Saturday, January 06, 2007

The Neo-Traditional Post-Postmodern Circle to Premodernity and Back

Yes, Yes, I hear you. I realize that there's a substantial proportion of the raccoon population that is sick of the word "Integralist." It was not my intention to spend several posts dwelling down there in that two-dimensional opinion space, but I do not plot these things out ahead of time, and I do require blogfodder for my daily brood. It has to come from somewhere. I no longer have time to read books, and once Future Leader wakes up, the daily distractions begin.

That's why I've come to enjoy blogging so much -- the silence and darkness of the early morning, sitting down and waiting for inspiration -- a little merciful K from O! I don't have much time to prepare, and there are no second drafts, so I pretty much have to light on the first thing that catches my attention. It might be a comment by a reader, or a post from one of my favorite sites, such as American Digest, Dr. Sanity, or American Thinker, or some kernel of an idea for an idea that floated into my noodle the day before, but I basically have to just grab it and run.

Now that I think about it, it's rather interesting, in a Polanyi-esque sort of way -- the idea that we are able to non-consciously intuit the full implications of the kernel of a potentially fruitful idea before we have ever worked them out in any conscious or explicit way. As philosophers go, I hold Polanyi in the highest regard, and believe him to have developed the only philosophy qua philosophy -- i.e., not a theology -- that effectively counters and transcends the plague of deconstuctionism, the latter of which I believe to be a somewhat inevitable, if malodious, development in man's cognitive tool shed. Deconstructionism is literally an adolescent phase in our collective evolution, a weed that sprouted up in the gap between man's pre-critical understanding of the cosmos -- which is to say, the underlying and overarching whole of reality -- and our post-critical understanding of it.

I am not a professional philosopher, so there may well be others, but Polanyi's is the most clear articulation of a post-critical philosophy that I have ever encountered. Furthermore, once you have understood Polanyi, you can then move on to a post-critical mystical theology in a rather seamless way -- which was perfect for the absurcular needs of my book. Because once you have a post-critical theology, then you may circle back to the origins of religion and understand it in an entirely new way -- you may, to paraphrase or possibly plagiarize Eliot, "return to the beginning and know it for the first time." I don't know what to call this new-old phase, because I'm not sure there is a name for it. Call it "neo-traditionalism."

This exactly mirrors my own personal evolution. I won't say that I was ever a deconstructionist per se. For one thing, looking back on it, I can see that embracing such a cynical philosophy that rejects absolute truth is entirely foreign to my nature. Nevertheless, throughout my formal miseducation, this was the backdrop, the culture, the milieau that one could not help imbibing.

Interestingly, this pernicious philosophy doesn't have to have any "content" for it to burrow its way into your soul and begin doing its damage. Rather, one must merely internalize the stance, which is skeptical if not cynical, world-weary, and always ready to prove the superiority of the mind that can disprove anything with mere reason -- a reason that is detached from intellection and thereby become infrahuman, or monstrous, killing God but destroying man in the bargain. Deconstruction is a magic tool that allows the most bovine intellect to imagine itself superior, merely because it can rebelliously dispute the adults on its own adolescent level. It is no wonder that most people don't know how to counter it except, for example, to hold up a cross and insist in the face of such perverse reason that "We preach Christ crucified! He is risen! Now get behind me, satan!"

Naturally, back when I spent my spore time in the moldy academic mildew, I would have probably contemptuously dismissed such an unfungal person to the mulchroom. But now that I have completed the cosmic circle, I understand them entirely. Now, if someone were to ask me if I believe in the literal resurrection, I could say "sure." And yet, somehow "literal" does not mean literal. Hard to describe -- call it "transliteral" or "metaliteral." But sure enough, when I circled back to the origins of Christianity, I found capacious souls that had already beaten me to it -- people such as Origen or Pseudo-Dionysius, who already had a very post-modern cosmic view of things. Thus, within the very heart of paleo-tradition I discovered the neo-tradition that had been there from the start! Such are the miracles of revelation.

Look at what Origen -- who lived between 180 and 254 -- had to say about the interpretation and understanding of scripture, for it is extremely subtle and sophisticated: "[T]o those who are at the stage of infancy and childhood in their interior life... it is not given to grasp the meaning of these sayings..." Later, he says that "divine scripture makes use of homonyms; that is to say, they use identical terms for describing different things." He then distinguishes this capacity from mere reason -- i.e., he is already postcritical -- by referring to the faculty of spiritual gnosis (not to be confused with gnosticism) "by which we go beyond things seen and contemplate something of things divine and heavenly, beholding them with the mind alone, for they are beyond the range of bodily sight."

But "the soul is not made one with the Word of God and joined with Him until such as time as all the winter of her personal disorders and the storm of her vices has passed so that she no longer vacillates and is carried about with every kind of doctrine." In short, being tethered to the Absolute, as reflected in scripture, is the cure for a hypertrophied and stupidly curious reason, a centerless deconstruction that "carries the mind about with every kind of doctrine."

Or consider the great Dionysius (c. 500 AD), who cautioned that the fruits of mystical contemplation are beyond the rationalizing intellect. They are protected from "the uninitiated, by whom I mean those attached to the objects of human thought, and who believe there is no superessential reality beyond, and who imagine that by their own understanding they know him who has made darkness his secret place."

To reach the summit of our being we must "leave behind the senses and the operations of the intellect, and all things sensible and intellectual, and all things in world of being and non-being, that you might rise up unknowingly toward the union with him who transcends all being and all knowledge." Here is "where the pure, absolute, and immutable mysteries of theology are veiled in the dazzling obscurity of the secret silence, outshining all brilliance with the intensity of their darkness, and surcharging our blinded intellects with the utterly impalpable and invisible fairness of glories surpassing all beauty."

This, my fellow nocktrinical marysophicals, is a man who knew all about O-->K, a man who was post-postmodern before there was even modernity. Or to put it succinctly, a man, properly so-called, a Raccoon, a brother under the pelt! Woo woo!

A final orthoparadoxical Dionysian ode to O, only slightly altered:

"Ascending yet higher, we maintain that O is neither soul nor intellect; nor has he imagination, opinion, speech, or understanding; nor can he be expressed or conceived, since he is neither number nor order; nor greatness nor smallness; nor equality nor inequality; nor similarity nor dissimilarity; neither is he immovable, nor moving, nor at rest; neither has he power nor is power, nor is he light; neither does he live nor is he life; neither is he essence, nor eternity nor time; nor is he subject to intelligible contact; nor is he knowledge nor truth, nor kingship, nor wisdom; neither one nor oneness, nor divinity nor goodness, nor is he Spirit according to our understanding, nor anything else known to us or to any other beings of the things that are or the things that are not; neither does anything that is know him as he is... neither can the reason attain to him, nor name him, nor know him, for O is free from every limitation and beyond them all."

And yet, this inexhaustible void became flesh. And we speak of, in, and through it continuously. For how could it be otherwise, without being other than wise?


Anonymous said...

I'm not even going to try to translate the experience I just had down into words.

Dionysius just unlocked something big in me.

No words.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

This post brings to mind the "Rapture" metioned in scripture(where Jesus takes his own from the earth 7 years before the end-time).

What's your take on this? Literal? Transliteral? Metaliteral? Or, perhaps none of the above?

I find it one of the most striking and specific elements of Christian doctrine.

Anonymous said...

I myself have penned a short treatise on the subject of the rapture. It is naturally difficult to explain in a short comment, but if you study the matter closely with a sufficient dose of psilocybin, I believe the key lies in understanding the perpetual "rupture" of Bob Dobbs -- specifically, one must ask What is the symbolic meaning of his truss?

Anonymous said...

>>"the soul is not made one with the Word of God and joined with Him until such as time as all the winter of her personal disorders and the storm of her vices has passed so that she no longer vacillates and is carried about with every kind of doctrine."<<

Oh yes - the mistake made by so many "materialist Christians" (and those of other faiths)is in believing we are all born with a fully developed soul.

To an extent, such a belief can obviously distract one from the personal effort needed to nurture, develop the soul.

Anonymous said...

As I let slip everything I thought I knew,
I fear the dark night of the soul comes next.


Anonymous said...

If you have the willingness to step into it, you will also find the capacity to move through it to the other side.

Anonymous said...

The good news, 'another bob', is that you will have a new capacity to deal with what comes in the dark night.

The bad news is that your new capacity means that you will be dealing with crap the likes of which you can't imagine.

But hey . . .

ximeze said...


Welcome the the next level(sega!)

Just keep in mind, when you think you're going nuts, as the whole existentialda gets arranged in a new order: you now have a target painted on your back. Things seen & unseen are gonna mess with you.

Coraggio! Forza!

We stand with you.

Anonymous said...

He whom God calls, he enables.

You may face new things which may be very difficult -they seem. But the Lord is with you, and his life within you, is that which overcomes the world.

This same life, is the life that God raised him from the Dead with. His righteousness is yours now to stand in, and not your own.

Soul combat advice for believers:

"Breaking the Power" by Liberty Savard -an ex-rabid feminist.


Anonymous said...

Is the Rapture so much more amazing that raising from the dead?

I wonder.

The sign of Jonah!


Anonymous said...

We are with you, Another Bob, as you enter your Dark Night. It is but a Doorway to the Divine. Integralism is yours. Fear and pain is there, yes. But also Trust, Light, Joy inexpressible, Rebirth. Attachment to the Divine. Exquisite Fruit. Know you are not alone. We are with you. He is with you. His love faileth not, is Eternal. Trust as a child trusts His Father. His arms gently enfold you as You look in His Eyes and Know there is no Dark Night of Your soul so deep that His Love won't shine through all the more to Touch You, Transform You. He is waiting for You. Touch Him.

Blessings in Your Transcendence, AB.

- PrincessSpirit -

Anonymous said...

For AB & Anonymous:

"Unshakable Faith is faith that has been shaken. Unquenchable Joy is joy that has been quenched. Unbreakable Love is love that has been broken. Brokenness. Then Communion." -Alan E. Nelson

- PrincessSpirit -

Anonymous said...

I like your good news and bad news reporting of the dark night.
The most accurate and succinct I have read.

Anonymous said...

Ben, thanks for the compliment.

Actually, I think all of material life is a sort of good news/bad news proposition.

Anonymous said...

"And yet, this inexhaustible void became flesh. And we speak of, in, and through it continuously."

I tremble at the power of that Void. It shakes my physical being violently when I subject my soul to it. I fear it more than all the boogey-men of pretenders and their arguments. It is Deep Heaven, not a playground.

As the placard over the dark hole of Hell may proclaim "abandon hope...," the somber invitation to Heaven is, "nothing is impossible." That turns my knees to jelly, bows my pride, and changes me.

"...the rod for the back of fools" is the chastisement for wrong thinking. The " uspeakable and full of glory," calls to the soul and heart.

Why play around in thoughts when Deep Heaven is calling? And like Princess observes, the Communion is found in the unspoken fellowship of the soul and its journey, not in agreeing on every point, jot and tittle.

Worshiping words is less than experiencing Logos in its unwritten form.

And heck, I don't even know what I'm writing. It's just good to be here, 'mongst the most diverse group of 'coons whose good humor abides and whose longsuffering allows the likes of me to bustle along with the gang on their trip up to Raccoon Point.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of good news/bad news, I spotted an absolutely beastly revelation in the Wikipedia entry for "raccoons." Needless to say, a Beaglehole is a man of his word, but if you don't believe me, just investigate for yourself, if you have the stomach. It is the very last sentence of the blighted article, and reads, misspellings intact:

"Raccoons has extremely large penis which are used as an appetizer and or orderve."

Anonymous said...

The idea of the "rapture" is a perfect example, it seems to me, of an all too literal understanding of scripture. It is akin to Paul's reference to baptism for the dead, which the Mormons have taken the literal idea to its logical, and ridiculous (I once vicariously baptized about 500 people named Maria--no last name--in a Mormon temple), conclusion. "The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life".

Anonymous said...

Col. Beaglehole-
Beastly indeed! Zounds!

Anonymous said...

Beaglehole old boy;
by whom? Does it say?
Then it's no wonder the memories of a coonman such as yourself have been seared into the psyche of Dame Edith, orderves and all.

Now come to think of it, I seem to remember a night when Dupree was adding some additions to the Wikipedia website on the computer he got through algores “everbody gits a computer” gubmint supply program. Hmmm.

Anonymous said...

"Raccoons has extremely large penis which are used as an appetizer and or orderve."

OK. So what's the problem?

Anonymous said...

Beaglehole, MUST YOU?

If you insist on being this gauche in public, then all I can say is:

No wonder then you have been clamoring to be admitted to this One Raccoon Cosmic group.

Anonymous said...

Dionysius sounds like someone who had an influence on the Muslims. Beyond everything; not knowable. etc. Sounds like Allah. My God isn't so abstract.

No thanks

someone who doesn't usually post anonymously

Anonymous said...

Will said:

"The bad news is that your new capacity means that you will be dealing with crap the likes of which you can't imagine."

Speaking of this crap the likes of which you can't imagine -

I've been getting some rather unsettling visits from baphomet over the past few weeks.

He has been "appearing" in my consciousness and my dreams.

He comes offering power and immortality. All he asks in return is that I submit to his will.

I've told him I'm not interested and that I submit only to The One. But he is persistent.

So I'll say it again for all to hear:

unholy abomination, I will never give in to you or your tempations. I will never accept anything you offer. I reject your lures of power and immortality.

My physical body, emotional body, mind, soul and spirit are the property of The Lord. My will is subordinate only to Him.

I come from The Nameless One, and to Him alone will I return.

I was born to fulfill God's Will, and when His Will is Done, I shall die.

My true power and immortality comes from The Nameless One alone. Nothing you can offer will ever come close to matching the gifts God has already bestowed upon me.

I will Realize my Self, and master my fears. I will overcome the burdens I was given. My cross to bear will become lighter with every passing breath. With the passing of each holy instant I return to The Lord whom I have never left.

My burdens are mine alone to bear. No matter how challenging they may be, I accept them.

baphomet, evil beast, there is no home for you in my fears or desires.

I will never give in to you.

Stop invading my consiousness, my dreams, my ego and my soul. Take your vile tempatations elsewhere.

I will except no savior but God, for all of time and eternity.

I see you, demon, for what you are. You are my fears and desires. You are the unholy manifestation of my ego run amok.

And I speak to you now, baphomet, egoic monster, in the name of the Most Holy One.

As I submit my ego to the will of the Lord, you too shall subordinate yourself to His Will. You will submit yourself to The Nameless One and praise His Name alone.

As an agent of God and a conduit for His power and wisdom, I AM your master.

Anonymous said...

To all who may be interested.

I just posted some spiritual warfare information on my blog.

It is a small foothold, a grab onto some of the issues discussed today.


Anonymous said...


Granted I just spent an hour writing about my "visits" from baphomet.

But covering yourself in the blood of Christ?

That's just crazy talk. :)

Anonymous said...

It's very strange how similar my rant against temptation was to the prayers you post on your blog, Luke.

Coming from a guy who knows little about formal Christianity, it is a true testament to the universality of the spiritual journey.

Anonymous said...

Well, they reminded me of each other, due to the afore mentioned similarity.

So I thought another example might be useful.


Anonymous said...

Ed Murphy's "Handbook for Spiritual Warfare" is cool.

It is a tome, in a way, but useful in that he includes much history in the beginning.

Ed used to be a professor at San Jose Christian College, which is now William Jessup University (Rocklin, CA) -and he lives nearby with his wife.

Although, they recently got back from a long trip to Africa.


Anonymous said...

Do you know anything about baphomet, Luke?

I'm curious why the corrupted parts of my being would manifest in this specific way.

Anonymous said...

Oh, this could be a long session!

Real summarized -sometimes it is because you have had previous occult experimentation or experiences in your life.

Other times it is just that the Devil and his minions want to scare the you know what out of you.

Such feints also can occur prior to moments of become free of things -they don't want you to be free.

In either case, they are liars and have no power over Christ.

You may wish to check with the folks at:

-If in fact you really need some counselling.

Sometimes, due to past activities or experimentation, by yourself or other family members, or ancestors, darkness can attach itself to your life.

Naturally grumpy they are -about you being free in Christ.

But having said that -they cannot win against Christ.

Did you try the prayer in faith?

-Only curious about that -not insistent. I have, however, found it to be very useful at times.


Anonymous said...

Just remember,

They are like bullies. Get in your face, yell, huff and puff, and try to back you down.

But you have the big "equalizer" sixgun of Christ.

They don't want you to know you can draw your weapon in prayer and faith and stomp them out of the way in your life.

So they bloviate and throw smoke and lightning and fear and such, just to keep you off the point.

Focus! Stay on point!

Where God was leading you to go -go. Where they get in your way -give a headshot in faith by Christ.

It is merely a ruse to occupy your time and attention, and shift focus off God.


Anonymous said...

Sorry if I was unclear, Luke.

At est, you missed my point. At worst you are the Fundamentalist, self-righteous narcissist that everyone else here seems to think you are.

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now.

I was simply curious why it was the form of baphomet that came into my consciousness, as opposed to a different form.

I had never heard of baphomet beforehand, and had to do a lot of googling to figure out what it actually was that I was "seeing."

Maybe it's something I picked up from Mediatations on the Tarot that I just didn't realized at the time.

But I found it odd that my egoic thoughts and temptations took on this specific form.

Is there anything unique about this specific demon that would bring him into play here?

I'll phrase my question in a couple of different ways so it's more clear:

1) Traditional / Mythical

In the higher spirit world, what specific unredeemed aspect of my soul was baphomet drawn to?

2) Psychological

Why did my fears and desires take the specific form of temptation from baphomet as opposed to any other of the infinite possibilities it could have taken?

3) Spiritual / Mystical

What does baphomet symbolize, both above and below? And how does this meaning relate to the current state of my being, both above and below?

Anonymous said...

So, you seem to consider the Warfare Prayer something outside your reality?

It sometimes causes spirits to manifest -as they don't wish to see people get free.

Perhaps a Jungian psychologist could go on for days about the "symbolism" here.

I do not know you well enough to know why this would be the particular imagery. However, I am thinking that since it is a rather recognisable form, that this is why it "works" for you.

"In the higher spirit world, what specific unredeemed aspect of my soul was baphomet drawn to?"

Frankly, any of them. Also, it may not even be this character, but one who is imitating him for "fun" to toss you off track in considerations of him, rather than God. (A pretty stock and basic feint) In that sense it does not matter which, only that you go beyond this.

Again, what you are (sort of) asking me is to analyse you from afar with respect to this incident.

What does Baphomet symbolise? From the hip -Satan. From the history I was able to look briefly at just now -various forms of that across differing associated cultures.

Unfortunately, my library is in my storage locker, as I am preparing to move.

I can, however go dig around in there this week and see what comes up -provided you have no giant urgency.

Specifics on Baphomet are somewhat circular -as they refer to his other names in other cultures. Basically -the god of this world -again refers to Satan himself.

My "guess" and forgive me, Bob and other professionals, is that this is a very recognisable symbol you've picked up someplace.

For other people I've talked to, they do not get imagery so much as fear and randomly fearful nightmares occur.

These things are loosely labeled "oppression" rather than "possession".

Still a feint to get your heart looking in other directions from God.

The analysis of your state of being (without actually really talking with you in person) is transition.

You're growing across a gap of somekind into something greater.

Baphomet and crew prefer this not occur. They manifest to distract you, or for some it is depression, or nightmares, fear, etc. etc.

In other words -look at where you were going when he started bothering you -and go that way -which is where he does not want you to go. He lies.

Ask God what its about, his Holy Spirit can tell you more clearly than Luke can.

Just for general background...

Luke was raised Catholic, but became a Christian due to some real Christians of many denominations, including but not limited to:

Catholic, Charismatic Catholic, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Methodist, Foursquare, Aseembly of God, and non-denominational.

My focus comes from nearly 30 years of hard Bible study and historical study, mixed with philosophy and ancient languages. -Those are my "hobbies" and not my profession. Professioanlly, I am an analyst (criminal and financial) and have done wire taps and other technically similar things.

Thats the Cliff's notes on it, anyway.


Anonymous said...

Glad I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I guess it was a just a matter of style.

Anonymous said...


A good book for me to check -just for the entire volume of reference in the footnotes on ancient variations of things like Baphomet and Mendes, etc. is "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop.

The ancient history in the book is cool!

But, I loaned it out -so I could go arm twist it back tomorrow or the next day. :)

But I suspect it will do essentially the same thing -Baphomet refers to Mendes, which refers back to Baphomet by various steps.

Gut level -the evils in life -the three basics out of the Bible.

The world
The flesh
The devil

So, in a way, this is a classic battle of light and darkness, using a classic symbol for evil, and is classic in that you are center stage in the conflict.

God will lead you out. Just understand the enemy is prone to "psyops" to keep you away from the truth.


Anonymous said...


I think I see both your point and Luke's here, having been in each position. I have tried to understand why the demons hit me as they do, and I have tried claiming the Blood of Jesus as my protection. When I are under full-scale attack, I need protection and not understanding! After the attack has subsided comes the time to seek understanding: "What is the hook in me that the demon(s) were able to hold onto?"

Pleading the Blood is not intellectually satisfying, but the demons cannot abide it! Try it!!


Anonymous said...


If you've not read, "The Adversary" by Mark Bubeck and Ed Murphy's Handbook, I recommend them.


NoMo said...

Luke - You're being baited. Don't get sucked into this baphomet crap.

Anonymous said...

Luke is going to dinner.

I will take your remarks under advisement, Cosmo Nomo.


NoMo said...

"Now Rocky Raccoon, he fell back in his room only to find Gideon's bible.

Gideon checked out, and he left it no doubt to help with good Rocky's revival."

Keep it simple...

Dlanor said...

"And yet, this inexhaustible void became flesh. And we speak of, in, and through it continuously. For how could it be otherwise, without being other than wise?"


Mind Or Machine As Source Of Moral Reference:

One may prefer to believe that God is micro-attentive to one’s prayers. Should one be disappointed were God to have freed up God’s imagination by delegating mundane attentiveness to some sort of computerized or logarithmic function that is programmed to respond or not to respond, just as God ordinarily would have inclined were God to have been more directly attentive?

If it is only some sort of Supernatural Program or Nature that is attentive to mortals or to material interaction, then to what extent may the experience of such attentiveness be lost insofar as potential effect on God? Is it God whom we believe directly expresses cares through us, or is it only God’s assigned program?

Regardless of extent to which God may supernaturally delegate, would not the attentiveness of any programmed function likely be duplicative of the attentiveness God would have afforded, even had God not made the delegation?

Do the choices we express require the involvement and attention of some sort of synchronizing free will? Or, may such “choices” be dictated and pre-programmed by a supernatural machine? Or, may such choices be randomly generated within parameters controlled by a supernatural machine? Or, may “God” consist of supernaturally overlapping layers and degrees of attentive consciousness?

To me, the “God” concept serves two main purposes: First, to inspire us with a sense of self worth; second, to inspire us to cooperate in respect of a sense of enlightened empathy.

IN TERMS OF INSPIRING US with a meaningfully worthwhile sense of godly-esteem, to my taste, the usefulness of God as a concept would remain equivalent, even were “God” to consist of supernaturally overlapping layers and degrees of an attentively conscious involvement with us.

IN TERMS OF PROVIDING A REFERENCE for inspiring us to come to reason together in search of meaningfully enlightened empathy, to my taste, the usefulness of God as a concept would remain equivalent, regardless of whether: The choices we express require the involvement and attention of some sort of synchronizing, Godly-free-will; or our “choices” are fixed and pre-programmed by some sort of Deity-designed machine; or our choices are randomly generated within parameters controlled by some sort of supernatural machine; or “God” consists of supernaturally overlapping layers and degrees of attentive consciousness.

Any reasonable way you slice it, “God” remains relevant.

Anonymous said...

joan -

Your words sent shivers up my back; they were the shortest direct conduit to the Logos for what I needed to 'hear' right now. Few words = profundity.

Deep Heaven - that's going over the door jamb to remind me where I'm headed each morning. And over the bedstand as a suggested dream destination.

Thanks. This little village never ceases to amaze.

Anonymous said...

Then thank C.S.Lewis, who planted that bit of holy fear into me in, "The Last Battle."

"They have called down Deep Heaven on their heads..." still sends shivers up my spine, too.

Van Harvey said...

Will said..."Oh yes - the mistake made by so many "materialist Christians" (and those of other faiths)is in believing we are all born with a fully developed soul."

As well as the political arm for expressing that, the progressives. One of the absolute worst messages of progressivism was that we are all equal in fact already.

'Maintaining standards? Virtuous behavior? Manners? psshaw, just tools of class oppressions.

Everybody is already as good and deserving as everybody else, we just need to train them in new strategies for expressing that.'

Nothing stops spiritual progress deader than thinking there's no need to progress.

Anonymous said...

What the heck did "dlannorenrag" say? I'm not so advanced, need translation.

PSGInfinity said...

I'm reading your work with mounting horror. I'm shocked, saddened, and frankly I feel betrayed. To think thank younger folk (I'm 39) will have almost no chance of seeing the Divine through music is just so, so sad...