Jesli mowa o Radiu Maryja

drf "Can the Devil Be Saved?" 21.02.05, 14:46

tygodnikforum.onet.pl/1,11,8,8961348,26806778,1401512,0,forum.html
Everyone professes to dislike modernity, a characteristically modern stance. We
all waver uneasily between what we know to be modernity’s attractions and
achievements on the one hand, and its profound, even radical, hollowness on the
other. Whatever modernity is, it appears in perpetual transition to something
else. Matthew Arnold first and best conceptualized our situation: "Wandering
between two worlds, one dead / The other powerless to be born."

Good guidance in navigating this condition has been rare—too confident in one
way, too tentative in another. Hence it is refreshing to turn again to Leszek
Kolakowski’s Modernity on Endless Trial. Why this powerful, poised, and
beautifully written book did not receive more attention when it was first pub
lished is a mystery. Perhaps the neglect stemmed from its pacific intelligence,
not easily reducible to any party program, political or religious. Kolakowski
describes it as a collection of "semiphilosophical sermons" that explore
currently insoluble dilemmas and argue for "moderation in consistency." But it
is much more than that.

To reduce Kolakowski’s multifaceted argument to a few simple points would be a
travesty. But it would not be overly reductionist to say that, for him, both our
uncertainty and our achievement point to why modern Western civilization is
"Christian by birth." Kolakowski deplores the Enlightenment currents in the West
that were too quick to believe that certain truths had been established beyond
question. Because of that hubris, Stalinism, Nazism, Maoism, and "other
fanatical sects" became inevitable. That many celebrated modern intellectuals
fell prey to murderous fundamentalisms reflects both their arro gance towards
normal people and their subsequent need to identify absolutely with the
downtrodden to justify their own existence.

A different approach is to see the "uncertainty, incompleteness, and
unestablished identity" of our world as a Christian contribution to our
self–understanding that is to be accepted rather than overcome. Out of that
unsettled state, the religious tradition at its best provides us with motivation
to know and do better—but also with the recognition that, in this life,
perfection is beyond our reach. That tension is uncomfortable because
"Christianity constantly strives to strike a stable balance that cannot be
achieved." But if we have learned anything in this bloody century, it is that
there is no good alternative to that perpetual striving. We have seen every
conceivable experiment at radical human freedom and social perfection, and the
results are in: "The utopia of man’s perfect autonomy and the hope of unlimited
perfection may be the most efficient instruments of suicide ever to have been
invented."

It is characteristic of Kolakowski that he does not regard a healthy uncertainty
as a threat to all truths. In one essay, he asks: why do we need Kant? And his
answer is that we have seen too many attempts at disguised moral suicide by
Western intellectuals in the name of multiculturalism and other false
humilities. Only a universal notion like Kant’s belief in the sacred core of the
individual, whatever we think of the philosophical underpinnings of his
position, can prevent us from rationalizing away slavery and worse. Kolakowski
is no friend to socialism, but he says that socialism could become viable only
by accepting something like Kant’s views.

It may be only a personal prejudice, but I believe the heart of Kolakowski’s
argument is the chapter "Can the Devil Be Saved?" The title bears a double
meaning. Kolakowski thinks we need to remember that Satan is a real being in
order to avoid taking evil lightly and falling into a wishy–washy Pelagianism.
The danger of the orthodox view is that we may think we can do everything or
nothing against evil. But more interestingly, Kolakowski speculates about
whether the Devil can be saved in a theological sense, and, if so, what that
would do to our sense of the world. If evil will ultimately be transformed, we
run the risk of relativizing it even as it occurs. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind
and Teilhard’s The Phenomenon of Man are just two examples of the dangers that
lie down this path.

But these dangers are not symmetrical. And that points towards an important
feature of the world: "The fact that both affirmation and rejection of the
concept of original sin have emerged as powerful destructive forces in our
history is one of many that testify in favor of original sin. In other words, we
face a peculiar situation in which the disastrous consequences of assenting to
either of two incompatible theories confirm one of them and testify against its
rival."

Yet this seemingly undeniable presence of original sin does not leave us
entirely helpless. In fact, it provides two benefits. First, it rules out
utopian impulses. But, paradoxically, it also spurs us to seek to overcome our
errors and limitations, within an overall understanding that we shall not, ever,
reconcile all things here on earth short of the Second Coming. Doubt and
uncertainty are thus transformed into witnesses to, rather than sources of,
imperfection.

The Devil, too, is a source of doubt. Where his existence is acknowledged and a
full–bodied Christian response to it is deployed, however, the Devil’s game
changes. His very temptations remind us of the truth. Christianity has been
recommended to us lately by revolutionaries as well as social reformers. Both
groups may be right about the importance of faith for particular situations. But
Christian thought is valuable long before we get to making such judgments
precisely because it prevents us from assuming too little or too much about our
condition. It is Good News both in good times and in bad.

All this seems to me to resemble the general direction of First Things over the
last decade as well. May her editors and writers continue that work for many
years to come.

www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft0003/articles/kolakowski.html

Drzewko
Od najstarszego
Od najnowszego

patience Redemptorysci to nie jezuici 21.02.05, 14:33

... a wizja Panstwa Indian w sytuacji, kiedy Indian mordowano lub obracano w
niewolnikow, byla silnie zwiazana z podstawowym przeslaniem Chrystusa, o ktorym
ojcowie redemptorysci zwiazani z RM nie pamietaja: prawa czlowieka. Kochajmy
sie. Wszyscy ludzie sa sobie rowni. Radio Maryja jest przeciwienstwem
dzialalnosci misyjnej kosciola w brazylijskiej dzungli, a pewnie tamci
misjonarze, gdyby wysluchali jednej audycji Rydzyka, to by go nazwali
Antychrystem.
- indris Można się obawiać... 21.02.05, 14:43
  
  ...że leje_sie czerpał wiadomości o redukcjach paragwajskich z
  wolterowskiego "Kandyda". Wolter był genialnym pisarzem gdy chodzi o styl, ale
  za źródło historyczne do dziejów Ameryki Łacińskiej lepiej go nie uważać.
  - leje-sie Rozwieje twe leki: 21.02.05, 15:09
    
    1. Literatura piekna (Kandyd) sluzy mi do smiechu lub strachu, nie do czerpania
    wiadomosci zlego i dobrego.
    
    2. Historia missiones nie jest wcale jednoznacznie pozytywna - choc oczywiscie
    stanowily one pewna ochrone dla Indian (byc moze to jedyny, ale jak wazny
    pozytyw).
    
    Z drugiej strony nietrudno w idei zauwazyc podobienstwa do Gulagu, czy
    wczesniejszej arakczejewszczyzny. Jak rowniez do nigdy nie zrealizowanych
    totalitarnych utopii (poczawszy od "Utopii" wlasnie) panstwa idealnego.
    
    W te raczej strone chcialem skierowac Wasze skojarzenia.
    
    3. A i Pacjencja trafnie zauwazyla, ze redemptorysci to nie jezuici.
    
    indris napisał:
    
    Można się obawiać...
    
    > ...że leje_sie czerpał wiadomości o redukcjach paragwajskich z
    > wolterowskiego "Kandyda". Wolter był genialnym pisarzem gdy chodzi o styl,
    ale
    > za źródło historyczne do dziejów Ameryki Łacińskiej lepiej go nie uważać.
    >
    >
- drf "Can the Devil Be Saved?" 21.02.05, 14:46
  
  tygodnikforum.onet.pl/1,11,8,8961348,26806778,1401512,0,forum.html
  Everyone professes to dislike modernity, a characteristically modern stance. We
  all waver uneasily between what we know to be modernity’s attractions and
  achievements on the one hand, and its profound, even radical, hollowness on the
  other. Whatever modernity is, it appears in perpetual transition to something
  else. Matthew Arnold first and best conceptualized our situation: "Wandering
  between two worlds, one dead / The other powerless to be born."
  
  Good guidance in navigating this condition has been rare—too confident in one
  way, too tentative in another. Hence it is refreshing to turn again to Leszek
  Kolakowski’s Modernity on Endless Trial. Why this powerful, poised, and
  beautifully written book did not receive more attention when it was first pub
  lished is a mystery. Perhaps the neglect stemmed from its pacific intelligence,
  not easily reducible to any party program, political or religious. Kolakowski
  describes it as a collection of "semiphilosophical sermons" that explore
  currently insoluble dilemmas and argue for "moderation in consistency." But it
  is much more than that.
  
  To reduce Kolakowski’s multifaceted argument to a few simple points would be a
  travesty. But it would not be overly reductionist to say that, for him, both our
  uncertainty and our achievement point to why modern Western civilization is
  "Christian by birth." Kolakowski deplores the Enlightenment currents in the West
  that were too quick to believe that certain truths had been established beyond
  question. Because of that hubris, Stalinism, Nazism, Maoism, and "other
  fanatical sects" became inevitable. That many celebrated modern intellectuals
  fell prey to murderous fundamentalisms reflects both their arro gance towards
  normal people and their subsequent need to identify absolutely with the
  downtrodden to justify their own existence.
  
  A different approach is to see the "uncertainty, incompleteness, and
  unestablished identity" of our world as a Christian contribution to our
  self–understanding that is to be accepted rather than overcome. Out of that
  unsettled state, the religious tradition at its best provides us with motivation
  to know and do better—but also with the recognition that, in this life,
  perfection is beyond our reach. That tension is uncomfortable because
  "Christianity constantly strives to strike a stable balance that cannot be
  achieved." But if we have learned anything in this bloody century, it is that
  there is no good alternative to that perpetual striving. We have seen every
  conceivable experiment at radical human freedom and social perfection, and the
  results are in: "The utopia of man’s perfect autonomy and the hope of unlimited
  perfection may be the most efficient instruments of suicide ever to have been
  invented."
  
  It is characteristic of Kolakowski that he does not regard a healthy uncertainty
  as a threat to all truths. In one essay, he asks: why do we need Kant? And his
  answer is that we have seen too many attempts at disguised moral suicide by
  Western intellectuals in the name of multiculturalism and other false
  humilities. Only a universal notion like Kant’s belief in the sacred core of the
  individual, whatever we think of the philosophical underpinnings of his
  position, can prevent us from rationalizing away slavery and worse. Kolakowski
  is no friend to socialism, but he says that socialism could become viable only
  by accepting something like Kant’s views.
  
  It may be only a personal prejudice, but I believe the heart of Kolakowski’s
  argument is the chapter "Can the Devil Be Saved?" The title bears a double
  meaning. Kolakowski thinks we need to remember that Satan is a real being in
  order to avoid taking evil lightly and falling into a wishy–washy Pelagianism.
  The danger of the orthodox view is that we may think we can do everything or
  nothing against evil. But more interestingly, Kolakowski speculates about
  whether the Devil can be saved in a theological sense, and, if so, what that
  would do to our sense of the world. If evil will ultimately be transformed, we
  run the risk of relativizing it even as it occurs. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind
  and Teilhard’s The Phenomenon of Man are just two examples of the dangers that
  lie down this path.
  
  But these dangers are not symmetrical. And that points towards an important
  feature of the world: "The fact that both affirmation and rejection of the
  concept of original sin have emerged as powerful destructive forces in our
  history is one of many that testify in favor of original sin. In other words, we
  face a peculiar situation in which the disastrous consequences of assenting to
  either of two incompatible theories confirm one of them and testify against its
  rival."
  
  Yet this seemingly undeniable presence of original sin does not leave us
  entirely helpless. In fact, it provides two benefits. First, it rules out
  utopian impulses. But, paradoxically, it also spurs us to seek to overcome our
  errors and limitations, within an overall understanding that we shall not, ever,
  reconcile all things here on earth short of the Second Coming. Doubt and
  uncertainty are thus transformed into witnesses to, rather than sources of,
  imperfection.
  
  The Devil, too, is a source of doubt. Where his existence is acknowledged and a
  full–bodied Christian response to it is deployed, however, the Devil’s game
  changes. His very temptations remind us of the truth. Christianity has been
  recommended to us lately by revolutionaries as well as social reformers. Both
  groups may be right about the importance of faith for particular situations. But
  Christian thought is valuable long before we get to making such judgments
  precisely because it prevents us from assuming too little or too much about our
  condition. It is Good News both in good times and in bad.
  
  All this seems to me to resemble the general direction of First Things over the
  last decade as well. May her editors and writers continue that work for many
  years to come.
  
  www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft0003/articles/kolakowski.html
hiperrealizm Re: Jesli mowa o Radiu Maryja 22.05.05, 06:55

leje-sie napisał:

>
>
> o. Rydzyku i jego pomyslach na urzadzenie Polski "po bozemu" to odsylam
> wszystkich zainteresowanych do lektur o paragwajskich missiones - czyli
> wielkim eksperymencie stworzenia krolestwa bozego na ziemi.
>
> Fascynujace - mimo, ze missiones zostaly zlikwidowane dwa wieki temu, to ich
> implikacje daja sie odczuc do dzisiaj. Na przyklad to, ze Paragwaj jest w
> praktyce dwujezyczny jest rezultatem owczesnej dzialalnosci jezuitow.
>
> Wiecej czasu na rozwiniecie tematu nie mam, bom tylko w przelocie.
>

Najnowsze z forum Aquanet

Zaloguj się