The Victory of Virtue.

Traditional moralists, who believe in the wisdom of nothingness, appear to their opponents as dull, monotonous, stern, and cursing damners. Well, believe them, they are not. They are rebels because it remains in the age of relativism orthodoxy as the only possible form of rebellion; these rebels also sing during the fight. They constantly keep hope in themselves until the end, even when they condemn our civilization. All the prophetsoffer hope. The patient has not died yet.

Patient, Western Civilization, maybe really soon he will die, perhaps a little later, but once for sure, because everything human is mortal. However, it is not necessary that she died immediately. On the slippery slope, along which they plunge into the abyss, “someone” has carved handles, which, if we catch it in time, we can still go back. As long as our single will is not just some kind of illusion, we are free to return, regret, turn around, and turn back the hands of the clock, which shows the wrong time. Unless we are victims of ourselves and our tools, like Dr. Frankenstein, as long as we are not slaves to time and masters of moralizing, we can still go back. No one with a flaming sword will close the way to paradise, which has long been settled. The history of the Israeli nation, our ancient history of the archetype, are interwoven with countless examples of the nation’s repentance and its return to God’s favor despite many, almost irreversible failures.

And God, like the loving father of the prodigal son, constantly waiting for our return. For this reason, we traditional and old-fashioned seafarers can smile because we are rebels and we have hope. However, relativists have no reason to smile. In his work The Fall, Camus briefly summarized: “Sometimes I think about what future historians will say about us. A simple sentence will suffice: they were fornicators, and they read newspapers.” We traditionalists “do not read The Times; we read eternity”, as Thoreau advises. And it is in her that we read the most wonderful news for us: God decided that we will make his bride.
A prevailing opinion is slowly disappearing: that traditional Virtue is uninteresting. It’s the opposite but the truth. Virtue will prevail. Virtue conquers the world.

What God planned, we will not change, and therefore will never change human nature. A person will starve from ordinary food repeatedly, and the stones will never be replaced with bread. It is the same with food for our spirit. A skeptic has the same digestion as a believer, only he does a different diet. He is not consciously looking for the right food to feed him, and he may find her only by chance. It can, for example, despise Mother Teresa’s faith, but he can no longer despise her when he once met her in person. These people do not know what Virtue is. They think it is something like a dried plum: old, wrinkled, and disgusting. By doing so, they essentially contrast Virtue and happiness however, it contradicts the comparisons of the oldest and the wisest philosophers and the discovery of the great moralists Plato and Aristo of the body and, last but not least, the content of Scripture.

They do not see Virtue’s winning campaign. However, the defenders of the virtues, who let themselves go, also made mistakes in part involve in a false dispute of concepts between Virtue and happiness, between Virtue and joy, Virtue and vigor; and who, somewhere along the way, lost the key to the victory of Virtue – to the pursuit of Virtue.
Medieval people knew how to be passionate about Virtue.
Today, however, it only seems bizarre, eccentric, and idiosyncratic. In the sixteenth century, Spencer could still portray Virtue as a beautiful lady. However, in Milton’s time, in the seventeenth century, divine virtues already appear cold, unpleasant, and unsympathetic, while vices, which were offered by the devil, enjoy more and more popularity and interest. Nietzsche generalized this contrast to the contrast between “Apollonian” cold reasoning, reason and truth and “Dionysian” explosiveness, passion, evil – and attraction. Well, Hannah Arendt he is right when he writes about the “emptiness of evil” (in the work Eichmann in Jerusalem), and members of the literary discussion group at Oxford University (among others, Lewis, Tolkien and Williams) point out that goodness is much more burdensome than evil, although others write otherwise. Liberals have a hard time getting fired up for Virtue because they have always tended to identify with general things like social justice, which is correct, but very distant. Conservatives rather identify with loyalty to a smaller whole – family, neighbors, and marriage, in short, to what we feel an irrational passion for. For ages, we have been created equally for emotional passion and reasonableness. And since liberalism gives us no room for zeal in virtues, only in vices, and conservatism shows zeal for Virtue, it is clear. If the world became what it was twenty years ago, when heroic virtues fascinated it, we can say he won.