Thursday, June 28, 2007

Beyond the Human Margin of Politics

Schuon has a thought-provoking essay entitled The Human Margin, in which he points out that there is necessarily a realm in religion which, "while being orthodox and traditional, is nonetheless human in a certain sense." This is because "the Divine influence is total only for the Scriptures and for the essential consequences of the Revelation," which always leaves a "human margin" where this divine influence shades off to the human and "exerts no more than an indirect action, letting ethnic or cultural factors speak."

For example, many of the differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy are at the human margin; they are ethnic and cultural, two different ways of interpreting and living the Christian message -- two different views of the Absolute. As Schuon points out, "It is to this sector or margin that many of the speculations of exoterism belong; orthodoxy is on the one hand homogeneous and indivisible, on the other hand it admits of degrees of absoluteness and relativity."

This is why theological disputes are inevitable even within a given revelation, as man with his relative mind attempts to grapple with the absolute and eternal message. If time is the moving image of eternity, then perhaps theology is man's diary of this movement. It is not in eternity, nor is it quite in time, but in that ambiguous twilit realm where eternity pours into each of us at our own human margin: O-->(k).

I would like to abruptly shift if not grind gears for a moment, as I was thinking yesterday of how this principle might apply to the political realm. For Americans, the Constitution is analogous to revelation -- a quasi-divine message from the Absolute with regard to the best way to order relations between the individual and the group. In fact, because we are American, this is more than an analogy. Our innate sense of a spiritual mission is something that people from other nations do not comprehend -- with the exception of the many essential Americans who were only accidentally born in other nations, such as an Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Irving Berlin, or my own father. Or even me, since I was actually born in the People's Republic of Santa Monica.

Because of the constant drumbeat of sick and twisted leftist anti-American propaganda, I don't really know if it is equally true today, but there was a time when immigrants flocked to America not just for the economic benefits but because of the beacon of spiritual liberty. But the left, because it is thoroughly materialized -- which, you must understand, is a spiritual state -- looks at America only through a crude economic lens.

I would say this is "ironic," but it really isn't. The organizing fantasy of the left is that conservative classical liberals are obsessed with money and wealth, but this is pure projection. It is the left that is obsessed with money and wealth, which it must be, since it knows no realm higher than the material. This is why they cannot understand the phenomena of "Reagan Democrats," or "values voters," or just everyday Americans who -- in the eyes of the left -- "vote against their own economic interests" by being in favor of low taxes and limited government. In short, conservatives are much more motivated by eternal values, not by class envy or leftist schemes of income redistribution.

And this is why the left has such undisguised contempt for middle America and certainly for "red state" America. For the leftist, reality is by definition reduced to the material plane. But you cannot reduce reality to the material plane without a disastrous effect on your own psyche and spirit. It goes without saying that in embracing materialism, you do great violence to your soul, since you essentially foreclose it. But not exactly. Rather, you transform it into something hard, inflexible, and concrete; furthermore, you render yourself impenetrable to the divine light, or to the influx of transcendent forces in general. As always, the rain of grace will fall from the sky, but it will land on the stony soil of your own shrunken and desiccated soul. Anyone with awakened coonvision can see this -- can vividly perceive the interior state of someone whose soul has turned to stone.

It would be bad enough to be in the presence of all these creepy stoners if they were only encased in stone, but something else happens to them on their merry way to hell, and again, it is something I think you'll agree is vividly apparent to one's awakened coonvision. No soul can actually live in a closed state. Rather, like the body, it must always receive "nourishment" from outside sources. In fact, take the analogy of something with which I am intimately familiar, diabetes. If I did not give myself insulin on a daily basis in order to metabolize glucose, my body would soon begin to literally consume itself. In so doing, it would give off a toxic, acidic byproduct known as ketones, which would kill me in a matter of days.

Is there something analogous to ketoacidosis that happens to the leftist mind, by which it suffocates in its own acid? Now that I think of it, it is interesting, is it not, that the left is so very acidotic? When I say this, I obviously cannot get through to the leftist whose soul is in a state of advanced ketoacidosis, such as these typical examples. For one thing, this spiritual acidosis -- like its physical analogue -- causes confusion and eventually delirium.

(An interesting point: one reason why there isn't any controversy about leftist "hate speech" is that so much of it is unprintable as compared, say, to Ann Coulter, who may be polemical but not even remotely similar to the haters of the left, such as a Rosie O'Donnell or the rantings of the most popular leftist websites. The MSM takes Coulter to task for merely taunting John Edwards for being a such a feminized man, whereas the anti-Catholic bigotry of the official bloggers Edwards hired is so vile that it can't even be repeated on TV or printed in any mainstream newspaper. I can't think of any mainstream conservative rhetoric that can't be repeated in the MSM except for self-censoring reasons of political correctness. For example, many things I say are unmentionable in the MSM, not because they're hateful, but because they're true. In fact, you might say that political correctness is the left's corrupt technique for converting truth into hate and rendering it unmentionable.)

When you hit the above link -- and I recommend that you do, if only to firmly understand my point -- pay no attention to the intellectual content, which is obviously nil. Rather, try -- but not too hard, since it is not healthy to go there -- try to discern the spiritual state of the person from whom these "headlines" -- bowel-lines is more like it -- arise. Again, such a person is subject to a continuous flow of "grace," as it were, but it is the inexhaustible satanic grace which allows, say, a Noam Chomsky to write book after tedious book of corrosive bile. Yes, it is the same book over and over, which it must be due to the very nature of satanic grace, which contains no true novelty, just infinite permutations of the satanic message. This is why, for example, left wing radio is so incredibly boring, and why the totalitarian left wants to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" to force-feed their unpopular message to Americans.

This kind of pseudo-novelty is apparently "thrilling" to the vital mind of the materialist; it provides their "intellectual food," just as "transgressive" art provides their spiritual nourishment. Again: the materialist mind, cut off from its source above, will attempt to feed itself from below, which, over time, leads to deeper and deeper states of pathology. This is the true source of what we call the "culture war" in America, as the left necessarily becomes sicker and sicker, but imagines that the movement responsible for this divide is coming from "conservatives."

To cite one obvious example, Barack Obama -- who is increasingly beginning to sound sinister and not just stupid -- spoke the other day of how conservatives have "hijacked faith." Yes, you are hijacking faith if you simply adhere to what the faithful have always believed, which is that marriage is the spiritual union of a man and woman, or that children do best with a mother and father, or that abortion cannot possibly please God. Let's at least be honest -- who is trying to hijack faith to ram through their new sociopolitical agenda?

As I was about to say, I cannot possibly speak to the leftist whose own mind has been fully hijacked -- or lowjacked -- from below. Rather, I can only reach the leftist who is still at the human margin (which I know happens, since I have the emails to prove it). No, not in this case the margin between the divine and human, to which my theological bobservations are addressed. Rather, the margin between the human and the infrahuman; or, if that sounds too harsh and insulting, let us just say, between the human and the post-human -- which is what postmodern secular humanism surely is: an experiment in what it means to violently toss aside what it has always meant to be human, and to try to "transcend" the human state.

But this transcendence is not from above, but from below. It is not actually transcendence, but rebellion. This is why, ironically -- but not really -- the left is the real reactionary movement, since it is always reacting to, and rebelling against, the Divine. In so doing, it comes into contact with intoxicating forces that are greater than the individual, but they are from below, not above.

Returning to the question of the "human margin" and how it applies to politics. Again, if we look at the American Constitution, it is analogous to divine revelation. It is absolute, but it nevertheless shades off into the human margin. In turn, the purpose of the Supreme Court is to determine the point at which the human margin shades off into political heresy, so to speak, into the realm of the "unconstitutional."

There is a "natural" left and right which is healthy and to which no true American should be opposed. This represents the realm of alternative points of view within the Constitution, somewhat analogous to different traditions that cohere around the divine revelation of Christianity. The Constitution allows for a certain latitude, for certain "divergencies within orthodoxy," in which different theologians -- or constitutional scholars -- can hammer out their differences at the human margin.

But at some point in our history -- different people will argue whether it was, say, with FDR's usurpation of federal power, or with the rise of the anti-American left in the 1960s -- the honorable left-hand side of American tradition veered well beyond the acceptable human margin and began embracing doctrines that were frankly extra-constitutional, un-American, and completely at odds with our traditions.

Running out of time here, but the examples are too numerous to mention. For example, America was intended to be a Judeo-Christian nation -- not government, but nation, which is something much deeper, and from which the government derives its just powers. If you argue that America was somehow intended to be a secular nation, or a Muslim nation, or an anti-religious nation, then you are simply un-American. You are "out of bounds."

Smoov left a relevant comment yesterday, which was actually the inspiration for today's post. He wrote,

"Yesterday's 30,000 foot reading included the current New Yorker, wherein an essay contains a casual reference to the recent decsion of America to introduce the practice of torture.

"The Left has fully insinuated this vile slander against their own nation into the global zeitgeist. The 'fact' that Americans are now morally equivalent to Robert Mugabe's thugs or the SS is so entrenched that the likes of Jon Stewart routinely use it as fodder for inane jokes.

"The indecent Left's willingness to sabotage their own nation in such a thoroughgoing manner -- all due to an infantile hatred of the current President -- should elicit a stronger response than it does.

"Call me a torturer publicly and I'll see you in court, and liberate you of half your paycheck for the next 20 years. Do it to your own nation and get published in the New Yorker or knock down 5 or 6 mil a year fronting the Daily Show.

"Where's the public outrage over these diabolical affronts to America?"

Why, it's right here at One Cosmos, where we point out how the Left has ventured well beyond the human margin -- where the bright and gory post-human moon god steps ashore from the sea below, surveys the sinister world he has created, and pronounces that it is bad.


dilys said...

leftist "hate speech" is that so much of it is unprintable

My impression is that leftists are astonishingly adept at the schoolyard perversion of invisible provocation so that the victim of their measures responds, and then is painted as the aggressor.

And you're right on the money IMO about Orthodoxy and Catholicism. I have been beating the drum (received with notable coolness yea outrage) that the relevant discipline to look to is the Corporate Merger, Corporate Cultures rubric. Not theology.

And no, I'm not too dumb to grasp some of the differences in theology and universe-mapping. But they're the presenting data, not the drivers.

Perhaps in the vein of Blake's "If the fool would persist in his folly he would become wise;" if the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches would joyously sound the depths of their own tradition and benignly ignore each other except for sincere vague courtesy, the paths would converge in an organic manner.

Otherwise, as Blogger says, "pctlxvx" to ritual ignorant libel of the other party, religious or political. Cheers for accurate spiritual discernment.

hoarhey said...

"In fact, you might say that political correctness is the left's corrupt technique for converting truth into hate and rendering it unmentionable.) "

Amen to that statement!
And after the most recent political defeat i.e. "immigration reform" when does the next round of legislation begin to shut down the "haters" since PC scorn and accusations of racism don't seem to be working.

Joseph said...

I think rather than a "merger" of Orthodoxy and Catholicism, which in any case is entirely unrealistic, a simple acceptance that the other's is a more or less accurate description of the Absolute would suffice. It is the "mine is the only true view" idea that is simply not compelling.
On the other hand, Schuon was definitely of the view that Catholicism has, in the last 50 years or so, veered beyond the human margin and become heterodox. After Vatican II, many of his disciples were instructed to "convert" to Orthodoxy, or enter Sufism. Therefore, even if a "merger" were desirable, it would be akin to merging the current leftist and conservatives in America.

Gagdad Bob said...

.... bearing in mind, of course, that "God knows best"....

Robin Starfish said...

...the bright and gory moon god of the post-human world steps ashore from the sea below...

Fast Forward

nap on a park bench
family pet gets off the leash
space ride eighteen bucks

aquila said...

...the bright and gory moon god of the post-human world steps ashore from the sea below...

Gee, where have I heard that one before? :-)

joseph said...

I assume you are referring to Catholics and not leftists:)

River Cocytus said...

Hmm, well, dealing with some of the Orthodox theology, a friend who is a Pastor said "They exchange one set of chains for another" (referring to whom the authority comes from.)

But, Protestantism, at least the American variety, has its own set of chains - often it is dependent on the society to provide the conditions in which it may exist. Without these specific conditions it will wither.

Which is a way of saying, I find fewer and fewer young men and women in church - which is interesting, because it means that they being in church was less dependent on the Church being God's vessel of grace and more dependent on the social conditions allowing its 'marketing' to work.

I can see why some have gone to Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, but they have a share of their own issues as well.

Anonymous said...

For someone allegedly interested in the divine, you sound awfully like you want to beat the shit out of someone.

Robin Starfish said...

aquila -

Thanks for the link, haven't read HPL in years.

I see Algernon Blackwood referenced there as well - one of my favorite short stories is The Willows which can be heard on BBC7 (scroll to bottom of page). Or read instead.

For insomniac raccoons.

NoMo said...

Anonywuss - The divine will always be interested in beating the s**t out of evil. Don't kid yourself.

Anonymous said...

Of course Nomo your response underscores that you're not really as interested in the divine as interested in cloaking your aggression in the discourse of the divine.

River Cocytus said...

Well, if they ask for your belt, give them your cloak too, huh?


ximeze said...

Spot-on there bubba.

Don'tcha love how the poke & hide crowd gets niffed when 'someone allegedly interested in the divine' shows an ounce of spirit.

No, no, no! Ya'll gotta be wimpy. Interest in the Divine = lifeforceless. I just gotta believe that those dedicated to God cannot be as alive as ME. Ya'll should just 'turn the other cheek' & lie down so I can walk over you.

Anonywuss indeed.

Where did you learn that 'discourse of the divine' meant a kumbaya Ophrafied kind of thing? Can't we all just get along & be above this?

Snore. Shades of Inty. Same bore, different snore.

Skully said...

Anonymous said...
"Of course Nomo your response underscores that you're not really as interested in the divine as interested in cloaking your aggression in the discourse of the divine."

Ain't no cloakin' about it, bub.

The Divine beats the shit outta evil and those of us who love the Divine beat the shit outta evil.

What part of "beatin' the shit outta evil" do you not comprehend?

Yer not one of them candyass pacifasses are ya?

cousin dupree said...

For someone allegedly interested in the divine, you sound awfully like you want to beat the shit out of someone.

Say, could I use you as a reference?

ximeze said...

Beaky hearts Skully

Anonymous said...

There is something intrinsically retarded about the kind of partisanship here. It's ultimately not incisive or different in any way from the usual BS out there. More of the same death drive, repetition, uninteresting left-right loop, with updated language.

Van said...

Aninnywuss said...
"Of course Nomo your response underscores that you're not really as interested in the divine as interested in cloaking your aggression in the discourse of the divine."

Their existense depends on those who dare to profess values, to also value (misplaced) geniality over justice.

Their little wussie hearts fear justice & laughter most - and cringe in pure terror when they come bound together.

NoMo, Skully & Ximeze - rip 'em a new one!

cousin dupree said...

There is something intrinsically retarded about the kind of partisanship here. It's ultimately not incisive or different in any way from the usual BS out there. More of the same death drive, repetition, uninteresting left-right loop, with updated language.


What do you suggest? We can't exactly follow you, because you're following us.

Magnus Itland said...

It is sad that, after reading a lengthy exposition on how much more civilized conservatism is than the new breed of rabid leftism, people still feel the need to beat the shit out of someone.

Wake me up when pro-globalization demonstrants wreck vegan shops, will ya?

wv: smenita

ximeze said...


Who TALKS like that!??

I don't get it. Are you using that subtle Scanahoovian humor again?

NoMo said...

Yes! I don't remember being so excited by a package at the door -

(and Bill Withers Live)

Hey, BLTN!

Maybe now someone will teach me the secret handshake.

juliec said...

"Wake me up when pro-globalization demonstrants wreck vegan shops, will ya?"

Funniest thing I've read today, Magnus.

It goes hand-in-hand with a thought I had earlier today, in connection with the frustration I've seen so lately amongst conservatives who feel, frankly, unrepresented in politics at the moment. Part of the frustration, for me at least, is a feeling of impotence. We don't take to the streets, or engage in civil disobedience; we know for now that such gestures are futile (at least, if the endless cavalcade of lefty demonstrations are any example), and in any case we have jobs and obligations that don't permit us the luxury to craft giant puppets and elaborate displays. We don't feel the need to vandalize private property, nor to deface public property (which, we are all-too-aware, we have paid for), just because the country doesn't work exactly as we think it should. For now, all we have is discourse, which we use as much as the internet allows (it does seem to be helping somewhat, if todays failure of the immigration bill is any evidence), but frankly at times it is cold comfort.

In short, all most of us can do to fight evil right now, short of joining the military, is to expose it through discourse. If, in the course of exposure, our occasional desire to "beat the shit out of someone" comes through, what of it? I defy you to find any rhetoric here as vile and violent as that which passes for acceptable dialogue as this, for example.

We hate evil. If you have a problem with that, then this isn't the place for you.

Anonymous said...

I suggest this: colonize "the left". If you seek for your ideas to prevail, you must make "the left" think as you think. Only you can design the rhetoric that accomplishes that. When the rhetoric you lay out provides an easy-out for "the left" to feel antagonized by your ideas, you make an enemy, and not a useful enemy, but one which will bog you down in petty debates rather than practically implementing your ideas as a social foundation. My suggestion is make allies with your words. That is why I have said your posts are much more successful at communicating the ideas you have about the one cosmos when you eschew the attacks on "the left", attacks which are guilty of the faults of ad hominem logic. To paraphrase, all politics is building bridges to the divine.

walt said...

Smoov asked, "Where's the public outrage...?" Well, some of it spilled into the Senate this morning. But I realize he was referring to a different sort of diabolical affront.

I don't take those affronts lightly either. While I may have the inner wish to exteriorize someone's, er, "dregs," I generally don't let myself get started along those lines. But there are a couple of things I purposely do.

First, I vote with my money. I try to arrange it so that it does not flow where I don't like it ending up. The "Daily Show" for me is OC; Mr. Stewart gets none of my attention - nor the horse he rides in on, Mr. TV. And I know a fellow that produces clever-but-oh-so-snide cartoons for the New Yorker, but would not buy a copy in order to see his work.

And secondly, I work at living as simply as I can, thereby not participating in the parts of the culture that "affront" me. It is not a Grand Strategy - rather, "a drop in the bucket."

Zi would have reminded us that it says in the I Ching, "Single acts of resistance count."

Cosa linked an article the other day that spoke of Big Change coming from "small changes:"

"It will be a slow process. This is because we do not make change, we simply precipitate it. This is not mere semantics. What we normally think of as change in society, be it a new law or a new fashion, is actually the result of complex processes that have been brewing for generations. New ideas spread slowly, from individuals to a select group, and from there to the broader society, where they are accepted or rejected. This can take many years."

ximeze said...

Oh Lord,
Now here comes the holier than thou.

Van, my beloved Flogger, you're snoozing on the job again.

Wakey-wakey. Time to go to work.

Hey, has blogger lost its mind again?
wv smenita still there

juliec said...

"Colonize the left?"

I suppose there may be a time and a place for that, but to colonize in the way you suggest requires the ability and the interest in deceiving those whose opinions you would sway. Speaking for myself (though I suspect most Raccoons would agree), I wear enough masks in the course of the day (as does everyone); the only one I care to wear online is black and furry. I have no interest in pretending to be other than myself in order to sway people to my way of thinking. The great thing about being here is that I don't have to do that. The reason I come here to read is that Bob and the other Raccoons do not pay lip service to ideals we know to be wrong, in order to perhaps seduce someone into our way of thinking.

In a way, a blog community is like any relationship: it is founded on trust, and has strength because it is not based on a lie. If he misrepresented himself, chances are anyone swayed would be ultimately disillusioned, to the detriment of all.

This blog isn't for the left. In fact, it's fair to say that it isn't even for everyone on the right. I'm sure there are people (and their blogs) who work well as covert operatives, trying to transform liberals to conservatives through gentle manipulation. Good for them, and I hope it works. This is not such a place. I, for one, prefer an establishment where the proprietor wields a Cluebat, as opposed to opiates slipped into the drinks of the unwary.

Skully said...

"If you seek for your ideas to prevail, you must make "the left" think as you think."

As our pal Cosanostradamus would say: "Splorg!"

Now that was funny! Woof! Heh!

A bit of Sailor wisdom from ol' Skully (free!)-
Skip that second bowl of fruit loops.

juliec said...

ximeze, I have the same word veri, and it's on every blog where I've looked at comments in the last half hour. Blogger must be having a seizure.

NoMo said...

Walt - Cosa also likes to quote St Francis (I really love this):

"Do not try to change the World. Change worlds."

To "change worlds" is a small personal step that ultimately results in changing the World.

NoMo said...

Finally a wv for everyone -


juliec said...

Skully how about Froot Loops Straws instead?

ximeze said...

Anony said:
If you seek for your ideas to prevail, you must make "the left" think as you think.

Don't have a clue, do ya.

We think what we think because it is True. People who won't face Truth will never think like us.

Gagdad Bob said...


I'm just repeating what my teachers did for me, which was drive the Truth through my thick skull, not sugarcoat anything or try to "colonize my world." I was antagonized by the Truth until one day I wasn't.

It takes all kinds to make a world, and I can't be other than who I am. I certainly don't seek anyone out, and I only write for those who seem to get something out of it, not for those who don't.

skully said...

That was hilarious! Ha ha!
Good grief! Fruit Loop cereal straws that taste like cereal sludge.
And artificial what does that remind me of?

WV: smenita is hot!

Van said...

What's up with wordverif?
wv:smenita - same one I had before I left work, looks like Magnus got it too.


Van said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Van said...

Van said...
aninnymouse said " must make "the left" think as you think."

You might want to take note that 'must make' and 'think', are pretty mutually exclusive. Your comment is worthless on the whole, but I'll reach back to the beginning for a reply - mainly because it is way more fun than considering what you had to say.

From the very first book of the West, the one that began Western Civilization, the Iliad, book IX, Achilles said to the embassey asking him to be more understanding, to make nice, to accept gifts, build briges and forgive and forget the tresspasses of his king:

"Then thus the goddess-born: "Ulysses, hear
A faithful speech, that knows nor art nor fear;
What in my secret soul is understood,
My tongue shall utter, and my deeds make good.
Let Greece then know, my purpose I retain:
Nor with new treaties vex my peace in vain.
Who dares think one thing, and another tell,
My heart detests him as the gates of hell."

And he said this to his close friend Odysseus [Ulysses], the exemplar of craftiness, of saying one thing while thinking and doing another.

The West was born in fiery debate, and the day we forget that, is when we perish - as these molly coddlers well know.

BTW, those who've been told that Achilles was nuts or pouting, should consider that those who've said such things feel real cozy with our pomofo ninnymouses, and ought to reread the Iliad, particularly book IX. There you'll see the first glimmerings of the value of an individual as opposed to a king, of valuing justice as opposed to public fame and honors - the dawning of the idea of Principles and of questioning authority and public debate.

(Sorry so sparse tonight Ximeze, pesky kids think they rate time. The noive of da little crumb crunchers!)

Ooh! Look! wv:smenita! How original!

Ah! 2nd go, jarewd - ya, I am rude - but very clean.

Van said...

"It is the left that is obsessed with money and wealth, which it must be, since it knows no realm higher than the material."
This one really stuck with me today - not sure why, I mean its not like I didn't know it, or we hadn't touched on it here before... interesting how the 'same' thought come from just a slightly different angle, can seem to break new ground in your grey matter(?!) - the source springs anew.

"...knows no realm higher than the material.", sure, and what is left to aspire to when that is the case? If you keep all your thoughts flat on the table, you don't look up to anything, but around and down towards equivalents and lesser values - valuables. Nothing higher to keep those valuables in perspective with - whichever has your attention at the moment and keep the sensory juices flowing that's da bomb!, till the juices recede, then its off to the summer home, or the hamptons or the newest spouse or whatever. And of course everyone else must secretly desire the same... in fact probably the same things - better make sure to keep them regulated, those greedy sob's!


cosanostradamus said...

St. Francis was actually a little less windy than that; his quote is:

"Don't change the world; change worlds."

There is no try.

Splorg! That was a slow pitch right over the plate...thanks, NoMo!

Behold I have broken the curse of smenita: ebeiw.

It's what smenita smells like when left out too long.

walt said...

Nomo -

By virtue of the principle of living simply, I am compelled to prefer Cosa's version.

NoMo said...

I googled...poorly.

wv: ailghwog (that's what I get)

River Cocytus said...

Transformers... very cool.

It has a few ish's, but it was a wild ride, plus they get in some good C.L. quotes.

And the new transformers? Wow.

Plus, Optimus rocks the hizzy.


Sal said...

JulieC.- you're en fuego !

Joseph- I think "mine is the truest view" would be a better description.

Thank goodness Bob explained Schoun's bonnet bee re: modernism or I'd have to dismiss him for not being able to discern between style and substance re: Vatican II.

Must mull over Dilys's organic convergence theory.

NoMo said...

Re the earlier discussion on the merger of Orthodoxy and Catholicism. To me, the Holy Spirit IS the merger of all the True traditions.

Whatever the Christian tradition of two true believers, when it all comes down and lives are on the line, I am confident that the two will be on their knees, side by side, hand in hand, by the power of the Holy Spirit within them both, proclaiming exactly the same Truth - even to the death.