Contra “The Dead Spirituality” of The Catholic Church: Against the Caricature That the Church Will Reject You for Being Heretical; this is Contrary to Christ “Turn the Other Cheek!”   Leave a comment

1. Introduction

“When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.” (1 Corinthians 13:11)

As a child coming of age into young adult years, my Reversion to Catholicism is one marked by an initial hatred for The Catholic Church as I understood it. I was the poster child of Progressive Modernist thought who yet embodied a fierce New Age Protestantism about things pertaining to The Church and the surrounding cultural and spiritual developments that I found myself growing up around in. This series is written to rebuke the writings of my Youth, a sort of self-imposed Penance to atone for my own personal ignorance. The writings of my youth are held on the internet at the Yahoo! Voices website, there are 4 Articles written between July to November 2007, just after my graduation from High School. It should be noted that the rebuke is thematically addressed rather than chronologically answered.

The First Article written in July 2007 was titled, “Christianity Vs. True Christianity: A Problem with the Church?” This article embodied perfectly my Anti-Catholic view influenced by Progressive Modernism, Protestant propaganda yet New Age influences at the time. The Second Article written in August 2007 was title, “Church of Christ: The Church is Not the Real Thing!” This article embodied my confusion and the varieties of cultural propaganda set against the Church, this article sounds most like what I hear today, and that I have come to most fight against today. The Third Article was written in the same month and was titled, “Is the Bible Really Full and Complete?” This article was my argument that the Bible was incomplete and that since it has been left to many revisions it is no longer a trustworthy book, this attack the notion that The Bible was the Complete and Final Word of God. The Fourth and Final Article was written in November 2007 and was titled, “My Road to Christian Gnosticism” Here it is showcased for all to see my love of Heterodoxy and lack of understanding of Orthodoxy, of course in celebrating fighting against the superstitious ignorance of the Church I now confess that I was the one being superstitious and ignorant.


PART ONE – AGAINST THE YOUTUBE HERESIES

PART TWO – AGAINST THE YOUTUBE HERESIES

II. My Argument Against My Past Self

When I was a rebellious teen I sought to have peace of mind, I just wanted to be accepted for what I could believe. However, as I got older I saw the rejection of Hersey as a good thing and in fact I saw Hersey as an opportunity delivered by God to further understand The Faith better. When I was a kid I thought the Church via its Ex-communication from the Church for Heretical ideas was a permanent status and that through this permanent status the Church exposed its own failure to Forgive, its own failure to “turn the other cheek” but to be blunt I was wrong I was wrong in my understanding. In this article I want to talk about the terms of having the temporary ex-communication placed on someone and also lifted, in this article I want to talk about some of my own personal errors in thinking that lead me to falsely so-called “Christian” Gnosticism, The New Age Movement, and The Occult.

On The Terms of Excommunication and It’s Lifting

Excommunication does not have to be permanent so long as the individual repents of whatever grave action they have done. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia NewAdvent.Org on Excommunication only those who have been Baptized and are living are truly those who are liable to Excommunication. These Baptized and Living individuals would need to abandon the True Faith and go on to become Apostates, embracing schismatic or heretical ideology and groups. There are 3 Factors that can be argued to save a person from Excommunication: (1) Ignorance, (2) Lack of Liberty due to Grave Fear, and (3) Lack of Full Use of Reason.

We live in a society today in which Excommunication is not thoroughly practiced by those in Ecclesiastic Authority, and how much better would it be if we did purify the ranks of those who would be willing to defend the Church from the errors of this world, things would be all the more different. Today though many of the laity belongs to the Ex-Catholic or Cafeteria Catholic Mentality, does this mean they are all Excommunicated Ipso Facto? While I am not qualified on Canon Law, I would think that it could be argued that with Catholic Education especially in America found lacking, where kids go into Catholic Schools and more often than not come out not wanting to practice their Faith, it could be argued that they do not know better. Let it first be stated that, even Christ is willing to forgive ignorance of this kind. Even when I was in the Grips of Apostasy of my Youth, it could be argued that I did not know what I was doing, that I was Ignorant and still learning.

Excommunication ought not to be seen as damnation per se but as a corrective; it can be temporary insofar as the excommunicate is willing to repent. Once the excommunicate is willing to formally declare himself repentant, professes the creed, and (if under a previous ecclesial authority) renews his vows of Obedience (perhaps showing a penitential act of solidarity to the Church) that person has the Excommunication lifted and are able to practice the Faith in Fullness.

Excommunication then should not be seen as juridical punishment but rather as medicinal containment, preventing the spread of errors throughout the Organism that is called the Mystical Body of Christ. If only containment was practiced more often in the modern world against the wolves in sheep’s clothing who would call themselves Catholic but do so only in outward expression but not try to live it in Substance.

On Debunking My Own Personal Misunderstandings

Let’s assume though that in my own youth I was truly excommunicated from The Church and the argument for Ignorance could not be used for me, then having received the Sacrament of Reconciliation this “Debunking My Past” series could be seen as my penitential act of solidarity to the Church. More to the point my personal and previous errors of my past ought to be shown and rebuked as well and this is what I would like to do here in the remaining space below:

1. Debunking The Belief That Adam and Eve Did Not Die After Eating From The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil; Debunking The Belief That God Lied To Adam and Eve and Debunking The Belief That The Serpent Told the Truth

First of all, Adam and Eve did die after Eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The death was first a spiritual death which was The Nakedness they both had after eating, and then inevitably became a physical death as The Book of Genesis goes on, it is part of Christian Tradition that when Jesus Descended Into Hell He rescued Adam and Eve from the Spiritual Prison that is Hell. The Physical Death occurs after when we fall short against The Spirit. To speak as an example of my own life I can say upon reflection, after living a life of rebellion against The Spirit in my teen and portion of my young adult years, I always felt spiritually naked, incomplete, not whole and there were certainly times that I did feel dead inside, but upon my reversion I do not feel that way especially when I am filled with zeal for living a more devout life toward God. Now truly we are going to die physically and possibly Spiritually, but this is inherited by virtue of our primal parents.

Second of all, since we can conclude from the First Part that God did not lie that they would die, then we can prove that The Serpent did not tell the Truth! For I had given the text a literal reading, and when I heard, “In the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die.” I thought in that literal day, at that literal moment. But as I pointed out above, they died spiritually which was symbolized by their Nakedness only to eventually die later on in the physical form. It has also been learned as well that although many people think that it was The Fruit they took a bite out of that killed them, what really killed them, according to St. John Chrysostom’s Homilies on Genesis (See Pages 216-217) was,

“Instead, the eating from this tree was the symptom of their disobedience and the breaking of the command given by God; and through their guilt they consequently divested themselves of the glory surrounding them, rendering themselves unworthy of such wonderful esteem. Hence Scripture takes up the point in its customary way with the words, ‘They both ate. Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked;’ because of the Fall, they were stripped of grace from above, and they felt the sense of their obvious nakedness so that through the shame that overcame them they might know precisely what peril they had been led into by breaking the Lord’s command. You see, before this they had enjoyed such confidence and were not aware that they happened to be naked (actually, they were not really naked: the glory from above garbed them better than any garment), whereas after eating that is, after transgression of what had been commanded they fell into such baseness that they then looked for some covering through not being able to bear their shame. You see, transgression of the command entered the scene and snatched away that novel and remarkable garment I mean the glory and favor from above enveloping them and it both lent them an awareness of their nakedness and also clad them in unspeakable shame.”

This is important to know, for according to St. John Chrysostom in the same series of Homilies makes it very clear that Adam and Eve both knew what Good and Bad was already. What made them die was the decision realized by the action of disobedience to God. The action was consummated by the eating of The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, not so much the Tree itself, for else where in the same set of Homilies of Genesis it was made clear that (See Pages 218-219),

“Who therefore could bear with those people who insist on saying that the human being had knowledge of good and evil after eating from the tree, that creature who before such eating was liberally endowed with intelligence, and along with intelligence had been granted also the prophetic gift? How do these two things make sense on the one hand, knowing goats and sheep and all the species of brute beasts, what vegetation was suitable for food and what was harmful, which types to keep away from sedulously and which ones to approach; and, on the other hand, the idea that the human being, this rational creature, should be unaware of what is good and what is evil? But behold, they say, it was Scripture that called it the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I know that, too: but if you are prepared to learn the characteristics of Sacred Scripture, you will know why it gave this name to the tree. You see, it wasn’t because it supplied knowledge that it is called that, but because (133a) the transgression of the command happened to concern the tree, and from that event knowledge of sin then entered the scene, and shame as well that was why the name was given. It is, after all, the way with Sacred Scripture to name places from the things that happen, wherever it is they happen. So on this basis Sacred Scripture also named the tree of the knowledge of good and evil since transgression and observance of the command concerned the tree.”

Jesus Descends into Hell, Rescuing Those Souls From Adam and Eve onward Who Lived Virtuously

2. Debunking The Belief That God Isn’t Omnipotent Since He Asked Where Adam and Eve Were

On all occasions of commentary regarding the scene of Adam with his interrogation from God, none of the earliest commentators on Genesis believed that God was anything less than Omniscient. For me I got lead into Gnosticism however, because I choose to believe the Old Testament God was different from the New Testament God, if I were to keep myself consistent to the literal reading of the Old Testament it would need to follow into the New Testament then as well: I would need to account for all the times Jesus asked what the people who He performed miracles on wanted, which would then imply that Jesus The Son of God was ignorant of what people wanted, but this is sheer heresy and nonsense which can be debunked when I read Jesus’ Presence With Nathaniel, Jesus Knowing What The Heart of His Disciples Were Saying or even what His own enemies were saying in their Hearts, and when I read the commentary from St. Bede regarding The Healing of the Blind Man Bartimaeus (See: Lectio 8 on Gospel of Mark Chapter 10) we would read,

“Could He who was able to restore sight be ignorant of what the blind man wanted? His reason then for asking is that prayer may be made to Him; He puts the question, to stir up the blind man’s heart to pray.”

Now Jesus was present at the Creation of Man, it is well affirmed by the Early Patristic Commentators that when God said, “Let Us Form Man in Our Image and Likeness.” The “us” meant the Triune Godhead: God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Ghost, and St. Augustine in trying to elucidate upon the Mystery of The Trinity, shows how we are the microcosm of the macrocosm. Therefore, The Old Testament God is the New Testament God and Tertullian an early apologetic for the Faith made it clear in his commentaries that,

“God calls out to Adam, ‘Where are you?’ as if ignorant where he was; and when he alleged that the shame of his nakedness was the cause (of his hiding himself), He inquired whether he had eaten of the tree, as if He were in doubt. By no means, God was neither uncertain about the commission of the sin, nor ignorant of Adam’s whereabouts. It was certainly proper to summon the offender, who was concealing himself from the consciousness of his sin, and to bring him forth into the presence of his Lord, not merely by the calling out of his name, but with a home-thrust blow at the sin which he had at that moment committed. For the question ought not to be read in a merely interrogative tone, ‘Where are you, Adam?’ but with an impressive and earnest voice, and with an air of imputation, ‘Oh, Adam, where are you?’ —as much as to intimate: you are no longer here, you are in perdition—so that the voice is the utterance of One who is at once rebuking and sorrowing. God put the question with an appearance of uncertainty, in order that even here He might prove man to be the subject of a free will in the alternative of either a denial or a confession, and give to him the opportunity of freely acknowledging his transgression…”

Let it be known that eventually Tertullian himself gave himself over to Heresy before his death and if you feel that Tertullian would not be a sufficient defense of what I am explaining, then let us take a well-informed lifelong defender of the Authentic Faith, St. John Chrysostom who writes in his own Commentaries on Genesis (See, Page 348) the following,

“When He says, therefore, ‘where are you?’ it is not a question of a locality to one who knows what is hidden. God did not have His eyes closed, so that a man in hiding was able to escape His notice. For that reason He said: ‘Adam has become like one of us,’ [ Gen 3:22 ] because his eyes were opened… What, then, does He mean by ‘Adam, where are you?’ Does He not mean ‘in what circumstances’ are you; not, ‘in what place’? It is, therefore, not a question, but a reproof. From what condition of goodness, beatitude, and grace, He means to say, have you fallen into this state of misery? You have forsaken eternal life. You have entombed yourself in the ways of sin and death. Where is that noble confidence and trust of yours? That fear that you show is evidence of your wrongdoing and that hiding place of yours betrays your dereliction. ‘Where are you?’ does not mean ‘in what place,’ but ‘in what condition.’ Where have your sins led you, so that you fled the God whom before you sought after?”

Either way we read this, God was not Ignorant of where they were rather one could say, because Adam and Eve fell out of Grace God noticed this change and the question came as a response to their fall from Grace. It’s like someone turned off the faucet while the person who turned it on noticed right away that it was turned off by someone else in the other room, this is a gross analogy of course, for God is the Ground of All Being, so He was present when they fell since all things exist by God Presence. Some might say, “Why didn’t God stop them or the snake?” But then we would forget that God gave Adam and Eve Free Will so that they might choose to Disobey or Follow God, they made their choice and we suffer the consequences of it. When it comes to the Story of Creation to the Story of the Fall, I personally tend to view these events more allegorically, metaphorically and in a more archetypal manner than I do Literal-Critical Manner as even the Commentators expand more on particular parts of scripture.

The Creation of Adam and Eve By The Triune God

3. Debunking The Belief That The God of Love Wouldn’t Want You To Know Good and Evil

Out of all the charges I wished I had further investigated before falling into error, this would probably be the one, especially in our society today wherein people think that religious people are unintelligent. Contrary to what I originally believed, according to St. John Chrysostom in his commentaries on The Creation and Fall of Man (See, Page 218 and 219) makes it very clear that,

“There are, you see, many people bent on controversy who endeavor to maintain that after eating from the tree Adam had knowledge to discriminate between good and evil an opinion of the utmost absurdity. I mean, in view of this and fore seeing it earlier, we dealt with many aspects of the intelligence granted the human being by God, demonstrating it from the imposition of names which he gave to all the animals, the birds and the brute beasts, and the fact that he was endowed with prophetic grace along with this ineffable intelligence lest anyone come up with such an opinion. This person, therefore, who both imposed names and gave vent to that so remarkable prophecy about the woman, as we have already mentioned how could he have been ignorant of what is good and what is evil? I mean, if we admitted that (God forbid), once again would blasphemous references be directed to the Creator. How, after all, could an ignorant per son be commanded that transgression is wrong? This, however, is not the case perish the thought; on the contrary, he knew quite well. It was, after all, on that account that God from the outset equipped this creature with independence: if this had not been the case, he ought not have been punished when he broke the command nor considered worthy of praise for keeping it…

Who therefore could bear with those people who insist on saying that the human being had knowledge of good and evil after eating from the tree, that creature who before such eating was liberally endowed with intelligence, and along with intelligence had been granted also the prophetic gift? How do these two things make sense on the one hand, knowing goats and sheep and all the species of brute beasts, what vegetation was suitable for food and what was harmful, which types to keep away from sedulously and which ones to approach; and, on the other hand, the idea that the human being, this rational creature, should be unaware of what is good and what is evil? But behold, they say, it was Scripture that called it the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I know that, too: but if you are prepared to learn the characteristics of Sacred Scripture, you will know why it gave this name to the tree. You see, it wasn’t because it supplied knowledge that it is called that, but because the transgression of the command happened to concern the tree, and from that event knowledge of sin then entered the scene, and shame as well that was why the name was given.”

But maybe your getting tired of me sourcing the great theologian St. John Chrysostom, and perhaps you are looking for me to source someone else, very well, let us look to St. Gregory of Nyssa in his “On The Making of Man” (See, Chapter XX – What was the life in Paradise, and what was the forbidden tree?) wherein he says,

“What then is that which includes the knowledge of good and evil blended together, and is decked with the pleasures of sense? I think I am not aiming wide of the mark in employing, as a starting-point for my speculation, the sense of “knowable.” It is not, I think, “science” which the Scripture here means by “knowledge”; but I find a certain distinction, according to Scriptural use, between “knowledge” and “discernment”: for to “discern” skillfully the good from the evil, the Apostle says is a mark of a more perfect condition and of “exercised senses ,” for which reason also he bids us “prove all things,” and says that “discernment” belongs to the spiritual man: but “knowledge” is not always to be understood of skill and acquaintance with anything, but of the disposition towards what is agreeable…

… The tree, then, from which comes this fruit of mixed knowledge, is among those things which are forbidden; and that fruit is combined of opposite qualities, which has the serpent to commend it, it may be for this reason, that the evil is not exposed in its nakedness, itself appearing in its own proper nature— for wickedness would surely fail of its effect were it not decked with some fair color to entice to the desire of it him whom it deceives— but now the nature of evil is in a manner mixed, keeping destruction like some snare concealed in its depths, and displaying some phantom of good in the deceitfulness of its exterior. The beauty of the substance seems good to those who love money: yet “the love of money is a root of all evil”: and who would plunge into the unsavory mud of wantonness, were it not that he whom this bait hurries into passion thinks pleasure a thing fair and acceptable? So, too, the other sins keep their destruction hidden, and seem at first sight acceptable, and some deceit makes them earnestly sought after by unwary men instead of what is good…

… Now since the majority of men judge the good to lie in that which gratifies the senses, and there is a certain identity of name between that which is, and that which appears to be “good,”— for this reason that desire which arises towards what is evil, as though towards good, is called by Scripture “the knowledge of good and evil;” “knowledge,” as we have said, expressing a certain mixed disposition. It speaks of the fruit of the forbidden tree not as a thing absolutely evil (because it is decked with good), nor as a thing purely good (because evil is latent in it), but as compounded of both, and declares that the tasting of it brings to death those who touch it; almost proclaiming aloud the doctrine that the very actual good is in its nature simple and uniform, alien from all duplicity or conjunction with its opposite, while evil is many-colored and fairly adorned, being esteemed to be one thing and revealed by experience as another, the knowledge of which (that is, its reception by experience) is the beginning and antecedent of death and destruction.”

This particular excerpt needed to be very long, in order to follow St. Gregory of Nyssa’s thought as he expanded on what The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil means. He makes it clear based on the excerpt above that: (1) This Knowledge is not Scientific Knowledge, rather (2) this Knowledge is a Knowledge of something that is experienced and affirmed but is not pure rather muddied, this Knowledge (3) leads to death because at its root it disposes us to evil and sin and thus makes us unaligned with Eternity, which brings about Death, a sort of Death of Being, as described in Substance D from A Scanner Darkly, which inevitably leads to the Death of our Entire being. We can see than from the earlier statement of St. John Chrysostom that Adam had knowledge he was not ignorant, he was not unaware of things, and St. Gregory affirms this for Adam had the ability to discern the Truth of God’s Will from the lies of the Serpent suggestions, what made Adam and Eve fall was the desire to grasp at Divinity without heeding God’s Instruction. Now since God is Love, and we are called to become Partakers of Divinity, God would have been all the more happy to give His Divinity to us for He had intend to do so since the beginning (and is now possible through Christ), if we would just ask, instead we get caught up between Grasping at and Hiding from God.

Hagia Sophia – Holy Wisdom: “Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding.” – Proverbs 4:7

4. Debunking The Belief That God Is A Hypocrite Who Changes His Mind: He Punishes in The Old Testament and Saves In The New

One of the earliest heresies that I and the Catholic Church encountered early on in our developments was the Heresy of Marcion called Marcionism, which is a Gnostic Heresy that posited the Old and New Testament God’s to be different. Like in the 2nd Debunking above where I thought the Old Testament God was Ignorant and the New Testament God was Intelligent, here I thought the Old Testament God was filled to the Brim with Severity and Strictness and the New Testament God was filled with Mercy and Forgiveness. However like in the 2nd Debunking above I was able to show that the 2 Testament God’s are the same God and are consistent to one another, and it can be proven here too. Let us take the excerpt of Jonah 3:8-10 specifically wherein it says, “God saw their deeds, that they turned away from their evil ways, and God changed his mind about the evil which he said he would do to them, and he did not do it.” According to St. Theodoret’s Commentary on this particular excerpt it reads:

“He did not pay attention to their fasting, but to their abstinence from evil. Therefore, God grants repentance by repentance, not changing his mind similar to us (for God does not will this now but that later). But, he called the change from the threat ‘repentance.’ On account of this, he made the threat. If he wishes to chastise, he would not have offered a threat, but he would have inflicted that punishment himself. Since he rejoices in salvation alone, he threatens painful things in order that he might not inflict pain. And he called that threat ‘evil,’ not since it is evil by nature, for how could the thing bringing the end of evil and the acquisition of virtue and good order be evil? But the divine scriptures, employing expressions which are used customarily by us, called the threat of punishment ‘evil,’ on the grounds that it is able to result in evil and create trouble.”

Later on down the Christian History we read from the Catholic Saintly Intellectual, St. Thomas Aquinas in His writings “On God and His Creatures” that to affirm that which we call “Immovable” or “Unchangeable” is what we would need to call God, he speaks on this when it comes to Prayer and how it works to make changes while not violating the divine plan:

“It is proper for friends to will the same thing. Now God loves His creature and every creature all the more that the said creature has a share in His goodness, which is the prime and principal object of God’s love. But, of all creatures, the rational creature most perfectly partakes in the divine goodness. God therefore wills the fulfillment of the desires of the rational creature. And His will is effective of things…

… There is nothing to hinder any particular system being changed, whether by prayer or by any other means; for there is that existing beyond the bounds of the system which is capable of changing it. But beyond the system that embraces all things nothing can be posited whereby such system could possibly be changed, depending as it does on the universal cause.

… Prayers then avail, not as changing a system arranged from eternity, but as being themselves part of that system. And there is no difficulty in the efficacy of prayer changing the particular system of some inferior cause, by the doing of God, who overpasses all causes, and who consequently is not bound by the necessity of any system depending on any cause; but on the contrary every necessity of system dependent on any inferior cause is checked by Him, as having been instituted by Him. Inasmuch then as pious prayers avail to alter some points of the system of inferior causes that was established by God, God is said to ‘turn,’ or ‘repent.’ Hence Gregory says that God does not change His counsel, though He sometimes changes His sentence, not the sentence which declares His eternal arrangements, but the sentence which declares the order of inferior causes, according to which Ezechias was to die, or some nation to be punished for its sins. Such change of sentence is called in metaphorical language ‘repentance,’ inasmuch as God behaves like one repentant, to whom it belongs to change what He has done. In the same way God is said metaphorically to be ‘angry,’ inasmuch as by punishing He produces the effect of anger.”

So here we see that when men act and pray in a manner that is grounded in or informed by the Eternal, and the subsequent values that would grow up around it are lived out God can alter the course along the way toward the determined end which is set in stone. God does not change His Ultimate Plan, rather we are changing in relation to God and His Ultimate Plan. So when God “changes His mind” about destroying the city He once threatened in the Book of Jonah, it’s not an arbitrary voluntarism that occurs, rather it was a change in participation with the Divine Life and The City which God sent Jonah to warn, that makes this change of mind occur. If I could use a crude analogy, imagine a boulder rolling down a hill and a man not too far off comes saying to you, “Get out of the way the boulder is coming through!” Your participation with the Boulder changes, if you get out of the way then you will not encounter the evil of getting ran over by a tumbling boulder. So in a sense it’s not so much God who changes, but our Relationship with God changes, the analogy I just described fails however, once you understand that a boulder is dumb and unaware whereas God is Living, Intelligent, and hence Aware.

Christ in the Miracle of the Feeding of the 5000 Icon

5. Debunking The Belief That God Is Within Us Since The Son Is Within Us Too

One of the prominent thoughts in popular New Age belief is the Gnostic thought that God is within us, and this debunking probably more than any other needs to realized for if one believed the errors I debunked earlier and still thought the reality of the Spiritual was still very real, they would necessarily feel that God would have to be interiorized since an exterior God who participates in history, would have been dropped. However St. Thomas Aquinas explains perfectly well that we are contingent beings, we are not self-sufficient, we cannot account for ourselves without some type of exterior locus, this locus can only be at the end of the day, God. We need to look past these Novel ideas that God is within me (which is really an old idea reemerging), and recognize that God is all around us, but needs to be Other than us in order to sustain us. Christians would argue that we receive things from God, we don’t tap into some occult source of power within us to get what we want, for this is exactly the Serpent tempting us all over again as was shown in 3rd Debunking above. It is clear from various Commentators regarding the 2nd Chapter of Acts the following:

“The Law was given on Mount Sinai, the Spirit on Mount Sion, the Law on an elevated place in the mountain, the Spirit in an upper room…
… They were not frightened because the Holy Spirit, the heart’s comforter, was given to them…
… Thus they were entirely baptized according to the promise, and invested soul and body with a divine garment of salvation….
… On Pentecost the Spirit was sent from Heaven, so that those who were to be divided on the morrow would accept the knowledge of tongues, lest they be in need of interpreters as they went forth throughout the world. And because God is simple in nature, the Spirit was given once from Heaven; but for the sake of men, who are composed of a twofold substance, namely of body and soul, He is to be loved in a twofold manner.”

Throughout all of these things, it is clear the relationship that is present here: Something is Given From Outside of Us and We Receive It. So much New Age Spirituality would posit that you need to put in Hours of Meditation and much work in order to achieve some lofty height, and while it is true that Faith without Works is dead, truly we are justified by Our Trust in Christ. Some people will get taken back, hearing this news for in their imagination they think they can merit eternity, but truly only eternity decides whether or not we are worthy to partake in it, hence why Christ tells us His Burden Is Easy and His Yoke is Light, for if we admitted that all things we truly desire can be realized only by way of a gift then we become humble and at peace and The Spiritual Life springs forth effortlessly. However if we do not admit this then we become filled with pride over how much work we put in and how much we deserve something and this does not bring us to lofty spiritual heights but only to agitation and distress and I have written elsewhere about how loss of spiritual peace is truly carnal and not spiritual.

You might be saying to yourself, “But what about the fact the Bible says, ‘Made in the Image and Likeness,’ or ‘Ye are Gods,’ or when Jesus Himself declares that, ‘The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.’ Surely there is something inherent to my being?” To which I reply, there is however, even that was given to you for does it not say that we were made in the image and likeness of The One Triune God who Made Us? These statements will only come to be realized if I accept the relationship I stated above in the previous paragraph. Your made in the Image of God, but the Likeness has been lost through the Original Sin of Adam, but it is restored in Christ who we are called to conform ourselves to in all aspects of our lives. Ye are Gods, but our power is only realized by The One who came down in the form of a man to instruct us into the ways of Divine Living while living the life of a man. The Kingdom of Heaven is within you and all around you, but only if your willing to listen-obey to The One who told you that in the first place, so that it may grow in you all the more!

The Descent of The Holy Spirit AKA Pentecost Icon

Conclusion

In #5 on the sourced page of my earlier dissenting logic, I do not remember why I asked that question, and until I remember why I asked that question on the particular page, I cannot answer it since it answers itself, God Lives Forever for He is Eternal Life, living outside of Time and Space. These initial statements are what lead me into Gnosticism and The Occult, at one point in my life I felt that Orthodoxy was collapsing and that those who saw it collapsing would either need to choose between Materialist Atheism and Occult Esotericism. What caused me however to go down this path? A Nonspiritual reading of Sacred Scripture, rather I confined myself to Literal and ‘rational-critical’ reading of Sacred Scripture and for that I was mislead, this is one reason why I disdain Biblical Literalism for even the apparently most direct statement has so much one could contemplate upon.

Having comeback seeing that orthodoxy is not collapsing but still very much alive I see that Occult Esotericism is working in league with Materialist Atheism since both would be willing to proclaim “The God Within” message whether it be the god of our own ego’s manifesting itself through the arrogant certitude of our flawed human reasoning through militant atheism or elevated to a defying and arrogant mystical level of being through New Age Neo-Gnosticism. Having seen these I see that the only choice now that can be made is between Catholicism and Everything Else. So having tried everything else and found it wanting, I turned back to the thing I never really gave the chance to try and found myself to be quite happily surprised.

Advertisements

What Do You Think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: