[EXCERPT FROM THE LORD'S LAMPPOSTS MANUSCRIPT IN RESPONSE TO OBAMA'S SO CALLED 'EVOLUTION' OF THOUGHT WHEN ADDRESSING THE HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE AGENDA.
IT SHOULD BE CALLED 'DEVOLUTION' OF THOUGHT. FOR THE DEVIL HAS ALWAYS TRIED TO DO AWAY WITH THE FAMILY STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE THAT MIRRORS THE HOLY FAMILY OF FATHER (ST. JOSEPH), MOTHER (MARY) AND CHILD (JESUS CHRIST). THE ENEMY HAS ALWAYS TRIED TO DO AWAY WITH ANYTHING THAT MIRRORS OR REPRESENTS THAT WHICH IS HOLY, AND ATTEMPT TO INVERT OR PERVERT IT.
IT SHOULD BE CALLED 'DEVOLUTION' OF THOUGHT. FOR THE DEVIL HAS ALWAYS TRIED TO DO AWAY WITH THE FAMILY STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE THAT MIRRORS THE HOLY FAMILY OF FATHER (ST. JOSEPH), MOTHER (MARY) AND CHILD (JESUS CHRIST). THE ENEMY HAS ALWAYS TRIED TO DO AWAY WITH ANYTHING THAT MIRRORS OR REPRESENTS THAT WHICH IS HOLY, AND ATTEMPT TO INVERT OR PERVERT IT.
SIDE NOTE---THANK YOU MACKENZIE FOR YOUR KIND AND ENCOURAGING WORDS IN MY LAST POST. I TRY TO DO MY BEST TO DO THE WILL OF GOD IN WHATEVER AND HOWEVER I CAN. I TRY, THROUGH THIS LITTLE BLOG TO APPEAL NOT TO PEOPLE'S BRAINS, BUT MORE SO TO THEIR SOUL'S MIND. PLEASE CONTINUE TO PRAY FOR ME.
IN THIS FOURTH MANUSCRIPT, YET TO BE PUBLISHED INTO A BOOK, I COVER FOUR OF OUR LORD'S LAMPPOSTS THAT HAVE GIVEN LIGHT IN PERIODS OF MORAL DARKNESS THROUGHOUT HISTORY. THIS EXCERPT IS FROM THE CHAPTER OVER G.K. CHESTERTON. I WILL ADD A FEW MORE EXCERPT OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS.]
THE LORD'S LAMPPOSTS.
“Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp post, which many influential people desire to pull down. A grey clad monk, who is the spirit of the middle ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say in the arid manner of the school men, ‘Let us first of all consider my brethren the value of light. If light be in itself good…’At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down. All the people make a rush for the lamp post; the lamppost is down in ten minutes and they go about congratulating each other on their unmedieval practicality. But as things go on, they do not work out so easily. Some people have pulled the lamppost down because they wanted electric light; some because they wanted darkness because their deeds were evil; some thought it not enough of a lamppost, some too much; some acted because they wanted to smash something, and so there is war in the night. No man knowing whom he strikes. So, gradually and inevitably, today, tomorrow or the next day, there comes the conviction that the monk was right after all and that all depended upon the philosophy of the light. Only now, what we might have discussed under the gas lamp, we now must discuss in the dark.”
G.K. Chesterton clearly understood beliefs that were/are not founded properly on not only strong conviction, but a right one, are doomed to fail and result in darkness. So too today, the latter analogy of the street lamp that Chesterton used, can today be applied to many modern and relevant issues of the day.
But society in their haste and their politically correct efficiency have done away with the contemplative/spiritual aspects of philosophy/theology, and each group has torn down the lamppost that enlightened society, but each one for a different reason, but all with the same results.
Apply this metaphor to whatever issue you like, and you will find that each group had a hidden agenda for tearing down the light of truth that aided people in darkness.
From abortion, to homosexuality, to the new improved progressive system of education, to even something as traditional as parenting, all of these issues today have been commandeered by different groups, for different self-interests and agendas.
Where once the lamp of life stood proud of its noble and dignified position, for providing light to the causes that guided and promoted life, today this lamp has been taken down and completely destroyed by the many forces that hated this lamp of traditional society.
Where once the lamp of the family also stood proud of its role in shining the path that helped the original cell of society become learned, conscience and helpful before entering and becoming part of society at large, today this lamp post has also been smashed by the same forces that brought down the first one.
Where once the lamp that gave its light to educating our young and teaching them the basics between right and wrong, today has been brought down by certain groups, under the pretext of helping children, that took power through political influence and helped one another through anti-Christian methods to help tear down the lamp that shone so brightly in the field of education.
As a result of this, today’s politicians foolishly think that by throwing more money at the problems facing public education, it will help bring back the light that they helped to extinguish in our schools.
Just as Chesterton noted, ‘And now there is a war in the darkness, and no one knows who they strike.’ Our schools over the past 25-30 years have gone from bad to worse, and the same forces that helped to bring down all of these metaphorical ‘street lamps’ that for years helped to illumine minds, are the very same ones that today fight one another in the darkness that is left as a result of their actions.
Each group wanting their share of the wealth, power and influence, all which has nothing to do with preserving the light, but all responsible for the darkness in which not only they fight in, but so too our children in these morally/educationally darkened schools.
The school shootings, the school closures, the school sex scandals, the school drug use, the extremely high rate of drop outs and failure rates. All of these things are laid at the feet of those that in their haste to tear down that traditional role of the education ‘street lamp,’ now find themselves in progressively failing schools; these lamps that for years taught and formed not only minds, but morals and the healthy fear of God for one’s bent actions, today have been put out in increasingly darkened hallways and minds.
Today these groups fight, trip and destroy one another in today’s so called progressive schools that have progressively run off the precipice.
For progress cannot be an end in and of itself. You cannot be progressive for progress sake. For if you do this, then the next time someone travels to the Grand Canyon, if they only think and are concerned about progress for progress sake, then they will not even stop at the end of the road, that leads to the beginning of the canyon, and will drive off into the canyon for progress sake. Progress can only be a means, to a fixed end. But this only makes sense to those who deal in common sense.
“Every one of the popular modern phrases and ideals is a dodge in order to shirk the problem of what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘liberty,’ that is we talk of it, that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘progress’ that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘education,’ that is a dodge to avoid talking about what is good. The modern man says, ‘let us leave all of these arbitrary standards and embrace liberty,’ this is logically rendered, ‘let us not decide what is good, but let it be considered good not to decide it.’
A century ago, G.K. Chesterton wrote these prophetic words. Prophetic because today, in the year 2011, we are all living witnesses of these bitter fruits, of which the seeds were planted a very long time ago.
But humanity has always reasoned this way for the most part. The concepts that Chesterton addresses, those of liberty, progress and education, can even be seen as the concepts that Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis failed to address, and therefore experienced the consequences.
The liberty/freedom they had in the Garden of Eden was not without limits. For the very fact that the notion/concept of freedom cannot be known unless the concept of limits or boundaries is known as well is an indicator of the importance of having working knowledge of both dynamics.
In the Garden, when they came upon the serpent, they were introduced to the false concept of liberty/freedom through the serpent, because it was one where the concept of authentic liberty that exist within the bounds of limits, was completely misconstrued by that crafty serpent. Liberty/freedom without limits ceases to be good and authentic and instead becomes license.
In the Garden, the serpent also appealed to the sense of hubris, by highlighting that their abilities and knowledge of right and wrong would be seen as a step in a more progressive path to self-enlightenment; where they too would be as gods, newly formed and more progressive than their Creator.
But here too the serpent left out the good of the argument. For he did not tell them that they would lose their status of immortality, which was fed and nourished by the fruit from the tree of life; so here too the good was omitted.
In the garden, the devil also falsely educated them by stressing their liberty with no limits, and their new progressive lifestyle. The day they did this, they shunned God’s authentic education, and His absolute non-arbitrary standards, for a false teaching.
They did exactly as Chesterton had stated, ‘Let us leave all of these arbitrary standards, and embrace liberty. Let us not decide on what is good, but rather let us consider it good not to decide it.’
Man throughout his history, has always been weak due to sin and easily falls into temptation. Man today is no different that Adam and Eve were in the Garden.
Regardless of whether you believe the story of Genesis or not, you could not argue that the story, even though 4,000 years old, has not lost any relevance to modern man and his attitudes and/beliefs, if anything it has only validated the message of the story.
Just as in Chesterton’s times, so too today do you have many secularists/humanists/atheists, which proclaim humanity can be viewed and studied without the concepts of art, religion, morality, philosophy, and theology.
That man need not, and should not be studied from these higher sciences, but can be studied completely from the more basic sciences of chemistry, biology and physiology.
While this is certainly reasonable to do, as these sciences can all attest to and answer everything from man’s atomic make-up, biological construction and physiological capabilities, it fails to answer one very basic and overriding question; what is the purpose or meaning in/to life?
For if the humanist or atheist answer of, ‘there is none,’ is correct, then all would be meaningless and non-purposeful, including their very statement. But obviously this is not the case. G.K. Chesterton asked, ‘what is the good of begetting a man until we have settled what is the good of being a man?’
This is the ultimate question that humanity has grappled with for thousands of years. This question goes back to a statement from St. Thomas Aquinas, ‘matter alone does not act for an end, but in order to aim at an end, you have to know the end,’ and in the end this will always point to a mind.
When these clever atheistic scientists attempt to do away with a higher purpose or meaning to human life, they in effect do away with any meaning or purpose they are trying to establish as well.
For it is the human being, with the potential and capacity for reasoning, and contemplating that which are immaterial thoughts, that has the seal and likeness of God Himself. While all the lower sciences are necessary and contribute to higher learning and education, it is the higher sciences of metaphysics, that include philosophy and theology, that can ultimately contemplate, meditate and grasp at the higher questions that deal solely with the ultimate purpose of man, of love, and of God.
Just as not all coins have the same value, so too is the case when it comes to arguments for and against God.
But it has been through the philosophies of subjective relativism, that this concept has created the belief that all ideas, philosophies and arguments are the same, or should carry the same weight.
No one in their right mind would admit that a penny and a 20lb. gold bullion bar have the same value. No one would admit that a 180 degree angle and a 10 degree angle are the same. No one would admit that an atom and a super red giant are the same size.
Each one is completely different in weight, value, perspective and size. There are fixed absolutes to these concepts. They may all be interrelated somehow in some way, but each has different value.
So too is this found with more reason when addressing the ideas and concepts that deal with the higher sciences. For if the lower sciences are all ruled by and controlled by laws and absolutes, how much more the higher sciences are governed by laws and absolutes as well.
The main point I am trying to make is simply this: That when you take the higher meanings and purposes of life out of the human equation, you are left simply with humanity at the purely material base level. Humanity without culture is no different than the rest of creation in the plant and animal kingdom.
Even the word culture originated out of man’s need to be a part of a cult that worshipped and adhered to something greater than himself. I suppose this is the reason why today there is a lack of culture in modern day societies.
Atheists and secular humanists do not realize that in attempting to do away with God, they are also doing away with the key lynch pins that hold society together and with a certain order.
Why even the word progressive rest on the thought or idea of an absolute, objective and non-moving point of reference, otherwise how can one know if any progress has been made?
It would be as if you started at a particular starting point, say a stop light, and walked in a definite direction to measure a particular distance, but ended up realizing afterwards that the stoplight had followed you all along. The point of reference must remain fixed and objective in order to admit the second point, progress. Regardless of direction, all progress can only be detected if compared to a fixed objective absolute point of reference. Also, as I have stated earlier, once progress is activated, it needs an end objective as well. A pre-set point of reference where whatever is progressing will ultimately come to rest and two things will be achieved: the end objective once reached, and the actual measurable work done.
The problem today’s rhetoricians have is simply this; they do not even allow for these points of fixed/absolute reference as a starting point, much less an ending one. Therefore what they call progress or progressive is really non-existent, or something else completely different.
Imagine a ship’s captain trying to navigate from London to New York, but every hour his points of reference that the ship’s navigation instruments are using, keep changing on him. Chances are, that ship would never get to New York, and just spin in circles out in the middle of the Atlantic, due to the ships constant changes in its points of reference.
Or perhaps imagine a bridge engineer that doesn’t depend on any absolutes or points of reference to build a new bridge over a 500 ft. deep gorge. He simply decides to build it according to his subjective points of relative knowledge. What he thinks would turn out to be a safe and sturdy bridge. Would you be the first volunteer to test his bridge in a car once completed?
I point to these examples to demonstrate that absolute, objective, fixed, doctrinal points of reference are necessary in all aspects of life. These must first be present in order to be progressive, subjective, and relativistic.
The former must exist, prior to the latter.
One of the ideas that is so prevalent today is that of the acceptance of the homosexual agenda. The inconsistency with this false and most wicked of acts is that, like we stated before, it attempts to have it both ways.
One the one hand, its supporters claim biologically deterministic claims, ‘I was born this way,’ yet while on the other hand they take and abuse free-will by choosing to do that which defines them.
As stated earlier in this book, all that is found in nature (in terms of procreation) works towards the Ultimate end that always leads to begetting offspring and thereby procreating for the survival of the species.
If, as the homosexual agenda states, they were truly born this way, then nature always working within the great order that defines and sustains it, would have also provided for the means of procreating within that new structure. If, on the other hand, biological determinism is not included in their agenda, then the ultimate conclusion is abuse of that which is freedom to choose and act.
If we take Chesterton’s model of logically following through a thought from beginning to end and arrive at two possibilities, these two would be it. As we can clearly note, nature, through God’s great providence, did not provide them with a method of procreation, hence we are left with the latter conclusion.
Just like the abortion advocates claim, ‘it’s about my choice!’ Always keep the following in mind---all people whether pagan, secular or Christian are recognized and confirmed by what their actions are or are attributed to them. No one is born an engineer, or a baseball catcher, or a priest, these are all terms that are given to identify a state of action. A homosexual person is not born the same as person who is born Black, White, Yellow or Red, for their identification comes from a state of being at birth, not from what they are doing at birth, nor later in life. A homosexual person, who claims is born this way, would by their interpretation be born doing the act by which they are known by, like a baseball catcher would be born catching a baseball! This is where this thought process, if the formula of complete thinking as followed by St. Thomas and G.K. Chesterton, would logically lead one to.
Also, for those who like to think of themselves as secularly progressive and anti-free-will, then the next time you choose anything over something else, keep in mind that you have just crossed over into the Christian world of free-willed, volitional freedom, and would be obligated to thank God!
“Freedom is glorious, but freedom is enjoyed only within the rules. We are defined by our limits, like the frame around a picture. You can free a tiger from his bars, but you cannot free him from his stripes. Freedom gives us the privilege to govern ourselves.”
THE LORD'S LAMPPOSTS.
“Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp post, which many influential people desire to pull down. A grey clad monk, who is the spirit of the middle ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say in the arid manner of the school men, ‘Let us first of all consider my brethren the value of light. If light be in itself good…’At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down. All the people make a rush for the lamp post; the lamppost is down in ten minutes and they go about congratulating each other on their unmedieval practicality. But as things go on, they do not work out so easily. Some people have pulled the lamppost down because they wanted electric light; some because they wanted darkness because their deeds were evil; some thought it not enough of a lamppost, some too much; some acted because they wanted to smash something, and so there is war in the night. No man knowing whom he strikes. So, gradually and inevitably, today, tomorrow or the next day, there comes the conviction that the monk was right after all and that all depended upon the philosophy of the light. Only now, what we might have discussed under the gas lamp, we now must discuss in the dark.”
G.K. Chesterton clearly understood beliefs that were/are not founded properly on not only strong conviction, but a right one, are doomed to fail and result in darkness. So too today, the latter analogy of the street lamp that Chesterton used, can today be applied to many modern and relevant issues of the day.
But society in their haste and their politically correct efficiency have done away with the contemplative/spiritual aspects of philosophy/theology, and each group has torn down the lamppost that enlightened society, but each one for a different reason, but all with the same results.
Apply this metaphor to whatever issue you like, and you will find that each group had a hidden agenda for tearing down the light of truth that aided people in darkness.
From abortion, to homosexuality, to the new improved progressive system of education, to even something as traditional as parenting, all of these issues today have been commandeered by different groups, for different self-interests and agendas.
Where once the lamp of life stood proud of its noble and dignified position, for providing light to the causes that guided and promoted life, today this lamp has been taken down and completely destroyed by the many forces that hated this lamp of traditional society.
Where once the lamp of the family also stood proud of its role in shining the path that helped the original cell of society become learned, conscience and helpful before entering and becoming part of society at large, today this lamp post has also been smashed by the same forces that brought down the first one.
Where once the lamp that gave its light to educating our young and teaching them the basics between right and wrong, today has been brought down by certain groups, under the pretext of helping children, that took power through political influence and helped one another through anti-Christian methods to help tear down the lamp that shone so brightly in the field of education.
As a result of this, today’s politicians foolishly think that by throwing more money at the problems facing public education, it will help bring back the light that they helped to extinguish in our schools.
Just as Chesterton noted, ‘And now there is a war in the darkness, and no one knows who they strike.’ Our schools over the past 25-30 years have gone from bad to worse, and the same forces that helped to bring down all of these metaphorical ‘street lamps’ that for years helped to illumine minds, are the very same ones that today fight one another in the darkness that is left as a result of their actions.
Each group wanting their share of the wealth, power and influence, all which has nothing to do with preserving the light, but all responsible for the darkness in which not only they fight in, but so too our children in these morally/educationally darkened schools.
The school shootings, the school closures, the school sex scandals, the school drug use, the extremely high rate of drop outs and failure rates. All of these things are laid at the feet of those that in their haste to tear down that traditional role of the education ‘street lamp,’ now find themselves in progressively failing schools; these lamps that for years taught and formed not only minds, but morals and the healthy fear of God for one’s bent actions, today have been put out in increasingly darkened hallways and minds.
Today these groups fight, trip and destroy one another in today’s so called progressive schools that have progressively run off the precipice.
For progress cannot be an end in and of itself. You cannot be progressive for progress sake. For if you do this, then the next time someone travels to the Grand Canyon, if they only think and are concerned about progress for progress sake, then they will not even stop at the end of the road, that leads to the beginning of the canyon, and will drive off into the canyon for progress sake. Progress can only be a means, to a fixed end. But this only makes sense to those who deal in common sense.
“Every one of the popular modern phrases and ideals is a dodge in order to shirk the problem of what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘liberty,’ that is we talk of it, that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘progress’ that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘education,’ that is a dodge to avoid talking about what is good. The modern man says, ‘let us leave all of these arbitrary standards and embrace liberty,’ this is logically rendered, ‘let us not decide what is good, but let it be considered good not to decide it.’
A century ago, G.K. Chesterton wrote these prophetic words. Prophetic because today, in the year 2011, we are all living witnesses of these bitter fruits, of which the seeds were planted a very long time ago.
But humanity has always reasoned this way for the most part. The concepts that Chesterton addresses, those of liberty, progress and education, can even be seen as the concepts that Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis failed to address, and therefore experienced the consequences.
The liberty/freedom they had in the Garden of Eden was not without limits. For the very fact that the notion/concept of freedom cannot be known unless the concept of limits or boundaries is known as well is an indicator of the importance of having working knowledge of both dynamics.
In the Garden, when they came upon the serpent, they were introduced to the false concept of liberty/freedom through the serpent, because it was one where the concept of authentic liberty that exist within the bounds of limits, was completely misconstrued by that crafty serpent. Liberty/freedom without limits ceases to be good and authentic and instead becomes license.
In the Garden, the serpent also appealed to the sense of hubris, by highlighting that their abilities and knowledge of right and wrong would be seen as a step in a more progressive path to self-enlightenment; where they too would be as gods, newly formed and more progressive than their Creator.
But here too the serpent left out the good of the argument. For he did not tell them that they would lose their status of immortality, which was fed and nourished by the fruit from the tree of life; so here too the good was omitted.
In the garden, the devil also falsely educated them by stressing their liberty with no limits, and their new progressive lifestyle. The day they did this, they shunned God’s authentic education, and His absolute non-arbitrary standards, for a false teaching.
They did exactly as Chesterton had stated, ‘Let us leave all of these arbitrary standards, and embrace liberty. Let us not decide on what is good, but rather let us consider it good not to decide it.’
Man throughout his history, has always been weak due to sin and easily falls into temptation. Man today is no different that Adam and Eve were in the Garden.
Regardless of whether you believe the story of Genesis or not, you could not argue that the story, even though 4,000 years old, has not lost any relevance to modern man and his attitudes and/beliefs, if anything it has only validated the message of the story.
Just as in Chesterton’s times, so too today do you have many secularists/humanists/atheists, which proclaim humanity can be viewed and studied without the concepts of art, religion, morality, philosophy, and theology.
That man need not, and should not be studied from these higher sciences, but can be studied completely from the more basic sciences of chemistry, biology and physiology.
While this is certainly reasonable to do, as these sciences can all attest to and answer everything from man’s atomic make-up, biological construction and physiological capabilities, it fails to answer one very basic and overriding question; what is the purpose or meaning in/to life?
For if the humanist or atheist answer of, ‘there is none,’ is correct, then all would be meaningless and non-purposeful, including their very statement. But obviously this is not the case. G.K. Chesterton asked, ‘what is the good of begetting a man until we have settled what is the good of being a man?’
This is the ultimate question that humanity has grappled with for thousands of years. This question goes back to a statement from St. Thomas Aquinas, ‘matter alone does not act for an end, but in order to aim at an end, you have to know the end,’ and in the end this will always point to a mind.
When these clever atheistic scientists attempt to do away with a higher purpose or meaning to human life, they in effect do away with any meaning or purpose they are trying to establish as well.
For it is the human being, with the potential and capacity for reasoning, and contemplating that which are immaterial thoughts, that has the seal and likeness of God Himself. While all the lower sciences are necessary and contribute to higher learning and education, it is the higher sciences of metaphysics, that include philosophy and theology, that can ultimately contemplate, meditate and grasp at the higher questions that deal solely with the ultimate purpose of man, of love, and of God.
Just as not all coins have the same value, so too is the case when it comes to arguments for and against God.
But it has been through the philosophies of subjective relativism, that this concept has created the belief that all ideas, philosophies and arguments are the same, or should carry the same weight.
No one in their right mind would admit that a penny and a 20lb. gold bullion bar have the same value. No one would admit that a 180 degree angle and a 10 degree angle are the same. No one would admit that an atom and a super red giant are the same size.
Each one is completely different in weight, value, perspective and size. There are fixed absolutes to these concepts. They may all be interrelated somehow in some way, but each has different value.
So too is this found with more reason when addressing the ideas and concepts that deal with the higher sciences. For if the lower sciences are all ruled by and controlled by laws and absolutes, how much more the higher sciences are governed by laws and absolutes as well.
The main point I am trying to make is simply this: That when you take the higher meanings and purposes of life out of the human equation, you are left simply with humanity at the purely material base level. Humanity without culture is no different than the rest of creation in the plant and animal kingdom.
Even the word culture originated out of man’s need to be a part of a cult that worshipped and adhered to something greater than himself. I suppose this is the reason why today there is a lack of culture in modern day societies.
Atheists and secular humanists do not realize that in attempting to do away with God, they are also doing away with the key lynch pins that hold society together and with a certain order.
Why even the word progressive rest on the thought or idea of an absolute, objective and non-moving point of reference, otherwise how can one know if any progress has been made?
It would be as if you started at a particular starting point, say a stop light, and walked in a definite direction to measure a particular distance, but ended up realizing afterwards that the stoplight had followed you all along. The point of reference must remain fixed and objective in order to admit the second point, progress. Regardless of direction, all progress can only be detected if compared to a fixed objective absolute point of reference. Also, as I have stated earlier, once progress is activated, it needs an end objective as well. A pre-set point of reference where whatever is progressing will ultimately come to rest and two things will be achieved: the end objective once reached, and the actual measurable work done.
The problem today’s rhetoricians have is simply this; they do not even allow for these points of fixed/absolute reference as a starting point, much less an ending one. Therefore what they call progress or progressive is really non-existent, or something else completely different.
Imagine a ship’s captain trying to navigate from London to New York, but every hour his points of reference that the ship’s navigation instruments are using, keep changing on him. Chances are, that ship would never get to New York, and just spin in circles out in the middle of the Atlantic, due to the ships constant changes in its points of reference.
Or perhaps imagine a bridge engineer that doesn’t depend on any absolutes or points of reference to build a new bridge over a 500 ft. deep gorge. He simply decides to build it according to his subjective points of relative knowledge. What he thinks would turn out to be a safe and sturdy bridge. Would you be the first volunteer to test his bridge in a car once completed?
I point to these examples to demonstrate that absolute, objective, fixed, doctrinal points of reference are necessary in all aspects of life. These must first be present in order to be progressive, subjective, and relativistic.
The former must exist, prior to the latter.
One of the ideas that is so prevalent today is that of the acceptance of the homosexual agenda. The inconsistency with this false and most wicked of acts is that, like we stated before, it attempts to have it both ways.
One the one hand, its supporters claim biologically deterministic claims, ‘I was born this way,’ yet while on the other hand they take and abuse free-will by choosing to do that which defines them.
As stated earlier in this book, all that is found in nature (in terms of procreation) works towards the Ultimate end that always leads to begetting offspring and thereby procreating for the survival of the species.
If, as the homosexual agenda states, they were truly born this way, then nature always working within the great order that defines and sustains it, would have also provided for the means of procreating within that new structure. If, on the other hand, biological determinism is not included in their agenda, then the ultimate conclusion is abuse of that which is freedom to choose and act.
If we take Chesterton’s model of logically following through a thought from beginning to end and arrive at two possibilities, these two would be it. As we can clearly note, nature, through God’s great providence, did not provide them with a method of procreation, hence we are left with the latter conclusion.
Just like the abortion advocates claim, ‘it’s about my choice!’ Always keep the following in mind---all people whether pagan, secular or Christian are recognized and confirmed by what their actions are or are attributed to them. No one is born an engineer, or a baseball catcher, or a priest, these are all terms that are given to identify a state of action. A homosexual person is not born the same as person who is born Black, White, Yellow or Red, for their identification comes from a state of being at birth, not from what they are doing at birth, nor later in life. A homosexual person, who claims is born this way, would by their interpretation be born doing the act by which they are known by, like a baseball catcher would be born catching a baseball! This is where this thought process, if the formula of complete thinking as followed by St. Thomas and G.K. Chesterton, would logically lead one to.
Also, for those who like to think of themselves as secularly progressive and anti-free-will, then the next time you choose anything over something else, keep in mind that you have just crossed over into the Christian world of free-willed, volitional freedom, and would be obligated to thank God!
“Freedom is glorious, but freedom is enjoyed only within the rules. We are defined by our limits, like the frame around a picture. You can free a tiger from his bars, but you cannot free him from his stripes. Freedom gives us the privilege to govern ourselves.”
No comments:
Post a Comment