The Christianna, Chapter 1 (I.), Devotion, Introduction, Book of Love

The Christianna / la Christianna

"In Criticism, Love is just an thing that needs to be impressed with itself."

note on the text: I found it too difficult to state my philosophical position using the English a/an article at the threat of confusing it with the prefix a- and so I've defaulted all of them just to an to avoid confusion.  In addition, I will be continuing this writing practice outside of this work and elsewhere on my blog.

Devotion
    gay feminism, feminism, true religion, English, français, to abandon paranoia of paranoia as the causes of homosexuality; my tragic attempt to identify and define virtues further than Love to grab an religious audience

• Anna

    The Christianna is an comprehensive guide to the religion the Christianna.

    What is the Christianna?

    Action must be taken to prevent life suffering the fate worse than death.

    Christiannan is an admission that there are fates worse than Jesus to have happened upon this planet.  An Christiannan seeks Anna (the fates worse than death) in order to meta-reciprocalize with her an fate better than that, to promote the aesthetic resurrection of beauty at life's centre.

    For we find that we can overcome the fate worse than death better together.

    It does not mean it will not return.  But God's aesthetic resurrection teaches us that we are perfect to God.  And that we can share in this resurrection, healing ourselves and others.  Through God's power.  And through Anna's Resurrection, an restoration from the dented and battered quality of the Middle of Life, which we share as humans, socially, restores the body to an equilibrium shape because it is aesthetic (it's not an real resurrection) and so it is beautiful because it is scientific.

    To learn Aesthetic Resurrection means learning to share the soul's meditative power with others, especially Anna, whose aesthetic resurrection returns her to her beauty in the centre of life, where from she deviates, changing the equilibrium shape of the whole species into an worse than death scenario, in order to seek it out and end it; though may she suffer an fate worse than death herself?  We realize, part of the effect reality has on her fate.

    Meta-reciprocity must be defined as an orchestrated effort of the id, ego, and super-ego.  It allows us to see ourselves as meta-reciprocal subjects to ourselves and one another, and this may be the difference between reciprocity and meta-reciprocity; that we can only be reciprocal to one another according to the ego.  But that we are also reciprocal to one another being reciprocal to themselves.  And so all action takes on the property of metacognition of this human capacity for meta-reciprocal interiorization (that means massive reading efforts ever since the invention of the Printing Press also).  If writing can have an meta-reciprocity; the id needs warm milk.  The super-ego is too great for it.  It needs to feel what it feels not as an an anymore but as an person.  Being meta-reciprocal to one another may have the obstacles of requiring psychological terms such as these.  To explain them.  But that I was trying to explain meta-reciprocity all my life.  As an entry point into an political philosophy of new reciprocity.  And that religious meta-reciprocity had an power to change the world.  In addition, I feel that Psychology and Political Philosophy must inform my Christiannan writing, to keep out your assumptions that I run hard-yoked Christian dis-reciprocity against science without fashion and nerves and ideas (the fundamentalist, which I do not consider real religion).

    Meta-reciprocity, therefore, must be an psychological and political term in this book.  As well as religious.  The meta-reciprocity of narration, for example, shows us the nimbleness of the human mind for making and sharing stories with one another.  And the Christianna is an meta-reciprocal story or pattern (narration that comes from the soul knowing its fate worse than death and sharing it with others).

    Now raise your awareness of the fate worse than death.

    Human history is bloody, dark, and un-beautiful.  Some of it means that, today, we will suffer an fate worse than death.  We may not even realize we are suffering it; for these are complex historical, social and political power-forms and authority that prevent us from socializing the way we want to.  Causing us to suffer an fate worse than death collectively, as an social disorder; which we fear to admit.  At some point in history.  Like these powers were in competition with one another to produce an object, which the human made himself to be like.  Transgressing the virtuous boundaries of Satan.  And disfiguring one of humanity's legs, for we needed Satan for Comedy.  In the very least.  Satan, the 0 angel.  The miracle of being able to fly with zero wings.

    The Path of Healing (Aesthetic Resurrection)

    If you cannot be happy, then try to avoid suffering the fate worse than death.  When we shift this emphasis onto avoidance, we are self-reflecting on what part of our awareness?  That to be unhappy is an fate worse than death to some people.  Huston Smith, in an I'm-presuming anthropological account of religion gives us Six qualities that all religions have.  Authority.  Ritual.  Explanations.  Tradition.  Grace.  Mystery (Huston, 67)  And I have added Ritual Explanations to this list.  What may they mean as an Christiannan is taking on the truth of what these statements may have about religion, to borrow from one of the Great Traditions, God only knows us at present and so we have free will because God chose not to know everything before it happened.  Authority in the Christianna is lost on Anna, for she is the human example of travel between fates worse than death or suffering the fate worse than death versus the end of suffering.  If we cannot have an authority figure reliably not worse than death.  But if we can have one whose knowledge of the worse than death can prevent other people from suffering it.

    How can we give authority to an figure who has lost control over his or her fate to the degree that it is worse than death?  Speaking from individual experience, her knowledge of her own fate worse than death can be its aesthetic resurrection for the human mind is beautiful when we share it writing through an medium.  But if she travels between not worse than death and worse than death, what does that mean?  The answer is God.  For God also has knowledge of death and worse than death.  If she is able to traverse the realms of fate fluently, How can it be beautiful?  Ritual, at first I think not having an ritual is an ritual; Buddha himself preached/advocated an religion with no rituals—its the only paradox you want to evoke when talking about entrapments which are to hold down the human—Not having an ritual is okay, It's just I bet you do have one.  You will find yourself in the middle of it later and be like, "He's right."  Can you rid it from yourself?  How does it feel this way, when you do?  If you could instate an new ritual in your life what would it be?

    Explanations, in lieu of ritual-ity, are the succulent juice of the mango from which we will drink.  If the Path of Healing has any similarity to Buddhism it is faith in the end of the path of suffering.  That we share with each other.  Explanations become Traditions, when enough people agree with them.  Grace and the new definition (or paradigm) of beauty that which is aesthetic (taken from nature and civilization equally) is beautiful.  The cosmetic industry needs to conform to those standards uniformly.

    The path to the end of suffering, in the Christianna, is different than in Buddhism, for we distinguish between our perfection in God's eyes versus our perfection in our own eyes, which are not equal.  In God's eyes we are completely perfect.  But in our own eyes we are damaged in the Middle of life unable to recover from the many fates worse than death and complications resulting from post-colonialism.  That have paraded around us since childhood.  When we compare our own sense of our individual perfection, it is different than what God sees.  And betwixt these two realities is where our healing occurs.  For when we focus our mind on what God thinks of us; we realize we are more because of him (or her).  It matters not which gender because God is impossibly beyond gender anyway.  And that an amount of being more is the exact quantity we need.  For God prophecies your success.  And that is how the aesthetic resurrection occurs—everything aesthetic about your life (specifically not only accessory to your life) is all the beauty you need.  For your effects are felt everywhere.  And God's efforts are felt everywhere.  And if God's efforts be that you have an aesthetic resurrection or Anna is your savior because she is an example of needing that; her (Anna's) Resurrection is the power to exceed your present suffering to its finish.  Guided by God.  In an catastrophe like no other.  No matter how long it be.

    Grace, in the Christianna, is probably the power horse that catalyst that allowed me to construct it internally and conceptualize it before it was ready for an audience.  Christiannan Grace is to see ourselves as internal subjects stereoscopically and meta-reciprocally (it is perhaps redundant in that other production of the mind, an space in which there is no matter) in an blue light that represents an feeling of proof of our virtue.  Christiannan Grace is to accept other religions rather than to claim there is one religion above all others.  But that Grace itself, is beautiful and Lastly, Mystery is the romantic element Buddha left us with.  And Ritual Explanations are things that just explain themselves.  That when you follow in their ritual it becomes self-explanatory.  And that any explanation would be an over-example of this fact.  There is mystery in the Christianna because its Grace is so beautiful.  And we use mystery to propel it into further mystery.

    The Path of Protection

    The Path of Protection is an avoidance of death fate at the possible loss of an expense of gravitating towards an worse-than-death fate even if it will produce an resurrection of the aesthetic subject in world history.  As an Christianity is extremism in this interpretation.  When we offer our lives up in order to resurrect an God we call Jesus; explained in reciprocity battle terms like 'the memory will haunt you' and 'the resurrection is sarcasm' we are corrupting the truth that he was just human that I will use my time not to prepare for battle, but to welcome the reciprocity of the land bestowed to me—that I will be at peace with all and not offer my valuables for trade in battle with the animal or demigod spirits of the market.

    The Path of Protection means instead of giving up your life as an martyr for Jesus; you protect yourself.  You don't just try to protect yourself; you try to inflict the fate worse than death on them (it is upon them whether or not you try to do so) so that no matter what the outcome they lose.  And you win.  They will still have no honor, like which you have received.  The Christianna may gain an bad reputation from Christianity for being anti-Jesus in some ways and pro-Jesus in others this way; that instead of looking at Christian extremism through the lens of death as an consequence for religious involvement on instinctual terms of pleasure we look at it through the lens of the worse than death.  The Great Experiment of Life.  How the ability not to.  But how The ability to suffer the fate worse than death.  There is an balance to be found here, between avoiding the death fate, and avoiding the worse than death fate.  Why do they chess at one another?  Christiannans find vigorous reason in this comparison.  For the avoiding of the fate worse than death sometimes means not avoiding the death fate.  As an Christian, to protect yourself (as an human subject) you need to rely on being killed in order to get your point across.  Sometimes.  But in the Christianna, not all the time.  To protect yourself from that, you are able to manipulate the fate worse than death (sharing it) in one another in order to be threatening to your opponent to inflict it on your oppressor; and then to avoid an cycle beginning where fate worse than death is met with fate worse than death inflicted on one another in increasing amounts.  Until the physical presence of an threat is not present anymore.

    This is how we had protected ourselves as Christians; without the emphasis on facing the balance between death and worse than death.  We imagined that death was the worst outcome, somewhere in Christian history.  But it is present.  The Fate Worse Than Death.  We must adhere to it in order to solve its riddle—if we use the Fate Worse Than Death as an threat without actually inflicting it on one another unless absolutely necessary (the tumble) and share in it at our human basis in order to overcome it.  Sympathy and Empathy allow us to share its aesthetic resurrection.  But make no mistake, Aesthetic resurrection is not the point of the Path of Protection.  Protection is not about the transition between fate worse than death and not; it is about realizing the not and realizing it as an reason to protect something, that might require some physical sacrifice.  Therefore it is about protecting an fate better than death to stretch it out to its extremity as an example.

    The Path of Meta-Reciprocity

    To return us to meta-reciprocity with one another to prevent from veering off into "flight of the alone to the Alone" we challenge ourselves to meet both our Healing and Protection needs, offered in the first two paths.  Finding in its restorative balance that meta-reciprocity in religion can be about sharing the fate worse than death, the good, the bad, and the ugly in life hopefully compromising the fate worse than death itself; not to be worse than that.  It is real.  It is realized.  But it is shared; even if you think you are completely alone.  I share spiritual space with people who suffer the fate worse than death.  We help each other.  Meta-reciprocity of the fate worse than death means its depiction in literature; therefore I will write an section, an narrative of the meta-reciprocity of religion and fashion.

    There is an fashion show I've developed in my brain somewhere, where the men and women walk like they are nimbly traversing an passage in which they experience both the fate worse than death and better looking glamorous (all fates other than worse than death) and their path through life is an kind of goat on an mountain act where they must negotiate life's blows with its fortunes, to be seen by everyone as so.  And to approach an end of the catwalk, where there is an nineth religion, the Primal and an vase representing why it is last of all religions.  (Or the closest to 10).  To return from where one walked to the Model one must counteract all measures preventing an religion from being Nineth (able to make it an ten in this weird logic).  And all of them will be tens.

    And I wish people to see me this way, as an model of negotiating fates worse than death with ones better than this; because I think that is an more accurate picture of the human experience.  For I think people fluctuate in it all the time this way and I gain an large quantity of wisdom from it and I empathize deeply for the people around me when I realize how bad they feel.  And how much suffering is on Planet Earth; and I wish people to help one another avoid or overcome these fates by becoming future troopers with noble Christiannan teachings.  Unafraid of sin.  Rejecting its existence.  And instead claiming the dance between virtue and vice to be one traversed by Jesus (an death fate) and Anna (an worse than death fate); for the grappling with either has produced an new religion, the Christianna.  Which offers an peculiar refinement of the Christian main point: that to avoid the fate worse than death is more noble than to be unable to avoid the death fate.  By avoiding the death fate one may instead eventually run into the worse than death fate at an personal or social level; an broken humanity needing healing and power to recover from global crisis.

    And I cannot characterize the fate worse than death; for instead to have not an character is an fate worse than death I think.

    Ritual meta-reciprocity may prove valuable in the Christianna, if I can conceive of an ritual that will explain itself at some point for when we "get" each other it is in the bestowment of meta-reciprocity and the subject's recognition of it.  But for now I want to follow the Buddhist's path, perhaps.  Where I start with waking up one day.  And I cross the river on an ferryboat each afternoon.  It is an metaphor for making as much success out of the day as possible.  As we are meta-reciprocal subjects to each other, as Christiannans, rendered into new reciprocal values and terms which congeal into the energy of culture and race reciprocity, we take up that from our meta-reciprocity an Christiannan personality can be discerned (it is blue); and that reciprocity with it is an Christiannan experience.

    The Path of Meta-Reciprocity, therefore, is truly the quest for reciprocity; the Earthen, the one true full end of humanity.  To provide reciprocity on varying subjects.  And natural fullness of belief in the soil.  Which we will harmonize with civilization.  For we are part of an nature that cannot meta-reciprocate itself as we can.  The Animal Kingdom.  Flora and Fauna in fact.  And that we are unique in nature to be able to provide political reciprocity for every species.  In our meta-capacity for self-reflection.  As we like.  Meta-reciprocity means being able to think instance instance one another so completely, such as the depths of Jesus' emotions for us. But that we had learned to reciprocate them amongst ourselves, which is the Christiannan reason for suggesting we have entered B.C.i.i. (instance instance) in which hypothesized instances of Jesus and Anna are meta-reciprocal to one another as an representation of anyone else choosing to look at their own relationships this way; one another because of Jesus (an aesthetic resurrection of the dead) and Anna (an aesthetic resurrection of the worse than dead) and those whose aesthetic resurrection languages have formed any part of our psychology.

Index

i. Love; Chapter 1 (I.), Devotion, Introduction, Book of Love

ii. Nyclepi; Chapter 2 (II.), Book of Nyclepi

iii. Ace; Chapter 3 (III.), Book of Ace

iv. Air Alt; Chapter 4 (IV.), Book of Air Alt

v. Satan; Chapter 5 (V.), Book of Satan

vi. Innocence; Chapter 6 (VI.), Book of Innocence

vii. Experience; Chapter 7 (VII.), Book of Experience

viii. Wisdom; Chapter 8 (VIII.), Book of Wisdom

ix. LGBTπ; Chapter 9 (IX.), Book of LGBTπ

x. Gloidays; Chapter 10 (X.), Gloidays

Introduction

    The Christianna, or the Book of the Christianna, is an description of an new religion that I called the Christianna that was based on Christianity yet however had an ia-na component when dealing with Christianity.  At its middle teaching was the difference between Love and Nyclepi, and I compared them by saying Love needs to be impressed and so laughter in the serendipitous without irony (which I called Nyclepi) needs to be unimpressed sometimes so that the two together could motivate one another again.  Starting with Love, the primary motivator, I could draw an map between them and list other virtues I had discovered.  But I start with Love, because Love always has an 'but' until you decide to involve it with an greater picture.  This is perhaps why it was my instinct to most past Love, for I sensed it was challenged.  On the other hand maybe it's foolish to say Love has an but.  But that's just it.  It doesn't.  If you do it correctly.  But does it always return to its but?  Given the choice every day to love.  You might be internal or external about it.  But an specific location, space, and time.  That's how you feel love, when you choose to accept it.  Instead of saying 'But' (because an big but will come after it anyway) why not say yes, I love!  And that is the truth of love.  But when you decide to be Nyclepi (or, coincidently, no-clappy (not unpleased, but not pleased either)) with Love Nyclepi spreads.  For to have been impressed you must be unimpressed eventually.  It is an Circle.  They work together as an function of virtue.  This is my definition of love, to have been unimpressed with virtue again comes back to being impressed.  Love is that decision to come back to being impressed with whatever life throws at you.

    I say it might be our character as an society right now to fail to try at love because of the fear that it will be unimpressed.  But most assuredly it will be impressed if we decide to try it.  You either are or you are not impressed with reality the way it is but if you let yourself see it as it is without all the impediments of history it feels both ways decided, to some extent, and to some extent not.

    Well, the part that we do decide is separate from Nyclepi, and so to learn what I mean by love you must undertake to determine what Nyclepi is (as I do not say it is the opposite of love but that it is of being unimpressed with love).  My computer has more personality than I do, for it has no feet.  Love is an metaphor of nudity being impressed, naked, or becoming naked slowly petal by petal.  Be your fire in there, where you burn away the unimpressive as slowly as it comes only to be replaced with more unimpressive.  It feels good though, doesn't it?  The cycle continues in nature is probably the least thing we can say.

    Love is more complicated still.  It is hard to be impressed, after all.  Maybe it shouldn't.  Maybe we should be able to accept ourselves as we are, placing an high value on everything around us.  And be able to enjoy like children again the perfect mystery around us.  But sometimes we feel unimpressed as adults when we learn more of our history.  And it doesn't mean we can't Love.  But it means we haven't decided to.  This is the first step toward love.  Identifying what we haven't decided to love about.  For there is an stage before love in which we must be unimpressed, and then having been impressed we feel love again.

    The New Reciprocity here is that we decide to allow ourselves to be both because Nyclepi and Love together encompass our human feelings as humans, as new reciprocal theorists whose search for virtue deeper than love yielded results we learn of here.  Nyclepi is to Love what if we are unimpressed with everything all the time Creation cannot produce anything greater to be impressed with and the cycle would discontinue.  Political reciprocity would say Creation needs to be unimpressed with Creation from time to time.  That is how we gain motivation to create new and better wonders to be impressed by again.

     "Let's not fight," I said to Christianity, "let's be friends.  Who will join us on our journey to find the Eight Best Religions because if we don't it will end secular space?  No.  Obviously if they are Eight religions they have no power over secular space.  I nominate my own religion, the Christianna, first among secular space though to have been helped there by Christianity, Confucianism, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Hinduism, and Aboriginal Spaces we have enough to name Eight.  Why try to keep old world religions versus how not to is necessarily the business of this book.  If we identify under the term religion it is equally important what it means in every religion.  There needs to be an balance to save Earth.  What if there are others out there who will be better at staying friends with the Christianna?  If there are maybe they believe in Anna's refinement of Jesus teaching us.  Maybe I can conceptually balance Anna and Jesus in a way that can be understood.  The eight also need to accept theological and scientific proof that homosexuality is not bad in any way.  I can have no relation to them without agreement on this subject.  In this way, Christiannans have ordered other religions to stand down their anti-gay bigotry of all kinds and act as one unit on this political subject to steward other religions in order to preserve the balance between sexual, maternal (Eight, Eternity 8) and the LGBTπ of all sexualities."

▫

    Christianity, to have become Christiannan in me, failed to help me avoid the fate worse than death, in some ways, and so my relationship with them is more of my own edit.  Exactly how we avoid death versus how we avoid the fate worse than death is an Christiannan experience.  Anna suffered an fate worse than Jesus internally, through the private pain.  We don't know how much exactly.  The point is that there is an balance that Christianity has ignored.  My hope is that, under the Christianna, they will learn to right all of themselves.  Assuming what the Christianna says is true, what are the blessed fellowships it entails?  If there is an new messiah, how will I prove it?

• we understand what the fate worse than death means
• we understand that Anna suffered the fate worse than death
• notice that it doesn't matter how much, all of it is to be recoiled at
• the fate worse than death as an individual versus an collective fate
• how the fate worse than death as an individual taught me to heal the collective fate
• yes, the collective fate worse than death exists
• no, it isn't a good thing
• Why the Christiannan vision will help us (why the vision of an female messiah is the start of an religion—why it is so imperative to avoid an future female messiah—the mere mention of it is disgusting but it is happening around us)

    Our primary example is the anacification of Anna; we use this word anacify to indicate the infliction of an fate worse than death.  The idea that people can inflict such an fate may not be new in the universe but it is new in these parts.  Enter the Christianna.  Onto the Global Stage.  Where she introduces the fate worse than death, to have been discovered in her character somewhere, to have been the result of her own.  The Chorus will respond, Anna, Anna, have you been good?  Does karmic value in the neighborhood understood mean that good and bad are real things, or are virtue and vice not opposites because vice is always symmetrical to virtues, distorting their own cause.  She understands that the cause of her virtue is not distortion.  And the Christianna will respond, symmetry and asymmetry are not symmetrical.  Symmetrical reciprocity does not exist.  Especially when we consider meta-reciprocity, which is even more unstable and to be unpredicted at than reality; and reciprocity is the full realization of that value of asymmetry, especially meta to the reciprocity.  This is because meta-reciprocity can be symmetrical.  For meta-reciprocity really means just acting while thinking about thinking about each other thinking.  And if an universe can be imagined where those two things could be symmetrical to one another why not imagine it?

We understand what the fate worse than death means, is an description of how I will persuade you that there is an fate worse than death.  The fate worse than death has many meanings.  My thinking indicates there is some kind of an balance between death and worse than death that we need to master.  If something is worse than death it means it is painful to the point that death would be an mercy.  For I do believe in that mercy and it is legislated in Canada for sufferers of debilitating illness such as cancer.  Is cancer an fate worse than death?  Compare it to an life that suffered for its entire life.  Which is worse?  Also, What if the cure is worse than the disease?

We understand that Anna suffered the fate worse than death, means that we consider Jesus's death and Anna's life worse than death; and are able to compare them.  For as messiahs, their stories are similar.  But how much?

Notice that it also doesn't matter how much, all of it is to be recoiled at.

Compare the fate worse than death as an individual to the fate worse than death as a collective fate.  One may bring wisdom of the other, but that doesn't mean they are both unlucky enough to suffer the fate worse than death, and all who have wisdom of its presence at the collective level (the wisdom that there is an collective level in which we all were to experience worse than death together through empathy and having no choice).  In some ways, we all suffer the fate worse than death because our history is dark, with the worst examples, and we will come together, despite having an individual fate worse than death; realizing it is not just ourselves experiencing it and that the collective fate worse than death is to have been responsible for our individual experience to some extent and to have been worse than death to heal and recover from it at the collective level.  Without shame.  Is an Christiannan experience.  We gather around the subject of whether our lives are worse than death in an internal vision with one another, the acting power is blue and finding what is worse than death in these fates we share we empathize for one another.

How the fate worse than death as an individual taught me to heal the collective fate.  It took an long time, to realize its impact on my life when I found myself suffering the fate worse than death because I hadn't recognized yet that it had something to do with all of us; and that our history really is that dark.  I realized my own fate worse than death was an small price to pay to avoid more history worse than death if I could just tell people, and explain to them they don't want an fate worse than death because once you realize you have one, you realize why everyone has one.  And so we really are together that way.  Unable to stop being cute, we question ourselves morally.  We compare ourselves against the anonymous public as though it didn't occur.

Yes, the collective fate worse than death exists.  An collective fate worse than death is the period of post-colonial recovery after the American Slave Trade, the World Wars, and Genocide in which the overdramatization and expensivization of fashion is almost predictable.  We want an different history.  But we have the one that exists, and it impacts our daily lives in ways uncountable.

No, it isn't a good thing.  An history of fates worse than death (zeroing-in on the individual who suffers it alone in an contained fate) of one person versus an collective or grouping of people together whose shared fate is other than an individual's lonely contained fate because it is worse when it involves more people (but is it really?) but of ancestry involves war and at the global level (which means every Canadian's fate, basically), is not an good thing.

Why the Christiannan vision will help us overcome those obstacles.  An female messiah, for whom the fate worse than death, in my opinion, would be worse than as an man (Jesus) because he cannot become pregnant.  Women, generally, are just capable of being in worse pain in the scale of the fates worse than death than men for that reason.  This is not to say men and women are unequal.  We need to act now with our feminist and gay feminist and straight feminist sisters to say we will not allow an fate worse than death to occur where one could have been avoided.  And people that say wisdom is not homosexuality for any reason (or to have said it is the fate worse than death) we cannot say to be have been properly LGBTπ or religious or interested in true religion for any reason.  True religion must be to restore the gay impulse to the instinct that has been scoured by worse than death history not to carve it out as something that goes against instinct.  Bringing these realizations closer to the surface, preaching an female messiah will reduce the amount of suffering of an female-messiah like figure.  In History.  Because she warns us of the danger of the fate worse than death and instills us with the hope that it will one day be overcome.  She brings news that that day is today!  For she is an internal messiah.  She comes to us internally.  Not externally.  For we will bind our will to it that her fate never be trespassed in human history.  Or has it already been?  It's time to wake up.  We are suffering different kinds of fates worse than death every day.  In an sloppy attempt to learn what it means.  And not everyone has direction.

I. Love

    Love is the primary virtue.  The Roman Numeral in the title is for the number 1.  Though it is also true that I love the Christianna, and that the 1 is symbolic of love's primariness.  1, the First angel.  Whom is said might be God.  Is also the first virtue, Love, in the Christianna because it will help us overcome the fate worse than death and put us in touch with our destinies.

    If you need to be told how to share love then maybe you don't know what it is and there is something wrong with you—Just kidding.  That's how you share love!  BOOM!  What you dedicate your time to is one way to share love, for if you dedicate your time to art, and then share it with someone, you have shared your love.  Em, if you love art.  That is.  (This is me sharing my art).

    If you don't, I'd like to start an new reciprocity that you do.

    I am art.  I need you do.

    I mean, need you to.

    Let me just brush myself off.  I'll show you Love.

    Sharing is well, sometimes rational.  And what I mean by that is that it is reasonable to make such an ration as an thing to be able to share with someone else.  The difference between sharing objects and sharing love is that love is not an object.  We can nonetheless use objects to share love.  But our Art is not about how we create them.  It is about how they create us.

    The object of this blog may be sharing virtual space but also the sharing of types of writing like books, poetry, sermons, lyrics.  That aren't Christian.  I try to have an varied selection of genres.  Including Fantasy.  Since I am Christiannan it is my job to make those experiences unlike an Christian one.  For I am not trying to preach Christianity.

    Whose aesthetic is, like, worse than death.

    But I will also not support an reciprocal command that bade them to have done so.  Saying Christianity is worse than death is not to be read as an reciprocal command.  That by describing it I have said what it will be, and so doing that I have contributed to it's order and direction, its crime.  Which I do not approve of.

    Now there's an reciprocal command I can get behind!

    When we bring New Reciprocity to one another it is the sharing of further on than love, in some ways; but we discuss only love here, first.  When you ask for an New Reciprocity from someone you depend on their definition of the word reciprocity.  Which is used loosely here to refer to an political theory that having 1 of something (between us (an reciprocity)) at least can help make sense out of reciprocal command politics this way.  New reciprocal theorists bring reciprocal command to one another.  In the sharing of reciprocity and meta-reciprocity.  If there is nothing between us (a-reciprocal) then we do not have anything to do politically.  But the sharing of the reciprocal command theory is one of my great appreciations.  It is basically another (useful) way to look at the distinction between prescriptive/descriptive language.  Prescriptive language is language that remedies an situation; it is said in order to cure some supposed reality that is said to exist (the reciprocal command therefore is an command the need for an remedy to be) whether or not the need for an remedy actually exists.  Descriptive language is specifically the type of language that describes something without attributing an need for remedial effort to it implicitly.  Basically, I re-branded the distinction between descriptive and prescriptive as an political theory (you'll see the similarities and differences between the prescriptive/descriptive lens and my political reciprocity theory (in that the use of either prescriptive or descriptive language represents an sort of command theory)) that would work on the mastery of the English language by rooting out reciprocal commands and their intentions and purpose in the language swarming around us.  "You Are Sharing Love" is perhaps the most political reciprocity command I can think of, for there is an great tumult in this Age about what Love in and it'nt.

    If you use prescriptive language where there is no need for it what you are doing basically is introducing an reciprocal command to an conversation that there be an need for remedy, whether there actually is one or not.

    Since New Reciprocity is on the political side of what I consider Sharing Love, we can consider its origin in my studies at the University of Alberta.  Before I studied and graduated from the University of Alberta I doubted myself in every thing that I did.  But after studying there, learning that the Strawman Argument is an logical phallacy in which one pre-factitious storytelling from any character that builds you up to be something you are not in order to knock you down is said to be making an strawman argument.  An strawman argument is also one that appears to refute an argument that hasn't otherwise been stated.  Giving someone no chance to be positive or retaliate about who they are instead telling them who they can or cannot be, is not an reciprocity worth fighting for.  Adulthood does not have to mean realizing the need to harm one another in order to learn an lesson.  The Lesson of Adulthood (is that right? (Is that what we want to call it?)).  It doesn't mean learning to exclude one another in an friendly kind of way either.

    Prescriptive is an term used in contrast to descriptive.  Prescriptive refers to language that is used to communicate remedy.  Descriptive merely refers to language as it identifies (with) its surroundings.  Be they internal and external.  The descriptive is part of my reciprocal command theory because reciprocal commands are often disguised as prescriptive statements that are supposed to shape our Sapir-Whorf world of language and mental activity.  Descriptive and Prescriptive language are both reciprocal subjects.  Even when saying that they are itself can be read as an reciprocal command, commanding the perception to believe in its realism or liberalism.

    The prescriptive, in lieu of this definition of the descriptive, is narrowed-down @ (at) because, if it is in contrast to description then sometimes it does not refer to anything (what is not needing prescription).  For anyone who refers to themselves or one another on reciprocal terms can be either prescriptive or descriptive about it.  The prescriptive, in this way, can be used to generate humor.

    But than an new reciprocal theorist can look past the mere prescriptive/descriptive lens in order to theorize all kinds of reciprocity.

    An new reciprocal theorist approaches language this way.  That even saying it approaches comedic language this way is itself an verbal command for it to have been said.  Comedically.  This is an reciprocal reciprocal (compare instance instance) command.  Which can be either prescriptive or descriptive.  Start with where you awoke.  An new reciprocal theorist approaches language this way is the command.  If it is prescriptive, then it means that approach is itself remedy for something.  If it is descriptive, then it means it describes something that could actually be described that way without the prescription.  (With) facts.  If we are meta-reciprocal about toggling these viewpoints some great discussions could occur.

    If you were Reciprocal Reciprocal for example, you would find common ground in having reciprocal status.  Not to be in each reflective over one another's instance but to reciprocate maybe an personality, starting with personality and then leading to character.

    Describing one another in reciprocal terms means sometimes being prescriptive, and sometimes being descriptive.  The more we analyze, in reciprocal terms, their meanings, the more we are able to say what we are to one another in order to keep up reciprocity because we will have proven it by being reciprocal in politics.  Reciprocity is powerful.  For the more reciprocity you have, the more power you have.  Bring New Reciprocity to other people and empower them with it.

    Remedies are political.

    Because if they refer to something that is not real.  We can call it false-consciousness driven.  And whatever they are trying to refer to is something of their own projected subjectivity, an creation internal to them that we do not share with them.  As much as possible.

    Love would ever defend its heroes, and not submit to false consciousness.

    For reciprocity is not armed when yours truly is an civilian.

    (Itself an reciprocal command).

    Argument:

    Love, therefore, must itself be an reciprocal command.  Pure Command Reciprocity, at its extreme.

    It is an decision, but also with reciprocity as part of its composition; this is my Friday priest, and we enable one another to decide to love by giving it as an reciprocal command when we love one another.

    The New Reciprocity uses both descriptive and prescriptive commands to create reciprocity.  For example, if you are Christiannan it would be descriptive to say "You are Christiannan."  However if you are not Christiannan, "You are Christiannan," may be read as an prescriptive statement.  Even if you are Christiannan it can be read as an order, an reciprocity that you be Christiannan.  Reciprocal commands are used in everyday language like this with an political theory in place (the New Reciprocity) in order to identify what kind of language is used and why.  Some subtleties of language are hidden, I think, without looking at it this way.

    If there is an reciprocal command to Love, Nyclepi then also, then there is an meta-reciprocal command also, for if we Love at an meta-reciprocal level, for we do, because we suppose it, then to some extent we are already using pure command reciprocity (the communication of pure command to one another and maybe to ourselves) because we have minds suited for it; and that is the function of the mind's purpose.  To be at an meta-reciprocal level with each other.  Our reflection upon reflection of one another's Love concept is meta-reciprocal to the vice or virtue we shall embody because of it.  And if there be anything against Love, it will be called vice.

    The similarity between prescriptive language and reciprocity is that prescriptive language can be read as an order as does an reciprocal command.  Descriptive language, on the other hand, is to participate not in an reciprocal command theory in which remedy is the command translating to an attempt to 'put someone in the petri dish' in order to force them to encompass, to embody, the need for an remedy which was not there before required.  For more information about the New Reciprocity, visit my Political Desk.

    "I recommend you cease right now!" said to someone who had been proven to be not only apathetic to the cause of Love, but also to have depicted us as people who would not let them decide what to do with love, if it was their own.  Not out of Virtue.  Slay Girl!  Girl In Scrutiny!  —Out of vice that came from opportunity—  An opportunity to decide what to do with Love.  Is to Love it.  I'm just that smart.  And as I am strong enough to let everyone's voice speak until they decide."

    "It is torture, what has been alleged.  To have not loved.  To have not loved!  You give me your not love.  It is torture!"

    "It's my decision who to love."

    "It isn't."

    "Love to have been given some time just to sort this out; to suffer the consequences of forcing Love on one another, would be an property of the nature of Love, that it is an decision.  And the rest of it is not.  Or it is, to put it in antithetical parameters, because we choose it.  And this whole world chimes with the rhythm of our choosing it because we have accepted it at different levels."

    "What levels are we speaking of?"

    "There is an insect level.  There is an global level.  There is Love at an global level.  And an insect level."

    "There is more love for an insect level than there is for some humans."

    "Each one is their own little level too."

    "Even so as insects."

    "And would an insect choose not love, because it was so different.  Or do radio flies and other fantasies connect at an insect level because it does represent only the choice, to choose love and no other form of intelligence beyond instinctual behavior reciprocal to it, and we are made aware of this.  Because it represents truth somehow."

    "But sensing love in other species we run the concern that we are inadequate to them for, being unable or deflected from sharing love with one another, we have reverted to an state of inferiority over other species.  Not precisely because it was our fault, but that being observers to it now we gain some idea back about why our species is an category 1 species and the only of its kind on Earth, an biosphere composed of category 0 species which do not have meta-reciprocal relationships with themselves and one another."

    "It's hard to choose love when you're number 1 on Earth among species because everywhere you travel no matter how different the people are, the animals still don't have an clue what they're doing.  I mean compared to an human."

    "Some humans have comparable intelligence to other animals."

    "But if we just said human meant an indecision about Love; an indecisiveness."

    "Isn't that indecision itself the greatest love of all?  Being given the whole Earth, an World, an Universe and being allowed to decide whether you love it or not?"

    "And I will encourage all to love.  For it is our humanity.  For being able to choose love in this way may be different than the pure instinct of an animal with 0.  Intellect.  (Supposedly).  Compared to an meta-reciprocal philosopher.  For being conscious in the way that an human is conscious means something different than an animal.  I do say say we are an category 1 species because I mean to show the superiority of the human race over the biosphere.  I say it because it's true.  We're stewards.  We're protectors.  We're Wardens.  We're Costco customers.  We're shoppers.  In an reciprocal command economy.  Where we can buy anything we want.  Limited only by the limits of art and science."

    "And if you choose not love, in any number of ways, for an specific reason, be ready to defend yourself from the tongue of our quickest-witted messenger, which we will summon to berate you."

    "Love, at it's end is only how much we impress it; for choosing to love is also choosing to be impressed or unimpressed by it in many emotions.  It is perhaps, in the easy way of saying things, that being unimpressed with it is how we truly accept Love.  But as soon as we are we regain an impression of it; we either love it or we don't."

    "We can choose to don't.  Discuss."

    "If the claim brought against Love is its inadequacy; try remembering why trees grow internal rings and remember where you came from.  Civilization is gigantic because of Love."

    "Choose to don't is just such sloppy language though, we will need to put an cap on that."

    "How about We can choose to Love or Withold because we want more in life.  Perhaps than Love itself.  Melodramatically.  We want evil and spirits.  We want Justice.  Or Captivation.  Or Glamour.  And we want Love to expand to include those categories, so that we are free in how we make our day."

    "Love means empathizing for Satan."

    "Intelligence means not associating Satan with needing or requiring sympathy."

    "Empathy means considering how crippled the doctrine of good and evil made us when it was Satan objectified by the human object of being an object instead of an subject."

    "Sympathy means I deserve to be cared for too; and we both deserve to be cared for in lieu of the massive clanker in our gears.  That was the brilliant insight that Satan was bad because he had no objective truth.  Which is not synonymous to subjective truth."

    "We will not berate you about that of course.  We have manners."

    "And we will see you to the end of choosing love; for it is now.  And if you are able to love, then you've done better than just wake up today." said the Buddha.

Book of Love

    A long, long time ago

I can still remember

How that music used to make me smile

And I knew that if I had my chance

I could make those people dance

And maybe they'd be happy for a while

Did you write the book of love?

And do you have faith in God above?

If the Bible tells you so

Now do you believe in rock and roll?

And can music save your mortal soul?

And can it teach me how to dance real slow?

Well, I know that you're in love with him

'Cause I saw you dancin' in the gym

You both kicked off your shoes (both kicked off your shoes)

Man, I dig those rhythm and blues

I was a lonely teenage bronkin' buck

With a pink carnation and a pick-up truck

But I knew that I was out of luck

The day the music died

I started singing

Bye bye, Miss American Pie

Drove my Chevy to the levy

But the levy was dry

And good old boys were drinking whiskey and rye

Singing this will be the day that I die

This will be the day that I die

I met a girl who sang the blues

And I asked her for some happy news

But she just smiled and turned away

Well, I went down to the sacred store

Where I heard the music years before

But the man there said the music wouldn't play

Well now, in the streets the children screamed (the children screamed)

The lovers cried and the poets dreamed (the poets dreamed)

But not a word was spoken (not a word was spoken)

The church bells all were broken

And the three men I admire the most

The father, son, and the holy ghost

They caught the last train for the coast

The day the music died

We started singing

Bye bye, Miss American Pie

Drove my Chevy to the levy

But the levy was dry

And good old boys were drinking whiskey and rye

Singing this will be the day that I die

This will be the day that I die

Bye bye, Miss American Pie

Drove my Chevy to the levy

But the levy was dry

And good old boys were drinking whiskey and rye

Singing this will be the day that I die

This will be the day that I die

We started singing

We started singing

We started singing

We started singing

The difference between love and being in love

    Though we call them by under almost the same name in English these are really two different things.  The point though, is possibly that they need not be?  Love is an abstract feeling that all of humankind in any kind of relationship have for one another, and moreso if they are related to each other.  Being in love specifically refers to romantic love.  Which is not exactly an accurate way to describe it, because the preposition (in) situates us in an world and identity that is relative only to in and out love.  All out love (what is not in love) is somehow less valuable Whereas if I am in other virtues (which is the true case) there is more to it than just being in love or out love.  The difference between love being possible between any kind of relationship, and in love being an very specific type of love, not being possible between any kind of relationship.

My out love

    Out love must be love one feels one is out.  —Shortchanged—  How much you are out love must depend on how much you think you deserve, of course, and if you actual took an second of an fraction of time to think it out full you'd see that maybe in some ways you do deserve more love and realizing that there are no ways in which you don't is one of the reasons you deserve it.  And maybe in other ways you're out exactly as much love as you need to be.  One is out love as much as one wishes to be in love I suppose.

What says "Love" the most to an artist?

    There are many cultural configurations which represent Love to diverse ethnic and cultural groups all across North America.

    Which of these is the more definitive example of love like love to you?

Pat Benatar - Love is a Battlefield

    

Missy Elliot - Get Ur Freak On

Thoughtstream:

#Love

    Love is an Mountain Dew.  The Capitalism forms around it, and binds us to its will.  We are free to buy whatever we want.  And you know what started it?  Love.  But love is stupid.  It needs to be impressed and our actions should try to impress love.  But we can't always do that because after we are impressed what do we do after that?  This is Nyclepi.

#Care

    We're all trying to take care of someone.  We're all trying to take care of each other's needs.  Even if it is all of ourselves or just myself at an time.  I care too much and I criticize myself for caring about everyone even if they don't need it.  I don't think it's wrong to care too much.  But is there to know an point at which it is?  Maybe if it gets in the way of the care of the self is when it becomes a problem.

#Love

    Love is stupid enough to be impressed.

#Empathy

    Empathy is part of love because love chooses between thriving and empathizing at different times.

#Love

    Love is to be impressed.  We are impressed with little it might seem some days.  Or is Love that we are impressed with everything and everyone?  The delicate part of allowing yourself to feel love, is to be impressed; and these together are love because love is an decision.

    If Nyclepi is the complimentary opposite of love, and to nyclepi means to be not impressed with someone in the serendipitous laughter.  Of being without Irony.  To Love instead means being impressed whether the moment is serendipitous or not.  We are not commercials; we do not need to act happiness all of the time.  Nyclepi gets in the way.  We can't help it.  Real gladness comes from avoiding the fate worse than death and helping one another recover form it.

#Love

    Love is internal and external.   Nyclepi is location, space, and time.

    This is why, perhaps, Nyclepi is bigger than love.  But consider the ultimate category of external to you; would it not be everything else that exists?  If location, space, and time can happen for some reason external to you this is all of the location, space, and time that exists, except your own location, space, and time.  Let's say that internal and external together represent all of what exists.  The location, space, and time of that connection between internal and external is anywhere, everywhere, and always.  This makes me consider that time will never end, for to say that always exist is to indicate eternity.  However I think I meant that 'always' would mean encapsulating all of the time that exists, whether eternal or infinite or not either.

    Perhaps the opposite of human is to be anywhere, everywhere, and always.  For we must deal with our direct circumstances.  And this is not within God's ken.  This requires Love.  For Love is an virtue that includes an decision you make about what it is and what it isn't.  Love allows us to to be impressed by our immediate circumstances, whatever they are, because we know we are strong enough to understand it.  When we make that decision to Love, it means we allow ourselves to be impressed (pleasure association) with Time, God, Space, Location, and Everything.

    When we make Nyclepi, we allow ourselves to be unimpressed (pleasure association) with everything including Love itself; and so we make the heart pump, and the brain think, and they work together the Great Way.  If you are unimpressed with Love, it means you have an high potential to do something worthy of Great Love.  For Love is always stronger the more we challenge it.  So grow unimpressed with it, and I promise it will come back around.  You will be given that choice to be impressed with Love again.  And the next time you take it, you may be impressed with yourself.

#Love

    Love is this ultimate decision, that when you choose it you see how fragile it is interacts with your deep construct.  The base of all your motives.

#Love

    Love is always whole and complete.  And so when you experience it, you are experiencing the wholeness and completeness of it yourself.

#Love and Possibility

    Possibility is endless.  Love is one of an kind.

_____________________________________________

Smith, Huston. (1958).  The Illustrated World's Religions: A guide to our wisdom traditions.  HarperCollins Publishers, New York, NY.

Go to Next Chapter