{Spiritual Recognition of Evil [continued]}[5th December 1973]

[Redbook2:27-28][19731205:2339a]{Spiritual Recognition of Evil [continued]}[5th December 1973]

                                                                                                           Wednesday 19731205.2339

[continued]

So what is left?

            We allow an exception of generality(?) from the rule of spiritual perception; and we allow elitist ‘value judgment’ (by those who recognise the Spirit, probably a self-defining group).  Still I think this must be the answer:

Evil is only seen in:

• Distress of the Spirit of the ‘sufferer’, as perceived in the spirit of the judge – this is the clearest measure, and is open to nearly everyone.
• Disturbance of the Spirit of the Actor, as perceived in the spirit of the judge – this is more dangerous because more dubious (?).  The Spirit is crucial.  It is open only to those with a finer ‘spiritual’ perception and discrimination, and those who do not have it do not always know that they do not.
• The ‘Generalised’Act, as shown by the class of such acts, as deduced from the two categories above – especially the first.  This is so far open to abuse that it cannot be used safely as more than a prima facie indication of evil indicating the need for investigation under one of the first two headings (above).

The crucial part is that each case must be taken individually before a final decision is made and acted upon.

[PostedBlogger13032014]