Totally agreed. What passes for current morality is a decaying relic of the past, an inheritance from our forefathers who, unlike most people today, vividly experienced the moral law as a creation of God, just as He created the natural law.
With God "gone" out of the contemporary picture, the opportunities for experiences of divine Truth become increasingly rare. We remember the words, but we no longer feel what lies behind them. Active reciprocal love is gone out of them. And so if the words constrain us overmuch, we simply ignore them. We become our own "moral center" — thus the increasing subjectivity of "morality" nowadays.
But human history tells us that societies only last and flourish where there is a shared moral consensus, that is, a commonly agreed-on objective morality that binds the entire community together.
Now as an objective morality, I recognize that what the authors of the DoI wrote was the culmination of the classical/Christian historical moral development over two millennia of human experience. It stresses life, liberty, individual responsibility and accountability, self-reliance, and the sacred dignity of the individual human person.
However, the "Modernist project" does not seem to value such things. In our age of "group think," all such are under relentless attack.... The human individual continues to shrink away into virtual nothingness, while the putative "plight" of groups is shouted from the rooftops.
But notice this: There is nothing in the federal Constitution that takes any cognizance of "groups." Justice is always premised on the individual....
In this, the Framers were very prescient, wise men: For the group, not the individual, is the natural unit for party organizational purposes; and the Framers found the idea of "political parties" and "party politics" extremely distasteful, as fomenting passions rather than encouraging deliberation according to reason.
The present moral/cultural meltdown cannot continue much longer without devastating effects (IMHO FWIW). Truth cannot be denied and will always assert itself in the long run — Even if there are human beings who think God and His Truth are non-existent; or find God's Truth "wrong" or inconvenient. In whichever case, the "old morality" needs to be "improved upon" by human efforts to make it other and "better" than it is.
Perhaps it will take a truly horrific catastrophe before human beings wake up to such facts. And I do call them "facts!"
Thank you so much for your excellent essay/post, dear brother in Christ!
[[self-reliance, and the sacred dignity of the individual human person.]]
Yup- that’s what’s sorely missing htese days- our government feels they are to be relied on, and are imposing subjective ‘morality’ to ensure we becoem dependent upon our government instead of ourselves, which is a real shame because it does away with a sense of accomplishment which is a major dirving source which compels us be the best we can be. Instead, what we have today, are peopel liek the woman who was interviewed and aksed why she voted for Obam, and she replied something like ‘Cuz now we are gonna get us some ‘Obama money’, and when asked where the ‘Obama money’ was suppsoed to come from, she had no answer, just that she felt she was entitled to profit from wealth redistribution, and that was good enough for her. ‘Obama money’ indeed!
[[The present moral/cultural meltdown cannot continue much longer without devastating effects (IMHO FWIW).]]
Agreed- the wealth redistribution has been proposed for a very long time now, since Lincoln’s days infact, when it was tried, but failed. Democrats have tried ever since to manipulate the country to becoem welfare dependents, and as such, We’ve seen a steady and constant degredation of our country to hte point where I beleive that God has removed His blessings from this country, and we’re seeign hte results, and it aint pretty, yet the far left still feels that their subjective ‘morality’ is superior to God’s and won’t go down without a fierce fight.
[[Even if there are human beings who think God and His Truth are non-existent; or find God’s Truth “wrong” or inconvenient.]]
They know i ntheir hearts that His morality isn’t wrong, but you nailed it by stating they feel it’s inconvenient, and impedes o ntheir lust for sin, power and corruption
[[In whichever case, the “old morality” needs to be “improved upon” by human efforts to make it other and “better” than it is.]]
Yup- and we’ve seen the disasterous results of subjective morality ‘improving’ on objective universal morality- it has NEVER worked, and never will- but again, the far left socialists are bound and determined to do away with anythign which sears their conscience
[[Perhaps it will take a truly horrific catastrophe before human beings wake up to such facts. And I do call them “facts!” ]]
Oh I hope not- We’re already sufferign from God turnign His face from this nation- We were ocne them ost repescted nation on earth (Note- I’m not saying we were liked- this is a much different issue than being respected), and it’s clear that Obama values being liked more than he values being respected, and his policies are goign to just turn God’s face fro mthis nation even further- Where God effectively hands the socialists over to their own evil desires. Nations used to look to us for help and guidance precisely because we would NOT compromise on moral values (for htem ost part- yes, there have always been corrupt politicians, but we’ve had great presidents who have udnerstood that this coutnry NEEDS God’s blessings in order to remain great) but unfortunately, our current president just doesn’t get it, or just doesn’t care (I thin kthe latter), and a great many socialists in power are too consumed by the lure of power $$ and shallow ‘pats on the back’ by those who are out to destroy us
VERY VERY VERY EXCELLENT POINTS. THANKS:
#############
BETTY BOOP:
With God “gone” out of the contemporary picture, the opportunities for experiences of divine Truth become increasingly rare. We remember the words, but we no longer feel what lies behind them. Active reciprocal love is gone out of them. And so if the words constrain us overmuch, we simply ignore them. We become our own “moral center” — thus the increasing subjectivity of “morality” nowadays.
But human history tells us that societies only last and flourish where there is a shared moral consensus, that is, a commonly agreed-on objective morality that binds the entire community together.
Now as an objective morality, I recognize that what the authors of the DoI wrote was the culmination of the classical/Christian historical moral development over two millennia of human experience. It stresses life, liberty, individual responsibility and accountability, self-reliance, and the sacred dignity of the individual human person.
However, the “Modernist project” does not seem to value such things. In our age of “group think,” all such are under relentless attack.... The human individual continues to shrink away into virtual nothingness, while the putative “plight” of groups is shouted from the rooftops.
But notice this: There is nothing in the federal Constitution that takes any cognizance of “groups.” Justice is always premised on the individual....
In this, the Framers were very prescient, wise men: For the group, not the individual, is the natural unit for party organizational purposes; and the Framers found the idea of “political parties” and “party politics” extremely distasteful, as fomenting passions rather than encouraging deliberation according to reason.
The present moral/cultural meltdown cannot continue much longer without devastating effects (IMHO FWIW). Truth cannot be denied and will always assert itself in the long run — Even if there are human beings who think God and His Truth are non-existent; or find God’s Truth “wrong” or inconvenient. In whichever case, the “old morality” needs to be “improved upon” by human efforts to make it other and “better” than it is.