Education and Spirituality
le doctrine et enformacion des enfants est chose espirituel
"the education and training of children is a spiritual thing”
(Thirning CJCP, Hil. 11 Hen. 4 47a. See image.)
From this ancient case, we see that education of children (in this sense meaning minors) is inherently spiritual or religious. This is a claim about the nature of education, not about any specific sort of education, but that education and training of children is inherently spiritual. The very process will indellibly imprint their minds with moral and spiritual values about obedience, conduct and so on and so forth.
If education is inherently a “spiritual thing,” then any system of state education is a de facto system of state spirituality. It is not possible for it to be anything else. A recent case involves a “male-to-female” “transgender” teacher in the Ontario School System:
Whether one agrees or disagrees with such a situation, the spiritual effect on the children is palpable: it teaches them that this is acceptable, moral behavior: it normalizes the behavior, just as vivisection would normalize vivisection, or driving without a seatbelt would normalize driving without a seatbelt.
And so, it is good to know that parents have a right to object to this sort of behavior on spiritual grounds: it is against their religion for their children to be exposed to such a situation. Of course, the corporation/state, with its covert religion, will try to explain this in terms of “evolving secular values,” or “safety,” but this is merely the religion of the corporate state.
This should not surprise anyone who has studied the French revolution:
“The Worship of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)[note 1] was France's first established state-sponsored atheistic religion, intended as a replacement for Catholicism during the French Revolution. After holding sway for barely a year, in 1794 it was officially replaced by the rival Cult of the Supreme Being, promoted by Robespierre.[1][2][3][4] Both cults were officially banned in 1802 by Napoleon Bonaparte with his Law on Cults of 18 Germinal, Year X.[5]” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_Reason)
And whether it is called the “Cult of Progressive Values” or “Secular Progress,” the object of “le doctrine et enformacion” is infants, that is to say, minors. The clear object is to normalize behaviors that would have, historically, been illegal or seriously objectionable. For example, take sodomy:
“This was an indictment for committing of sodomy in ano, with a girl of eleven
years of age” (Fort. 91)“The word buggery made use of, is not a term of art appropriated to the common
law, but the punishment is provided, because of its being a vice so detestable arid
abominable, and against nature” (ibid. 94)“This is only a species of sodomy, and a description only, not a definition. Sodomy is the genus, rem veneream habere in ano with a man is only a species, and with a woman another species, and so with a boy or girl, is another species, and with a beast another species.” (ibid. 96)
From this case, we may see that sodomy is a “genus,” and that sodomy in ano may be comitted against man, woman, girl, boy or beast. One commonplace in the Progressive Cult is to normalize sodomy in ano as by giving boys and girls instructions on how to “safely” sodomize one another, as sodomy in ano is a sort of normalized, ritual behavior in the Progressive Cult.
If you object to your child being taught that sodomy is acceptable, which is a spiritual value concerning the right use of the body, which you might call the temple of God, then it is clearly within your right to object, et sic on the same grounds to any contemporary aspect of the Progressive Cult, which will be detailed further in a subsequent article.
One of the problems with people leaving the organized churches in large numbers is that they lose understanding of what organized church is. This enables the progressive cult to engage in spiritual warfare where they subject naive individuals to doctrine et enformacion covertly; for, deprived of the knowledge of church, the subject does not recognize when he is being religiously indoctrinated.