Sometimes the best way to post something new is merely to reply to a comment. This is in reply to this comment:
It's "whack"! Whack! "Whacked" means something else!
Anyway, the answer is, no, I can't. I can't tie any of this together, and I would like to keep it that way. Some thoughts:
1. I am beginning to think that the Marxist thing was an aesthetic decision as well. Having been rather angry at God as a teenager, I decided to go for the most beautiful system a Godless universe can have: dialectical materialism. One can be very consumed with indignation and a thirst for justice as the only way to justify an absurd existence. Unfortunately in our time, Nietzsche is more a paradigm to be followed by godless intellectuals, not Marx. I find this most unfortunate, since at least Marxist intellectuals are engaged and committed, and not too busy staring at their protruding navel to care about anyone else.
2. I have been to a Coptic monastery since I used to go there as a monk. In the Mojave Desert, we were virtually neighbors. I have a great admiration for Copts, in spite of their Christology.
3. Anglicanism was something I stumbled on while I was working out some issues in my life. To tell the truth, I was angry at the Roman Catholic Church, so maybe being an Anglican provided a bit of a breather for me while I worked some stuff out. I was never in communion with the C of E or the Anglican Communion; my time was spent among the mavericks of the Anglican Continuum that don't ordain women and don't do any of those other silly things.
I found in Anglicanism a beauty in simplicity and an orthodoxy in freedom that I thought I could never have as a Catholic or Orthodox Christian. In truth, though, I found a lot of it artificial. I think Christianity must be more "constricting" than what Orthodoxy and Anglicanism say it should be; that is, you must struggle in your mind and heart with the rest of the Body of Christ. And that means having a Pope, a Magisterium, etc. I just think that we know more than Anglicans or Orthodox would like to concede, that in the end, the authority of Christ is more present.
4. We all have to go through life the best we can. I have hoped to be honest with what I believe and what I have difficulty with. I think we live in a world of such plurality that we can't give a smug answer as to what is the truth and what is a lie. We can stake our lives on it and our own consciences, but to go throwing your intellectual weight around in order to convince people of what YOU believe is a tiresome exercise in my opinion. You should be able to formulate and defend the Truth, but you should not use it as a bludgeoning device that will probably end up boosting your own ego and not augmenting your virtue. I can say this because I am one of the worst offenders, and those closest to me know this. The best way to convince is by example and love; that will bring people to you in a receptive and fertile spirit. To go around trying to pick fights, even under the guise of dialogue, is for me is a waste of time.
I am going to post a poem tomorrow. That is far more important than anything I can write.