To preface, what follows may be seen as a small critique on: Personhood. But first, one needs to unavoidably concur that God: the One; the All; the Monad; the No-Thing of Potential, possesses distinction and self-awareness; this is arguably the very essence of Personhood. Now, with this distinction, this Archetypical Person is undoubtedly set in “opposition” to its rarefied environment, but one still cannot identify this “opposition” as a good or a bad thing, as this thought experiment is far too close to the Source of Differentiation to have enough tangible distinction on hand for comparative use. This “Monadic-God-Person”, if you will, could be seen analogously to the state in physics called: Compression. Compression in its fundamental operation cannot necessarily be identified as either a good or a bad thing, it’s simply an unavoidable structure that inevitably affekts something else.

Within the triumph of the Sovereign-Indivisible-God-Person, Mankind was born absolutely radiant in Kind. And yet, as we now look at today’s ever-morphing, schizophrenic notion of the subjectively independent person(a), we emphatically argue that this solely independent, utterly unique, self-subjected person(a)– one who literally personifies the current “manu-fractured” state of society– is a malicious distortion of the Indivisible Sovereignty that manifests as the personifying Image (i.e., Mankind). AMankind is (at the very least) a unified “cosmic organism” of indivisible uniqueness. 

Now, the subjectively unique persona of today is undoubtedly set in distinct opposition to its environment. Because of this, I will not subjectively say, “I am a person”. I objectively say, “I am Sovereign, yet Indivisible (just like you), being in-divide-able from Mankind”. I’m not solely unique unto myself in Fabric or Essence, even though I possess individuality, I’m still fundamentally inseparable from the Sovereign Whole. Put another way: She is a Sovereign Indivisible Woman, not solely unique unto herself, but equally radiant in Kind. We are not dissociable “personas” unto our subjective-selves, We are of One indivisible “Person”, cosmically interacting within the subtleties of profound depth.

With that, today’s notion of “personhood”, being seen as a closed system of subjective and abstract uniqueness (i.e., in the sense of Augustine’s God in opposition to Himself; the assumption that Man is in a quasi-negative state of opposition to His environment; or in the now trans-national “corporate person”), is a total assault against what can only be described as the Divine; the Sovereign. We ask, are we Sacred Souls inseparably birthed in indivisible Oneness, or are we masked actors, being tasked with the babbling personas of malnourished malevolence?