I've had several comments and compliments sent my way again - thank you to all who are continuing with me on this journey.
One point in particular seems to be creeping up in many of them - my partial admission last week that I have indeed been an angry, even wrathful young man on far too many occasions. On the one hand this is nothing of note - what are young men if not a fairly angry, easily triggered lot? But in my case, I believe a question of origin is in order.
As we come to the middle of Lent, for some of us, the novelty of no beef, beer, or binging on Netflix is certainly starting to wear off. One could even venture to say that many are beginning to get quite irritable as their favourite vice has been taken from them for too long. Said irritability might not be such a bad thing however; after all, it goes to show us how much amusement is required to keep our very souls from reaching a boiling point of indignation.
This I believe is the first key to understanding both our general malaise, as well as my own vehemency when I see political or philosophical heresy on the horizon. The fact, indeed the great unsaid truth of the matter, is that "a-muse-ment" (to think not) is the way we keep the deep dissatisfaction and outright injustice we feel at bay. There is nothing to be wrathful about if we cannot see the twistedness of our world around us - so we twist and titillate ourselves to fit.
Or, put another way, I was born and raised in that Johannine tradition that declares the idea of inalterable, ultimate truth to be real and wholly entangled in our existence.
Christ as Logos is certainly the idea of the Christian religion that penetrates my heart most deeply. Which, by logical inference, means that our actions have real consequences, both on an earthly and eternal plane. Thus, there really is justice and injustice, right and wrong, good and evil.
I will allow the sophomore's question here because our own civilization is so diametrically opposed to the idea of ultimate truth and eternal justice that to take said stand is to court everything from scorn to accusations of insanity; the basis of such a position cannot be proved by conventional (post-Enlightenment) philosophy and science, and the ramifications of such ideas, if true, are indeed terrifying. For further meditation, Aquinas, Pascal, and Nietzsche are needed.
But after all the caveats and references, there is still the matter of owning up to my own activities on this question. For the first time in this series, I must admit that I have several regrets yet very few outright retractions I believe I must make. For clarification on this point, do look up those instances where the Savior gets mad: there are no apologies for whipping rent-seekers or calling the first Pope Satan, but I'm sure there is indeed pity and regret it had to come to that.
I regret referring to UNBC as "the pagan temple on the hill." I also regret using rather colourful language to refer to corporate unionists, neo-liberals, as well as Trudeau and Hillary supporters - I should have simply called you "the lukewarm" and kept it at that. Regarding bourgeois social-democrats of the kind of ilk that put their kids in French Immersion while claiming it is a public school house, you indeed are the emperors wearing no clothes - I regret nothing.
I do regret how I treated my opponents and their supporters during my candidacy. And I will here and now fully retract my praise for the arsonist over our city planners, though I still intend to nominate him for 40 under 40 if I ever learn his name. As a general mea culpa, from the political class to the nouveau riche, I do regret how I may have spoken about you, your beliefs, or particular activities. I was angry at the lack of justice in this world - sorry you bore the brunt of it.
And perhaps this is the reason that vengeance belongs to God alone. For in our wrath, we often share only one aspect with justice: we are blinded. But only to good evidences for mercy.
