It is vile if you do it in person. It is vile if knowing your person will be avoided by him, you do it by intrigues with other persons which he has as yet an interest in not avoiding. And it doesn't exactly become noble just because you do it with spiritual means, like magic, post-hypnotic suggestions (if such are possible to you or to an intermediate) or even prayer.
I say this because some people seem to have been very busy seeing to it, that I do not get recognised as a Catholic writer for what I have written all the while offering me ways out which I would counnt in one case as apostasy (like becoming a new ager) and in another case as a heinously false confession (like confessing to having been a new ager while writing).
This goes for the theme of angels guiding stars and planets, including sun and moon and the moons of Jupiter and Mars, and including both α Centauri and 63 Ophiuchi - which is a logical explanation for them showing "parallax" in opposite directions, since the observed movements cannot both be parallactical illusions seen from a moving earth, since earth cannot move around the sun in two opposite directions at once.
| 63 Ophiuchi is perhaps not the best example of negative parallax, another clearer one, same implications, see below. |
This goes for believing Odin lived, was a magician and founded a false religion which gave him power in Sweden. This goes for believing similar things about Romulus and Remus or for believing Mahabharat may reflect memories of pre-Flood Nodian civil wars. In each of these cases, I have known New Agers from sufficiently close to know that as long as they aren't becoming Catholic, they will prefer to believe that earth does move, that stars may be living organisms, but not lamps (or reflectors) wielded by angels* as I believe, that Odin, Krishna, Romulus, Jesus were all different degrees of Avatars of different divine emanations of Brahma or whatever, and that Mahabharata is straight uncorrupted immediate history, Bhagavadgita correct morals and Genesis the book which may contain corrupted half memories rather than Mahabharata.
And therefore, I have no reason either to have to confess to any Catholic who doubts about me, that I was in these matters fooled by a New Age philosophy, and even less to confess I had not been a good Thomistic philosopher, since if anything it is rather they who have been too Kantian to be good Thomists.
Similarily, this goes for claiming I have been seeking avidly for spirituality in my life, when I have been seeking for certain successes, and so it goes for anyone offering me to become a monk or an adept of a gooroo, or a hesychast or a seeker rather than a having-found-er, and it also goes for anyone claiming I need to get rid of spirituality before I can live a normal life. It is not I, but such enemies, who have blocked me from living that. Enemies including but not limited to the shrinks who tried to bump into my life back when in 5-II-1998, day of St Agatha 17 years and some days ago, I defended myself against them. And of course it also goes for "alternative" offers of either sinking into alcohol abuse and habitual drunkenness or "rising" from such a thing, which I never was into in the first place.
I do not know how often I shall need to repeat this. I do know that IF I had become a freemason, I could in their modern theory get out of it by for instance writing them a letter saying I am leaving them, BUT I have never been into their lodges, not as an adept and probably not even as a visitor, and so they can always claim before fellow masons, that I am a candidate but they are still trying me, and my complaints are a breach of the one year silence they require. No, I am not a candidate, have never been and God guard me in the good intenttion so I will never be so either! Similarily, anyone claiming to be testing me to see "if I am worthy to become a Jew" is committing a similar fraud. I have been in love with a girl who turned out to have Jewish connexions, but she was obviously also a Catholic and it was as a Catholic, not as a Jew, that I considered us as "belonging to the same people" i e as sharing the same faith. And if anyone is waiting for my rejection of "Pope Francis" to become a rejection of Papacy, I hope he is not holding his breath. Waiting till I die before seeing he was waiting for nothing, might involve more time than even Brahmins know how to keep their breath.
I am personally thankful to any Jew, Protestant, Communist, Moslem, etc. who has openly helped me. This does NOT involve gratitude to their communities, and if they want some token of gratitude, they can after all ask me to write about a set subject, but not to avoid certain subjects and not to state what they would want stated on the subject. A writer is not the same thing as a mouthpiece for his benefactors, especially not if they have convictions other than he has.
Nor is gratitude an obligation to reexamine whatever division there is in religion or philosophy or politics between myself and the benefactor.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
St Romwald, Abbot,
founder of Camaldulenses
7-II-2015
* Personal, purely spiritual angels, personally devoted to God who created them and us, and personally opposed to our enemy Satan and the other powers of Hell. The angel who holds the Sun made it stand still over a place for the benefit of Joshua, not for the benefit of Agamemnon. He danced for Our Lady at Fatima in Portugal, but not for any Pagan divinity. Stars fought from their orbits for Barak, not for Barack Obama.
| I had known from the catalogue search on Tycho Main there were these objects with negative parallax, and in these high ranges, but had no names for them, so I checked a search with "negative parallax" and landed on 63 Ophiuchi - which I presumed would be the clearest case of negative parallax, since only one mentioned in wikipedia. Then I misread the range. My bad. Since I am a writer, not an astronomer, I will not loose the promotions in astronomy for this, I am not expecting any.
The maximum negative parallax I found, at any rate, had rectascension 040.79214577 and declination +41.43010962. It is not 63 Ophiuchi, since that star has (according to wiki) Right ascension 17h 54m 54.04380s and Declination −24° 53′ 13.5413″. Even if the system of the catalogue did allow a totally different notation of rectascension, the declination would hardly vary between ... well, here is what the README has to say about ra and dec: Right ascension (epoch J1991.25, ICRS): Field H8/T8 from the Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, range [0,360]; Declination (epoch J1991.25, ICRS): Field H9/T9 from the Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, range [-90,90] T8 and T9 are the fields I copied. These should be identical for the H8 and H9 fields in the other catalogue. Well, what do we get: Catalogue Selected: Hipparcos Main Catalogue Fields and parameter search limits: ra (degrees): Min 040.791 Max 040.793 dec (degrees): Min 41.429 Max 41.431 0 entries satisfied your request. But switching to Tycho Main we do get one, namely the one I started with. Parallax -904.4 mas. More than a thousand times greater negative parallax than the one I read (when rereading correctly) for 63 Ophiuchi. |
No comments:
Post a Comment