Back in 1978, I was studying telecommunications electronics at the Universidad Laboral de Sevilla. One of our subjects was physics and chemistry. And in it I came across its second term: chemistry.
Far from being a test of my patience, it was a time of great enjoyment. I noticed that I was not resisted like other science subjects, which seemed to me to be the labyrinth of Ariadne’s minotaur without help.
Being a lover of letters in the arid sea of technique, it was an unexpected discovery. one impression I always had was the equivalence between all the terms that make up the creation «of the good God».
I learned that atoms had as a fundamental part of their «relationships» the electrons of their outer layers. The electrical value of those layers was called «valence. I could almost think of valence in human terms of values. The sociability of atoms, their ability to form structures more complex than themselves, depended largely on their external values.
The loss of valences
Over the years, one converts the knowledge of youth into thick, almost sedimentary stories. Some kind of solids with which to build a «personal chemistry» and now here I am «studying again» how the Christian values that have enriched humanity with complex structures, that have formed our atomic or personal profile for thousands of years, are being displaced by…nothingness.
Next, my intention is not to question the theory of evolution (it would be sacrilegious) because I have neither the necessary training nor the courage to face these…random works of Hercules. But as the son of this unknown god and dressed in a fur tunic, perhaps because of that inherited chance, he will only perhaps promote in the reader some useful idea.
The human being is understood today as the only result of an ancient evolutionary process, with no definite purpose, other than that attributed to chance. Chance, in reality, also has its owner, only we don’t know how to find it yet. So adopted by this unknown god, we have received a new identity: «we are an evolutionary product».
The nakedness of the human being
This curious concept coined in 1859 made us the result of a process. Already, by then, the vocabulary was ready, it had been generated by the industrial revolution, beginning in 1733 with the textile revolution and its consecration in 1769 with James Watt’s steam engine.
To endow therefore of transcendence, of purpose and therefore of the moral associated this ethics to «an evolutionary product» as the man is considered as futile as to do it with the old machine of Watt. And from there starts a cause of the impoverishment of values in the human being.
With these wickers, theories and their revolutions have been woven, leaving millions of dead in their wake. Since there is no specific end, the values are conditioned by the winds of doctrine.
Christianity rises from its inception as a reference to the intrinsic value of the person, his divinity, freedom and consequently his responsibility. Hence the feeling of guilt, sin and repentance, anathema words today. These are replaced by a permanent obsession with eradicating personal responsibility and transferring it to society and the family. By understanding guilt as a consequence of old conditioning, by seeing freedom as an objective in itself, when it is nothing but an environment in which to put «something».
This «surgery» deprives the human being of any responsibility and turns him into a billiard ball of the natural game. The Froidian vision of the individual made this a spectator in his own consciousness, conditioned almost entirely by stackable events in the subconscious and therefore a subject diminished in its responsibility.
In other words, the abandonment of the Christian tradition and its concept of freedom, moral responsibility in exchange for nothing, deprives us of moral courage when it comes to creating social structures. An example of this is the crisis in the family, parasitized by a whole series of doctrines that are absolutely untapped.
The corruption of words such as gender and sex, confusing both in the same meaning. The degradation of the patriarch towards a heteropathic tyrannical heteropathriarch. The promotion of the general concept of freedom, disappearing a responsible agency.
In short, it is the ionised atom or the naked man.
The fur tunic
In the book of Moses we read the following:
«And both their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked. Then they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons» (Moses 4:13).
I was always struck by Satan’s instruction to Adam and Eve to cover themselves with improvised fig leaves. Not elaborate, but improvised. On the contrary «…I, the Lord God, make coats of skins, and clothed them.» (Moses 4:27), which represents a finalist elaboration. And not only that…» and I clothed them» which is an instruction to use the elaborate.
Leather tunics are not only a garment to hide the nakedness of the body. They represent the endowment of knowledge and values to face the freedom to which they were thrown from the safe garden. Freedom in a hostile and predatory world.
Today’s naivety towards sentimental and moral education tends to consider that investiture deposited by the good God in experience and age as unnecessary. It considers any effort to teach the young person as an imposition, to reprove as a coercion, the right thing is a convenience, to separate the dry land from the waters a violence and finally, to separate the light from the darkness a discrimination towards the abysses.
The option not to wear the fur tunic that Jehovah prepared for us is to wear anything.
It is only after and not before the time of receiving the tunics that God affirms: «And I, the Lord God, said unto mine Only Begotten: Behold, the man is become as one of us to know good and evil.» (Moses 4:28)
We see, then, that we need instruction and protection to be complete and to face our destiny. However, that tunic, which has more or less battered our culture through millennia, is being discarded. And the most curious thing is that in its place we do not have the comfort of fig leaves.
The tree of the fall
«When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.» (2 Nephi 9:28-29)
The redemptive vocation of ideologies and their doctrines based on materialism try to «save» man from a «fallen» state, understanding it as an unfortunate state produced by a third party, which has been poverty, tyranny, the absence of knowledge at the hands of classes or power groups. This salvation, offered by some, is at the cost of the suffering of the very people who are trying to be saved, says… «Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea…there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.». (2 Nephi 28:8)This way of «stripping» now of the fur robe and chaining man before the world and before freedom, makes this naked man cover himself with «anything».
«Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!» (2 Nephi 15:20) For example, what we see today as «new values» which are nothing but the extinction of the old ones and their substitution by the term freedom, or personal feelings, produces structures such as new types of marriages.
And now I make a parenthesis in what we talked about.
This article is a revision of the one I published in November 2005 in the first edition of the digital journal Teáncum. Thirteen years have passed (¡) In revising it, I have been shocked by my own words! When defining myself about the different kinds of unions of couples, I have perceived them as violent. And yet I still think the same thing, but the fact of expressing it alarms me and I almost decide to eliminate this part.
I have reflected on why it is now a problem for me to say what I thought before. To my relief it is not a change in feelings toward my homosexual brothers and sisters. The conclusion I have come to is that I am immersed in an environment where language has changed the use and meaning of the word marriage. That’s what really alarms me, therefore in appearance, to legally limit the use of that word to define a man/woman relationship suggests to many a discrimination against those who request it in other kinds of relationships.
[su_note note_color=»#f9ded0″ radius=»6″]There are some words that should be the subject of a nature reserve for our social ecosystem. They cannot be extinguished without something of ours going with them.[/su_note]
Perhaps it is because of the respect I have always had for language that I consider words to be a legacy of our ancestors. An almost genetic heritage that we carry within us. And it is a responsibility to bequeath them to the future, which is why their conservation is everyone’s job.
If there are new or novel facts, changing the original meaning is like changing our cells without knowing the consequences. To subvert the meanings of foundational words is to despise the past, confuse the present and ignore the future.
To be loyal to the fur tunic received or invested from the Lord is really risky. The spectrum of ideas has moved so far to one extreme that one is literally out of all decency before the world, as tolerance is confused with submission.
Once devoid of moral valences society is covered with fig leaves, ie «anything» and speaks in any way. To translate this union as marriage, supposes «expropriating by force» the language, the thought, the culture of a moral valence that has been able to form the family for thousands of years.
Just as Ulysses
This, the traditional family (word in scorn) has brought us here, through disasters of all kinds, wars, famine, revolutions and yet is there gratitude to the family? There is no such thing, but it is congratulated when it leaves its functions in the hands of the state, when it renounces its principle of authority for that of freedom (remedy for all ailment). When tolerance (word on the rise) is of such caliber that it breaks the educational framework as if it were a threat.
«And it came to pass that he departed into the wilderness. And he left his house, and the land of his inheritance, and his gold, and his silver, and his precious things, and took nothing with him, save it were his family, and provisions, and tents, and departedinto the wilderness.» (1 Nephi 2:4)
This flight of Lehi, from the security of his inheritance in Jerusalem, reminds me of the exit from the garden of Adam and Eve, I wonder: could a group of people «clothed» with the dominant values today go out into the desert and be able to create a new world, just as they did?
Honestly, I think you’d have to look for your spiritual homeland. Just as Ulysses sought Ithaca. Facing dangers and demons, fighting for his life on the edge of the world. Seeking and living those values that made his parents come here. Recognizing that this new morality is only an artifice, a luxury. Possible thanks to material well-being, well-being that can be lost.
The idea that society and its wealth, as we see it, is something as natural as a forest or a beach, is false and naive and results in a lack of a sense of danger. It is now taught that happiness or well-being are rights. That is deceiving our children and sending them out naked.
No one teaches that they arise from the responsibility and moral attitude of the person. That’s what the gospel teaches.
The atoms of my youth
The atoms in my youth knew how to associate, shared values. For example two of Hydrogen join to one of Oxygen and sharing their only electron, they form the water. To behave like a liquid, they need to associate in groups of 3 to 9 molecules. I could see them as a family that shares values. I don’t know if it took them long to realize the need to do so, because «the Gods watched those things which they had ordereduntil they obeyed.» (Abraham 4:18)
The truth is that their electronic «moral» empowers them for this miracle. The variety of structures that we see in nature, shows that there is a margin of freedom and therefore of possibilities on the way and we also see an obedience to the principles taught in creation. This obedience (forgotten word) has caused the wonder that surrounds us.
Nature is «invested» with knowledge and its language is truthful, it produces life in abundance. It is perpetuated in time. The earth, has its tree of knowledge that has led it to the tree of life by the right path so Enoch when he saw the evil on the Earth «…and cried unto the Lord, saying: When shall the earth rest?» (Moses 7:58)
Jehovah, in making us the fur robe, demonstrated knowledge of our needs and genuine affection, like that of a mother who dresses her child to go to school. The investiture of her knowledge takes the form of our body, of what we are. The fig leaves that they offer us denote haste, imprecision. A transitory solution to what is elaborated and enduring.