Two very good posts actually by you. Thanks. But you and I just don't have any common frame of reference at all. I think it is relevant what the law of the land is, and think it should be respected, as relevant, even if one advocates a change. I guess I am just an incorrigible secular democratic humanistic pluralist. And I don't think any advocacy of kidnapping based on some religious doctrine is anything other than akin to cultism. That kind of thinking just leads into the opening, yet once again, of Pandora's box. We have been there, and done that, and the experience was neither sacred nor noble, nor frankly, anything other than sanguinary.
Actually a bit of a backhanded compliment but Thanks.
But you and I just don't have any common frame of reference at all.
If you believe 2+2=4 then we can make a start from there. That would mean you believe in an absolute truth on some level.
I think it is relevant what the law of the land is, and think it should be respected, as relevant, even if one advocates a change.
I think it is relevant that the law of the land acknowledge Christ as the source of all power, whether a country is democratic or monarchic it must be subject to God's law.
I guess I am just an incorrigible secular democratic humanistic pluralist.
Why is that not akin to cultism in attitude?
And I don't think any advocacy of kidnapping based on some religious doctrine is anything other than akin to cultism.
Yet you didn't address the exact same action in the name of "secular protection" by the secular state. Cultism is already in the public schools in the form of "outcome based education" which is really just secular indoctrination, nature worship in the form of environmental propaganda, And the imposition of a Creed of religious pluralism, Indifferentism that directly undermines religious truth in the same way that 2+2=5 or 7 or 1. Error is allowed to blend with fact.
That kind of thinking just leads into the opening, yet once again, of Pandora's box. We have been there, and done that, and the experience was neither sacred nor noble, nor frankly, anything other than sanguinary.
Pandora's box was opened when Christendom was resisted. There is no historical precedent that matches the murder and violence and degradation of humanity by today's standard. It's just nice and neat now that you don't see the blood flowing from the hundreds of millions of babies, unneccesary surgeries, harvesting of organs for "transplants" the problems of drugs, pornography, the secular attack on the family (and ultimately the Trinity) by groups that want to "redefine" the family according to their sexual appetites, Feminism trying to destroy femininity and blurring gender roles. All of this is advocated on a steady diet of filth pumped into the homes by a secular Mass media. Secularism is not neutral it is a positive attack on Christianity in the form of Catholicism. All other Christian denominations have compromised or aided the situation in one point or another. I know that sounds fantastic but G.K. Chesterton (hardly a clouded mind or cultlike mentality in the sense you referred to) said the same thing at the end of his life as well. Christ doesn't allow us to sit it out, we are either with Him or against Him. And if you look carefully you can see that the attitude of secularism or pluralism is ultimately against Him.
That truth had already been put in one sentence by St. Jerome, when he said that, if the Graeco-Roman world had accepted the Catholic Church in time, the decay of civilization would never have taken place. --Hilaire Belloc, The Crisis of Civilization: Being the Matter of a Course of Lectures Delivered at Fordham University 1937 (Tan Books, c. 1937/rep. 1992, p. 39)
You will not remedy the world until you have converted the world. -- Hilaire Belloc, The Crisis of Civilization: Being the Matter of a Course of Lectures Delivered at Fordham University 1937 (Tan Books, c. 1937/rep. 1992, p. 165).