Ankyloses and clumsinesses have made me slow down. I am having a bit of a rest after the Pilgrimage and taking advantage of it to work a little and think over the blog entry 211.
There is no shortage of ideas for entries. The bag of my brains is full of them, but there is such a problem as to get the right helpful entry. First I wished I would take Léon Bloy as a good topic, because he was a fiery believer, an intresting weirdo among the mad men of God, who have left right Holy-Heights-oriented steep paths behind, but hard rocky paths. However, not only are those torpedoes of God quasi untellable, because the inevitably slow sequence of words prevents them from showing the rainbow of their humanity as a contiguous unit, but they are frightening sometimes. This is the case in Bloy, who was a man of very great piety, kindness and generosity in his intimity, but could appear as a dreadful writer. He often made big hullabaloos, so he was regarded as a nasty, abusing, sometimes sardonic mocking guy towards the half-hearted, the middle-class, the conformist, the clever, the worldly preachers — he called Lacordaire "a liberator-like trombone"; François Angelier called Bloy "The just man's fury" (I have not read the book, but it seems properly entitled) —. Many people used to consider and are still considering Bloy as an implacable foe or an unhinged man. But well, I postpone the entry about Léon Bloy.
However, the issue of Bloy's language characteristically poses the problem of language as a whole. That mocking accuser used to offend or frighten people, because I think the French language did not offer to him many alternatives between what is normal and what is rotten, the truth and falsehood; but language as a whole never offers alternatives in a lot of fields. Therefore, I have just decided to talk a little bit about language, which I consider as the most difficult problem that confronts people willing to go to the bottom of matters, unravel mysteries of the Truth, including God Himself, because He has to speak a weak incomplete language to be understood by man, if that! On the condition that a prophet makes every effort to explain and develop His Word.
Man cannot attain the Truth, as it is,  and the impotence of language does not fix it. For instance, I have said over and over again that I am unable to depict the Surnatural that I witnessed at Arès whether Jesus' apparition in 1974 or the Theophany in 1977, because they defy description, they are beyond vocabulary. All the components of the the Messenger's and the Father's manifestations were physically visible, audible, tangible, but all of them were different from all that is physically visible, audible, tangible on earth. And let's not forget the feelings that went through me then! Montaigne was right when he gave his written works the title of essays in the meaning of attempts. Our speech is but an attempt at expressing things. We stutter, we talk gibberish, we abbreviate, we are forever looking for words which we cannot find. Our speech is always approximate. But well, do we have had any better speech?
Language is not an outcome of the stammering which is supposed to be the first attempts of the primitive's communication. Language has its origin in speech, which is one of the five gifts or Attributes (Rev of Arès 21/4, 22/11, 26/17): individuality, creativity, love, freedom and speech that the Maker gave Adam on the day He created him by spiritualizing an animal with a well-developed brain (vii/1-5). In the beginning it was certainly the angelical language, but sin later made it fail, ruined it (Rev of Arès 2/1-5, Tour de Babel Genèse 11/1-9). It has so far changed into an unstable sequence of unsufficient inadequate words linked together by a doddery olf grammar.
Words never stop inflecting in meaning and not only are just residues from the very ancient riches of the Edenic vocabulary, but also just indications, or hints, or "verbal traces" (Merleau-Ponty); they fail to determine things accurately, whether concrete or abstract. Etymologists set forth how words make headway, but they can do so because nobody can contradict them, because little or nothing is known with certainty about that. They say that Athena or Minerva has eyes pers and that Louis the 18th suffered from podagra, but in reality no one knows the accurate meanings of pers (some blue color) and podagra (some kind of gout). A third of the Quran words, honest Arabists admit, lack clear meanings and sometimes have no meaning at all, but religious people and translaters abhor emptiness and fill the gaps. The same is told about the Psalms and other Biblical books: How can you understand Ezekiel unless you have any spirit of invention? What about misleadind impressions when they add their colors to the unclear colors of the text ? Is it really possible to avoid the exegetic theologic amazing  colorings: the Trinity, the Redeeming of the world's sins through the cross, the double predestination, the emptyness in brackets, etc?
There are no safe ressources, but the witness as long as he is alive.

Now, the Bible and Quran, which have lost purity and meaning in many passages (Rev of Arès 16/12, 35/12), demand no salvage operation. Under the Light of The Revelation of Arès a reader easily ignores those of their passages obviously distorted and remains trouble-free, since The Revelation of Arès, the Good Book, which is immensely Wise, tells clearly that man does not reach salvation by reading or by ideas, but by penitence. The devil take language! Penitence is the absolute chariot that takes us to the Kingdom, which even people who do not believe in God (28/12) can enter. No need to rebuild a cathedral of words and bow and knee down before it. Living in love. Attaining a penitent life of love, forgiveness, peace, good-hearted intelligence free from prejudices is enough. Not language, but penitence makes man comes across good inspiration.
We cannot think otherwise than in forms inherited from language. So this means that thinking is as deficient as speaking and it is even weaker when intuition is involved. Intuition cannot be either explained in detail or set forth or grammaticalized. Borrowing from intuition is like keeping on belonging in something unspecified, a crossover, close to the Truth or still further from the Truth? It is like plunging in chaos: Truth or entanglement? So thinking of the Truth is something of an oxymoron. Hence the numberless variations on Protestant faith, for instance. This proves that the more a reader loads up a text, for instance the Palestinian Gospel, with intuitions, the less the text promotes Truth.
Reckless and hasty as we are, we always fail to keep in mind sufficiently what remains clear and right from all that we read and that disperses in our brains. We are never cautious enough facing the inevitable instability, therefore  relativity of language whether spoken or written. Hence we cannot blame those who interpret The Revelation of Arès in different ways. We can only regret that they do nor believe me when I tell them that the Arès Word means this rather than that, because I am the cause and root of what is printed, so only I can lay down the sense and life of the words. If they are loath to refer to the man that has been given the charisma of recognizing the sense, they would better let the words move continually in their minds rather than allot to each of them a sole final place. Words too can love the way men love, that is, in a way often very difficult to discover on first glance. We have to learn how to socialize with the words that disconcert because a lot of them move about in a circle of ideas, which they represent and which have no words anymore in the language. Words too happen to be free particularly when... indeed yes... they come from the Father, the ultimate, prime Free One, Who let them freely move around in our heads of images and likenesses (Genesis 1/26). The best way out is to forget the words and enter into penitence.
The prophet exists, because words are inadequate to tell and manage everything.