GABRIEL'S CLARION (apr13gab.htm)
WEDNESDAY
April 13, 2005
vol 16, no. 103
The Desecration of Tolerance
    Part Two

Distortion, Deception, and Desecration determine today the standards of tolerance. How can such be tolerated?If God won't tolerate sin, why should we?

      "Even in law one finds that there is no legal consideration for doing that which one either has a legal duty to do or loves to do anyway. As Christ said, what is so great about loving those who treat us well? It is true tolerance, however, to love those who hate us, for therein lies the enduring patience, humility, love, and sacrifice and service of salvation. The modern twisted version of tolerance has turned this concept from one based on Good Friday to one based on a 60's flower- and-love fest where everyone is happy, smiling, dancing, singing, and embracing their 'diversity.' The dangerous toxin of diplomacy, so widespread in the unGodly UN, tells us that we must accept, embrace, and treat as equal all disparity. Given such an absurd spin on tolerance, God Almighty would have embraced Lucifer for demonstrating his 'diversity' in trying to overthrow Heaven!"

    In Part One we saw how the original and sacred meanings of tolerance stand for everything God is about and Christ exemplified. We saw how tolerance fits neatly with the kind of love, patience, suffering, hardship, mercy, forgiveness, humility, and compassion that following Christ demands. However, we also saw how true tolerance also demands respect and never expects submission or surrender of one's conscience or moral code. The dictates and strategy of the devil drip with irony and cynical distortion of the divine and sacred, and tolerance is no exception. In this Part Two we will see how the evil one has managed to twist this divine and sacred concept into a tool of perdition and sacrilege. He who blurs and stains all has been able to turn a virtue into a vice, a code for good into a prescription for evil, and a map for salvation into a trap for perdition.

Slipping Toward Perdition

    Somewhere along the line, the definition of tolerance moved from recognizing and putting up with error to accepting it, from seeking to remove that error to allowing it to fester and grow, and from rejecting that error to embracing it. Perhaps the influences and forces that caused this change to come about are so numerous that only Heaven and Hell can keep account of their contributions, perhaps the myriad of ingredients that turned this soup of salvation into a putrid brew of perdition can never be fully accounted for, but clearly the secular, modernist, atheistic, humanistic, ecumenical, politically correct, sodomite, feminist, and Masonic forces so often implicated in this kind of process are involved. Just as concepts such as equality, justice, privacy, freedom, and choice have been twisted and mangled to accommodate the evil schemes of these forces, so too tolerance has fallen prey to this vile and despicable distortion and deception.

    Michael Novak sees this is a move from strong convictions accepting the burden of putting up with disparity and error to seeking to co-exist peacefully with it and finally to having weak convictions easily agreeing with and embracing such disparity and error. Novak sees this as the victory of practicality over conviction, of laziness over commitment, and of apathy over integrity. Once we move from enduring disparity to humoring it, we easily reach the point where unity, peace, and smiles at all costs become the goal over morality, order, and values.

    Where original and divine tolerance is based on pointing out differences, asserting inequality and seeking truth, tolerance has now become about ignoring such differences, pretending that equality is universal and automatic, and selling lies. In the relativistic world of today, tolerance is both a mantra and a mantle, boasting empty phrases while covering up the fact that it has become an empty concept itself. After all, if what is right and wrong depends on how one looks at things, if authority and right rests only in myself, if everything is right, what is there to tolerate? Additionally, if "everything goes" then anybody who tries to put limits on "everything goes" is the convenient target of the "intolerant" label. At the end of the day, one tolerates only what one does not approve of since if one approves of something there is nothing to tolerate. I do not tolerate or endure chocolate ice cream because I crave it but I do tolerate a dental visit because I frequently find it distasteful!

    Even in law one finds that there is no legal consideration for doing that which one either has a legal duty to do or loves to do anyway. As Christ said, what is so great about loving those who treat us well? It is true tolerance, however, to love those who hate us, for therein lies the enduring patience, humility, love, and sacrifice and service of salvation. The modern twisted version of tolerance has turned this concept from one based on Good Friday to one based on a 60's flower- and-love fest where everyone is happy, smiling, dancing, singing, and embracing their "diversity". The dangerous toxin of diplomacy, so widespread in the unGodly UN, tells us that we must accept, embrace, and treat as equal all disparity. Given such an absurd spin on tolerance, God Almighty would have embraced Lucifer for demonstrating his "diversity" in trying to overthrow Heaven!

The Slippery Slope

    The slide from which original and divine tolerance has fallen from its pure and sacred meaning to its present state is as obvious and clear as to be tragic. From recognizing disparity we moved to enduring it to allowing it to accepting it to equating all of it to respecting it to approving of it to defending it to embracing it to enforcing it! Now tolerance means that one cannot say any view is wrong except any view that implies that any view is wrong (more on logic in Part Three).

    Value judgments or any claims of legitimacy become intolerance and anything said that rocks the boat of unity, equality, and peace becomes hate speech, as in the numerous cases where those citing Bible verses or speaking out against evil and immorality are branded as intolerant purveyors of hate.

    William Watkins, author of Is Tolerance a Virtue? has stated that whereas in the 50's and 60's tolerance meant putting up with foolishness or stupidity, not laughing at strangeness, or remaining silent in the face of harmless error, it has now become condoning immorality, letting harmful beliefs go unchallenged, and allowing dangerous lifestyles to influence and even teach our young. Watkins notes that the new tolerant regime paints those who disagree with this corruption of tolerance as bigots, judgmental prudes, or moral fundamentalists. He concludes that tolerance has turned from a virtue to a vice and that it must be exposed for what it has become and replaced with truth.

    Greg Koukl, author of many pieces on tolerance including The Myth of Tolerance has stated that this shift from the original and divine meaning of tolerance to its present distorted, debased, demonic brand is simply a corruption of its original focus and pure meaning. Whereas true tolerance is about how we treat people with differing views, false tolerance is about how we treat ideas we think are false. True tolerance respects people without accepting their error but false tolerance respects ideas without considering their error. In the end, only true tolerance loves and respects people since it cares enough about them to consider their views and separate them from whatever error those views may have. False tolerance, however, pretends to love and respect people when in fact it does not even care enough to truly consider and evaluate their views, preferring instead to throw all views into a common bin where all is accepted. False tolerance is laziness, apathy, and ignorance dressed up as virtuous nobility!

Gabriel Garnica

    Next: Part Three Illogical Myth


    Editor's Note: Heaven is once again under attack by those who would seek to ignore and overthrow God's majesty and authority. Gabriel Garnica, educator and attorney, submits regular insights and commentaries to remind and help guide readers toward a deeper and more assertive faith. Touching on topics and issues ranging from personal faith, doctrine, education, scripture, the media, family life, morality, and values, Gabriel's notes are music to traditional ears but unpleasant tones to those who have bought into the misguided notions so prevalent and spreading in today's Catholic world.


    Gabriel's Clarion
    April 13, 2005
    Volume 16, no. 103