TMOS – Part 4

Bear with me, because the introduction to this one takes a little while, but is absolutely necessary in order for us to understand each other properly. I think you will agree, especially if you are not Catholic; as —perhaps to your surprise— this post is nevertheless for you too.

In writing this ongoing series, despite the fact it was the most requested among the choices I gave on the Poll, the fact is that it is at time hard to determine if it is having the intended useful effect.

Of the people who read this blog regularly, only a fraction will reply to polls, and of that, possibly a part will be hate-readers trying to skew the stats.

That said, I received a private message that made it clear that at least one person, and a very good person at that, is finding it useful. Among a busy life, a relatively recent marriage and a new son, he is also busy trying to form a Sede community in a place where there isn’t even a proper Catholic Church. Sounds crazy? Well he is not, and amazingly, he is already having some material success, grouping the few Sedes and making them achieve a first contact with each other. Meaning he is becoming successful at creating one of those communities I tell you all you should be busy forming, of like-minded people, whether you are Catholic or not.

His comment to me was also helpful because it ties very smoothly into the next aspect of TMOS, and that is, the proto-cell of the whole thing: The Individual Man.

Introduction before the concept

In my explanation, the analogies and explanations are best executed in terms of the underlying Catholic (1958 Sedevacantist) spiritual underpinnings.

Now, possibly heretical though it might be, I do not want this to dissuade people who are not Catholic from understanding the baseline concepts. Remember that if the model works, you should use it. As I already explained in the first 3 parts, as long as you base everything on the spiritual reality that sustains the physical, you will achieve some measure of success, and there are many spiritual realities. It’s just that most are not good, and of the few that might be considered “good” all but one are less than ideal. And even if you don’t agree with me about which one that is, if you can do basic logica at all, you must concede that the truth can only be one, whatever it is. Nothing can be both true and not true at the same time.

It became my considered opinion, after some 4 years of intense investigation (between 2013 and 2017) that the original Catholicism that existed (mostly) and was promulgated by the Vatican until 1958, is the very best approximation or approach to reality that humanity has ever had. It has produced the best and most fruits globally, and therefore has an impeccable track record when compared to any other spiritual model.

That said, is it possible for a human being with some other philosophy to produce demonstrable and overall good effects in the world? Yes. Absolutely.

It is certainly possible for a truly pious, well-meaning Buddhist, or even Protestant, or even Muslim believer, to have interpreted what shrinking good there is in their false philosophies, just so, that they really do produce an overall net good that is certainly superior to that of a genuine Catholic, that however genuine in intent, may have misunderstood the basics of his own philosophy. We are all in error to some degree or other, and it is not a race to some finish line, so this is a bad analogy in many ways, but if we assume that in order to get into heaven you have to accumulate 1,000 points, starting out as a proper Catholic is like starting with 1,000 points right out the gate. You can certainly lose points in your journey, and it may be a lot easier to do so than you think maybe, but you sure have a better shot than someone who starts out as a Muslim, which might be like starting out with -500 points and generally in a lifetime you can only accumulate say 500 points max, and converting to Catholicism gives you a 1,000 points.

I mention all this not to try and scare you into conversion (I mean, hey, if it happens, and you chose it of your own free will, great) but only to identify that fact that despite there not being any salvation outside of the Catholic Church, in our path of life, it is possible (if not very probable) to find people who are not on the true path (Catholicism) that nevertheless can have demonstrable (good) effects in the world due to a variety of variables and factors.

There are also plenty of people that have demonstrable effects in the world that are using an underlying evil spiritual underpinning of course, but we are talking only to the “good” guys here.

And while I sure hope you would all become able to see the logic, beauty and truth of Catholicism, find yourself a real Church, a real priest, fall to your knees and beg for proper baptism in it, I am, above all, a realist. Which means I am aware of the war I face. And while I wish you all the Truth with a capital T, I know many, probably most, will not be moved an inch from your erroneous ideas any more than I was moved from mine for 43 years.

So, while I leave the details of your possible salvation by conversion to the Lord, because ultimately it is a job waaaaaaaaaaay above my station to even worry about, aside from pointing out, as crudely, simply, and correctly as my human flaws allow, the retta via (right path), I tend to work with what I have.

And if all I have are a bunch of Pagans, heathens, agnostics and autistic atheists, so be it. Within your errors, I wish you to find the best, the snippets, the shards of good that may exist, imperfect and insufficient though they are, for you to fashion weapons out of them and combat the enemy.

Do not think I will treat you as equal, or pray with you in your heathen ways, we are not the same; but also know, I do not hate you; and, in my heart, I wish you only well and that one day you too are saved, and get to heaven, by whichever tortuous path you might need to. My own path has certainly been far from straight, after all.

And now, with that out of the way, let us now get to this Part 4: The individual Man

The Proto-Cell: The Individual Man

Continuing with my imperfect analogies, and considering you as if you have already read and digested parts 1-3 (including 3a), I shall now explain why the individual man is the proto-cell.

The actually cell of human society is the nuclear family, and the only version of that that actually works analogously to a healthy cell within the body, is one that is composed of a Husband, Wife and Children, all operating under the foundational principles of a real spirituality, which I will from now on simply refer to as Catholicism. But feel free to substitute that with your own word for your philosophy of life; and if you do, yet are perceptive, you may notice that certain things simply do not work in your heathen ways, because you lack the demonstrable fruits throughout history to show you the truth of the matter, you lack the reason and logic that prove the truth of Catholicism throughout the ages, and on and on. I am not striking at you here, just making a point that you might want to take note of and verify for yourself.

Any other version of the nuclear family that is not composed of Husband, Wife and Children can be considered as a damaged, crippled or even a cancerous cell. Now, there are some cells, that can’t have children, but these too, if under proper spiritual underpinning, are genuinely positive and helpful. In each body there are cells that are specialised and appear to be slightly different, because they have a different role, but all are still healthy and required. Childless couples can improve the world by adopting children that might otherwise be lost, or help others in other ways, and they do. But the model is still based on the same foundations.

We will discuss the nuclear family in the greater context of the very practical and beneficial effects they have on society in later posts, but first things first. The proto-cell, I you like, the DNA of the cell, is the individual man. And I say man not coincidentally. Without a man at the spiritual helm, you get nowhere. The female may be considered the cell wall and other parts of it, you need both to form a real, proper, functioning cell, but the code of life is in the DNA and similarly, the code of a proper community and functional society is the individual man, both in each cell (family unit), as well as in greater society.

The second concept, that of the proto-cell in greater society will be a subject for a future post. Here, today, we will only examine the proto-cell of the individual man on its own terms. What makes a valid, viable, strong, Individual Man? That is going to be a good example that will perform well in both the complete cell (nuclear family) and/or in the larger body (community/society). This is what we will concern ourselves with in this post.

Trying to avoid my common error of skipping something obvious to me that turns out to be not so obvious to others, I also just want to say that why the individual MAN is the focus first, is because both in a family, as well as in society, it is ultimately men that create civilisation. Which is not to say that women are completely useless in the process, but women simply are not the civilisers of humanity. Men are. Always have been, and always will be. No matriarchal society has ever existed, and any attempts at creating one have invariably always failed in ways that are absolutely horrific. The current fruits of feminism most certainly included. But again, the details of the role of the woman, as well as the evils of feminism, etc. are for a post way down the line.

Accepting the above premise then, what makes a “good” proto-cell?

We already know he has to have a a sound spiritual foundation but on a more practical level, the key factor that makes the difference is self-knowledge.

The Oracle at Delphi was right.

Above all, Know Thyself

I need to emphasise something regarding the examples I make below. Whenever I insert myself in the discussion, it is not for some reach for glory, but rather because if I use an example from my own life, the experience is absolutely real and factual. In other words I am trying to show you it is based in reality. And it is not my “opinion” of some third party, but rather something I have personally tested and verified works. So keep that in mind.

Even from a very young age, possibly due to my touch of Aspergers’/High IQ I spent time imagining various scenarios life might throw at me and how I wanted to respond. Many were prompted by the fact that my life had been different from most children my age in rather extreme ways. My father moved us to Nigeria when I was four and we grew up pretty wild, being home schooled by my mother in how to read and write and do maths. Periodic returns to Italy were usually short lived and then my brother and I lived with out grandparents in rural Italy for a number of years too. When I enrolled in my first elementary school I was ahead of most of the other children in both maths and reading and writing comprehension. Socially I was never much of a joiner and this sometimes resulted in what today would be labelled as “bullying”, but I never took it and generally fought back regardless. It wasn’t that I was necessarily brave, as such, just that my sense of innate justice was more powerful than fear generally speaking. It was mostly a reaction, treat me bad, I treat you bad right back. The fact there are 30 of you and one of me is sort of irrelevant.

That was luck, genetics, some of my upbringing, and I stress, only some of it, or divine intervention that made me that way from early on, because I don’t think I can take any credit for it before say age seven or so for trying to foster that mentality consciously. But because Justice absolutely is a fundamental spiritual concept, that is closely aligned to Love, my spiritual foundation, even if shaky in many other respects, had at least one strong and unshakable pillar around which the rest of my personality could grow. If Seeking Justice is your main characteristic, you can’t really do it without developing Courage. Which is not easy to do, but is doable, I know, because I did. Courage may or may not come easier to some than others, but I certainly am aware I had to consciously work at it as a child and even as a teenager. It has been one of the constants in my life, to continually try to improve it. At age 55 my efforts are far less in the physical realm, but rather more on the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual level. By exposing perhaps more of myself to the wider world, there are costs to it, but I feel it is important and as such the type of courage required in it is of a different sort than facing, say, an armed opponent.

My point is that in order for you to be effective, you need to be congruent. I made conscious choices as to what type of man I wanted to be, and pursued those choices relentlessly. So I imagined all sorts of scenarios or situations in order to understand what was my natural inclination, and if I was happy or not with it, and if not, how to change it or improve it. By the time I was in my late teens, and certainly by my early 20s, my internal self-knowledge was pretty absolute. Certain events continue to happen in life for which you can never be prepared, but if you have a truly deep understanding of who you are, even the unexpected, tragic, surprising, and so on, can be at least survived, and often navigated and sometimes even taken advantage of and turned into an opportunity. If however, when life throws you a curve ball, you end up reeling in confusion as to what to do with it because, on top of the event itself, you also are unsure of who you are and, so are unable to quickly or even instinctively process it appropriately, life will definitely be harder for you.

Self-knowledge inevitably requires a deep delving into your philosophies of life, and if these are in turn based on false spiritual concepts, your efficiency in the world will, once again, reflect that.

Prior to my baptism, my overall philosophies of life were few and far between, and I always knew and said this too. They were limited to a set of ethics that I had investigated very deeply and knew was correct, but did not venture much beyond that. Justice was absolutely the core of it (and remains so, mostly), followed by the related concepts of honesty and honour (keeping your word, essentially) and courage. The rest I was pretty much agnostic about. And because I limited myself to the spiritual reality I could absolutely reconcile with reality, my foundation has always been solid. One can say it was incomplete, but not that it was ever unstable. Which is why, mentally, emotionally, and even physically, I have generally been able to outperform most people in terms of efficacy and results.

When I suddenly was presented with a huge revelation concerning the very bedrock of reality, I took time to simply sit and observe. Try to learn, as I did when I was a small child, by simply sitting and observing everything going on around me. Except I was 43, not a child. Which meant some things I could actively begin to investigate in more depth and detail right away, as soon as I became aware of them. And this search was done in the same relentless way I did my previous investigation of the fundamentals of reality. I suddenly had a gigantic, pivotal, absolutely core piece of information that I never had before, and had experienced it directly and unquestionably. For the first time I realised with absolute certainty that:

1. God exists, and,
2. God is Love, and Loves us, (despite ourselves!) individually, specifically, and personally.

It took some time (months for the basics at least, but it continues throughout life) to process my past experiences, my life to that point, so that I could verify that yes, those two points are absolutely true and everything in my life to that point actually proved them. Nothing contradicted or invalidated those two key points. Literally nothing. Including my “worst” or most “lost” moments. In other words, perhaps if I had been a more careful observer, I could have, or maybe I should have, inferred God simply by my surroundings and reality as we find it.

In fairness, the enemy does throw up quite the smokescreen at every level of our lives, so it’s not as easy as all that, but it certainly has been possible for others. My friend Tony for example, in pure weaponised autist fashion, became a Catholic purely as a result of following the logic of it.

So that was step one. Verifying that my Road to Damascus experience was rooted in reality; that is, in truth, that the aspects of reality I had shown did in fact fit my experience, observations, and logical deductions. And not only did they do so, but they did so to a level of precision, perfection and correctness I had not encountered even in engineering, which tends to be a rather “exact” science.

Then I proceed to step two, which was to test the model. This took longer (at least two years I would estimate) but once again, every experiment I did, as long as I did it correctly, fit the model. Of course, in experimentation, the failed experiments are worthwhile too, as they provide information on the processes that do or do not fit reality. To my astonishment, I discovered prayer absolutely works. It is a difficult thing to get right, and in some cases almost impossible at times, BUT if and when the conditions are repeated correctly, the result is invariably positive. In other words, the scientific method can be applied to prayer and the results it provides are proof enough that it is a real thing and works.

The issue with prayer is not that it does not work, but that in almost all cases, we are not applying the “formula” or “rules” correctly or sufficiently accurately, to make it work, and some of it is also possibly dependent on external factors beyond our control. Nevertheless it remains wholly and totally scientifically testable.

Say you want to prove that you could use ball-lightning to power something, say charge a battery fully in seconds. First of all you would need to test various models of engineered equipment to make it happen, but you also need the ball-lightning to happen too. Even if you have got all the equipment totally correct, but you do your experiment on a cloudless and sunny day, your results will be zero. If you then chalk that up as evidence that ball-lightning cannot charge a battery in seconds, or that the equipment used is faulty, you are making an error. In good science, the conditions need to be replicated in order to test a theory. So it is not easy to test for how prayer works and how to do it properly. Nevertheless, I have explained this in both Believe! and Reclaiming the Catholic Church.

Again, to summarise, I had a deep knowledge of myself, and this was based only on those valid principles of spirituality I was sure of because I could test and verify them to an absolute degree and see them reflected in physical reality as well. Then when additional information was given to me that showed me a whole aspect of reality I was ignorant of before, I immediately set about observing, exploring and testing it.

It is only in this fashion that I gradually came to my conclusions regarding Catholicism. In each step of the process, I tested, kicked at, explored, and verified, each additional element of the philosophies I was taking on.

The process, in very summarised format was as follows:

Road to Damascus moment leads to the observation that:

1. God exists, and
2. God is Love and does Love us, individually, specifically and personally.

At this point I could be defined as a Deist. Shortly thereafter however, observation and testing makes it absolutely clear that:

1. An enemy to God absolutely does exist and is actively trying to lead us as far from the truth as possible. In fact this reality is so obvious once you even begin to look, that the fingerprints and clues of the eternal psychopath are littered all over the place, as if the entire planet was a giant crime scene, which, in reality, it kind of is, and this too fits with reality as we find it, as well as the historical models of it.

At the same time, it also becomes obvious that the only possibly valid version of God that fits the experience and observations must be one of the following:

1. An open-ended generic Loving God that potentially (but not historically) could be associated with certain aspects or elements of: Shintoism, Zen agnosticism, Taoism. Vanishingly small chance of being the case, but not totally excluded.
2. Hinduism, Judaism and Islam are absolutely and definitely out, and not related to the reality of God at all.
3. Christianity is the only religion that descriptively and historically presents God (the father) as approaching the same reality I was aware of and tested to my satisfaction.
4. All of the other Pagan religions from the Aztec gods to the Zoroastrian ones, are clearly either nonsensical, or actively working for the glorification of the precise opposite of God.

Further investigation then makes option 1 potentially “valid” but without any real evidence of it throughout human history beyond some inference here and there. The focus then becomes Christianity as a whole, but necessarily the process now must now include the question: “Which Christianity?”

Further observation and investigation very quickly makes it absolutely plain that everything and anything related to Protestantism is in fact, almost certainly the work of the enemy and designed to secularise, destroy and confuse the truth. Every single one of the 40,000 denominations of it (more like 700 million, though since each person is an interpreter of the law onto him or herself) can be safely discarded with the same ease one discards the “logic” of a child that is trying to convince you that 2+2 is purple.

This leaves the Copts, the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholics.

The first two have a problem of not bearing anywhere near sufficient fruits to be the One True religion. The Copts are also almost extinct and never achieved much at all anywhere at any time. That leaves the EO, which are generally split into nationalistic versions, did not spread the gospel anywhere near as much as Catholics, did not achieve any of the civilisational markers Catholicism did, did not invent the scientific method, did not create as varied and beautiful palette of art in all its forms and has not been exactly the fountainhead of logic and reason that Catholicism has been since the start. They also betrayed the very Catholics that came to rescue them despite their schism from them some 40 years earlier, and literally tried to kill them by making pacts with the very Muslims the Catholics were saving them from. Three times in a row. And then are still bitching about when the fourth time round the Catholics sacked Constantinople (which as far as sacking of cities goes for the period, was really quite a gentle affair anyway).

Against that, I had a “Pope” that protected pedophiles, homosexual orgies fuelled by cocaine in the Vatican by supposed Catholic clergy and this too could not be reconciled. While it was clear that human fallibility was always going to be a part of any One True Church, because humans gonna human, two things had to logically be true:

1. God’s real Church, if one existed, must, logically, be infallible, and also be able to be discovered (visible) and tested to be as such. This is no small feat. I have no problem with it being possibly difficult to find; or you needing to work your butt off to figure it out. All that is fine to me, because there is the enemy, and the smokescreens he shoots up are huge, and so on, but anyone truly earnestly seeking should, be able to find it. Logic dictates that a Loving God, even allowing for free will, would absolutely make it possible for you to find it in some way if you truly were seeking for the truth. So that was a thing, secondly, it had to be infallible despite the humans that represented it. Which it would and could only be by supernatural Godly protection, because you can bet every single human in it was going to fuck up some aspect of it in some way to other. And there is only ONE Church that makes that claim. The Catholic One. But even that claim could be fake, so you need to study what the rules of this Church are, and how do they fit reality, which leads to the second point:
2. The One True Church must —again, necessarily, by reason of the most basic logic— have rules. And at least some of those rules, like absolute truth and math, must be eternal and unchanging, because if a Loving God exists, that Love would NOT be actual Love if:
   • It was not inclusive of you having free will, including the free will to reject it, and,
   • Love without Justice (rules) is not Love. If Justice does not exist, then neither can Love. If your Love towards another is potentially never even acknowledged, or worse, is abused constantly, can it really be love? Or is it merely a perverse dictate without any goodness in it? Just as if you were forced to Love God, that would invalidate Free Will, if you were forced or only able to “Love” no matter the response, then it would just as identically not be actual Love, because Love, the real one, can ONLY be given as an act of free will.

Now, again, the only Church that has:

1. Visibility,
2. Infallibility, and
3. A Code of Conduct that is precisely spelt out

is the Catholic Church.

But far more impressive than that, it has had this from the start, has always proclaimed it, and the deeper into it you look, the more astonishing what you find.

You find that the Church has been protected from fantastically “successful” attacks, heresies, lies, and attempts to subvert and destroy it, for two millennia; and no matter how dark and desperate the times can be, even for centuries at a time, ultimately, it continually returns triumphant against odds that simply make no sense unless some divine intervention was taking place.

All of that made it pretty clear that Catholicism was probably it… except… Pedophiles.

In my heart of hearts, it could never be accepted and reconciled that the One True God that I personally experienced in that Road to Damascus moment could ever, or would ever, let His Church ever be represented by Pedophiles. That the odd pedophile pretended to be a member? Sure. Just like the thousands of fraudsters, unrepentant thieves, murderers, adulterers, whatever. But those would be “members” of it, but as a class, represented so repeatedly and dramatically in its upper echelons of the supposed “leadership”? No. It could not be. Cannot be. And yet, Catholicism seemed to fill all the other requirements. So what happened? I began to investigate if it was always thus, and discovered that no, it was not. And then I became aware that the real infiltration started in earnest in the late 1700s. And following that thread of Illuminati, Freemasons, Carbonari, Rosicrucians, Communists, Homosexuals, Jews, and Protestants that plotted against the Church over at least two and a half centuries, it became obvious that Vatican II was the culmination of those efforts and it usurped the Church almost (but not quite) entirely.

At this point one might lose hope if one was affected by rhetoric and appearances instead of fundamentally seeking only the facts. Only the pure unadulterated truth as we really find it, and can test it in reality as we find it all around us.

And luckily for me (and some others too, I guess) precisely because I always had an instinctive understanding of the importance of knowing yourself —and basing it only on the truth that you can absolutely demonstrate is real and reflects reality as it is, not as you wish it were— I carried on digging.

I read the Code of Canon Law of 1917 by myself, and came across Canon 188.4 by myself. It was here that a light bulb moment went off. I had found the point of departure.

It was, indeed Vatican II, its instigators, and all its pomps. And it also confirmed that the impostors squatting in the Vatican not only are NOT merely human representatives of God’s Church, but they are in fact, working for the enemy. Imagine then my amusement when I discovered that this too is prophesied both in the Bible as wells in the visions of many saints throughout the centuries of the Catholic Church. If you had taken this journey with me, even if perhaps you are the type prone to despair because of appearances, this discovery would undoubtedly provide comfort and joy.

Because although it is sad that the Catholic Church has now been reduced to only a tiny remnant of what it was at its peak, it at least explain everything. It explains precisely why things are as they are and, once again, it explains reality as we find it. The Pedophile Protectors are Satanists, just pretending to be “Catholics”, and yes, fooling more than a billion people, but that too is to be expected. Again, we know that the large and well paved road leads to Hell.

Only at this point then, and studying and testing further to my satisfaction, did I realise that indeed, the position known as Sedevacantism is actually, simply, truly, mere Catholicism. The real one. The one that has survived other dark times like the persecutions by the Roman Emperors, the Arian crisis, the attacks by numerically superior Muslims, and now, the almost total infiltration of the Church by its enemies now pretending to be the rightful “Catholic Clergy”, but really only being servants of Moloch and other demons under Lucifer himself.

It all fits, the logic returns correct, the math works, the reality we live in proclaims every aspect and facet of this correctly, so I am now comfortable to take on the rules and ethics of the Catholic Church. As best I can of course, which is miserably imperfect, because as I keep saying, all humans are badly flawed, and me perhaps more than most in some ways, but nevertheless, I understand that the correct position is Catholicism and any errors or lacunae I make are mine alone.

The official processes, and rules and ways of Catholicism, are all written down in one volume, the Code of Canon Law of 1917, and it all stems from the Bible and the Catholic tradition that actually put the Bible together too. And reason and logic, verifiable in the world and reality all around you, if you can but do it.

Armed with all of the above then, I went from one solid pillar (Justice) to a veritable temple composed of many huge and unshakable pillars. Some that created themselves in some mystic fashion that I yet do not understand but cannot deny.

Added to Justice comes Love, Charity, Beauty, Virtue (in its many forms), Miracles, the sacrifice of Christ, and my simple, but honest devotion to Him and His Church. The reality of the Saints and how we are eternally linked to and connected to them. The mystical effects that praying the Rosary has on your very Terrene and Earthly life.

I went from one lone column in the dirt of no man’s land, called Justice, with vines of Honour, Honesty and Courage growing upon it, to a veritable enormous and constantly expanding beautiful temple of many columns and rooms and altars of beauty that almost blinds the eyes.

My knowledge of self has expanded exponentially simply by having seen far more of the truth of the spiritual reality that underpins all of creation, and seeing exactly how it absolutely verifies all that we see in the world, both good and evil. Aligning myself with that wider and deeper and far more beautiful spiritual reality, absolutely makes me more capable, more effective and more able to create more in the world in accordance with His Will, which I absolutely wish to serve as best I can, within the confines of my human flaws and God-given talents I may posses.

And yes, Evil certainly appears to have the upper hand in this specific timeline. You can argue that it is in fact a reality and not just an appearance. But am I worried? No. Not at all. I am aware and I will fight to my last breath, but I am not unduly worried. Because even if it lasts for a few centuries, the Church is undefeatable, at least until the very end, at which point, it will rise triumphant, and more so than in any other human era, with the return of our Lord and the final cleansing of the evil spirits from this world, to be relegated to their eternal prison.

Now this last bit may seem to be absolute nonsensical fantasy to you. It certainly seemed so to me for some 42 years or so. And I certainly can’t prove it even now.

But what I can prove and have done so, first of all to myself —and then only very imperfectly and distantly to others through my books and words— is that the entirety of those things that the Catholic Church says that can be tested and that I have tested, have, without fail, proven to be true.

Therefore, I trust too, the extrapolated “big picture” for the future as well. But even if it were wrong, even if the ultimate big picture turned out to be an error, I still, cannot see a better way to live until it is revealed as such by actual events in physical reality. Which I doubt will happen in my lifetime.

So, once again, even if you have followed me here only as a secular reader, I ask you: What other system or model can even begin to provide the same level of recurring proof and evidence, as well as functional societies that come anywhere close to the beauty, glory, peace, serenity and joy that a real Catholic community exhibits? There simply isn’t one.

All of the above, to show you that my acceptance of Catholicism is based not on any kind of idiotic version of “blind faith” but rather on the detailed, deep, constant, probing and testing of all that I can observe and test within the dogma of Catholicism. And should I later find any “holes” in it, I’ll be sure to let you know, but, so far, there aren’t any. And there are gaping maws letting fetid water in in every other system I have checked.

My self-knowledge has expanded and some of my reactions changed in light of this new information, that I have tested and continue to test daily, but that is not to say I am a different person. My soul is still the same, but as my understanding has evolved, my actions, choices and efficiency changes with it and shifts in expression and scale, all of which is normal.

The overarching point I want to make in this whole extremely long post then is this:

I have shown you (briefly and imperfectly, but I think well enough) the level and depth with which I look into things before I base any of my principles on them. How much work have you done? How much of this investigation into reality do you do, or can you do, before you get too scared of what you might find and stop? How much of it is based on true, objective investigation and how much instead because someone or multiple someones in your life have told you “Here be Dragons! Don’t you DARE go look in there.”

And to be sure, there are places that are absolutely dangerous to go look into, but I for one, will never tell one of my children “Don’t go there and that’s that!” I will instead say “My son, in that hole you will find a snake that is poisonous, it is of this shape and colour and general size. And you can smoke it out in this way, and kill it in this way, using this tool. Now, if I am still able enough, come, I will show you and you can see for yourself, and if I am not, then heed my warning, because I love you, and I trust whatever you decide to do, you will use your brain and your heart as best you can. Do not be afraid, but also, do not be foolish either.”

And with that last sentence as a guide, there is very little a man cannot more or less safely investigate.

So I tell you the same, reader, if you are still with me to this point.

Find out who you really are, and what you base it on. Discover what is absolutely true and what is merely a shadow created by your own ignorance, fear, or arrogance. And then decide who you are going to be once you discover the deepest truth you are able to. And don’t stop doing it.

[ X ]

This entry was posted in Catholicism, Theoretical Models of Society. RSS 2.0 feed.