Becoming-Protestant of SSPX like Opus Dei is as much a production of Catholic political technology. It’s Leo’s pragmatic heresiology prosecuted by something like orchestrated acting-out, confessio on the offensive. Are we ready for the culling game that is counter-reformation II?
SSPX still don't realize that they're now in the same category as the Lutherans and Anglicans, because they only want the Catholic aesthetics without submission and fidelity to Rome.
Congrats on becoming Protestant!
Catholic desiring machine does not think fundamentally of ideological mediation. ‘Woke’ oscillates between ‘everything is a mask’ & ‘the mask is ontological evidence.’ The former is impotent, the latter potent gnosticism (evangelical drift), which this Pope was chosen to unmask.
I think one of the main reasons why some Catholics are shocked by the SSPX excommunications is because in our current day, ecclesial punishment seems to go only one way. Yes, the consecrations against papal approval were a schismatic act, and the punishment is deserved.
But this upcoming Sunday, you could essentially attend a “Pride Mass” (like this one pictured below, from last Sunday) and not face any penalties. You can advocate for women’s ordination, publicly dissent from Catholic teaching on contraception (see Fordham University’s president), or be a pro-abortion politician (Biden)—and you remain in “full communion”.
I’ll leave it to the canon lawyers to figure out legal minutiae. But the fact is, on the ground, faithful Catholics see a ridiculous double standard. You can “bless” a same-sex partnership during Mass (pictured below, at London’s Holy Apostles Church), and remain a priest in good standing. You can doubt the existence of Satan (see the Superior General of the Jesuits), and publicly dissent against revealed truths, and still not be excommunicated.
This isn’t “whataboutism”. This is an attempt to examine the basic principles by which the Church condemns dissent and rebellion. If those principles aren’t applied evenly and consistently, don’t expect the Catholic faithful to trust the Church’s leadership on crime and punishment.
Some poems are autobiographical (Schiller), some are anti-autobiographical (Holderlin). Some are para-biographical (Stein), some infra-biographical (Dickinson). The former compete over biographism, the latter over its beyond. The law (=desire) “write your life” itself is written.
Psychology-therapy is a business proposal: it says all human drama can & should be negotiated with egoistic compromise. Suicide threats are egoistic, but that’s irrelevant. The task is to get something “on the table,” which, if spoken, makes a person feel like they’re alive.
Clavicular & the culture he bears is burdened by a fundamental misreading. He ‘believes’ the image creates desire, but it is desire that creates the image. Still even belief believes in the image not as bait but gaze. Images bait by seeing & drawing desire in the field of being.
One of the strategies I used to become more neurotypical was to pick out a random person on the street and follow them around for the entire day. I would carefully log all of their movements and observations I made.
I still try to do this from time to time, but I get recognized alot which makes it hard.
@pachabelcanon The situation here is one where the perspective articulated by the utterance negates the content of what is articulated. It may well be a condition for this form of communication we are engaging in here. It would also be the highest contradiction for the Habermasian orientation.
Need a term to designate a saying of something that refutes its sense by the saying of it. ‘Hypocrisy’ doesn’t work: the operation of unmasking is the very thing that the utterance at hand falsifies itself with. ‘Inauthenticity’ also no, since it is always a mode of authenticity.
People don’t realize that writing requires practice, which means, yknow, doing it. Nobody who doesn’t practice violin would wonder why they can’t play a violin sonata, but there are so many people who are like “I’m a writer, but I don’t write, because I never have any ideas”
@pachabelcanon ‘Peformative contradiction’ (a tautology because what form of contradiction wouldn’t suspend the ‘act’ of reasoning?) is intended to mean something like: ‘you can’t say that ‘nothing is true’ because your use of ‘is’ is a case of saying something is true.’
…there are commas…? What you don’t see on the left are parentheses. Why? Because in the desert nothing can hide, while in the swamp the world hiding itself from the eyes of men. M’s Gnostic hunt for what cannot hide from the voice in the wilderness loses F’s art of the un/canny
This is why Cormac had to leave the South and become a Western writer. The comma dawdles and delays. It’s fit for a former aristocracy decaying in humdity. Nomadic desert war machine speeding thru desert needs no comma.
@UndermineLove3 Provocative question I don’t really mean but is worth addressing: in what way does this not amount to identifying the cause of the egirl with pedophilia? Ultimately perversion drives all this much less than we assume but it is not easy to articulate
signified by his age the exogeneity to time of novelty, so that time itself changes, not merely things in time. Holderlin was for Hegel the deeper influence because he signified crisis of novelty in the face not so much of the weight of the tradition (Bloom) but it’s arbitrarity
“The German language likes to call the last day (the point in time that closes all time) the youngest day,” said Kant—an old man whose rush to youth created an infinite distance “in either direction” (Jacobi), like Zeno’s turtle. But Hegel, denoted by his friends as the “old man”
@_bonaventurian@tenshi_anna False refutation. Nothing “was never love in the first place” because whatever “was never” never even appears as such; any cognition of it as a ‘false love’ is a falsity that belongs to the object of that ‘love’. You cannot prove yourself into the situation that calls for proof.
Written artifacts are still being written if read, not by hermeneutic vitalism of a ‘zeitgeist’ but by the written’s making the reader per se—& the making of the reader-model is transmitted to the reader, making the condition for interpretation as intervention into social process
Virgil: guide for one who remembers-repeats-and-works-through the personal hell, object of a desire deeply complicit with its own imposture, & substitutable (& finally substituted at the edge of creation) with a woman.