CYCLE FOUR

1. We have argued that in contrast to form and content(ment), which are graceful in their psychic connection with the self, or with a self disposed to metaphysical conduct, power and glory are sinful in their natural connection with the not-self, or with a metaphysical order of not-self, and that this applies no less to the sensibility of metaphysics than to its sensuality, even if the important distinction between a maxi-sinfulness in association with the ears/airwaves and a mini-sinfulness in association with the lungs/breath, together with contrary degrees of grace, has to be allowed for, in view of the overall distinction between the Eternal Father on the one hand and the Eternal Son, or the per se context of the Son commensurate with a Second Coming, which is nothing less than a distinction, in broad terms, between sin and grace, and more specifically between a secondary order of sin (compared to the temporal Father, Who is equivalent to Man-the-Foolish-Father) and a primary order of grace (compared to the temporal Son, i.e. the First Coming, Who is equivalent to Man-the-Wise-Son).

2. But if power and glory, equating with will and spirit, are sinful compared to the form and content(ment) which accrues to the metaphysical manifestations (not to mention physical manifestations) of ego and soul, then the association of grace with God only applies to the Son, not to the Father, who is ever commensurate with sin, whether in the maxi-terms of sensual metaphysics or in the mini-terms of sensible metaphysics, wherein sin, being inner, is either wise or holy according to whether we are focusing on the lungs or the breath, God-the-Wise-Father or Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit. But it is still an aspect of Nature, in this instance subnatural, which makes possible to that which transcends Nature in the Psyche, in this instance subconsciously, its grace, and in the context in question the maxi-grace which manifests on qualitative and essential, egocentric and soulful, or psychocentric, terms.

3. One can therefore distinguish the graceful truth and joy of primary God and Heaven, that of the Son and the Soul, from the sinful truth and joy of secondary God and Heaven, that of the Father and the Spirit, and this whether in relation to the folly and unholiness of sensual metaphysics or to the wisdom and holiness of sensible metaphysics. For grace, like sin, can be foolish or wise, as well as unholy or holy.

4. It can also be either absolute, and noumenal, or relative, and phenomenal, which is to say, of metaphysics or physics, of air or vegetation (earth), and in the latter case we can no more distinguish between paternal and filial forms of God in relation to spiritual and soulful forms of heaven than designate the former as germane to man and the earth. Anything physical, and therefore of mass and volume as opposed to time and space, is of necessity foolish or wise, unholy or holy, sensual or sensible in terms of man and the earth, whether in relation to Fathers or to Sons.

5. Hence there is nothing godly about the First-Coming position of Man-the-Wise-Son, any more than there is anything heavenly about his redemption, via Man-the-Wise-Father and Earth-the-Holy-Spirit, viz. cerebral will and spirit, in Earth-the-Holy-Soul or, as one could alternatively phrase it, the Holy Soul of Earth. Anything prayerfully cerebral, exemplifying the religious form of cogitation, necessarily falls short of Godliness and Heavenliness, and not only in relation to the saved metaphysics of respiratory sensibility, wherein the utilization of lungs and breath by a wise order of God-the-Son for purposes of His heavenly transmutation into holy Soul is the transcendent norm, but also in relation to the cursed (under the blessed hegemony of a female First Mover) metaphysics of audio sensuality, wherein the utilization of ears and airwaves by a foolish order of God-the-Son for purposes of His heavenly transmutation into Unholy Soul is the transcendent norm, and more in relation to the maxi-sinfulness of secondary orders of sensual power and glory than in relation to the mini-sinfulness of secondary orders of sensible power and glory, i.e. wise Father and holy Spirit.

6. Hence power and glory are only sinful, whether on absolute or relative, noumenal or phenomenal, terms in relation to metaphysics and physics, the upper- and lower-class male alternatives whose Fathers and Sons are either heavenly or earthly, as the elemental case determines. One is delivered from the predominant sinfulness of sensuality to the preponderant gracefulness of sensibility, but always on the understanding that sinfulness still attaches to the natural, or not-self, manifestations of sensibility, and that God-the-Wise-Father is no more graceful than Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, without whose sensible metaphysical sin no sensible metaphysical grace would be possible to the inner metaphysical self, and that, likewise, Man-the-Wise-Father is no more graceful than Earth-the-Holy-Spirit, without whose sensible physical sin no sensible physical grace would be possible to the inner physical self, albeit the grace revolves around knowledgeable and pleasurable, rather than true and joyful, forms of ego and soul.

7. Be that as it may, when we cross to the other side of the gender fence, as to metachemical and chemical alternatives in fire and water, we find that power and glory are no more sinful than form and content(ment) graceful, but that, given an objective precondition in both not-self and self, power and glory divide between wilful and spiritual forms of criminality, while form and content(ment), ever subordinate to a predominant not-self, i.e. to both unnatural and supernatural forms of Nature, take on a punishing correlation which ever sets them apart from their male counterparts.

8. Hence far from the female parallels to Fathers and Sons, viz. Mothers and Daughters, being either sinful or graceful, they are rather criminal or punishing, with correlative orders of purgatorial or hellish spirit and soul, according to whether the context is one of Nature or Psyche in either phenomenal or noumenal contexts.

9. But even when we divide a maxi-criminality in natural sensuality from a mini-criminality in natural sensibility and, conversely, a mini-punishingness in psychic sensuality from a maxi-punishingness in psychic sensibility, we still have the right - as with their male counterparts - to uphold the contention that, objectivity remaining characteristically constant with females or, at any rate, with what is properly female, the self is subordinate to the not-self, whether in metachemistry or chemistry, and that greater or lesser extents of natural or psychic factors no more confutes this gender-conditioned constant than eliminates the need for the punishment of crime whether directed outwards, in sensuality, where crime is its own punishment, or directed inwards, in sensibility where, by contrast, crime is punished, or censured and reigned-in, by a seemingly preponderant psyche.

10. Just so, but in contrast to females, males remain fairly constantly creatures for whom Psyche takes precedence over Nature, specifically with reference to the natural and subnatural, physical and metaphysical forms of Nature, even when the emphasis between grace and sin is reversed or inverted in consequence of its being external and free rather than internal and bound; for, unlike females, males exemplify the triumph, in plenumously conditioned subjectivity, of self over not-self which is called Psyche and which renders both the will and spirit transmutably subordinate, as mind and subspirit, to the ego and soul.

11. In contrary vein, the female exemplification of the triumph of not-self over self, stemming, as it does, from a vacuous premise that makes for objectivity principally in relation to unnatural and supernatural forms of Nature, renders both the soul and ego transmutably subordinate, as id and superego, to the will and spirit, which are the primary factors with them and guarantors that, come what may, crime and punishment will remain in the driving seat and continue to condition their outlook on life even if and after the salvation of males from sin to grace, or, rather, from a maxi-sinfulness and mini-gracefulness in the Father to a mini-sinfulness and maxi-gracefulness in the Son, damns females from crime to punishment, or, more correctly, from a maxi-criminality and mini-punishment in the Daughter to a mini-criminality and maxi-punishment in the Mother, as described in greater detail in a previous text.