A Likely Story

The Truth cannot be canonized by men.  Canons pretending authority on matters of Ultimate Truth can be written by men, but the referral is not the thing referenced.  One would suppose this were taken for granted by people who hear stories from others' lips, or read words of written language, nothing more than marks on something which when looked upon remind the looker of his spoken language, and so he "reads" the marks, interpreting them as indications of an attempt to preserve the spoken word in visible form.  He then must interpret the words themselves without any active support of the author (unless he was the author himself, obviously).  That would be next step to perform.  If he has access to the author, even then the author must go through the same process (unless he has an eidetic and accurate memory of his writings), and must remember what he meant by his writings.

That is just how shallow text is.  It is just a phenomenal form in our experience, completely without any meaning except what we attribute to it.  When we write our words, just as when we speak them, there is a certain intended effect upon those who would read them, just as there would be such an intention upon those who would hear them if we had spoken them.  The difference between spoken and written word is tremendous!  The depth of the spoken word is immediately the person speaking, the depth of the written word is about half a millimeter as an entity of paper and ink, or perhaps a few centimeters of lacuna in stone if an inscription, or maybe some scratches on metal if an engraving. That's what written words are.  Nothing more.  Sure, many elements inform such artifacts with meaning beyond the phonemic interpretation of the image, and the subsequent delvings into the semantics of that product.  But these elements are in themselves feeble in their assistance compared to the living person himself who may better assist us in person, by literally "telling us what he means".

Speech is simply telling someone what you mean by "saying it".  It can be said by gestures, looks, postures, breath, tone, rhythm, but primarily it is meant to be a verb which refers to the human act of using the vocal cords, mouth, tongue, teeth, lungs, diaphragms, etc to generate sounds which present ideas from one mind and offer them to the consideration of another through some lexicon of reference so that the effect of these sounds is to stimulate some minimally accurate sets of images (broadly construed to include all forms of sense), and which result in a mental state in the hearer which, taken at its face value, is a bare act of suggestion where the hearer's mental state is accessed through its own willing attention and guided to have experiences which do not directly result from bodily sensations alone....

By the way, to avoid pretense and also to prevent confusion, I am simply performing an exegesis of a few insights I had earlier in my studies of "Early Church History", specifically with a view to getting my mind around the rather amusingly embarrassing notion of "paleo-orthodoxy" of the CHRISTIAN CHURCH (gratuitous thunderous echoes ensue...).  I found that while my own studies were primarily in philosophy, psychology, religion (these long before, during and after college), and the basics of a four year college education, my main academic experience was simply philosophy and Asian studies, no more no less.  I cannot pretend to a study of linguistics, archaeology, history, or a vast number of others subjects to which my investigations point, approach, delve, and sometimes explore without any reference to academic or other worldly sources of education other than those already acquired through my own experience through this flesh, by the witness of my Spirit, and with some augmentation by logical, intuitive, linguistic and other semantic narratives of expression which help me (and perhaps others) "make sense of it all".  I recommend caution to the reader of my blogs or other writings, to listeners of me or my recorded sayings, because this is just one example of how what someone is, and how they can appear to others can range from a gulf to an abyss.  You alone are responsible for what you make of it...  handle your own soul with care.

Now I can't imagine any of the Church Fathers saying such a thing as part of anything they ever said or wrote, can you!?  (Can I get a "hellz no"?).  Good, well, if you know anything about me at all, you know I am a Free Spirit and I don't take well to those who presume to "suggest" to me a state of mind they think better than the one they happened upon when they found me!  What I've seen of the dignity of people suggests to me that it can be found to have some proportionality to their unwillingness to put up with such a prospect in person, let alone through a secondary medium.  Good graces are not to be taken lightly or thrown about casually when considering the grave dignity of persons who administer their attention to those who may solicit it "in ignorance of whom it is they address".  It is a given that a person in himself is a secret to others, except insofar as others presume to be fluent in reading his "character" through his other bodily attributes.

That brings me back to the issue of soliciting attention through language.  Usually when we want to tell other people a story we start by getting their attention.  Of course maybe they will have other things they'd prefer to spend their time attending... so we might concern ourselves with the question of whether or not that is appropriate.  Usually common law systems develop in an informal manner, then institutionalize to ensure a set of rules gets commonly accepted concerning this detail, and the question of whether or not one can use coercion to demand the attention of the audience is not a minor detail of custom or law.  Stipulations concerning communication and all the vicissitudes of its manifestation are usually directly handled by those involved, taking for granted that there are boundaries which cannot be crossed without the consent of those involved, and that per the instance of interaction one side may enjoy rights which are not symmetrically reflected in the position of the other.

If someone wants to get your attention with a story, they should first of all make sure you're not busy with something you might think is more important... they should respect your privacy, and your right to decide what to include within it, as well as what to produce from within it.  One cannot win over an audience by jarring them with inappropriate distractions from their proper concerns...least of all to "simply tell them a story", no matter how important it may seem to be for the teller...

So we get back to the "Church Fathers".  When did this become a well-known entity?  This is an ICON, look it up.  An icon may or may not refer to a specific entity.  Indeed, much of history concerns itself with icons rather than actual persons, because the further one goes back into history there is a depth of significance which grows (due to its being causally antecedent to our current situation in fact) in inverse proportion to the efficacy with which its medium of expression to our awareness is capable of delivering that depth... or even of delivering an indication of this disparity enough to help us see that fact!  History speaks grandly of itself as soon as it opens its mouth, and the further back it goes in telling its stories, the more grandiose its pretensions to facticity becomes.

Iconography ceases to be a byproduct of effective communicative address, and becomes the exegetical equivalent of a mythology that is only openly addressed as such by "specialists in the field".  But if these people were grilled properly on the authority of such a mechanism of communication when it is anciently historical, religious, from a time of heavy conflict and dispute in which sources both living and recorded were subject to being "erased from history", or perhaps heavily distorted, and all through mechanisms of cultural hegemony controlled by parties who are heavily invested in the outcome of the processes of historical storytelling to which they apply their own heavy hands of occult authority, then these "historians" would be forced to admit that they are not at all unlike historians of ancient times who might be commissioned to write official history for some of these interested parties.  Those poor guys...  Not only were they always subject to the dangers of offending the wrong people, they might have even had agendas of their own... you think?

Take this interesting character as an example.  He's one of the "pillars" of Church Authority (cue echo machine), and he seems to have a lot to say about things that happened a long time before he was ever around.  We say he "has a lot to say" both in terms of volume and weight.  At least the volume is certain, but while the weight is heavy for a lot of people... it is for others "to be taken very, very lightly".  Can we be surprised given the "inverse law of authenticity" I proposed earlier that someone like this guy cannot be taken without a bucket of salt?  Read the outlines of his story, look at the line of Bishops of Rome, the Ecumenical Councils, the Church Schisms, the political, economic, and cultural forces at play (which were Byzantine to say the least...), and you have scratched the surface of that ABYSS of MEANING to which I have alluded earlier.

And this is for a not-unimportant story, if the CHURCH is to be understood, whether it is Roman or Eastern, or even Oriental...(forgot about them, huh?).  That's also just scratching the surface, because this is an historical story that is heavily edited by its promulgators throughout its own published record.  We don't have public accounts of what they edited out of their own public record except here and there, usually in a form recovered from being hidden for what ended up being many centuries longer than those who hid them would have hoped...  Yes, I'm talking about "The Gnostics".  Leaving aside the issues of terminology and its fine-tuning so as to avoid anachronistic dysplasias of ideation, we can refer to this group as a large, once living population of Christians (in a sense probably alien to most modern people) who were fairly wiped out of existence in the centuries preceding the manifestation of "Da Church", but whose straggling and sometimes resurging or even "resurrected" manifestations were finally stamped out by those who would later take their name "Ex Cathedra", from the Bishopric of Rome.

Aside from the "likely stories" which were produced to explain the line of authority which is claimed to exist from "Jesus" to "Simon Peter" to "Linus" to "Francis", we also have some interludes of severe editing of the sources themselves which would be publicly acknowledged as available for use in the inventions produced centuries after the facts (whatever they were), we have the gratuitous violence and coercion applied to the control of these resources (again, living and recorded), and we have the very underappreciated issue of the means of the propagation and preservation of authentic meaning through the means they had at the time, over time until now, and the particularly conflicted interests of those involved in these alterations, I mean "preservations" of historical and archaeological evidence.

Much of what is claimed concerning the undergirding of the authenticity of Da Church's lineage is simply apocryphal.  Get real, people...  They made this shit up after the fact on the face of it, as this was almost as good as going along with what was kept preserved in a reliable form concerning the events which purportedly took place.  We also know that these remains of evidence were HEAVILY redacted and altered, by both nature and men, interested and uninterested, and GOD ALMIGHTY had almost NOTHING to do with that (unless you mean Yahweh-Demiurgos by "God", then we could say he had everything to do with that, but this will only confuse modern readers as to my point here).  Looking at the FACTS as we experience them, we are treated to a very fanciful story right away, just looking at what is proposed in front of us!

Then when we look into the doctrines they've established, the hackneyed and hacked up canon writings they offer, the dogmas they've propounded, especially when we refer to the dramas of Da Schism and the Ecumenical Councils, we come away with the image of a complete FARCE being passed off as reality and normality.  It is a supreme fraud.

Christianity as the world knows it today is a completely distorted mockery of whatever it was before the likes of Iraneaus got hold of its name and corpse and paraded about with its mutilated forms as they saw fit.  It was also a complete farce BACK THEN...  That is why they killed off anyone who didn't agree with their particular version of what "Christ" means, along with everything else contained in the rubric of RELIGION.

They used deception, theft, plagiarism, coercion, fraud, murder, and every vice and crime to push through a version of "religion" for the masses which was, quite simply, calculated to crush and erase the Original Reality of what happened, is happening, and will happen.  They delayed the inevitable, the most they can ever do.  The Apocalypse is NOW, the charade is OVER.

By the way, without wanting it to appear merely tangential, I wrote that phrase because literature, which involves a use of human language which can subvert any aspect of culture.  It often does this for a good reason when it is a counter-establishment force, but when that reason is cosmic in scope, it surely must be taken seriously or else all pretense to taking consciousness, existence, spirit, religion, ethics, doing what is right, etc. ALL MUST BE SURRENDERED AS INVALID.  So in order to be a "good man" or a "good woman", and more generally a "good person" one must often oppose others who would dictate to you what those terms can and cannot mean.  This is a fundamental fact of human existence in all cultures, but the use of language and ritual to a higher level than can easily undersood and either rejected or subverted is the reason for the existence of "art" in the first place, as Plato rightly suggested in his Republic.  Therefore we see literature, which is simply written language as a matter of FACT, is a tool of resistence against evil hegemonies which temporarily gain power over the Spirit in this evil world.  Therefore it is a KEY (the  Logos is a KEY) to the Kingdom of Heaven.  The ability to use human faculties to a level that is sublime, including the faculty of language, is the very antidote to the evil poison of many a deception and fraud.  So subterfuge and fraudulence can be properly assessed in these areas of the exercise of the Spirit incarnate, which is a fundamental aspect of REAL Christian culture, and that means Real Religious Culture regardless of the name.  So the phrase I used above allowed me to condense the ideas of a relevent novella of the late 1800s (Heart of Darkness) in its form as an adaptation for film in 1979 called "Apocalypse Now", which retells a story of what it is like to witness humanity in its true form, and yet to still retain the possibility of realizing a TRUER AND HIGHER FORM of an ideal that is suppressed in the world, not only by mankind himself (and that'd be bad enough) but also from "nature herself" and "god himself" and so on.  Apparently existence as such is against man and some philosophers made mind sculpture out of their wits trying to understand this fact which presents to us as a thing which should not be...   So literature in so many forms is very important to all involved with this war for the Spiritual Dominon over all who are on the earth, and that means also song, poetry, all genres, all styles, plays, cinema, sculpture, painting, dance, religion and philosophy, and the empirical sciences as well as all the trades.  So I really did want to "insert that feel" as the modern internet hounds like to say, and suggest to the reader that they have some options in expanding their minds and consciousnesses beyond what is planned for them by those others who would make them into clay puppets.  There are also many arts which can be practised that lend direct aid to this noble endeavor, and all of these are the subject of many a likely story of their own.

I recommend that you read about these things on your own, or explore by whatever means available, and delve as far in as you can, from any angle and to any chain of investigation to which your mind and Spirit are drawn, so that you can deprogram yourself from the abuses of THOSE WHO LIE, and restore to yourself some of the sanity they have stolen centuries ago, thousands of years ago, and which they've today semi-perfected into a technogogic nightmare for you and all of your descendants.  You will have to force your own way through Byzantium, forge your own ciphers, and work out your own methods of heuristics and analysis.  That is your "cross" to bear.  Don't let the likes of Irenaus, or "Innocent" III take that away from you through their modern effigies.  Seek the Key, and you shall find It.  This is partly because the Seeking, if from the Right Spirit, is part of the finding directly.  You find your Truth in the Seeking from the Spirit of Truth within you.  That is what the hierophantic demons want to take from you, though they themselves couldn't really possess it or use it.

Pft.  Just do what Ireneus or Origen, or Jerome et.al. did, and just go at it from your own deepest imagination.  Refer to the stew of highly questionable facts, of course.  Learn a little something of logic and good sense and apply that, too.  But basically take a page from the book of the fakes and forge your own authentic understanding of what "really happened".  At least then you'll be doing it for yourself rather than letting those damned fraudsters do it for you.  At least then you can own the iconography of your own spiritual fate and destiny rather than let someone else decide those matters for you.  You'll have an infinitely better chance starting from scratch, frankly.  That's what Buddha did.... and all the others.  You don't have to throw away a world of evidence in order to reframe it properly.

Just remember that its not just what people pretend their stories mean that ought to grab your attention, but how they go about getting your attention, and what they do if you refuse to give it to them on their terms.  Those things count also.  If you would rather be busy with "your own religion" than bothering to hear the ramblings issued at you by those who claim to be more expert than you, then maybe you should listen to that feeling and follow it for a change.  Especially if those who tried to get your attention with their version felt the need to threaten you if you wouldn't listen, or even if upon listening you wouldn't agree!  Follow the bloody trail to Truth, and it will tell you who the liar is.  Every time it is the one who uses force to communicate.  Break their hold from within, for whatever is stronger than they are must be the Truth, especially if they hate this in you.  By this Truth Within you can break their evil spells of lies, ignore their nonsense stories, see through their vain pretenses, overcome their foul noise.  Then the Truth will shine in That Silence they could never take from you, for their falseness needed to graft itself upon That Truth in order to have any weight.

For the best stories, anyhow, go to The Source.  Be there when it happens.  Don't get it from a delusional con man.  One heuristic I  like to use is rather scientific, and so it is probably worth sharing with you.  Take the proposed and popular truths of your day, in whatever form.  Reduce them to the "likely story" they really are by means of archeo-epistemic hermeneutics, as we did in outline for the story of "Christianity" in this particular instance.  Refer to the primary data of your own awareness by all its venues.  Check this data with whatever was suppressed from the supposed story of the status quo:  check this "Inner Data" with all possible contraries and contradictions to the system of thought proposed by the story-weavers arrayed against you.  See which has more consistency with your Inner Truth.   Notice this: it takes more energy to hold on to the lies now then it does to let go of them...  Just let them go.  Accept what remains as closer to "The Truth", and continue this process at all times.  You're bound to get some interesting results from that.  By doing that I was able to discover that all "Christianity" is amounts to "anti-Gnosticism", and all "Gnosticism" ever really amounted to was a kind of Religion which is polarized against this world as its distinguishing Spiritual Energy, and this took many forms throughout the "human event".  It is the Religion of Anti-Matter.  Test this by looking at the "anti-material" religions and religiousity of the ages, and compare that to the tenets held and deeds done by those who opposed them with the sword after failing with the word.  Sift through the modern evidence, compare it with the past.

Then ask yourself in a new way:  Who is God?  What is Truth?  How Best to Choose Rightly?  Keep doing this, and you'll get a certain set of results which prove it to be Truth or false, and vice-versa for the positions which oppose what you discovered.  Just trying to do this without being unduly distracted from it by the world which surrounds you will tell you a lot!

The world and its falseness demands you adhere to their story, I tell you how you might discover a more authentic one.  They aim their canons at you, I suggest ways you can survive their barrages of trickery.  That alone should tell you something about what "The Story" really is about!  It is a Story that in this world is being steadily and artfully hidden from you, and which you must find for yourself!

Monopolizers of Truth

Summarily Pope Francis reiterates that "It is absurd to say you follow Jesus Christ but reject the Church."

It appears that to their "god" it really matters how many people pray to him about something, about what, with what degree of fervor, for how long at a time, with what frequency over time, and by what means (usually ritual), and by whom are the prayers made, and at the behest of whom they are performed, how he is bedecked (in frocks), what is his known background, who liked him enough and for whatever reasons he was promoted in the church hierarchy, etc… (after all they pray quite a lot about who will be the next Pope, and all that "white smoke" when they finally figure it out… whoosh… wonder from where THAT symbolism arose… (pun intended).

In any event, for their god it boils down to bowing down one's very own soul, emptying it of all spiritual willpower, such as to even exercise a moral virtue, much more so if the thing willed were the decision of what were right or wrong on a moral level.  This means they've made a moral of being amoral.  They've made their primary ritual the sacrificing on the alter of obedience the very essence of their moral sovereignty!  They've called "god" whatever takes that sovereignty, and "the enemy of god" whatever asserts that sovereignty save whom they call "god", whether it is "only" a usurper of Spiritual Dignity or a creator of conditions in which they are usurped, by design and specifically for that purpose.  As to if they had such a Sovereign Spirit to begin with… it no longer matters because they are now its enemy, whether it is also in themselves or only in others who are perhaps far fewer, the world's smallest minority of any True and metaphysically Real identity.  To those who are not of this grouping, it must surely seem as if some Mind alien to those left out must have a very special Connection to those included in His Identity.  Since the Identity of this Great Mind, or Great Spiritual Lord is manifested in the world as a Spiritual Sovereign enclosed within an evil and enemy sheath of matter called "the world", then surely when the world "sees" He the Enfleshed they see some deformity of their own so-called "normality", when in fact they see The Real and Living God in the flesh.  And that flesh, if made worthy of the Spirit, would be ranked as something not unlike the "rohbutt" which protects Klaatu in the movie "The Day the Earth Stood Still", yet ensheathing as though a normal body would seem to, yet without any of its peculiar limitations.

The only limitations of the body would be that it must obey the dictates of the True Spiritual Sovereign within that body, no matter what other options are presented.  That means appeasing, as Socrates would say, one's Best Judgement, which means to satisfy One's Own Conscience above all else, which means to satisfy its "Guiding Voice", so that it sings through one as one's own voice, so that singing (in any form) becomes "Singing", and this is the ream meaning of "Praise God".  It is simply that this body is metaphysically insular in disfavor to the world except where that is critical for the purpose of the Spiritual Sovereign Judge over that domain, which is with whatever He comes into experiential or unexperiential contact.  This has to be a Substantive Fact or Religion means nothing, either because it has no extended substance or, more importantly, because it has no Substance of Devotion in a Spirit which Realizes This Truth.

But this is a question in most cases of becoming the case, this Transcendental Body, and rarely of Being in this world, and it is proven by an ocean of facts overflowing a pond of denial that this world and all its favored and popular authorities are frauds against those Spirits who are held back from the Truth by means of direct sabotage of their bodies and minds with poisons and lies, terrorism and all criminality, often disguised as war (whether for a holy cause or any other cause, including "against terror" or "against war criminals" or "against drugs", etc).  They demand the sacrifices on which these causes pretend to be righteously founded, and they make such pretenses nothing more than as window dressing to cover over opulent evils unspeakable around understanding children, or even around infants, because they would feel the chill and spiritual morbidity in the air as those who spoke it themselves shuddered or being so callous to their own topic and child would themselves have a detrimental effect on the child's Spirit (if it had one), and this no matter what they spoke about, but all the more on this topic!

There can be no good of this world except under the interpretation of what it "really is", and it is really a place of organized hellishness.  Those who claim rightful authorities in this world are really not worthy of the acclaim they receive in turn from these plebian masses of brain-washed lovers of Bread and Circus in all its forms!  We know its "warrior class" are a bunch of adrenalin junkies who have a strong sadistic streak and steroid-deformed bodies, who really do get off on having absolute physical power over a person's body as a sign of having absolute power over that person himself.  By extension, this represents a direct attack on the Spiritual Sovereign "ensheathed" within such a set of karmic bodies, and this is an evil violation of all that is Right, without exception.  As to the source of all this evil it is simply impossible to attribute it to this violated and Innocent Spirit, which is a SOVEREIGN BEING and cannot be judged, certainly not by some corrupt and inwardly evil committee of debauched and vile pigs in men's uniforms.

Yet it goes on, despite any and all protests, regardless of whatever actions are taken, or demands made by these Spirits.  They are commanded to desist their claims to BEING ITSELF beyond the point of RESPONSDING to these vile criminals, these would-be-cosmic overlords who rule through the petty mechanisms of those over whom the rule, mechanisms of subservience to the body and those who hold a sword over it.  All that flows from this in the form of pleasure or pain is all they can ever understand of morality, period, end of story.  There "is" no "moral psychology" of these beings, there is only "behavioral psychology".  Even some can understand this who are ensconced within academia, yet another arrogant domain of pseudo-authority with which Truthfulness and Honesty, as well as Integrity must contend as if a hopeless and hapless minority of spiritual folk surrounded by a continent of the damned.  Or, if one likes anything more concrete, take various Gnostic Religions at their beginning, prime, or decay before complete corruption set in and the same opposition to the "normal worldly order" is recapitulated in sterling exactitude:  Revolutionary Moral Thought of a Timeless Essence, adaptable to varied and temporal circumstances but never losing its Spiritual Content, and never sacrificing that Content to the vicissitudes of physical forms of expression or reflection.  Specific examples of this are the Proto-Religious origins of religion in all forms which spell out that this world is a battleground between Good and evil, and they have no properly common origin about their innermost essences, and they must fight to the death of either one or the other, and only the BETTER ONE WILL WIN and SURVIVE.  This is the only "Law" in this universe.

But these conventional mind-control cults cannot possibly satisfy the Spiritual Needs of a True Spiritual Sovereign, who must absolutely feel alienated by these institutions and most, if not all of their adherents.  Sometimes an adherent is presented in a private or public setting who, regardless of their notoriety seems a person of Moral Substance, sometimes even to a degree not properly demonstrated by a contrast in relative merit to that of greater evils!  One thinks specifically of the current Pope of the Church of Rome, Pope Francis, Pontificus Maximus in his official capacity in their order.  An order uniquely guilty of attempting to usurp the entirety of what is to be said about Jesus, and anything like Jesus in any other religion or religious interpretation about Jesus or again anyone like Jesus, even if these Beings and Religions, especially in their prototypical forms, pre-existed this Church and its Papacy by untold thousands of years!!!  Yet, comparing him to previous popes, he has gone the extra mile in demonstrating Mile High Humility!!  Oh Spiritus Romanus Rex, you are so HUMBLE!!!

     On the night he was elected, Francis greeted the crowd in St. Peter’s Square dressed in a simple white cassock. Although the tale may be apocryphal, it was widely reported that he refused to don the ermine-lined red cloak worn by past popes, telling Marini: “No thank you, monsignore. You put it on instead. Carnival time is over!”

Link to Quote

Yet this organization has no interest in revealing the world as it really is, as it won't even admit what that was 2,000 years ago, let alone before or since!  What do we need with their grandiose recomposure into a more fitting level of "pomp"?  Of course, one cannot help but enjoy the sight of someone showing the people as much simplicity and character as possible, with or without accessories of identity to augment the significance of such displays (and such displays with or without accessories are always significant when performed by a real "priest").

I once wore a "Cone Hat", and I've never explained it, why I wore it, why I stopped wearing it, what it was made of, what was inside of it and how affixed, what its effects were upon me as I wore it, nor even that I had worn it at all.  I will keep it that way.  But with or without that or any other accoutrements I am a Spiritual Sovereign and answer to no man or thing or spirit as if it were higher than My Own Conscience, not now nor ever, come whatever may!  As to figureheads in "spiritual offices" whose provinces of authority have long and shameful histories of unspeakable evil, don't ever try to impress me with your distinctive virtues, especially not as contrasted into greater distinction by way of being less evil than your predecessors and even your lower hierarchy.  This goes for any and all hierophants, whatever their claim to authority, by whatever means they express it, even those who claim "secular authority", which I say does not exist except far beneath Moral Authority and Spiritual Prerogative.

How on earth can such an office exist where excerpts concerning its significance rotate around the significance of its degree of pomp from one office-holder to the next?  As if the moral degeneracy of the office itself would be overcome by the relative virtue of one of its holders as compared with some previous to him, or as if this office, even if magically cleansed of its heinous evils and bloodstained history could somehow remake the whole church edifice into something different than it is, which is a rampaging murderer that has gotten "over the hill" in a world where the right to murder whom we please has been "emancipated" into a purely secular sphere, and so now these sorts of figureheads can slink back and talk about liturgical vestments and their latest fashions as if this were a "significant omen" about the spiritual state of things, even for the 1.2 billion people who purportedly think he is the "Vicar of Christ".

   

In an interview before Marini’s official reappointment, Francis said: “You say that my papal master of ceremonies is of a traditionalist character. And many have asked me about my choice to remove him from office and be replaced. I said no, just that I prefer him to even benefit me by his traditional formation and at the same time, so he is formed in the same way by my emancipated formation.”

Link to Quote

These are just a few pointed, empirically salient examples of why I say that in the Mysteries which I Oversee, I Know of No One on this Earth, with an Office over Me, save My Very Own Conscience, which is Supremely Rational, not of any merely opinionated ideation, and while It is Preeminently Explicable it is not responsible for others lack of understanding or affirmation as any flaw in Itself, but rather as a flaw inherent to those who aren't "initiated".  I'm saying that.

Now if only people who merely thought they were "spiritual" were able to commit to same path, with the same intensity.  They can't because this Truth "is not in them".  So, they not only do not have any use for the Truth, but they don't allow access to it for those to whom it is properly addressed.  Yet regardless, these Truly Blessed always and inevitably discover It "within themselves".  There is nothing in the power of these goat herders which can prevent it.

An Excursion Beyond the Ouroboros

One of the best, most professionally cast games by Gyle, very well done.  In congruity to this the players, two of the "OG"s of the game, and two of its top players, play with a finesse, precision, and ingenuity which are so masterful as to make the units themselves appear to be more "real", as if acting according to a potential which is more lifelike and intelligent down to their every step, where they go, when they stop, etc.  Their level of skill at micro-management along with macro-strategy are so precise and interactively gauged that it resembles the level of chess at which grandmasters of that game uniquely practice.  One wonders about these "pros", whether they were not in some way commenting on the game, and playing it, as though their very SOULS depended upon it.  One wonders if they would ever investigate the fates of their own souls as if their souls depended upon THAT.  Some possibly do.  

It's such a pity then that the rating system of this wonderfully designed modification to the original game, whether that rating system might not have been better designed to describe the strategic and cooperative substance of players and integrate that into their rating.  It might give a better climate for people who give a damn about the art and science of a cooperative game (when it IS team based), and who could actually play in the spirit of camaraderie and warriorship, even if only in such a way as can be squeezed out of a possibly very morally and physically unfit human being who may be at the computers involved. 

 But this game, any game, any activity which can contain or express the ideas of "excellence", are flawed with the subtle hubris of those involved, like all else in life, so that it can be rather easily derailed into the activity of proletarian-minded, spiritually crippled hylopsychic hominids.  Like so much else in our Ziodegradable "culture", it is a quicksand marsh of moral mush, with only a noxious effect on the spiritual sense of a True Person.

In the ages of decay, even excellence itself will become a mockery of the virtues it would have in a Golden Age been a token which vouched for their veritable proof of substance.  It must be owing to the format of this "New School" chess.  When the game is symmetrically "1 v 1" it is somewhat indistinguishable from two supercomputers playing each other (it is excellence almost altogether disembodied from the men themselves as such), and in team games, where bodies no longer inhibit the full expression of the good or vile natures of the persons involved, gives the maximum advantage to those truly capable of cooperation IN SPIRIT from those who are only banding together as a common extension of disparate egos.  It is that same hylic egotism that prevents the game designer to have bothered about such qualitative enhancements of the game which, in team play, would be programmable to give a reward peculiar to fact that better team play enables better team wins, and all other things equal MORE team wins for the team that does this better.

That is not only an unusual and valuable confluence of might AND right that one would think an intelligent method of signifying that could have been invented by that designer.  Unfortunately, it is probably beyond his ego's comprehension of things and values, so it cannot be understood well enough in the first place so that it could even begin to be translated into the required algorithms.  One would have rather hoped it were merely a lack of understanding of how to design such algorithms in computer language!  It is by the lack of a sense of MORAL SPIRITUAL AESTHETIC in such people that such qualitative aspects of anything humans do requires in order to be authentic and appreciable cannot be recognized, evaluated, and safeguarded by thought, word and deed.  In other words, they are proven, "even" in the sport of playing games of the most abstractly unphysical sort, to lack a truly religious sentiment within them, nor a proper conviction even for the real spirit of sportsmanship and warriorship.

The lack of such insights in people is the source of all corruption.  Their inability to properly respond to such are a cause for their tendency to hate and sometimes even actively persecute those who do possess it.

Still, there is a potential sense of "excellence" in this game, especially in this very battle here.  Games used to be integral parts of societies, and they used to enable social time to be filled with exposure to each other's spirits and their expressions.  In platforms like this, but also in an age of technocratic spiritual suppression generally, excellence is merely a "sheen" of itself, a mockery of itself.  It is like a unicorn which wanders in a forest as though "free" but in reality is in giant but well-secured cage of some kind.  It is NOT, on the face of it, truly a free being which it is meant to symbolize, except as this very symbol: something which SHOULD be free, is the ESSENCE of freedom, but is in chains, like on the coats of arms of many who take themselves to be "noble" (an opinion which crass society also seems to possess for some reason...).  The noblest of the crass, maybe?  In any event, the parasite in the brain of a parasite!  Maybe that would better describe their "position above others" in a truer fashion.

But that is an absurdity which is reflective of reality, not to be lightly disdained as to its truth value, rather than that, it should be judged by the value implied in how that truth is rendered.  So how absurd the modern human, who seems in some odd sense able to show a notion of value, virtue, and even excellence, but who in the end cares not one wit for a wider notion of moral values which actually faces the truths of a systemically evil society, and if left to its own devices and even one other righteous being, could form a true society right there with none of the abuses and pointless conflict of those societies they could gladly do without.

In other words, if a ratings system which tests for what qualities in a player makes him more worth playing WITH, then a proper contest between TEAMS (enemy armies) could take place, where virtue would be better rewarded in battle, and yielded more and better victories, at least insofar as such games could be invented which make such contests possible.  In other words, it would be a game which favored the "good" who can better form societies to begin with, and it would be a game which better fit into the spirit of such a society and its games, and more generally its culture.  We live in a world where all such societies are fundamentally sabotaged, both by "nature" as matter and "invention" as the spiritual essence or that mockery of the expressions of such an essence by another spirit.

In a contest between two such spirits, only "the real thing" would win.  Understanding this, and respecting it in all our behaviors, ritual or not, is what Spirituality MEANS.  But most humans are proven incapable of this.  But there is a strange residue of such proprieties in what humans actually do, but only "virtuous" in the same way that the disembodied and stuffed skin of an animal is "like" that animal...  And if virtue is really so manifested in this world when it is "at large" within it, then we have a very evil world, one which is surely the closest thing to hell known to good men, and one in which this very fact is even celebrated by the perverse mob, and actively affronted by their culture and, in semi-secret, desecrated as a religious act in the privacy of the homes of all, whether peasant or overlord.  If this is their "reality", it is less real than nothingness, because it is significantly less desirable for anyone with a true Moral Sense.  They'd rather "sleep through it" than live IN it.  But this is just as far beneath the dignity and worth of such a True Being that it would rather make a MOCKERY of that MOCKERY until this ends, if necessary, in its own oblivion.  It turns out that it will not, but will be the very bridge to His Origin.

So rather than ooh and ahh about the "excellent qualities" which can be seen in this game (and the Supcom Engine), I'd rather hone in on the spiritual rot which pervades it, as with all other parts of culture and society.  I'd rather put that EVIL to the question than pat it on its back's "good" part.  To be consistent, one must do this, or else compromise with, and succumb to, evil.  Only by preserving this alienation from what is evil can what is Good ever have hope of regaining an environment in which it truly belongs, where all that is possible for it is as much nobler than "nothing at all" than "nothing at all" is greater than this "worst of all possible worlds" at its root ontic through to its outer and manifest levels of phenomena, and that is to say by orders of infinities beyond those with which we are mathematically familiar, because they are Living and fully Qualified Existences, which are far beyond the "elohim" that these hylo/psychic anthropods uphold as their "Jehova".  Spiritual Men take their every act in this context, and are one with a Godhead completely antivalent to whatever crapsack entity behind THIS world in THIS universe!

We are NOT one, and every aspect of physics and culture, if forced through the sieve of a structure which favors TRUE excellence over its imitation, we would not only move toward a culture which is benign to Spiritual Men, but even capable of being expressions of such societies as are comprised of them.  Perhaps, after a few generations of such sincere civilization they would even BE such a society. That can no longer happen in this world, and if it could happen at all then certainly not openly so.

This is the REAL meaning of "As Above, So Below" which the New Thought Light Belaborers cannot properly understand since they can't understand the strange implications of admitting a duality of one kind, the physical versus the spiritual, but cannot seem to get any insight into a far more important one, which they wouldn't even have guessed by now if they were reading this, which is the distinction between Good and evil.

YET THEY PRETEND TO BE JUDGES OF WHO IS ONE OR THE OTHER ANYWAY

Pure hypocites, who can only mouth the words of justice but never exercise the substance of it, yet talk about it more superficially than anyone else and with the least number or quality of personal exemplifications of it in their lives, and even are often living antitheses of the idea!  They are in charge of the beast upon which they parasitically feast, and which they bring down eventually, and with it they descend into oblivion since they were not the real originators of anthing permanent nor permanent themselves, while the "true excellence" is returned to its Origin, along with all those who were never truly a part of that evil and facile world, hence never able to suffer a destruction with it as a member OF it.   Only we who would insist with that our every breath be drawn from a different air than our nemeses if possible, could possibly win in such a precise contest of wills which REAL Reality MUST demonstrate on pain of self-annihilation.  While they, on the other hand,would insist on the contrary, on an insistence of a falsified and insubstantial "commonality" (via materia), even though it is painfully obvious that such formalities are in a completely false spirit and in bad faith, and to be regarded as insignificant signifiers which signify the evil-mindedness which bespoke the signum but possessed not the signatum, namely, VIRTUE.  And so in the END it is the Good and True which will manifest ultimate Reality, and this is Known only by THEIR WISDOM, which the hylophiles cannot EVER comprehend or reach!  In THAT contest there can only be one Victory, and only ONE OF TWO will ascend to its Glory, NOT BOTH, the denials of the wretches notwitstanding.