us remain fixated on the downstream external authorities as primary authorities (over and above the Holy Spirit) or perhaps we are passively awaiting some future development in consciousness that promises to spiritually awaken us and usher in a golden era.
Taking total and personal responsibility entails setting all of this aside. We have to make our own choices going forward, but we cannot do this alone and in complete isolation. We must actively seek the guidance and cooperation of the Holy Spirit, who can and will guide us and cooperate with us individually, provided our motivations are sincere.
What Berdyaev terms the religion of the Spirit is not some future epoch.
The religion involves an individual Christian and the Holy Ghost.
It is already here.
It has always been here.
Right from the beginning.
Though he anticipates the development, he is quick to admit that we do not yet have this religion of the Spirit replete with its new revelation, mostly because the revelation “depends upon man's creative activity as well. It is not to be understood as only a new revelation of God to man: it is also the revelation of man to God.”
Berdyaev’s vision for the further development of Christianity “presupposes a radical change and a new orientation in human consciousness”, a “revolution of consciousness” that “will include higher achievements of spirituality.” Berdyaev defines this radical change of consciousness as a sign of “man's maturity, leaving behind him his childhood and adolescence....”
In the religion of the Spirit, the religion of freedom, everything will appear in a new light: there will be neither authority nor reward: the nightmare of a legalistic conception of Christianity and of eternal punishment will finally disappear. It will be founded, not upon judgment and recompense, but on creative development and transfiguration, on likeness to God.
In a nutshell, Berdyaev presents the religion of the Spirit as the fulfillment of Christianity, not as a replacement for Christianity; however, he does maintain that in a “certain sense, we may say that Christianity is ending and that we may expect a renaissance only from the religion of the Holy Spirit...”
The Divine and The Human appeared in 1947, shortly after the Second War. The “new orientation of human consciousness” Berdyaev expected has not appeared in the 77 years since his ideas on the matter were published, casting a long shadow of doubt on his contemplations concerning the further development of Christianity.
Of course, Berdyaev was not entirely optimistic about his expectations, at least in the short term.
The process of the decomposition of the cosmos ... is nearing its end. {but} least of all does this mean an optimistic concept of the destiny of history. The discovery of light does not mean a denial of darkness. On the contrary: before the advent of the epoch of Spirit man will have to pass through deepened shadow, through the epoch of night.
Berdyaev offers no clues as to how long this epoch of night would last, but I think it is safe to say that we remain firmly in its grips. Perhaps it is more accurate to say we are nearing or have reached the darkest point of this epoch of the night. Berdayev would likely concur. In Truth and Revelation, which appeared six years after The Divine and The Human, he notes, “I am not at all an optimist. Rather I am inclined to think that we are entering an epoch of darkness and of vast destruction.”
With this in mind, it becomes clear that the religion of the Spirit might be on the other side of this epoch of darkness and vast destruction. At the same time, the radical change in consciousness Berdyaev anticipates would have to begin in the dark and destructive epoch to bring the epoch to an end.
As much as I value Berdyaev’s ideas concerning the further development of Christianity and human consciousness, I find that I presently have little use for his “grand scheme of things” and prophetic perspective, much of which is grounded in his firm assumptions concerning the Second Coming and his distinctly Russian focus on the communal/collective/societal aspects of Christianity.
Nevertheless, I believe Berdyaev is pointing in the right direction regarding human consciousness and what individual Christians should concentrate on in this epoch of darkness and vast destruction.
In a post from earlier this week, Dr. Charlton argues that if Christianity is a society, a structure of authority, a group of people, or even a future situation or state that we should be working towards (such as Berdyaev’s third epoch or religion of the Spirit), then Christianity is finished. Dr. Charlton ends his post with the following assertion:
Unless you or I can be a real and full Christian here-and-now, starting with ourselves as we are, in this situation; and not depending upon any other people or authority to instruct, validate, or cooperate-with us - then there is, and shall be, no Christianity.
And unless we acknowledge this independence, and therefore take total and personal responsibility for ourselves Being Christian Now - then sooner or later we will Not be a Christian.
(Whatever we decide to call ourselves.)
This echoes Berdyaev’s point that “in a certain sense we may say that Christianity is ending.” Christians can no longer solely and passively rely on conventional Christian externals to guide them as they journey through this epoch of darkness and destruction. Something more is needed, and this involves personal responsibility.
Although I hold reservations concerning the minutiae of Berdyaev’s religion of the Holy Spirit, I am very drawn to the connection between the Holy Spirit and the shift of consciousness he foresees, which reminds me of a lucid comment Wm Jas Tychoneveich made on this blog:
"The ultimate spiritual authority is the Holy Ghost speaking to each believer's mind and heart, and all other authorities are downstream from that."
The new revelation of the Spirit Berdyaev expected has not appeared on the horizon, primarily because we have not taken total and personal responsibility for ourselves being Christian. We are not hearing the Holy Spirit as it speaks to our minds and hearts.
Most of us remain fixated on the downstream external authorities as primary authorities (over and above the Holy Spirit) or perhaps we are passively awaiting some future development in consciousness that promises to spiritually awaken us and usher in a golden era.
Taking total and personal responsibility entails setting all of this aside. We have to make our own choices going forward, but we cannot do this alone and in complete isolation. We must actively seek the guidance and cooperation of the Holy Spirit, who can and will guide us and cooperate with us individually, provided our motivations are sincere.
What Berdyaev terms the religion of the Spirit is not some future epoch.
The religion involves an individual Christian and the Holy Ghost.
It is already here.
It has always been here.
Right from the beginning.
January 30, 2024
Ahriman Will Not Attempt to Set Things Right
One of the most deluded lines of thinking I have encountered over the past decade involves the belief that the Ahrimanic leaderships within the System in the West will one day wake up to their errors, realize they have made a mess of things, and then frantically and actively seek to fix things by vigorously seeking out and recruiting all the competent and well-motivated people they have shunned, ostracized, and driven away from companies, organizations, politics, education, the media, the economy, etc.
This line of thinking is deluded for two reasons.
First, it defines Ahriman — the System — as corrupted but otherwise inherently good.
Second, it still holds to the belief that people maneuvering within the Ahrimanic System — blinded by errant ideology and enslaved by material obligations and debts— are largely ignorant of the havoc they wreak but will inevitably be forced to confront the havoc when “things get bad enough” and will thus be sincerely motivated to set things right.
Following this line of thinking, a company that hired unqualified people to appease the ruling ideologies of the day will eventually wake up and smell the coffee once their misguided hiring decisions begin to derail the company or reduce profitability.
After that, they will have no choice but to fire the unqualified and replace them with the genuinely qualified, conveniently pooled from the very people they previously rejected and considered discommodious.
Hence, the only thing that deplorable but otherwise competent people have to do is bide their time. Their moment to shine and reclaim what is rightfully theirs will come as soon as things “really begin to fall apart.”
As alluring as this line of thinking may be, it is utterly oblivious to the Sorathic elements permeating the Ahrimanic System. Unlike Ahriman, Sorath aims to destroy, not enslave.
The Ahrimanics are not blind to the destruction. It’s worse than that. Sorath has cast a spell over them. They sincerely believe they are controlling the destruction; that they are ultimately the masters of the desolation over which they preside.
This belief that they can keep the ruination “in check” will deter them from attempting to set things right.
The more things fall apart, the more they will convince themselves of their efficient and effective supervision, which will deter them from taking the sorts of actions and making the sorts of decisions needed to set things right.
This line of thinking is deluded for two reasons.
First, it defines Ahriman — the System — as corrupted but otherwise inherently good.
Second, it still holds to the belief that people maneuvering within the Ahrimanic System — blinded by errant ideology and enslaved by material obligations and debts— are largely ignorant of the havoc they wreak but will inevitably be forced to confront the havoc when “things get bad enough” and will thus be sincerely motivated to set things right.
Following this line of thinking, a company that hired unqualified people to appease the ruling ideologies of the day will eventually wake up and smell the coffee once their misguided hiring decisions begin to derail the company or reduce profitability.
After that, they will have no choice but to fire the unqualified and replace them with the genuinely qualified, conveniently pooled from the very people they previously rejected and considered discommodious.
Hence, the only thing that deplorable but otherwise competent people have to do is bide their time. Their moment to shine and reclaim what is rightfully theirs will come as soon as things “really begin to fall apart.”
As alluring as this line of thinking may be, it is utterly oblivious to the Sorathic elements permeating the Ahrimanic System. Unlike Ahriman, Sorath aims to destroy, not enslave.
The Ahrimanics are not blind to the destruction. It’s worse than that. Sorath has cast a spell over them. They sincerely believe they are controlling the destruction; that they are ultimately the masters of the desolation over which they preside.
This belief that they can keep the ruination “in check” will deter them from attempting to set things right.
The more things fall apart, the more they will convince themselves of their efficient and effective supervision, which will deter them from taking the sorts of actions and making the sorts of decisions needed to set things right.
January 29, 2024
The Motivations of Rooftop Screamers
Perhaps the only thing worse than being wrong is being constantly reminded that you were wrong. Although some are right more often than others, no one is right all the time.
Thus, if you happen to be wrong, the best thing to do is publicly acknowledge the mistake, learn from it, and move on.
The same applies to being right. Acknowledge it. Learn from it. Move on.
Nevertheless, people who are right about something tend to scream it from the rooftops — this applies particularly to bloggers.
Rooftop-screaming bloggers also relish reminding the world of the people who got something wrong, regardless of whether those who got it wrong acknowledged the error.
Put another way, rooftop screamers have a penchant for rubbing it in.
On the flip side, rooftop screamers tend to be far less vocal about their own errors, mistakes, and delusions and pass these off with hushed mumbling, provided they acknowledge being wrong at all.
This is relevant because some of the bad calls that rooftop-screaming bloggers have made are real doozies and of far greater magnitude than the wrongs they incessantly berate others about.
Something to consider when you hear voices coming from the rooftops.
Thus, if you happen to be wrong, the best thing to do is publicly acknowledge the mistake, learn from it, and move on.
The same applies to being right. Acknowledge it. Learn from it. Move on.
Nevertheless, people who are right about something tend to scream it from the rooftops — this applies particularly to bloggers.
Rooftop-screaming bloggers also relish reminding the world of the people who got something wrong, regardless of whether those who got it wrong acknowledged the error.
Put another way, rooftop screamers have a penchant for rubbing it in.
On the flip side, rooftop screamers tend to be far less vocal about their own errors, mistakes, and delusions and pass these off with hushed mumbling, provided they acknowledge being wrong at all.
This is relevant because some of the bad calls that rooftop-screaming bloggers have made are real doozies and of far greater magnitude than the wrongs they incessantly berate others about.
Something to consider when you hear voices coming from the rooftops.
January 27, 2024
Religious “Motivation For” Is Not Contingent Upon “Motivation Against”
Motivation is the drive, rationale, or reason for thinking or acting in a certain way. At the fundamental level, motivation is the quality and energy that shapes and defines being. The definition of being requires purpose — the impetus or justification that fuels and drives motivation.
Motivations generally have both a positive and negative side. Motivations to do, think, or be something positive are usually counterbalanced by equally powerful motivations to avoid doing, thinking, or being something negative. Put another way, motivations for something are also motivations against something.
With that in mind, it is worth considering that religious/spiritual motivations are only truly positive when the motivation for is far greater than any motivation against.
Taken further, positive religious/spiritual motivations for are never contingent upon motivation against.
This does not mean the against motivations do not exist — simply that the validity, cogency, justification, and effectiveness of for motivations of the spirit do not depend upon and are not subject to against motivations.
Motivations generally have both a positive and negative side. Motivations to do, think, or be something positive are usually counterbalanced by equally powerful motivations to avoid doing, thinking, or being something negative. Put another way, motivations for something are also motivations against something.
With that in mind, it is worth considering that religious/spiritual motivations are only truly positive when the motivation for is far greater than any motivation against.
Taken further, positive religious/spiritual motivations for are never contingent upon motivation against.
This does not mean the against motivations do not exist — simply that the validity, cogency, justification, and effectiveness of for motivations of the spirit do not depend upon and are not subject to against motivations.
January 26, 2024
You Rarely Know What People Will Remember You For
The other day, an old friend in Canada informed me that he has been watching Detective Forst — a Polish crime series currently available on Netflix — and that the main character, from which the series draws its name, reminded him of me.
I viewed the first three episodes to determine where my friend was coming from but could not understand how the protagonist was reminiscent of me.
I noted that the character is a bit of a maverick, somewhat taciturn, a creative thinker, suspicious of authority, and a little gruff and rough around the edges; however, this applies to a thousand other fictional characters.
At no point did I experience an Aristotelean “Ah, that is he” flash of recognition or discernment while watching the series.
Utterly puzzled, I contacted my friend. His response?
The character's hat and jacket resemble the kind I used to wear when I lived in Canada.
That’s it.
I spent three hours intensely studying the protagonist of an incredibly disjointed, dark, gloomy, disturbing, Silence of the Lambs-type serial killer series to learn that the only thing I had in common with Detective Forst was the hat and jacket I used to wear.
Note: Detective Forst is a six-episode series, but three shows were enough for me. My tolerance level for the serial killer genre is extremely low these days, and in all honesty, I did not find the series to be all that good.
I viewed the first three episodes to determine where my friend was coming from but could not understand how the protagonist was reminiscent of me.
I noted that the character is a bit of a maverick, somewhat taciturn, a creative thinker, suspicious of authority, and a little gruff and rough around the edges; however, this applies to a thousand other fictional characters.
At no point did I experience an Aristotelean “Ah, that is he” flash of recognition or discernment while watching the series.
Utterly puzzled, I contacted my friend. His response?
The character's hat and jacket resemble the kind I used to wear when I lived in Canada.
That’s it.
I spent three hours intensely studying the protagonist of an incredibly disjointed, dark, gloomy, disturbing, Silence of the Lambs-type serial killer series to learn that the only thing I had in common with Detective Forst was the hat and jacket I used to wear.
Note: Detective Forst is a six-episode series, but three shows were enough for me. My tolerance level for the serial killer genre is extremely low these days, and in all honesty, I did not find the series to be all that good.
January 25, 2024
The Reassociation of the Divine and Human Is a Matter of Consciousness; Or, Why Did God Create Man?
Most traditional Christians yearn to return to a Medieval worldview, replete with its organic and hierarchical framework, because it provides something modernism has utterly failed to provide — a sense of human integration of being in Creation.
This integration began to dissolve with the advent of the Renaissance, which slowly distanced human creative energies away from the integrated organic and hierarchical structure and focused instead on emerging humanism. As humanism developed, it became increasingly domineering until it became estranged from God altogether.
Ironically enough, the disassociation of man from God was also humanism’s death knell. The breach between the Divine and human in consciousness marked the end of our collective understanding of what human "really" means, to say nothing of our collective understanding of what the world or the cosmos means.
The end of the human as a purely materialistic concept — with the supposed rights and duties ascribed to the concept— is already on the horizon in the forms of totalitarian statism and technology.
As noted, this alienation from God is fundamentally a matter of consciousness — the disunity is a perceived one rather than a “real” one. Whether he likes it or not, man is still very much associated with God, and this reality stands even when man chooses to deny the existence of God outright.
Yet man has some leverage in this via his agency and his consciousness. His rejection of God and Creation does not and cannot obliterate the reality of God and Creation; however, it can destroy God and Creation as realities within his consciousness.
Man’s turning away from God has created a state of disunified unity. The Divine and human remain fundamentally united by default, but man’s vociferous rejection of this unity in consciousness fissures and limits the operations between the Divine and the human.
God yearns to reassociate with man via consciousness, and he is waiting for man to reassociate with Him via consciousness, but He cannot impose this reassociation upon man’s consciousness. He can only meet man halfway; the other half depends entirely on man.
A return to the Medieval worldview and organic wholeness offers a potential path to reunifying with God via consciousness, but this is entirely contingent on the belief that human consciousness has not changed in any underlying or meaningful way since the Middle Ages — that alienated modern man is the same as unified Medieval man and that only way modern man can get back to God is by becoming Medieval man once again.
The answer to whether this kind of reunification/ressassociation is possible, let alone desirable, rests in the following overarching question — Why did God create man?
Expanded further, Why did God create Creation?
This integration began to dissolve with the advent of the Renaissance, which slowly distanced human creative energies away from the integrated organic and hierarchical structure and focused instead on emerging humanism. As humanism developed, it became increasingly domineering until it became estranged from God altogether.
Ironically enough, the disassociation of man from God was also humanism’s death knell. The breach between the Divine and human in consciousness marked the end of our collective understanding of what human "really" means, to say nothing of our collective understanding of what the world or the cosmos means.
The end of the human as a purely materialistic concept — with the supposed rights and duties ascribed to the concept— is already on the horizon in the forms of totalitarian statism and technology.
As noted, this alienation from God is fundamentally a matter of consciousness — the disunity is a perceived one rather than a “real” one. Whether he likes it or not, man is still very much associated with God, and this reality stands even when man chooses to deny the existence of God outright.
Yet man has some leverage in this via his agency and his consciousness. His rejection of God and Creation does not and cannot obliterate the reality of God and Creation; however, it can destroy God and Creation as realities within his consciousness.
Man’s turning away from God has created a state of disunified unity. The Divine and human remain fundamentally united by default, but man’s vociferous rejection of this unity in consciousness fissures and limits the operations between the Divine and the human.
God yearns to reassociate with man via consciousness, and he is waiting for man to reassociate with Him via consciousness, but He cannot impose this reassociation upon man’s consciousness. He can only meet man halfway; the other half depends entirely on man.
A return to the Medieval worldview and organic wholeness offers a potential path to reunifying with God via consciousness, but this is entirely contingent on the belief that human consciousness has not changed in any underlying or meaningful way since the Middle Ages — that alienated modern man is the same as unified Medieval man and that only way modern man can get back to God is by becoming Medieval man once again.
The answer to whether this kind of reunification/ressassociation is possible, let alone desirable, rests in the following overarching question — Why did God create man?
Expanded further, Why did God create Creation?
