Why Vatican 2 is Based

The plain fact is we live in a post-Hippie world. For some reason after modernity happened we got all kinds of kooky beliefs happening all over the place. Whenever I think of the mid-19th century I just see mechanisms and steam engines and Worlds’ Fairs. And then “Darwin” came along and invented evolution, and all the religious people went nuts. Serious biologists take evolution very seriously. But the Separate But Equal doctrine of the non-overlapping magisterium was supposed to prevent bad things from happening as a result. Well, bad things did happen, and that bad thing was Hitler. It started because evolutionists got in a fight with Creationists, and the Creationists wanted to restore the Edenic Aryan. Well it turns out that guy lost, Bucko, and the fundamentalist Christians in the United States couldn’t let it go.

So anyway they invented LSD and gave it to like, a ton of people. Around this time Switzerland and Bavaria or whatever was seriously hoppin’. And I guess you can count Austria or whatever, too, because Freud. But I’m really pointing more at Carl Gustav Jung and the LSD guy, who rode the bike and dosed himself. Albert Hoffman. These guys invent psychedelia and non-psychedelic but definitely trippy psychology (reverse respectively). The best way I can think of this is that whereas we once thought animals were robots (see Descartes) and the universe was ordered by a Mean Guy in the Sky, these guys had other ideas. C.G. Jung in particular (who lived on Lake Zurich and had lots of sex, probably, while sailing, stone carving [whatever that’s called, masonry maybe], and leaching off his wife’s money while making her have lunch with his known goomahs [which is based and red pilled, btw]) thought this was dumb and Jewish.

C.G. as I’ll refer to him henceforth invented evil in the Godhead and a non-redemptive worldview, whereby God was such a bad guy that man had to do stuff so that He (God) wouldn’t look so bad. Anyway this is all very technical and has a lot to do with fake chemistry and probably very early transgenderism, but the main idea is that evil is actually really bad. Now this sounds a bit redundant but according to Jung, Thomas Aquinas (whom no one has actually read to check this, but it’s probably true) thought evil was just an absence of good. So if you’re blind it’s because you have the absence of eye-sight. This sort of makes sense, but Jung was a dirty/backwoods Swissian and his disputation of this involved the Real Presence of Smell in a rotting egg, rather than an absence of good-smellingness. This very sophisticated form of thinking apparently made a lot of waves back in the day.

Enter Victor White, who was an Official Guy of the Catholic church (which I think means he never said sex, but he might’ve, at some point). Victor White wrote a letter to C.G. about his Theory. His theory was basically, as far as I can tell, that psychology had to do with like, putting casts on the broken bones of the mind, whereas religion, theology, etc., has to do with divine grace, which is something more than physician’s work. So these guys got in a fight via snail mail about this and you can read it if you want in a book. C.G. held onto his view about the rotten egg theory of evil in the Godhead, and Victor White onto the Pints with Aquinas view of grace.

Anyway that doesn’t matter that much except that Vatican 2 happened like the year after C.G. died, and I think they made a lot of changes ol’ Carl (I reserve the right to nicknames, my prior stated naming convention notwithstanding) would’ve liked. The main reason I think this is not because of the “from the chair” declaration by the Pope that the Virgin Mary assumpted into Heaven, which Carl (let’s go with this) saw as the “right move” by the Church to recognize the Divine Feminine / anima. That’s part of it. But another thing is that you can watch live-streamed videos of Catholic Mass at post-conciliar churches, and it’s all lay boomers in shorts and Hawaiian shirts casually handing people the blood of Christ to swig like a cold draft beer with French fried potatoes. Anyway if you compare these guys to the post-Hippie Analytical Psychologist boomers that read some Carl Jung in the 70’s they look almost identical.

Ok so my main point here is that the Catholic boomers and the Jungian boomers are actually the same species of boomer, and it probably has something to do with Vietnam and The Man. Carl had the idea that there’s a really dense bundle of psychological neurons that are illuminated by the numinous (look it up) and contains emotions from when you were a kid about how your dad was mean to you. I think all these guys had that. Carl’s approach, like we discussed previously, was to call dad evil and then take it upon himself to redeem him (there’s a classic line in Answer to Job where he starts one of the late chapters with like, “And now everything is the responsibility of man,” and it’s supposed to be profound but it’s kinda not). This is what Jordan Peterson talks about with Pinocchio having to save his father from the belly of the whale, but in that case Geppetto is an idiot not an asshole. The point is the son has to become a real boy vis-a-vis the father, in some way.

This is kind of what Christianity is about maybe, but not really. That’s why Vatican 2 is so weird. It seems like the Cardinals and Pope all recognize there’s a real hero myth thing going on in their religion, but they can’t just say Jesus was 1 of 1,000 faces. More specifically, they seem to recognize some kind of angry dad situation is happening in the church broadly, so they introduce the idea of “participation” in the Mass by the congregation. The idea, it seems, is to active their own agency so that they can Stand Up to The Man. I don’t think this is directly related to the child sex abuse stuff that came slightly later, but it all part of the nexus. So anyway Vatican 2 is a sort of Jungian re-visioning of the Mass by re-ordering the psyche of the congregant towards participation and activity vis-a-vis the Priest, who isn’t just a Mean Dad anymore. This is why tradcaths hate it, it’s basically a therapizing of the liturgy. This is kinda based, however, for the reasons stated above.