gottlichenassi

I agree with Ryan that esoterica is insufficient for salvific instruction. However, I consider it an infinitely worse influence than esoterica for such instruction to be reduced to rational self-presence and masterable manifestation. It's idolatry of self and eliminates the entire core of Christian mystery. We must be extremely careful with these tendencies of the Hegelian liberal tradition (precisely the ones inevitably co-opted by Habermasian secularism)—if there is any Hegel worth retrieving, precisely for this reason, it is only the Hermetic, esoteric Hegel, as outlined by Glenn Alexander Magee, who effectively appropriates the totality of reason itself for Christian mystery (Neo-Gnostic heterodoxy notwithstanding). Apokalypsis works not by flattering rational self-presence but by breaking the sinful self and submitting it to God as utterly transcendent of it. That is the orientation of the analogia entis as Erich Przywara understood it—an uncompromising Augustinian theocentrism, willing to accuse the sinful eros of the finite self without the slightest liberal flinch. The fact is, some people are too obstinate to pay attention to the esoteric stakes of Christianity, and as they are cannot be genuinely taught, so that flattering them just destroys the entire pedagogical process. You have to leave particularly depraved individuals behind and demand that they change or face destruction by their own sins. Service to such mortal sinners precisely cannot be abstractly pedagogical, but rather must adopt more extreme methods to save them from themselves. You have to accept that some people do not have the resources to understand the erotic “ordeal of truth” (as Marion puts it) that faith reveals, because they prefer their sin over the truth. They have to experience genuine metanoia or they will never get it. You cannot let them rule you. The Straussians understand this better than Ryan does. What Ryan doesn’t seem to understand is the Augustinian point that sin is real and has real epistemic effects. He plays into the hands of the Straussians because he remains a Platonic-Origenist idealist who ignores actual depravity and so cannot actually confront it with Christian faith (this is precisely why Pope Benedict XVI, when confronted with Karl Rahner’s similar indulges of liberalism, said he understood why Origen was condemned). The Straussians CAN confront sin and depravity, but they do it with Machiavellian manipulation (that is: MORE sin and depravity). They have to be stopped, but stupid Rousseauian democratic populism, or any perspective whatsoever that affirms some kind of “general will” (as opposed to what William Desmond understands as “general eros”—everything hinges on this structural difference) is incapable of this. You have to abandon the utterly deceitful conceit of democracy and impose a different kind of hierarchical elitism that makes room for the relation of reason and revelation, or else you will be perpetually dragged down by the sin you endlessly indulge.

“Tudo o que os homens querem é sexo e dinheiro” Sonho do homem comum:

A Química é o mais próximo que temos de magia.

Se acostume com isso clavicular, até sua mãe só vai ser legal ctg se você tiver algo a oferecer A mulher que for diferente disso é raridade hoje

Clavicular left Akademiks SPEECHLESS after revealing he CRIED on camera once he realized no GIRL actually wants him…only what he can provide them 💔

Vcs já pararam para pensar que essa eleição provavelmente será a última em que teremos o privilégio de votar no político mais importante dos 526 anos de História do Brasil?