Why does "the word of God" mean Thomas Aquinas instead of what others have to say? Power is corruption, not virtue. Making gods of corrupt humans such as Thomas Aquinas and Paul is blasphemy.

Natural law is the only significant element of Thomistic theology. It means God supposedly placed moral concerns in minds when they were created. It is often equated with conscience.

How then is the sin inside of people differentiated from the morality? Christ said sin comes out of the mind (Mat 15:19)(Mark 7:21). (See page on Elitism.)

A twisted logic could say that both morality and sin could enter a mind. But the result would cause people to express and reinforce the corruptions inside of themselves instead of overcome them.

Natural law would be irrelevant, because it never enters the usual vocabulary of Catholics. But its real significance is that it replaces (in theology) the moral truth that Christ described. The result is that moral truth is not a part of such theology, and any attempt to add rationality to the subject is demolished with the natural law nonsense.

Specifically, morality must be defined by and studied as objective realities (originating outside of the mind--like actions or events). Natural law says not so. If morality was placed in minds when they were created, then it is not found in objective realities.

The theology shows the result. Instead of evaluating the objective elements of morality, the theology consists of authorities arbitrating morality. It's a method of using authoritarianism to replacing the knowledge and responsibilities of individuals

The original state in which minds were created is not all there is to morality. Morality has to be developed as proper reactions and understanding in relation to the sin which is encountered in life. A morality that goes no farther than original creation is not adequate for resisting and overcoming sin. That is why Christ taught the importance of understanding his moral teachings (Mat 15:10)(Mark 4:13, 7:14, 8:21)(Luke 24:45)(John 8:43) and practicing them (Luke 6:47).

With the theology of natural law, the source of morality is a person's own mind. Being subjective, it must be arbitrated by authorities rather than evaluated through rationality applied to objective reality.

Natural Law says that something inside of persons is the standard for morality. That's like saying a smart pill could teach mathematics. Morality is like mathematics. It is defined by objective reality, as Christ taught the subject. A person can only study and understand objective reality. Placing something in a mind cannot substitute for the learning process any more than a smart pill can teach mathematics. If it could, sin would never have begun in the first place.

The theology of Thomas Aquinas is used as a substitute for Christ's version of morality. The modified morality allows elitism, exploitation and bigotry to be promoted through status and domination. Church authorities demonstrate and promote those corruptions by example.

Along with reason goes criticism or alternative analysis. It is never valid to obstruct reason for any purpose. Christ did not do so. He taught the rationality of the subject including the evidence. And he said the authority game is a corruption (Luke 22:25,26).

The theology of this whole subject is broken into illogical pieces creating sand for reality. But the sand is all cemented together with one all-encompassing gimmick. The gimmick is divine influence.

God's divine influence supposedly assures that the theology and instructions of church authorities can be nothing but perfect truth. Thomas Aquinas explained how that works.

First, Aquinas defined law as "an act of reason by the perfect ruler." Presumably, the purpose of saying "perfect ruler" rather than using a more common title for God was to allow the secular authorities to assume it applied to them.

Then, law was divided into three categories. "Divine Law" was everything God put in the Bible. "Eternal Law" was most everything else God did. And "Natural Law" was the moral inclinations that God planted in the minds of humans.

Therefore, Natural Law is often equated with conscience. Nobody can agree on what conscience is.

When Clarence Thomas was being confirmed by the U.S. Senate for the Supreme Court, a question arose about his previous statements on Natural Law. So the journalists went to Prof. Charles Rice, who is the foremost authority on the subject.

He told them that Natural Law works like this: If an automobile engine requires oil, you have to put oil in it to make it work, and without it, it won't work; and that's Natural Law.

So Natural Law was the same as the laws of physics, which dispelled the fears of the journalists; and nothing more was said about it.

Tell the physicists that what they are studying is the moral conscience which God created in humans. That's not what physics is considered to be.

The concepts are too fluid. There is always a duality to corruption, which is where the word "duplicity" comes from. A noble concept is used to justify corruption, and then an opposite meaning is used in applying it.

A major contradiction in Natural Law is in not differentiating between objective and subjective. Laws of the universe are considered to be objective. Conscience is considered to be subjective.

So let's consider how the theology is applied. Notice that law is supposedly an "act of reason." Inserting reason into law is the entire significance of Thomistic theology.

Who could quibble with reason in law. In the usual sense, reason is what is needed. But the purpose of Thomism is the opposite. Reason is the source of law, not the interpretation; and only God's reason is said to be valid. Human reason supposedly corrupts the process.

Therefore, church authorities must represent God's reason in evaluating morality; and individuals must not allow their imperfect minds to corrupt the process. Producing this effect is the entire purpose and application of Thomistic theology.

Consider what is wrong with worshipping wooden idols. The human mind is reduced to nothing while worshipping wood; and therefore, those persons who speak for the wood are the only ones who have anything to say on the subject.

Notice in both cases the obsession by authorities to erase the functioning of human minds, so they can dictate uninhibitedly. This purpose is the essence of authoritarianism, when defined as misused authority.

Corrupted persons are so driven to prevail against other persons that they use their power to overwhelm vulnerable persons. When they have a source of authority, they impose it onto the persons who are subject to them creating authoritarianism.

The real corruption of Thomistic authoritarianism is not in saying that church authorities are under divine influence. That concept is variable and mysterious. The primary significance is the claim that individuals are not supposed to apply reason to morality or attempt to acquire knowledge about morality, because their flawed minds can only corrupt the result.

Natural Law seems not to improve the reasoning ability of individuals. Instead, it creates some other influence, which is often called conscience.

But apparently, it does not perfect conscience either; so authorities must determine morality for the individuals. To determine does not mean stating rules, as rules are usually stated; it means replacing the faulty reasoning and knowledge of individuals in making decisions about morality. It's sort of like chewing other persons' food for them.

Can you figure that out? You can turn sand into gold, if you can. Thomists have it all figured out, about like they turn sand into gold.

Why does the Bible exist, and why did Christ teach, if people are not supposed to increase their understanding of morality? Christ said over and over that people were supposed to try to understand what he was teaching. So Thomistic theology is a mockery of what Christ taught.

There is a point where corruption has to be called fraud. When theology can defy the common sense of the value of reason and knowledge, and defy what Christ taught so blatantly after centuries of study, it has to be called fraud.

According to theology, reason is corrupt, while conscience is perfect, because God instilled natural law into minds when he created spiritual beings.

The pope describes natural law as the light of understanding deep within conscience (see Veratitis Splendor).

Theologians say there is a force within every person telling him to be moral, while something external causes sin. The external force causing sin is not described beyond original sin.

The attempt is to portray everyone as being virtuous inside. Satan is supposedly virtuous inside, but something causes him to sin. Do you see the purpose of the sham? It is to erase the truth about the causes of sin inside of corrupted persons and the manner in which corrupted persons differ from moral persons.

Satan is not like moral persons. He doesn't have the same forces inside of him, the same values, or the same ways of thinking. And look where the theologians are at. They are doing satan's bidding for him.

Christ said sin comes out of persons, from the deep recesses of the mind (Mark 7:21). So the theologians are directly contradicting Christ.

In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience can when necessary speak to his heart more specifically: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God. To obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it will he be judged.

Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths.