The Revolution revolves around the denial of sin, Original and actual September 3, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, different religion, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
Comprehending the nature of the Revolution that has invaded, undermined, and eventually subdued the former Christendom is not an easy task. The Revolution is noxious, it is invidious, and it is subtle. It is more than the sum of its parts. It is diabolical. It’s first major eruption was the protestant revolt but it has metastasized many times since then, from the rationalism of the 17th century to the endarkenment of the 18th and all that has come since (including socialism, communism, modernism, etc).
The Revolution is examined in great detail by Plinio Correa de Oliveira in his magnum opus Revolution and Counter-Revolution. The book is a critical analysis of the nature of the Revolution – which above all is ONE – from the perspective of first principles, history, and moral doctrine. As such, it approaches its criticisms from a variety of angles, far too many to fairly post. But I think Oliveira reduces the Revolution to its essence in his chapter on the revolutionary denial of sin, and its co-opting of sinful behavior to serve as its greatest selling point.
Hopefully the below will make as much sense to you, without the prior 60 pages of background material, as it did to me:
Among the multiple aspects of the Revolution, it is important to emphasize its inducement of its offspring to underestimate or deny the notions of good and evil, Original Sin, and the Redemption.
…….The Revolution is a fruit of sin. However, if it were to acknowledge this, it would unmask itself and turn against its own cause.
This explains why the Revolution tends not only to keep silent about its sinful root but also to deny the very notion of sin. Its radical denial applies to Original and actual sin and is effected mainly by:
- Philosophical or juridicial systems that deny the validity and existence of the moral law or give this law the vain and ridiculous foundations of secularism
- The thousand processes of propaganda that create in the multitudes a state of soul that ignores morality without directly denying its existence. All the veneration owed to virtue is paid to idols such as gold, work, efficiency, success, security, health,etc.
The Revolution is destroying the very notion of sin, the very distinction between good and evil, in contemporary man. And, ipso facto, it is denying the Redemption by Our Lord Jesus Christ, for, if sin does not exist, the Redemption becomes incomprehensible and loses any logical relation with history and life.
In each of its stages, the Revolution has sought to de-emphasize or radically deny the existence of sin.
In its liberal and individualistic phase, the Revolution taught that man is endowed with an infallible reason, a strong will, and orderly passions. [This is the “enlightenment” phase, upon which this country was founded, although with a fair recognition of the darker aspects of mankind] Hence the concept of a human order in which the individual – supposedly a perfect being – was everything and the State nothing, or almost nothing, a necessary evil….provisionally necessary, perhaps. It was the period when it was thought that ignorance was the only cause of errors and crimes, that the way to close prisons was to open schools. The immaculate conception of the individual was the basic dogma of these illusions.
The liberal’s great weapon against the potential predominance of the State and the formation of cliques that might remove him from the direction of public affairs was political freedom and universal suffrage.
Already in the last century, [19th century] the inaccuracy of at least part of this concept had become patent, but the Revolution did not retreat. [It never retreats. Even in apparent defeat, the Revolution has in almost all cases been secretly spreading and gaining influence over aspects of men’s thinking, ready to erupt in a further and worse expression at some future date] Rather than acknowledge its error, it simply replaced it with another, namely, the immaculate conception of the masses and the State. According to this concept, the individual is prone to egoism and can err, but the masses are always right and never get carried away by their passions. Their impeccable means of action is the State, their infallible means of expression, universal suffrage – whence spring parliaments imbued with socialist thought – or the strong will of a charismatic dictator, who invariably guides the masses to the realization of their own will. [The Revolution never acknowledges its error. It can admit of no error, because its tenets are fundamentally religious. It is a religion of man against God, positing an earthly paradise against the eternal, perfect one. It is the mass cultural acceptance of satan’s lie that “we may be as gods.” It is the most pernicious belief system and competing religion the Church has ever faced, and there hasn’t been a totally effective response against it found, yet. That is why a lot of people, not out of despair, but out of a sense of realism, believe that this culture will probably have to go through some kind of collapse that finally and irretrievably reveals the lies of the Revolution before a true restoration can begin.]
In one way or another, whether placing all its confidence in the individual alone, the masses, or the State, it is in man that the Revolution trusts. Man, self-sufficient thanks to science and technology, can resolve all his problems, eliminate pain, poverty, ignorance, insecurity, in short, everything we refer to as the effect of Original or actual sin. [“The vision of the anointed,” or the technocratic revolutionary elite trying to establish their earthy paradise with them at the top rather than a Christian aristocracy]
The utopia towards which the Revolution is leading us is a world whose countries, united in a universal republic, are but geographic designations, a world with neither social nor economic inequalities, run by science and technology, by propaganda and psychology, in order to attain, without the supernatural, the definitive happiness of man.
In such a world, the Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ has no place, for man will have overcome evil with science and social progress, and will have made the earth a technologically delightful paradise. And he will hope to overcome death one day by the indefinite prolongation of life.
For terrifying (in their accuracy) visions of this future I highly suggest reading We by Yevginy Zemyatin or Brave New World by Alduous Huxley. Both books contain immoral scenes but I think they are quite realistic potential future dystopias the Revolution would like to create and thus their value outweighs their problems. The religious aspects of worship of the Revolution cum super-State are very apparent in We.
All the ideas above can be fleshed out a great deal more. They also of course have limitations and objections, but I think overall the designation of Revolution as one, unalterably opposed to Christianity, and seeking to impose an endless human religion manifesting as a totalitarian state are inescapable. We should note the degree to which notions outlined above are very visible within the Church today. It is highly desired by the Revolution and their primary agents the Freemasons to make the Church the basis for this one-world religion and New World Order of no real national boundaries and one global superstate. The present pontificate seems to have fired new hopes that this dream may be much closer to realization than it appeared even a few years ago.
Our primary weapons against this looming dystopia are prayer, penance, practice of virtue, and personal awareness of the nature of the enemy we face. I hope to have more on possible means of reaction later.