Thursday, December 13, 2007

The Cause and Cure of History (11.17.10)

As Colonel Beaglehole has commented from deep inside his religious opium den for the elite, it's amazing that any history can get done at all when you're not even allowed to begin the barmy enterprise with the correct bloody premise. I mean, if you don't know what Man is or what he is for, then what difference does it make what climbs and crimes he accompliced in the past? He might have done this, or he might have done that, but since he has no essence and no cosmic role, then it really doesn't matter, does it? Now where's my blasted hookah?!

But Christopher Dawson begins with the idea that man is the metaxy, or "bridge," between the material and spiritual worlds. Didn't I sow psalmthing psimilar in the Book of Petey? Yes, here it is -- page 133, right next to the picture of that cute little baby caterpultering into a buddhafly:

"I have a very specific view of history in mind, and it's quite different from that of the typical historian who wrongs history while writing it. First of all, historians -- contemporary ones, anyway -- no longer presume to know the 'purpose' of history. Without question they tell us about causes and motivations within history, but they steer quite clear of asking what is the actual point of history. And understanding the point of history is admittedly quite difficult -- if not impossible -- if you don't know what a human being is."

Indeed, "the problem is only compounded if you are only a human being working with merely human sources, for how then can you stand outside the flow of historical events and gain any perspective on history, or have any stable frame of reference? If the historian is just a historically conditioned product of history, why should we pay any attention to him at all?"

The point is that 99% of historians would ironically reject Dawson because of his religiosity and "subjectivity," when he is the one who is being -- or at least trying to be -- objective, by placing history in its proper cosmic and spiritual context -- by understanding the flow of horizontal events in the light of an eternal vertical standard. This is in accord with Tomberg, who described history as a sort of "whirlpool" created by two opposing streams of influence, one horizontal, the other vertical:

"The spiritual-cultural history of mankind is the result on the one hand of the causes which are to be found in space and time, and on the other hand of the causes which are not to be found there, which are of a timeless and spaceless nature." Or, in the pcilly but accurate words of Terence McKenna, history is a "burst of static" between monkeys and God, as the "eschatological object" at the end of time -- call it O, if you like -- "mitigates and transforms the forward flow of entropic circumstance."

According to wikipedia, the metaxy is the "in-between" or "middle ground" between the divine realm and mankind. Eric Voegelin (who was influenced by Dawson) used the term "to mean the permanent place where man is in-between two poles of existence" such as infinite and finite, time and eternity, matter and spirit, form and substance, being and beyond-being, or -- would you believe? -- KAOS and CONTROL. Voegelin also used it to mean the unchanging "template of the mind (or nous) in contrast to the dynamic and unordered flow of experiential consciousness." Ultimately it is "the whole of existence being expressed as the cosmos." One Cosmos Under God, to join a craze.

Therefore, as Birzer writes, "Only by properly ordering himself between the two extremes and demands of the physical and metaphysical can man fulfill his purpose for the 'integration [of the material] in the universal order.'" Thus, even if you are not Christian, you can still see Christianity as our particular way (in the West) of conceptualizing and thinking about this underlying reality -- an unavoidably mythsemantical language, if you will, for explicating something quite real and objective.

To put it another way, if you toss aside our Judeo-Christian "wisdom tradition," as secular scholars have done, then you also throw out our traditional way of discussing the reality of man's role as cosmic metaxy. You end up with mere de-mythologized horizontal history, and ultimately with a "particularization" of historical events, divorced from the cosmic Universal. This is a kind of intellectual Fall that ends in the tin growl of deconstruction, multiculturalism, "diversity," moral relativism, and leftist totolerantarianism. In turn, this is why secularism is not just anti-religion, but a substitute "religion of darkness" for unfertile eggheads in their ovary tower.

When you worship at the altar of political correctness, you are engaging in a kind of primitive sacrifice of the One. It is a violent dismembering and therefore disremembering of Unity, and as as result, anti-human in the extreme. Instead of the "white unity" out of which the diversity of cosmic color emanates, you end up with the "black unity" of a chaotic blending of colors with no qualitative differences. This is why the "diversity" of leftist college campuses results in such a stupifyingly bland and shockingly anti-intellectual pneumatosphere, where you are free to believe in anything but Reality.

The new intellectual boorbarians of the left are specifically opposed to man's role as metaxy, even if they don't consciously realize it. Are they not simply re-enacting timeless biblical events, a sort of Black Mass in which they recrucify Christ -- who, again, even if you are not Christian, can be seen as the symbol par excellence of the metaxy, the link between human and divine? When they cynically ask, "what is truth?," are they not ironically parroting the words of another archetypal pilate light?

The question is, how does one hail this metaxy and whole one's cabeza?

So you want a luxury corps at pentecost? What lieability has my only begotten sonofabang! Ahriman is his own worst enemy! If your powers of deception were cleansed, then nothing would appear as it isn't. No body crosses the phoenix line lest it be repossessed and amortized.


Ricky Raccoon said...

“to mean the permanent place where man is in-between two poles of existence”

At some point it should become clear that Christ crucified on a cross was no accident. No accident that they just happened to find a couple of beams lieing around to nail him to. He, at the center of these two Worldpool forces headed toward each other, was no accident. These intersections, whether we like that they exist or not, we can choose to live “with” their fact or we can just live merely “in” it and get nowhere but lost in History. His “cross”, his example, is the eternal sign post for this message…to me at least.

at in la said...

another great post, bob.

and interesting that you should talk about what man is today. i was just about to do the same on my blog after discussing laws.

Frank Sheed from his book, Theology and Sanity says this,

“Sanity involves seeing what is; in relation to our self, it means seeing what we are, where we are, and what life is really about. To become citizens of the real world, that we might be at home in it, familiar with it- knowing its realities and its laws, knowing how to conduct ourselves in it. …not merely as something known, but as something seen, as a kind of landscape in which the mind habitually lives. ”

Sheed calls it "The Landscape of Reality" or coming mentally to citizenship of the Real World.

at in la said...

i have to say, too, bob. this is all really brilliant stuff and no easy task to do it at all, let alone daily. you're doing people a great service here at One Cosmos.

besides your obvious gifts, what is your friggin' secret? : )

and i would ask when you're going to convert to Christianity, but i have sense that you have already.

have a great day, all.

Robin Starfish said...

water from above
meeting at the middleman
water from below

Jim said...


It occurred to me that I have not said “Thank You” for all you do on your blog. Thanks, I don’t know how you do it but I read it everyday and am very grateful for the insights.

Van said...

at in la said "...besides your obvious gifts, what is your friggin' secret? : ) and i would ask..."

Not in any way a comprehensive reason, but rumor has it that Key was a Shift to mastering the capital 'I'.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)


P.S. Where's your Blog?

Van said...



I started pulling quotes, but it ended up being the whole damn thing - everyone should just go back and read it again, again.

Plus this:
"And understanding the point of history is admittedly quite difficult -- if not impossible -- if you don't know what a human being is""

My oldest's History prof sent home an essay of his own, on why they should study history, his answer:'to be better able to predict the future' and he used examples of being able to tell how prices of things like gas fluctuate, and having an understanding of history will make you better able to predict such things. Seriously. To college students.

No mention of seeking to better understand the nature of Man, of how people respond under the influence of different ideas and situations, how it seems that there are always some people how somehow manage to think and act differently than prevailing beliefs, etc.

If it's just to understand how things will behave, how is that different from insurance actuarials? Economics? At leas with those, you can earn some money! If history is just the study of things that have happened in the past, why look any further than the plate I broke on the kitchen floor last week? Physicists could use that to expound on KAOS theory to no end!

What is the point of any of it, divorced from seeking better understanding of Man in/and of the Cosmos?

Van said...

Oh, yeah, my mistake - there is no point, it's all KAOS.


Dat's no way to wun a wailwoe'd.

coonified said...

"His “cross”, his example, is the eternal sign post for this message…to me at least."

I concure Ricky. But, I can't say that it was all a predetermined incident. I mean, come on, the cross, a pre-christian symbol of heaven and earth, and Jesus, claiming to be the above it all. What are the chances of his being crucified after descending into "cosmic metaxy?"

Two books on that:

Forgotten Truth and the more detailed The symbolism of the Cross for anyone whose interested.

"besides your obvious gifts, what is your friggin' secret? : )"

Kick ass indulgence deals from petey?

julie said...

The vertical state of Man is rather like the global temperature. The materialists would have it flattened (or static), when the reality is both are dynamic. Much like the temperature, we are always getting either higher or lower on the scale, but if the flatManders have their way we'll plummet right down into an ice age (both literally and figuratively). If global warming were actually somehow reversed due to human activity, the climate wouldn't just stop changing, we'd all freeze in a new ice age. If spiritual growth were ever actually stamped out by scientism, humans would not suddenly dwell in mental utopia freed from the constraints of faith-based morality, we'd simply plummet to the cold depths of subhuman behavior.

Looking at a three-dimensional object (or abstraction, since in both cases that's really what we're dealing with) with one eye closed may make it appear to be lacking depth, but just because the difference can't be seen doesn't mean it isn't real and potentially hazardous.

cosanostradamus said...

What are the chances of his being crucified after descending into "cosmic metaxy?"


Bob F. said...

hear there is a new Scorsese movie coming soon, Metaxy Driver, with Rosie ODonnell starring as the cab...

Anonymous said...

Mizz E said...

Newly released:

"The Attack of the Matterbots"

"What we need to do is raise the public discourse so that (not believing in evolution) is not an acceptable statement."

Ricky Raccoon said...

I didn’t say ‘predetermined incident’. You did. I’m not one of those types. But that’s ok I understand the coonfusion. Sort of. By “not an accident”, if I even know what I mean, I meant that the cross symbol was in a sense, say, selected from perhaps all of the infinite symbols available. And I don’t mean selected by the regular old ungardened variety people bumping into each other down here. I happen o think the symbol was selected because we could understand it. I think I might even prefer a possible explanation that suggests the incident was inevitable or eventual given the circumstances at the time, yet freewill was always available to adjust the timing if not even prevent the necessity of the incident itself. I am in no way insisting I’m right, just trying to describe one of the meanings it has come to mean to me from meditating on it. And even if I am right I’m almost certain there are many more if not infinite meanings within it.
Whichever the case may be, I think the primary purpose may be that we think about it seriously and apply it to our individual lives – which is what we are doing right now.
I hope we still cooncure.

NoMo said...

For me, it is all so very obviously about relationship. I see the initial relationship of the Creator with His creation (Gen 3:8) pictured as God "walking in the garden in the cool of the day" - apparently a common occurence implying a real and personal relationship between the Creator and the people living there. Once severed by the decision of those people, the relationship was lost and alienation from the Creator became the one sure inheritance of everyone to follow.

Then, over time, the Creator continued taking actions to recover what was lost, by establishing a series of covenants with the people - each in its own way picturing or foreshadowing the coming final act of reconciliation (prophesied clearly throughout scripture). Then, at the chosen time, in the chosen place, the Creator returned in the person of His Son to again "walk in the garden" with the people who lived there. This time, however, when they chose to severe the relationship, they in fact fulfilled exactly what He came to do - establish a relationship that would endure and never end for those who believe.

However you want to slice this up, however literally you choose to take this story, it is the story scripture tells - in its entirety. As always, I encourage you all to spend time in careful, thoughtful, prayerful, reading of the Bible. There is so much there for each of us. Speaking of "The Cause and Cure of History".

Ricky Raccoon said...

I think we said the same thing just yousing different words.

coonified said...

"What are the chances of his being crucified after descending into "cosmic metaxy?"


Yeah, that was kind of my point, even though as I go back and read it now, it doesn't appear that way.

"But that’s ok I understand the coonfusion. Sort of."

Your right Ricky. I was confused. I'll stop trying to flex a mind muscle I don't have, and just shut up for a while.

Ricky Raccoon said...

I meant I wasn’t sure if I even fully understood what I was driving at. Impossible to put these things into words.
And I don’t want you to shut up.

Alan said...

re: man as the bridge...

Pontifex Maximus = Greatest Bridge Builder (better known as the Pope).

I had forgotten the origin of the title from roman religion but it is interesting (see wikipedia)

(hi everyone - I've been lurking but in heavy startup mode. This little community is still a must visit in my daily regimen)

jakesbrain said...


I think Aslan called himself the Great Bridgebuilder in one of the Narnia books. C.S. Lewis was an Anglican, true enough, but I can't help but feel that he meant something by that...

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