Fallen

I mean, wait a minute, who am I supposed to instill fear in?

@Psycho: As for your dialectical skills, don't worry because you're really a tough nut to crack ;-)

@Psycho, it follows that, however you want to call it, there is a shared sense that brings men together, at least on certain issues. The relativism you speak of, I wouldn’t call relativism but rather "open-mindedness," which is, among other things, a much more beautiful expression. Regarding Woytjila, my post is certainly lacking in completeness and overly simplified, but I was forced to research this character extensively for study reasons, and I believe I can speak about him with a certain level of expertise, regardless of my age. One last question: do you study anthropology? @Fiquata, a perfectly valid conclusion but not very constructive. Not that I am in a position to propose anything. @Lupin, I believe that Ratzinger, in his typically awkward manner that sometimes borders on dementia, intended, regarding the history of the condom, to pick up on Wojtyla's discourse, achieving the sole result of being spat upon by the entire world. Yes, I live in Rome, but I have never heard of prelates owning condominiums, even though I am well aware of the difficulties of renting. This does not mean that behind the Vatican scenes everyone is a saint and that the current church is in every way exactly how Christ would have wanted it; quite the opposite. However, what happens (interventions, influences, political weight) are consequences of the fact that the church, like all institutions, is made up of men. I found your reference to my personal profile out of place. Anyone who knows me even a little on this site knows that I am not one to speak in slogans or revel in macho slogans. The photo you can see was put up in memory of what an elderly friend of mine, who has since passed away, told me when we played chess occasionally: "If you want to know how much a man truly values, strip him, beat him, and observe his reaction." That said, I bid you farewell. No hard feelings.

Sorry, I have another reply to give. You will forgive me, Lupin, if I find it so difficult to remember you. Leaving aside your vile personal attacks (I really don't think I'm the prototype of machismo, and I don't believe I insulted you), let's talk about the Church. Following the principle that it's hard to judge an event in its early stages of development (event = J. Ratzinger, whom I don't approve of, I must clarify), to facilitate the analysis, but also to consider what I believe a papacy should be, let's take into account the work of a Man (capital letter mandatory in this case) named Karol Wojtyla. A man who did not remain silent in front of Hitler and the Mafia, a man who worked for the interests of the least, a man who tried to reason with a beast like Pinochet (FOOL who accuses him of collusion). What would be the "historical" positions on which he has entrenched himself? The fight against promiscuity, confused by many with an absurd campaign against condoms? Let's spend a few words on that. That we currently live in a climate of total sexual freedom seems undeniable: if you happen to wake up one weekend feeling the "monkey," all you have to do is show up at a club in the evening with a condom in your pocket. A little initiative, and the bathroom doors of the venue will seem like those of paradise. I won't deny having taken advantage of this situation more than once, but it’s precisely for this reason that I believe I can exercise a founded criticism. I have found, in hindsight, the spectacle of such overt commodification of beauty degrading. I speak from the perspective of a heterosexual twenty-year-old, which is just my own: if on one hand, the sight of so many beautiful girls, dressed to attract male gazes, is certainly tempting, on the other hand, I think it's undeniable that a bitter taste remains in the mouth from such immediate approaches, from all those omitted intermediate phases, which are the ones that make a relationship something beautiful to remember, even when it wants to be born under the sign of transience. What do I have left of a woman after such an encounter? Worse yet, what is left for her of me? Nothing, sometimes not even a name. John Paul II had come to understand this despite his vows of chastity. He was not fighting against condoms, but against this dehumanization of human relationships mentioned above.

Psycho, your reasoning collapses on itself. If, for example, there were a people for whom rape or murder are accepted practices (and, coincidentally, THERE AREN'T), then rape and murder would no longer be considered negative actions. They would simply become justifiable gestures of a culture foreign to us. And yet NO. Instead, rapes and murders are considered "wrong" everywhere. I wrote an editorial some time ago, in which I described a situation that would have outraged anyone. In the name of what, do you think? Is it possible, without postulating the existence of a natural moral law, for everyone to find an action wrong? Can we relate it to human intelligence, to customs? Of course not, because as you teach me, every country has its own customs. On what basis can we say that all men are equal? Precisely on that which you insist on denying the existence of: natural moral law. It is the ability to distinguish between good and evil that differentiates us from beasts. Let’s not forget that, or we might as well start running on all fours.

Psycho, I hope you’re joking. The current relativism is the black cancer gnawing at humanity, locking it in a prison of incommunicability, depriving it of the essential grounds for comparison needed to relate to others. It seems crystal clear to me that nowadays, in the name of individual freedom to interpret actions and facts as we see fit, everything has become justifiable. We have forgotten that there is something called MORAL LAW, identical and innate in every human being, according to which, if, for example, you steal or rape, YOU DO WRONG, in Naples as in Reykjavik, for a Native American as for an Arab. This is true not only for the striking facts brought up as examples but for all ethical and moral issues (see abortion). Those who advocate for unbridled individualism, those who claim not to feel a moral imperative in front of certain issues, have anesthetized their own conscience. What do human societies and civilizations rely on? On what basis would we compare, how could we distinguish right from wrong if natural moral law were to disappear? Remember that the concepts of Good and Evil are not categories of thought after the fact, but innate conceptions within every man. Remember that there exists an OBJECTIVITY, and no matter how much we might try to ignore it, there is always a voice within man that tells him when he is wrong.

Lupin, I bow to your highly scholarly analysis of the church, delivered in just two and a half lines. Such a truly deep understanding you have, and a command of socio-ethical-political issues that would make the best statesmen in history envious. Thank you for your enlightening comment. Servo tui

We really hope it’s as you say, Hell, and that with this album we’ve put an end to the pretentious displays of the Religious. Looking forward to reading you soon!

Beautiful, strange, truly insightful review. I completely recognize myself in the narcissistic writer of the final part and in the pompous and vague feeling of being a holder of blabla. What a poor fool, huh?

Let's start from the assumption that these Funeral Mist have never fully convinced me; I found the previous Salvation good but nothing particularly exciting. On top of that, lately, this Religious Black Metal has been getting on my nerves a bit. Primarily, I’m starting to find the way Arioch (who is as ignorant as an Afghan goat) and his associates (I think of Mikko Aspa from the excellent Deathspell Omega, who is a bit less ignorant, but nonetheless doesn’t seem to be a genius either judging by the accent with which he recites in Latin in the aforementioned Si Monvumetvm) cling to the shoulders of the giants of Judeo-Christian spirituality to borrow expressions and words whose true meaning they don’t even remotely understand. This attitude contributes to making BM a receptacle for ignoramuses (I was talking a few days ago with an idiot who claimed to have translated the original code of the gospels FROM GREEK, deriving a completely different text from the one we know. As if the four gospels had come to us in a single code, and as if the original codes from Lebanon had been written in Greek). I didn't listen to this album as a protest against what I've just listed. Let's leave theology to those who are qualified to handle it and, if we want to do BM, let’s do it on topics we can address competently. I don’t know if the irony hinted at in the review, which is very well done by the way, is real or just a mirage caused by the good faith of the reviewer (whom I greet with respect), but I struggle to believe that a group of bad guys like Funeral Mist is capable of laughing at their own album. After all, they are with the Norma Evangelium Diaboli..pajura.