[Progressives decrease the liveliness of the spontaneous order by imposing ‘fairness’ with respect to material and immaterial limitations. They act as if ‘they are able to adjust spontaneous orders to suit their organization objectives’. They act as if self-esteem is a thing or a state of things.

Normal contexts are limited, and limiting. They are tailored to fit a Progressive designation.

‘Self-esteem’ is not situated by ‘recognizing myself as an image of God’. It is a thing to be manipulated. It is a thing to be directed according to various religious^infrasov organizational goals.

For example, in America, race and gender awareness mimics tribal affiliation. Identity-based affiliations are supposed to increase self-esteem, according the Progressive’s definition of the word ‘self-esteem’.

Progressives diminish everyone in ‘their implementations of cures for our lack of self-esteem’. Consequences do not matter. They are religiously driven to impose their cures on all society.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 67 and 68

[When ‘I recognize myself as an image of God’, I glimpse God’s Omnipotence.

Sanctifying grace is an interpellation by the Holy Spirit.

Sanctifying grace cleanses ‘my lack of self-esteem’.

‘The realization of my own self-esteem through the image of God’ inspires me to join various organizations. These institutions strive to address the material limitations of other children of God. They have an object^organization to give. The object^org is a gift, not a demand. The object^org offers a trade, not a tax.

This striving grows the entire spontaneous order.

In that growth, I feel the amazing mystery of God.]

From previous blogs, I have several Peircean categorical tools for imaging commentaries on “sin”, including the intersecting nested forms.  This tool may be integral to a postmodern definition of “religion”.

In 1962, Schoonenberg had none of these tools.  As a Dutch Jesuit theologian, he had the tools of scholasticism and modernism, the same tools that had failed the Liberation Theologians of Latin America.  He was like a chemist trying to synthesize a novel molecule. Chemistry and Theology have something in common.  Both can be flammable.

Liberation Theologians distilled their life experiences, their society, and the Bible into concepts, such as “a preferential option for the poor” and “social sin”, that unwittingly fueled the ambitions of leftist tyrants throughout Central and South America as well as leftist Progressives in North America.

South of the border, “the preferential option for the poor” became “a preference for the tyrants who claim that the poor are victims of the rich”.  You have heard the slogans: It is not your fault that you are poor.  Even the wealthy imagined that they were victims of the (even more) rich.

North of the border, the concept of “the sins of the world” transformed into “the political incorrectness of the world”.  You have heard the slogans: Who is more politically incorrect than the racist, woman-suppressing, homosexual-damning, money-grubbing, Catholics?  OK.  The Baptists.  They must be re-educated.  Let them be baptized by immersion in the fiery solvents of Progressivism.

By 2012, the crass, defiant, entrepreneur-hating, crony capitalist tyrants of South America and the hygienic, high-minded, sharp-tongued, self-anointed Progressives of North America had rebranded the elixir of Liberation Theology and made it their own.