How An Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy Silences a Dissenting Movement Using
Hegelian Dialectics
How
Diaprax Functions In “The Meeting”
Group Think Roles [Of Agents Imbedded in the
Meeting]
Group Building and Maintenance Roles
| Encourager |
Praises,
agrees with, and accepts other points of
view to sustain Consensus agenda
|
| Harmonizer |
Reconciles
disagreements to keep procedure going |
| Compromiser |
Offers personal
compromise to assist the procedure |
Gatekeeper
Expediter
|
Regulates
communications to keep procedure going |
Standard
setter Ego Ideal
|
Expresses
standards for the group that support the
procedure |
| Follower |
Passively goes
along with the procedure |
Group-observer
and commentator
|
Keeps track of
group’s involvement in the procedure
and comment to keep the group in the
procedure |
 |
|
Group Task Roles
(Putting the Spin on you and the group)
|
|
| Initiator-contributor |
Suggests
a “new” procedure be
“tried.” (Diaprax)
|
| Information
seeker |
Asks
for clarification of “facts”
concerning the new proceduresuggested.
|
| Opinion Seeker |
Asks
for clarification of ‘values’
concerning the new procedure suggested.
|
| Information giver |
Gives
‘authoritative’ facts on the
new procedure |
| Opinion giver |
Gives personal
belief-the procedure should be used. |
| Elaborator |
Deducts ideas
presented can work with procedure |
| Coordinator |
Pulls ideas
together under the procedure. |
| Orienter |
Summarizes group
position in light of the procedure. |
| Evaluator-Critic |
Subjects group
actions to procedure standards. |
| Energizer |
Stimulates group
decision based upon the procedure |
| Procedure technician |
Adjusts room environment
to expedite procedure |
| Recorder |
Keeps
track of discussions which develop and
sustain the procedure.
|
Source:
Human relations in Curriculum Change, Kenneth
Benne, 1954.
(Robert’s
Rules of Order are put to the side or limited to
guarantee consensus and the ‘Delphi’
method is used (sub-group, dialoguing to
consensus, facilitated).
The roles to be
processed away in-group think are the persons who
express individuality, who are labeled:
aggressor, blocker, recognition seeker,
self-confessor, playboy, dominator, help-seeker.
(All these persons are negatively labeled to
reflect the need for counseling.) In other words,
those expressing individuality are a threat to
the group, and must be sent for counseling to
bring them into submission.
--Adapted
from Gotcher, Diaprax.
Euphoric,
Spontaneous Group Mind-melt
The environment for a
meeting where diaprax is implemented is carefully
set up to intimidate the dissenter. The leader
sets the rules, such as; no one can speak from
his chair, but must appear before a microphone in
from of the leaders, and be recorded. One after
another of those who have been co-opted by
conversion to the perversion of diaprax (opinion
givers) will be called upon to give their
testimony to the great value of the new
orientation of perversion. Gotcher writes, “Praxis
is thus facilitated experience of a
‘spontaneous’ uniting of minds upon a
common social interest. What diaprax wants to
create is a euphoric, spontaneous group
mind-melt, or what socio-psychologists
Abraham Maslow might refer to as a
‘peak-experience’-what I would rather
call a group-think orgy. According to
socio-psychologists, this can only happen with a
facilitated group-feeling-reasoning experience,
the outcome being group cohesiveness (SYYNTHESIS).
–Gotcher, The Dialectic & Praxis, p. 11.
Dialectical
Praxis: Jesuitical Application of Teilhard’s
Pantheism
It is diabolical. Anyone
analyzing this process of the destruction of
individuality and individual conscience will
discern the elements of pantheism which drives
the process-the melting of all minds into one
consensus based on the destruction of the
individuality created by the call of Christ. The
destruction of conscience and its re-education
has always been the province of Jesuitism. This
is fundamental to dialectical praxis. This
process has really taken off since GC31, in the
1960s when the Jesuits set out to utterly
transform all of human society using Teilhard de
Chardin’s pantheism and the dialectic. It is
the application of Teilhard’s pantheistic
concepts of noogensis (the coming together of
all minds in pantheistic oneness), cosmogenesis,
Christogenesis. The hippies sang about noogenesis:
“I’d like to teach the world to sing in
perfect harmony…
The
Utter Annihilation of Moral Absolutes
Your thesis, your
convictions, have to be negated by the
antithesis, which then resolves into synthesis, a
blending of the thesis and antithesis.
Dialectical praxis contemplates the utter
annihilation of moral absolutes. It is
Rome’s most potent force to eliminate
opposition. Once the moral absolutes are gone,
family, church or nation crumples, and the day is
upon us when the original Protestant
thesis is no more remembered. The battle
is not for the weak, or the timid, or the
ignorant. They are all blown away as the storm
approaches.
The
Law of the Negation of the Negation
These tactics of the
‘negation of the negation,” are
fundamental to dialectical praxis. Engels listed
three basic laws of the dialectic: the law of the
unity and struggle of opposites, the law of the
transition from quantitative to qualitative
change, and the law of the negation of
the negation.” –Engels,
Dialectics of Nature, p. 26, quoted in Nobel, p.
142. Stalin offered four basic laws, and Lenin
thought there were 16 ingredients.
“The negation
concept is primarily the reference to the
antithesis uniting with and struggling with the
thesis. In the ensuing struggle, the thesis and
its antithesis (negation) are transformed or
transcended into a different and newer quality.
The synthesis is the negation of the negation.
The third aspect (synthesis) negates the negation
of the second aspect (antithesis), which in turn
becomes the new starting point or new thesis
(slightly improved and developed), which elicits
its new antithesis as the eternal process
continues.” –David Nobel, Understanding
the Times, 143.
Jesus warned that
variance was the lot of being His disciples in
Matthew 10.
Chaos
in the Soul: Accepting the Gray Zone in Order to
Belong
When the moral structure
is removed from the soul through the negation of
the negation, the result is chaos. The person is
taught that he must accept the Gray Zone for the
sake of belonging. The person is led to redefine
his position for the sake of group acceptance.
“Don’t be so old-fashioned.”
Mediation:
The Fear of the Loss of Group Approval
Now the person is
compromised, and his new orientation is
acceptance by the group. It happens all the time
in dormitories. The student forsakes his home
training and principles in order to be accepted
by the gang. There is no substitute for a young
person to take a strong position that whatever
happens he is not going to give up his faith and
the orientation to God that he has learned all of
his life.
SYNTHESIS
DECISION: “Refreezing”
This is the process of
refreezing your conscience, your convictions, in
the new mould. It happens in gangs, in churches,
in dormitories, at the workplace, on the street,
in the interrogation rooms, in the torture
chambers, all the time. This is the goal of
dialectical praxis-to eliminate the Protestant
conscience of dependence upon the authority of
the transcendent God, and re-establishing the
convictions, the conscience, now in subjection to
the new social entity-the ecumenical movement,
the ministerial association, the gang, the
military, the police, the board, the church, the
dorm, the workplace, the interrogator. It is the
essence of brainwashing.
Determination:
The “Converted” Change Agent
The person now is a change
agent, determined to bring others into the
dialectical process in order to justify
his compromise while developing his
relationships with them. The new
‘convert” is out to convert everyone he
meets, to neutralize everyone who resists, and
remove anyone that threatens the process of
dialectical praxis that he has just came through.
It happened all the time in the Soviet Union.
They would break a minister in prison under
torture. The minister would convert to the
position of his torturers in the Gulag. He would
be sent back to head up his church and bring the
entire church over the line.
Only Some of the
Waldensian People and a Few Others Resisted the
Diaprax When the Church Went Into Apostasy
This is the process that
happened in the great apostasy in the early days
of Christianity. It was in the name of evangelism
that the “church” hierarchy lowered the
standard to bring in a flood of new converts. It
is the same today. The Waldensees found
themselves to be dissenters to this process. Even
their leaders caved in: “It required
a desperate struggle for those who would be
faithful to stand firm against the deceptions and
abominations which were disguised in sacerdotal
garments and introduced into the church.
The Bible was not accepted as the standard of
faith. The doctrine of religious freedom was
termed heresy, and its upholders were hated and
proscribed.
“After a long and
severe conflict, the faithful few decided
to dissolve all union with the apostate church if
she still refused to free herself from falsehood
and idolatry. They saw that separation
was an absolute necessity if they would obey the
word of God. They dared not tolerate
errors fatal to their own souls, and set an
example that would imperil the faith of their
children and children’s children. To secure
peace and unity they were ready to make any
concession consistent with fidelity to God; but
they felt that even peace would be too dearly
purchased at the sacrifice of principle. If
unity could be secured only by the compromise of
truth and righteousness, then let there be
difference, and even war.
“Well would
it be for the church and the world if the
principles that actuated those steadfast souls
were revived in the hearts of God’s
professed people.” GC 45,46.
Purity
of Faith Transcends Evangelism
The point? Purity of
faith transcends evangelism. Jesus said the same
thing, when he declared to the Pharisees,
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,
hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make
one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him
twofold more the child of hell than
yourselves.” Matthew 23:15. The scribes and
Pharisees had a comprehensive evangelism program,
but they were more under the control of demonic
power than the demoniacs. DA 256.
Using
the Argument of Evangelism in Diaprax
Diaprax has been around
since the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
it is just that it has become refined and
codified into a process that is now used almost
universally. Rome used the argument that
evangelism was more important than the purity of
the faith. The compromise resulting from this
argument created the papacy. The Waldenses
disagreed, and held that the purity of the faith
must be maintained as supreme. They were
persecuted.
Today many have succumbed
to the idea that the church only exists for
evangelism. The church Growth Movement, Church
Planting, Cultural Relativism, Dialectical
Praxis, and Spiritual Formation all proceed in
tandem with massive evangelistic effort and the
effort to accumulate numbers and form
megachurchs. If the people of God only exist for
evangelism, does the Church Triumphant cease to
exist in heaven and the New Earth where there
will be no evangelism? “Evangelism” has
been the argument for almost 2,000 years with
those who would lower or eliminate the standard
of conviction based on truth in order to
accumulate new ‘convert.”
And
For Those Who Resist by Faith…
For those by faith
persisting in resisting Diaprax, it will be
declared, “It is expedient for us that one
man should die for the people, and that the whole
nation perish not.” John 11:50. This will be
considered the conclusive argument in the death
decree. (GC 615.)
Part
III – Strategy for Defeating Diaprax
l page 1 l page 2 l
|
