So the topic de juer on this day in late October Anno Domini 2017 will be the Restoration.
Funny that – as the English would say, given that this is the stated mission of this blog.
Today, this post will be based on a conversation I had with my 10 year old recently about the existence of Heaven and hell. But its rationale is quite applicable to the subject matter at hand.
So here goes.
We start today with information that our modern day Joan of Arc, one Hilary White who has returned from a self imposed sabbatical, returned to the front lines and is ready to give ’em hell.
I say, welcome aboard the HMS Restoration, while raising my right hand sharply, fingers and thumb extended and joined, palm facing down, and placing the tip of the right forefinger on the rim of the visor slightly to the right of my right eye. The outer edge of the hand is barely canted downward so that neither the back of the hand nor the palm is clearly visible from the front. The hand and wrist are straight, the elbow inclined slightly forward and the upper arm horizontal.
Sorry about that. All these years and flashbacks still…
But back to the subject at hand. In her manifesto notifying the forces of Christiandom of her return, (see here), Hilary writes this in her lede paragraph:
They took the citadel for this reason and no other, to divide the world. Every battle has been formulated, instigated and aggressively prosecuted by them. Reports from inside confirm that other less ambitious men in the Curia are shocked at how intransigent, how un-appeasable these people and their agenda are. They are not playing the Vatican game. There has been no hesitation, no conciliation, no quarter given, no prisoners taken, and there’s been nothing subtle about it. And sights are being set on more targets as we speak.
Reading this passage, and after the first “so what else is new” thoughts finished running through my head, I began to think about why that would NOT BE THE CASE.
In other words, why TeamFrancis would not “not be taking any prisoners”.
Or in other words, why he would be acting IRRATIONALLY.
Everybody knows that Francis is out to “change” the “post-conciliar church”. He can’t change the Catholic Church, (YES?) …any more than he can change the laws of mathematics and make 2+2=5, because that’s not in his power. But I digress. His head honcho, ghost writer and expert on all things amorous including the art of the basiare, suaviare, et osculare and even basiatio, one Victor “heal me with your lips” Fernandez told “everyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear” just that. (see here)
And yet, this new information of “tranformative intent” of Bergoglio and TeamFrancis is still received with an air of shock and disbelief.
So this got me thinkin… why?
After a few short moments of reflection, dare I say discernment, one possible answer popped into my head. And that answer is:
Because that’s the way it is supposed to be.
And why is this so?
If we accept the premise that the GOOD is a derivative of the TRUE, and we also accept that the TRUTH is just a part of “the WAY and the TRUTH and the LIFE, then we see that the GOOD comes from Him.
Furthermore, we also know that our Creator created us in His own image. Here is that piece of the puzzle:
And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.
Given the above, God also provided mankind with, what an economist would term a “competitive advantage” over His other creation. By creating mankind in His image, he gave mankind the ability to reason. Given that mankind was given this ability, and given that God also has this ability, it follows logically that mankind is in fact created in God’s likeness, or rather more in God’s likeness than anything else that we have been able to identify so far.
Circular logic, you say? Nope!
Again given the above, we can also identify one of the attributes that mankind possesses which is also possessed by Him: FREE WILL.
Given that people possess free will, they are able to make choices based not only on instinct, but on a “reasoned basis”. In other words, people can make a conscious choice to consume now, or defer gratification to a later time based on a reasoned, thought out cognitive process. His ability to “think abstractly” as to the future consequence that his action imply, can, but don’t have to be, a part of the decision making process.
Given that mankind can make choices, he has the ability to make GOOD choices or not GOOD choices.
One way, and the proper way to define a NOT GOOD CHOICE is a CHOICE where the GOOD is ABSENT.
And to quickly move to the ultimate “absence of GOOD”, this is defined as EVIL. Here is how a theological explanation would read: As such, evil is not something that exists in itself; it is merely the absence of the good. (see here)
So we now can see that our Creator, making us in His own image, gave His creation the ability to chose between the GOOD and the absence of the GOOD, i.e. EVIL. And why would he give us this choice? The reason is that He want’s to know whether we want to be with Him or not… would be my guess.
Now some of you are saying, “Hey Armaticus, your argument is starting to careen down the supernatural, theological, non-objective turnpike”. What about those who do not believe in the supernatural?
So to get us back onto the OBJECTIVE natural road, lets see if any of our purported atheist/agnostic/undefined friends can get us back on the road to “material reality”.
Over in our post titled, Secularists Debunk Francis’ JunkTheology™ – The Primer, we transcribed this passage from a Stefan Molyneux (our resident ‘atheist’ here) video where he spoke with Dr. Duke Pesta. Here is that passage: (emphasis and comments added)
Dr. Duke Pesta: The modern world, absent all the things that have gone away, you know, God, faith, the superstructures of theology and belief, the modern world wants absolute freedom without any consequences. And those are the two things that you can’t have. (Objectively “mutually exclusive”) If you sum the bible up, you sum the whole of Christian tradition up, you sum more or less the whole of world religion up, theology up for more or less 5000 years, it comes down to that, doesn’t it. (Theological confirmation of Objective “mutual exclusivity”) That you can’t be free and be without consequences in your culture. In that they don’t go together. You can be free and without consequences, or you can have consequences and no freedom, but they don’t go together. And the story of Christianity, the story of Christ is the story of genuine freedom comes from a recognition of consequence. (Secular debunking of FrancisMercy ) And call it heaven, call it hell, call it carrot/stick, call it true false, call it life and death, call it the jungle versus civilization. All those are fair. The reality is, as we’ve talked about today, can they exist in the current climate. Everything tends towards the jungle now. Nothing tends towards the consequence, so I’m like you.
So what Dr. Pesta is explaining above is that you have consequences that arise from making decision, i.e. the exercise of free will. Those decisions have consequences. Those decisions that are not GOOD (i.e. absent the GOOD) do not have GOOD consequences. One way to define the not GOOD consequences is by its opposite, i.e. the term BAD. The ultimate BAD is EVIL. Those EVIL consequences, when taken collectively result in a state that is termed HELL.
So what we have above is a LOGICAL PROOF for the OBJECTIVE existence of HELL.
Concluding, if the above is correct, and your humble blogger thinks that it is, the following implications can be inferred:
- EVIL, such as the Bergoglian JunkTheology™ and the entire Francismagisterium will always be with us in one form or another.
- The reason EVIL will always be with us is because it is essential for the exercise of FREE WILL.
- Since we were created in the image of God, and therefore enjoy the attributes that God possesses. One of those attributes is FREE WILL.
- Possessing FREE WILL carries with it and implicit choice and accompanying consequences.
- In order for humans to be able to exercise their FREE WILL, there has to be a choice.
- That CHOICE must be comprised of the GOOD – with GOOD resulting consequences and consequences where the GOOD is absent, i.e. EVIL. Otherwise we would not have a choice.
- Given that a human is free to chose EVIL, there are consequence that results from those choices. The ultimate consequence for making EVIL choices is the state of HELL, where the EVIL-doers receive their JUST reward.
And I cannot confirm whether this entails the receipt of an accordion, some other musical instrument or anything at all…
But that’s not the end of the story.
The downstream implications of the above definitional rationale are that for the GOOD to triumph, only one GOOD person needs to exist.
Think Twelve Angry Men…
The reason being…
For EVIL to triumph, the EVIL doers must eliminate ALL GOOD. And this is the case simply due to the definition of EVIL, i.e. absence of GOOD.
Let that sink in for a minute or two…
If we now look at the initial Hilary White paragraph that I have put up at the top of this page, we can now see why the following is the case:
There has been no hesitation, no conciliation, no quarter given, no prisoners taken, and there’s been nothing subtle about it. And sights are being set on more targets as we speak.
What is playing itself out now is nothing short of the battle between GOOD and EVIL, where EVIL has gotten the upper hand.
EVIL realizes, whether consciously or not, that it cannot allow any good to exist. i.e. must eradicate ALL GOOD, if it is to “survive”.
Note bene: And here we are talking about “surviving” out in the open and having the institutional power to control the resources and influence the post-conciliar decision making process. Please keep in mind that we are dealing with post-Modernists, functional Marxists and a whole assortment of sexual deviants and perverts who want to continue to maintain a standard of living to which they have grown accustomed.
Notice I say survive. I say survive because EVIL can’t triumph. It exits only because it is needed in order for humans to have a choice. But the downside of this implication is that EVIL will always be with us for as long as humans need to exercise their free will, until the end of time and the Second Coming.
On the other hand, GOOD has already triumphed. It will win the ultimate battle, and win it simply by its definition.
Or I explained to my 7 year old: Because that is how God created the world.
Which leaves only one question open really: Where will you be after the Final Judgment?
And to go theological here in closing, Our Lord also promised us that…
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matt 16:18)
And the above must hold, regardless who the current Peter or FalsePeter is.
Have a nice weekend.
UPDATE 00:15 28 October 2017
And then there is this on EWTN: