EGINA Volume 2

For future posts, click here.

I discovered something the other day; this blog takes a very, very long time to load for a lot of you.

So I started to play with Blogger's Archiving feature, but a look at my site traffic stats reveals that many people, discovering this for the first time, scroll down and read the whole thing over the course of an hour. So I've decided to make this whole thing the archive, and create a Volume 2 at egina2.blogspot.com.

That's where all the new stuff will go, it'll look the same, and all the old stuff will remain here.

Rethinking "Williams": An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Reasoning

I have four tools in my toolbox: each are heavy objects with a handle and a sticky label.

The first is a hammer with the label "hammer".
The second is a hammer with the label "hammer".
The third is a hammer with the label "hammer".
The fourth is a pipe wrench with the label "hammer".

As the label is sometimes used improperly, we must conclude that there really is no such thing as a "hammer" and we should dispense with the term altogether.

Further;

We have documented evidence that the Cathars had vegetarian diets, that is to say, diets being identical with that of modern-day vegetarians. However, nowhere in the contemporary accounts of Cathar meatlessness is the term "vegetarian" even used! Therefore we must likewise conclude that the Cathars were not vegetarian because they didn't themselves use the word.

Further further;

Medieval seafarers; upon seeing walruses for the first time, often mistook them for mermaids. Modern science of course knows that many of the attributes ignorantly attributed to mermaids (long hair, lovely singing voice, shell-covered boobies) do not apply to walruses. Therefore we must conclude there is no such thing as a walrus.

And yes, he really does employ this reasoning to insist that there's no such thing as us. Instead, we're "biblical demiurgicals"; a term which is merely an awkward euphemism for "Gnostic".

Bart Ehrman says "Doing away with 'Gnosticism' entirely would be to fragment our knowledge to such an extent that we can't know what we're talking about."

Setting Jonas and even Quispel's framing aside, the common thread among "Gnostic" scripture, myth, and movements was and is soteriological; what makes us free is the gnosis of who we were, of what we have become.

Political Tangent: Smart and evil.

So the Conservative government has chosen to commit suicide by calling a Fall vote on whether some Canadians should be less Canadians than other Canadians. Why would they do such a thing? Is it because they are dumb as well as evil? Oh no, Prime Minister Bush... er.. Harper, is smart and evil.

1) The vote will fail, and everybody knows it.

2) Harper is hoping the vote triggers a non-confidence motion, which will be successful and bring down his own government.

3) An election will be called before the Liberals' Leadership Convention in December. As this is scheduled to be a Coronation of the next Prime Minister, forcing a vote before the Coronation will catch the Grits off-guard.

4) Anger (at the Liberals bringing down the freshman cabinet) at such an early election before the Liberals have a chance to rebrand at the convention will result in the same minority government numbers, and give the Conservatives another year in power, at a cost of only $150M of tax payer's money for the election.

I'd do it, if I were their head spin-meister. Here's what I'd do if I were the Liberals.

1) Defeat the idiotic, medieval and mean-spirited vote.

2) Call the non-confidence vote

3) Whip the benches into abstaining from the non-confidence vote you just called.

4) The vote will fail, the Tories will be in power until December, and utterly, utterly humiliated.

5) Have the leadership convention in December

6) 30 seconds after the new leader is chosen – and seriously, who cares who it is, a frozen low-cal entree in a cardboard box would win a majority – call a non-confidence motion on the basis that the current government isn't Liberal, which is against the natural order of all things Canadian.

7) Motion passes, election called, Frozen Entree is sworn in as Liberal Prime Minister for the next 15 years, and we're back to normal.

[Don't like me calling an anti-gay marriage bill evil? One cannot reasonably be in favour of marriage and then exclude adult citizens from entering such an institution on the basis of who they are – it's exactly the same as denying green-eyed persons the right to own property, or keeping the left-handed from having passports. Evil, and I won't call it less.]

The Lost Gospel of Orpheus?

Waterhouse, Nymphs Finding the Head of Orpheus
Nah, that was a shameless attention grab from a degenerate and jaded copywriter (me). Interesting find nonetheless, as the stories of Orpheus contains seeds of both the Christ and JBap myths. This article's author even throws us a Gnostic bone.

ATHENS, Greece -- A collection of charred scraps kept in a Greek museum's storerooms are all that remains of what archaeologists say is Europe's oldest surviving book -- which may hold a key to understanding early monotheistic beliefs. [...]

"We were now able to read even the most carbonized sections, as there were pieces that were completely blackened and nobody could make out whether there were letters on them," Veleni said.

The scroll contains a philosophical treatise on a lost poem describing the birth of the gods and other beliefs focusing on Orpheus, the mythical musician who visited the underworld to reclaim his dead love and enjoyed a strong cult following in the ancient world.

The Orpheus cult raised the notion of a single creator god -- as opposed to the multitude of deities the ancient Greeks believed in -- and influenced later monotheistic faiths.

"In a way, it was a precursor of Christianity," Pierris said. "Orphism believed that man's salvation depended on his knowledge of the truth."

Veleni said the manuscript "will help show the influence of Orphism on later monotheistic religions."


– Associated Press

What Gives Me The Right?

Some of you are really, really not going to like this.

I'm going start up an "internet church" today. I'll make a nice website, start a Yahoo! group, call myself the Episcopus Emeritus or somesuch. I'll never meet a Parishioner, minister a Sacrament, visit a hospital, sit on a local panel of interfaith dialogue, or wash a dish at a function. We won't go in for any of that dogmatic stuff. Oh my site will be peppered with chunks of Gnostic Scripture, drizzled over almost-entirely-Protestant theology with a little bit of Vatican-bashing ("oppresses women, kept the true secrets of the Faith from the faithful in its Archonic appetite for power..." etc.) and maybe a nice Abraxas gif on the sidebar, right next to the "donate now" button. Ta da! I'm a Gnostic too!

And, being a discerning individual, you will visit my instant website cum church and state that my efforts are "not Gnostic". And probably not even a church. What gives you the right?

I mean, aside from reality, discernment, intelligence, and a genuine desire for the word "Gnostic" to mean something other than soggy Protestant-flavoured New Age-ism, anti-Catholic bigotry, papyrus backgrounds and badly pixelated jpg files?

I'm going to pick on Rev. Troy for a second. Hi Troy. Now, I look at what his Parish is doing, in stark contrast to the above. He's meeting real people in a real space, listening, teaching, learning, leading, paying chapel rent, publishing a calendar, buying candles, (no doubt) failing, forgetting, stumbling, but making something real and beautiful and present. Not to mention the fact that he spent several years of his life in Minor Orders, studying, serving at Mass, being challenged, questioned, examined, and proving not only his intellect and grasp of history and theology but also his praxis and caritas; his willingness to do the work, and his compassion.

I look at that and say "that's Gnostic". Shame on me! What gives me the right?

*Dismounts high horse*

Listen. There's a cave up there, and I'm pretty sure there's treasure in it. Let's go explore it together.

With what? Flashlights? Rope? Canaries? No, we're going to use other tools. Our intellect. Our education. Specific and meaningful language. Our imagination. Our wit and courage and compassion. Our discrimination: discrimination is what keeps us from being so open-minded that our brains fall out. This is how such caves are explored, how such treasures are always discovered.

So Gnosticism is admittedly not entirely binary, in the way, say, that Symbolist painting overlaps the Pre-Raphaelites, and yet is still distinct: the labels exist for a reason. Gnosticism is and must be defined by its soteriology: the idea that gnosis of one's relationship with the Divine is necessary for salvation from Ignorance. When we let it mean "whatever you want it to mean" the word becomes meaningless, and the language that has stood for millennia is no longer remotely useful to us as a tool with which to explore the cave and discover the treasure.

My Licentiate of Sacred Theology doesn't give me the right to this treasure. In fact just the opposite: it says that the ownership is explicitly not mine. The Tradition is there to remind me to hold the treasure in trust, to care for the rights of the next seekers into the cave. I didn't invent my Church, declare myself to be x, and start marking territory. My role is older than I am, and it will outlive me, those who inspire me, and those whom I teach and touch. It's humbling: that's what it's for.

Two Gods?

William Blake, The Red Dragon & The Woman Clothed With the Sun

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert.

A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?


– WB Yeats

Twice in the last two days I've seen an unusual idea presented: that Gnosticism espouses "two gods"; a deadlocked dueling dualism between the god of spirit and the god of matter. This is of course Manichaeanism, and while Manichaeanism contains many Gnostic elements, this idea is not Gnostic per se – in fact it is ultimately antithetical to positions taken in Thomas and Philip.

Definition time:

Monotheism: the idea of one – and only one – personal "third party entity" Deity.

Polytheism: the idea of many personal "third party entity" Deities

Pantheism: the equation of Deity with the universe (everything is God)

Panentheism: that Deity contains the universe, but the universe does not contain Divinity. "God is everything... and then some."

Chart time:



Perhaps a simpler way to explain is this;

Monotheism: God is one noun
Polytheism: Gods are many nouns
Panentheism: God is one verb with an infinite number of adverbs

The emanations model of Gnostic cosmologies points to an explicitly panentheist view;

Light and Darkness, life and death, right and left, are brothers of one another. They are inseparable. Because of this neither are the good good, nor evil evil, nor is life life, nor death death. For this reason each one will dissolve into its earliest origin. But those who are exalted above the world are indissoluble, eternal.


- The Gospel of Philip

I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained.
Split a piece of wood; I am there.
Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.


- Gospel of Thomas: 77

Gnostic Tradition teaches that the Pleroma "the Fullness") is the Ultimate Godhead; everything – everything – radiates out concentrically from the Godhead like ripples from a stone dropped in water: Christ, Sophia, the Demiurge, you, me, chartered accountants, loofas, squids, ginko trees. The Pleroma is also the stone, and the water, and the idea and act of "dropping". This is a good analogy, as a wave/ripple is a transitory expression of a phenomenon rather than an object unto itself.

Christianity is superficially monotheistic, although a closer reading of scriptural texts proves it to be in fact polytheist yet monolatric; recognizing numerous deities but worshipping only one. In Christianity this is a hangover from Augustine's stint as a Manichaean (think of the cartoon shoulder-angel vs. shoulder-devil). The OT does seem to give God-status to Ba'al (although Ba'al just means "Lord" – it's like hearing fundamentalists say that Muslims don't worship God because they pray to Allah). The Marian cults of the 20th century are clearly evidence of polytheism, although with a great deal of hoop-jumping and spin-doctoring Fatima and Međugorje can be euhemerized away (an act criminal yet predictable).

Given such a context, it is easy to see why Christian apologists would project their own polytheistic God-vs-Satan dualism on panentheistic Gnosticism. Which begs the question: Does the Demiurge exist?

There's an interesting hide-and-seek phenomenon in particle physics; every time somebody theorizes about a new particle x, it's immediately discovered. Never fails. It's as though these things simply hang around waiting to be noticed. I'm not suggesting that we're inventing subatomic particles, but I do want to draw attention to the close relationship between intellectual constructs and observable reality.

"The way of the world" – domestic violence in down-market neighbourhoods, African poverty, sharpied swastikas on synagogues, parochialism and xenophobia and planned obsolescence – this exists as a construct in the minds of six billion and change earthlings. It is a meme, an idea which while not alive acts as though it were a virus, protecting and replicating and insinuating itself. The Demiurge is not some big bad wolf waiting to huff and puff and blow our houses down; he is the acceptability of "the way of the world", a self-fulfilling prophesy of our apathetic inhumanity. Even though the Archons are not real, they act as though they were through provable, observable and (tragically) repeatable phenomena, all the while slouching towards Bethlehem.

And yes, this meme, this set of constructs, of assumptions, is the Demiurge; the half-creator of the world in which we live; what Rastafarians refer to as the Babylon System. The Matrix.

Rejection of such a system does not make us dualists, or polytheists. Recognizing that we, as daughters and sons of God, can and should do better is not "world-hating". We as Gnostics sound the clarion call to accept our responsibility for ignorance and deception, and to awaken to gnosis: not to do battle with some malevolent third-party entity and settle this once and for all in an Armageddon-style smackdown, but to champion the compassion that is the antidote to Archonic force. To make art and poetry and music, to take a lover, raise a child, extend caritas that is just as visible, just as real a ripple in the pool of God.

Gnostic priest addresses Da Vinci Code controversy

By Mark Browne
Victoria News
May 26 2006


Even followers of Gnosticism have something to say about The Da Vinci Code.

But the Capital Region's only ordained Gnostic priest doesn't have the same concerns as conservative Christians angered by Dan Brown's novel and the movie based on the book. While many have suggested that The Da Vinci Code is rooted in Gnosticism, Jordan Stratford says that isn't the case. Stratford's position is explained in his just-released book, The da Vinci Prayerbook.

Many Christians denounce The Da Vinci Code for its premise that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and that the couple had children. The novel and film takes the view, which is consistent with the fourth century Arians, that Jesus was a man and not a divine figure.

Gnostics, on the other hand, consider the image of Jesus to be a purely spiritual being, according to Stratford.

"Purely spiritual beings tend not to have children," he said.

However, Stratford stressed that the notion of Jesus as a spiritual being - and all of the other stories about Christ - should be viewed in a strictly metaphorical sense.

"Gnosticism does not rely on historical literalism in the same way that Christianity does," Stratford explained. "Let's ask the bigger question about what this stuff means."

The idea that Jesus married Mary Magdalene can be understood as myth that conveys the "marriage" between Christian tradition and the older religions of the divine feminine, he said. Moreover, that marriage can be interpreted as a balance between the masculine and the feminine.

"Gnosticism teaches that Mary Magdalene is an expression of the myth of Sophia, the goddess of wisdom and of the holy spirit."

The idea of the sacred feminine was quite prevalent until the fourth century when the Roman church opted for a more patriarchal approach to Christianity with a sole emphasis on Jesus and a de-emphasis on Mary Magdalene.

There's no way of knowing with any certainty whether Jesus married Mary Magdalene and that they had children, Stratford said. At the same time, it's irrelevant whether that hypothesis is true as he reiterates that it's all about the metaphorical meaning.

All that said, myths surrounding the history of Christianity have an important purpose.

"It invites the reader into a mythic space where they can sort these things out for themselves," Stratford said. "These things aren't valuable because they are literally true. They are valuable because they are beautiful."

Gnosticism has been around for the past 2,200 years.

It's a religion that greatly influenced early Christianity, Islam and medieval Judaism, he pointed out. The origins of Gnosticism occurred in a community of Greek-speaking and educated Jews living in Egypt. The religion is essentially a blend of Jewish mysticism, Greek philosophy and the mystery religions of the ancient world, Stratford said.

Gnosticism is similar to Buddhism in that it stresses personal responsibility, compassion and enlightenment, he said.

The 40-year old has been a practicing Gnostic for the past 18 years and now oversees a congregation of 12. Stratford is a priest with the Apostolic Johannite Church. That branch of Gnosticism was established in 1770 by Freemasons, he pointed out. While people of all religions can be members of the Freemasons, there is a strong historical connection to Gnosticism, according to Stratford, a Freemason himself.

People of different religious faiths can also be followers of Gnosticism, he said. Gnosticism is particularly suitable for creative people because of the poetic nature of the stories encompassed by the faith.

"Imagination is prized as a Gnostic value," Stratford said.

While Stratford has concerns about the common perception that The Da Vinci Code is inherently Gnostic, he's quick to point out that the release of the novel and subsequent film is a positive development despite opposition by many conservative Christians.

"It's a starting point for discussion. I don't think anybody should be threatened by debate and dialogue."

For more information on Stratford's book, see the website, www.thedavinciprayerbook.com.

mbrowne@vicnews.com

Well there's some local press. Arrived in my inbox via Google Alerts (which is where most of my Gn news comes from). Ta da!

In HOC Signo

It was of course the older, pagan, Sol Invictus cross, the equal armed cross, to which Constantine owes his victory at Milvian Bridge. It represents the harmonization of the four elements, centering the wearer at its nexus. I have always responded to this "swiss" cross, and my wedding ring has a motif of four of these around it equidistantly.

$5 from the sale of this tee shirt goes to the American Red Cross, which is as worthy a cause as I can think of.

Neither Cup Nor Princess

But the true mysteries of the Sacred Feminine are not about cryptic codes, secret messages, and hidden hoards of treasure. They are the most ordinary, everyday things of life, which we all experience: birth, growth, death, and regeneration. Not that a child survives from some hidden royal bloodline, but that the blood of life, waxing and waning like the moon, nurtures every child in the womb. Not that one man may have risen from the dead, but that every Spring, seeds buried in the earth’s dark tomb sprout and rise anew. The Holy Grail, from the Pagan perspective, is neither cup nor princess: It is the receptive consciousness, our awe and wonder and reverence for the real wellsprings of life. Only the worthy can find the Grail.


–Starhawk, Is 'The Da Vinci Code' Good for the Pagans?

Yeah, I called her "Mimi". O, how we laughed and laughed... it was the '80s.

Pagels on "The Truth at the Heart of the DVC"

So many Christians throughout the world knew and revered these books that it took more than 200 years for hardworking church leaders who denounced the texts to successfully suppress them. [...]

Irenaeus said there could be only four gospels because, according to the science of the time, there were four principal winds and four pillars that hold up the sky. Why these four gospels? He explained that only they were actually written by eyewitnesses of the events they describe -- Jesus' disciples Matthew and John, or by Luke and Mark, who were disciples of the disciples.

Few scholars today would agree with Irenaeus. We cannot verify who actually wrote any of these accounts, and many scholars agree that the disciples themselves are not likely to be their authors. [...]

What, then, do these texts say, and why did certain leaders find them so threatening?

First, they suggest that the way to God can be found by anyone who seeks. According to the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus suggests that when we come to know ourselves at the deepest level, we come to know God: "If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you.'' This message -- to seek for oneself -- was not one that bishops like Irenaeus appreciated: Instead, he insisted, one must come to God through the church, "outside of which,'' he said,
"there is no salvation.''

Second, in texts that the bishops called "heresy,'' Jesus appears as human, yet one through whom the light of God now shines. So, according to the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus said, "I am the light that is before all things; I am all things; all things come forth from me; all things return to me. Split a piece of wood, and I am there; lift up a rock, and you will find me there.'' To Irenaeus, the thought of the divine energy manifested through all creation, even rocks and logs, sounded dangerously like pantheism. People might end up thinking that they could be like Jesus themselves and, in fact, the Gospel of Philip says, "Do not seek to become a Christian, but
a Christ.'' [...]

Worst of all, perhaps, was that many of these secret texts speak of God not only in masculine images, but also in feminine images. The Secret Book of John tells how the disciple John, grieving after Jesus was crucified, suddenly saw a vision of a brilliant light, from which he heard Jesus' voice speaking to him: "John, John, why do you weep? Don't you recognize who I am? I am the Father; I am the Mother; and I am the Son.'' After a moment of shock, John realizes that the divine Trinity includes not only Father and Son but also the divine Mother, which John sees as the Holy Spirit, the feminine manifestation of the divine.


– Elaine Pagels, Perspective

James Ingall Wedgewood, 1883-1951

Happy Birthday, Wedgie!

Bishop Hoeller has a wonderful must-read article on the Wandering Episcopate; the piece contains one of my favourite lines in modern Gnosticism:

The seeming promise residing in the wandering bishops is obscured and at times negated by the personal eccentricities and unsavory character of a large number of these bishops. Since consecration to the episcopate is often so easily obtained in the subculture of the wandering ones, venal, unstable, and woefully ill-educated persons abound in the ranks of the "independent" episcopate. Quite a large number of these bishops are simply people one would not wish to invite to dinner.

Bearing that in mind, I raise a glass to Ole Uncle Wedgie, truly an exception to that unfortunate rule. The liturgies of both the AJC and EG run rich with the legacy of the Liberal Catholic Church – +Wedgewood was one of the first to recognize that much of the mysticsm and transcendence the Victorian Theosophists sought in the East was abundant in the liturgical traditions of the West as well.

Gnostic Celebs: Tori Amos?

There was a garden
In the beginning
Before the fall
Before Genesis

There was a tree there
A tree of knowledge
Sophia would insist
You must eat of this

Original sin?
No, I don't think so
Original sinsuality
Original sin?
No, it should be
Original sinsuality
Original sin?
No, I don't think so
Original sinsuality

Yaldaboath
Saklas
I'm calling you
Samael
You are not alone
I say
You are not alone
In your darkness
You are not alone
Baby
You are not alone


– Tori Amos, The Beekeeper: Original Sinsuality

The Denver Post reports; "Tori Amos writes in her memoirs Tori Amos: Piece by Piece about the importance of Gnosticism to her personal growth."

Amos' pal Neil Gaiman (he moved into a house owned by Amos and her husband to write American Gods) has long been suspected of being a closet-Gnostic, and there may be a third degree due to the acquaintance (I read they were friends) of Gaiman with the Gnostic V for Vendetta and Promethea author Alan Moore.

Tori Amos' music has accompanied some very pivotal times of my life; one adopts such artists and their mediated sympathies as old friends. And she's not Tom Cruise, which is a definite plus.

Now on to the inevitable conversion of Scarlett Johansson, and my plan will be complete.

Gnostic Priest Authors "The da Vinci Prayerbook"

Victoria BC (PRWEB), May 19, 2006 – An ordained Gnostic Priest Jordan Stratford has just released a response to the The da Vinci Code phenomenon. Dan Brown's bestselling novel and upcoming film have drawn out countless critics deriding the work as "Gnostic", and now for the first time Gnostics are taking the opportunity to speak for themselves.

The irony is that the premise of Brown's novel isn't Gnostic at all, and the word never occurs in the book. Rather than reject the divinity of Jesus, Gnostics in the early Christian Church understood that the Logos, the incarnated Word of God, was always immortal.

Gnosticism is a 2200 year old religion that greatly influenced early Christianity, Islam, and medieval Judaism. Its origins lie in a community of Greek-speaking and -educated Jews living in Egypt around 200 B.C., and blended Jewish mysticism, Greek philosophy, and the Mystery religions of the ancient world. Similar to Buddhism, Gnosticism stresses personal responsibility, compassion, and enlightenment.

So do Gnostics believe that Jesus really married Mary Magdalene?

"Literally, no," says Stratford. "This myth can be understood as the "marriage" of both the Christian tradition and the older religions of the Divine Feminine.

"Gnostics have always used myth deliberately not to obscure but to explore with its symbolism, as part of a search for meaning – much the way artists have always done, and psychologists do today."

The da Vinci Prayerboook: Gnostic Reflections on the Divine Feminine is an exploration of the myths around the Magdalene, the Grail, the Templars, and Leonardo himself in this light. Rather than attempt to revise history or propose conspiracies, the book is a small collection of scriptural references from Gnostic, Christian, and Jewish literature, and one Gnostic's reflection on these sacred writings.

The da Vinci Prayerboook (Azrael Press, 100pp) is available at the book's website, thedavinciprayerbook.com

- 30 -
Sent this out to local media and PR Web today, and I post this not out of more book hype but to show that Gnostics are speaking for themselves.

Represent!

The da Vinci Prayerbook

Site is live, with a few important bits to come, but the book can be previewed and purchased by clicking here.

All Nuptialed

Many blessings and thanks especially to Erik and Michelle of the Aquarian Tabernacle Church – the ceromony was held in an historic cemetery, and was a combination of elements from the AJC, ATC, and EGM, with poetry from Robin Skelton, William Shakespeare, and Pablo Neruda.

Best. DVC Review. Evah.

The Da Vinci Code is a wildly contrived story about how the forbidden love between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, the Brad and Angelina of Judea, was revealed by Renaissance fresco-paparazzi, and later immortalized by Pierre Plantard, the L. Ron Hubbard of France, in the 1960s with his fabulous hoax called the "Priory of Sion," which author Dan Brown, the Tom Cruise of literature, took seriously.


– Betty Bowers,Landover Baptist

I've always loved Landover as a viciously acidic guilty pleasure, although I prefer the gentler satire of Lark News.

Yeah, okay, I'm going to go get married now.

Scholars & Goddesses

SUCH faith may explain why Wicca is thriving despite all the things about it that look like hokum: it gives its practitioners a sense of connection to the natural world and of access to the sacred and beautiful within their own bodies. I am hardly the first to notice that Wicca bears a striking resemblance to another religion – one that also tells of a dying and rising god, that venerates a figure who is both virgin and mother, that keeps, in its own way, the seasonal "feasts of the Wheel," that uses chalices and candles and sacred poetry in its rituals. Practicing Wicca is a way to have Christianity without, well, the burdens of Christianity. "It has the advantages of both Catholicism and Unitarianism," observes Allen Stairs, a philosophy professor at the University of Maryland who specializes in religion and magic. "Wicca allows one to wear one's beliefs lightly but also to have a rich and imaginative religious life."

Charlotte Allen, Scholars & Goddesses

Getting Married

...on Saturday, so posting will be non-existent for a week or so. Also, expect e-mail to be slow. Also also, don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not going to miss any of you. ;-)

Blessings and joy,

J+

סֵפֶר הַבָּהִיר: The Book of Brightness

"There is a striking affinity between the symbolism of Sefer ha-Bahir, on the one hand, and the speculations of the Gnostics, and the theory of the "aeons," on the other. The fundamental problem in the study of the book is: is this affinity based on an as yet unknown historical link between the Gnosticism of the mishnaic and talmudic era and the sources from which the material in Sefer ha-Bahir is derived? Or should it possibly be seen as a purely psychological phenomenon, i.e., as a spontaneous upsurge from the depths of the soul's imagination, without any historical continuity?

– "Bahir", Encyclopedia Judaica "

Excellent question. More on the Bahir, and a tip o' the yarmulke to the Soferet.

Pulled

There has been a rash of articles recently, posted mostly by Protestant Christian pundits, claiming that the falloff in mainline church attendance is due to the fact that yoga, tai chi, "spirituality" and the occult are easy, whereas Christianity is hard. Ofttimes Gnosticism is explicitly counted among the easy.

Easy?

Part of the reason I identify as a Gnostic is that firmly around my right wrist is the inexorable pull of the Roman Catholic Church; its solidity, ubiquity, liturgy and aesthetic. I could be so Catholic it's not funny: and not one of those tie-dyed chasuble guitar-Massing Vatican II theowobbly neo-Caths either, but a full-frontal SSPX Tridentine UberTraddie.

A similarly continual but contrary tug around my left wrist is Judaism; its wit, iconoclasm, spiritual literacy, and humanity.

My brain – well it thinks like a Buddhist. I trained it that way; to doubt, and to doubt my doubts, to suspend, detach, examine. and defer always to compassion.

But at the very center of these forces is my Witch's heart; my blood is salty with poetry and sex and lunar magics and imagination. The turning of autumn leaves brings out cravings for bonfires and woad and howling to the Great Mother.

Needless to say this agon, this ongoing negotiation of forces, is for the most part crazy-making, and it's little wonder that in any conversation I undertake I come across as a dilettante bibliophile, with either too much Kerouac or too little; either an overdose or tragic deficit of Aristotle. An ADD-addled molotov-hurling William Burroughs vs. my inner pipe-smoking tweedy Victorian Latin-spouting harrrrumph!er. Easy?

So how do I, personally, equilibriate these opposing forces? By identifying, fighting for, and championing common ground in Her name. Shekhina. The Holy Spirit. Sophia. By the understanding (Gnostics don't have beliefs, we have understandings), as in Theodoto, that what makes us free is the gnosis of who we are, of what rebirth truly is.

And what it is, is work.

Easy. Pffft.

Feast of St. Ratford

How will your family celebrate this special day? With the customary offerings of red wine and sushi? Secretly judging people by their shoes? Or by drinking too much coffee and arguing theology in chatrooms? Post your stories, and any craft ideas for the children...

The Blurbs are In

I've received, through the generosity and kindness of some very special people, some very kind words about the book. The tricky part is in "blurbing" them, which is to say, chopping the things into sentence fragments and making tight, punchy sentences for teeny tiny space allowed by book-cover real estate. I'm tremendously humbled and overwhelmed;

"Explores the Code phenomenon from a spiritual point of view without radically revising Western history...acknowledging that ideas need not be historical in order to be spiritually meaningful. Stratford has opened the way."

– Lesa Bellevie, Editor The Magdalene Review and Author, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Mary Magdalene

"Fresh and accessible, a brilliant overall picture of the myth – The da Vinci Prayerbook is a bridge connecting artists, mystics, and writers of the past with readers of today. This is required reading for seeker and devotee alike... a perfect work of Sophianic inspiration and insightful scholarship."

– Bishop +Rosamonde Miller

“Fr. Jordan makes a thoughtful exploration of the Magdalene tradition, gently peeling back the veil to reveal a glimpse of the real mystery of the Bridal Chamber.”

– Jennifer Emick, About.com

Beltane: I join'd them fairly with a ring

Deprived of root, and branch, and rind,

Yet flowers I bear of every kind:

And such is my prolific power,

They bloom in less than half an hour;

Yet standers-by may plainly see

They get no nourishment from me.

My head with giddiness goes round,

And yet I firmly stand my ground;

All over naked I am seen,

And painted like an Indian queen.

No couple-beggar in the land

E'er join'd such numbers hand in hand.

I join'd them fairly with a ring;

Nor can our parson blame the thing.

And though no marriage words are spoke,

They part not till the ring is broke:

Yet hypocrite fanatics cry,

I'm but an idol raised on high;

And once a weaver in our town,

A damn'd Cromwellian, knock'd me down.

I lay a prisoner twenty years,

And then the jovial cavaliers

To their old post restored all three--

I mean the church, the king, and me

Did Thomas Write Thomas?

When you know yourselves, you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father.
I've been re-reading Jeremy Puma's extraordinary manuscript, The Face of Heaven and Earth, which is slated to go to press in May. Of course any discussion of a Gnostic Gospel is topical these days, with an irritatingly disproportionate attention paid to the dating of such texts. The reasoning goes, if it wasn't written in the first century then it can't have been written by the person who claims to be the author, and therefore is unreliable. All that matters, the thinking goes, is authorship, not content, and authorship is entirely authenticated by date.

[We'll have to set aside the illogic of this insistence, at least for the time being, as yet another instance of psychic literalists putting all their eggs in one basket (at their peril).]

Dr. Elaine Pagels, currently in the crosshairs of an ad hominem attack by modern-day Iranaeuses, suggests that Thomas may have influenced John, and we know John was around in 130 because we have one. But Pagels may be wrong; she readily admits this is conjecture (let's not get dragged into this belittling of her scholarship and play into the hands of the New Inquisitors, okay?).

We should bear in mind the following;

1) The basic story of the canonical Gospels predates the biblical scenarios by millennia

2) The words attributed to Jesus in the NT are mostly paraphrasing of the Old Testament, and in numerous instances, quotes of Socrates

Because we're firmly in the realm of myth here, repetition of themes is to be expected. It's okay. The origins of the material in no way make it less spiritually resonant. It is what it is.

So did Thomas write Thomas? Was there really a series of secret conversations between John the Apostle and Jesus resulting in The Gospel of Thomas?

No.

Judas didn't write Judas either. These texts authors weren't trying to fool anybody; they were using a literary technique common in the ancient world of employing known characters to convey wisdom tradition. It's not history, it wasn't meant to be history, and the first audiences of this material were smart enough to realize that.

The first audiences of Mark were probably smart enough to realize it, too.

As I said, any discussion of these texts is met with the refutation that the Gnostic Gospels are too late to accurately describe their events as history (assuming that they were meant to do so, which they weren't), and that the canonical Gospels are first-century eyewitness accounts. I accept that this is accepted by the majority of biblical scholars. I also accept that it's based on... absolutely nothing.

We don't have any first century canonical Gospels. We don't have any first century mention of any first century Gospels. We have Paul, and evidence of first-century oral transmission. And that's it.

There are two writers who at first glance appear to be potentially useful for determining which (canonical) gospels were in circulation by the early second century. First, it appears possible that Ignatius of Antioch was familiar with Matthew when he wrote his letters around 110 C.E. In various passages, Ignatius seems to allude to the gospel, although he does not mention it explicitly. Most of these passages, however, are vague references at best and could easily be the result of oral tradition. Also, careful examination of the Matthew-Ignatius parallels reveals an interesting trend. Ignatius has an overwhelming preference for material found in Matthew, but not the other synoptics. This excessive familiarity with special M material has suggested to some that Ignatius may have known a source of Matthew rather than the gospel itself.

Second, Papias of Hierapolis mentioned writings by Matthew and Mark in his five volume Oracles of the Lord Explained around 130 C.E. ... Thus, it is not certain that Papias was describing either canonical Matthew or Mark...

Three gospels must have been written after 70 C.E.; how long after is anybody’s guess. Two gospels must have been written before the end of the first half of the second century C.E.; how long before is anybody’s guess.


– Journal of Biblical Studies

The arguments for ignoring the evidence and dating all the canonical gospels in the first century are as follows:

1) Everbody else does.

2) Ummm... shut up.

A defense of the orthodox take is here, but every argument made can be countered with a Q. If late-first-century Christians over here agree with late-first-century Christians over there, it does not prove that they all found Gideons in their hotel rooms; rather it suggests access to a common source (or sources) of oral material.

The Gnostic Gospels don't matter because they're contemporary with the canonical Gospels (which they are), they matter because they're beautiful. Because they speak to the imagination and our nascent recognition of the indwelling Divine. Not because they happened (they didn't), but because they are Real.

Lesa's Manifesto

Lesa Bellevie, Editrix of the excellent Magdalene Review, to which I am indebted for obvious reasons, posts a truly wonderful "Personal Manifesto":

1. As a general rule, I dislike ‘conspiracy’ as an historical theory.

2. I believe in defending history, critical thinking, and rigorous scholarship.

3. I am skeptical of revisionism but am willing to entertain new ideas.

4. I do not believe that history is predicated on what what is spiritually meaningful.

This one is my favourite;

9. I believe that truth is an indication of archetypal resonance.

Lesa is also the author of TCIGT The Mary Magdalene.



Definitely worth the read (both book and site).

Back-of-the-book Blurb and Wrap Cover

A Gnostic Priest Takes On The Code

Rather than dissecting history and analyzing conspiracy theories, ordained Gnostic Priest Jordan Stratford invites the reader to explore and celebrate the meaning behind the myths and to discover the Divine Feminine in the Western Mystery Tradition. Rejecting dogmatic literalism in favour of investigation, intuition, and personal reflection, The Da Vinci Prayerbook offers a glimpse into the Secret Church of the Magdalene and the Holy Grail; not a hereditary bloodline but a transmission of gnosis – the knowledge of the Heart.

Includes the complete Gospel of Mary Magdalene

Going to press as soon as the blurbs come back (gentle poke).

Back-of-the-book Photoshoot

St. Ratford, Authoritative-yet-friendly




'BAD Demiurge! BAD!"




April Mass

All thanks to the talents of Davin Greenwell and not the irrefutably lovely and indispensibly talented Zandra Gutierrez whom I did not credit on that March Mass pic.

10 Things Religious Pundits Need To Know About Gnosticism

"We don't need to take the Gospel of Judas / Thomas / Mary seriously, because unlike Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, it wasn't written in the first century, wasn't written by eyewitnesses and is not historically true. It was written by an elitist world-hating sect called the Gnostics who were rejected by early Christians as heretics. Gnostics preached that the flesh was evil, and salvation was only available to a select few who had secret magical knowledge, or gnosis."


– Every bible "expert" in the western world in the last three weeks.

I've read variations on this spiel at least twenty times this month. The problem is that this summation of Gnosticism is entirely false, and in many cases known by its proponents as false; this is bearing false witness.

1) Gnosticism is not a heretical sect of Christianity

Gnosticism is a distinct, pre-Christian religion. Its roots are in Alexandria in Egypt, about 2200 years ago, where a "café-society" of Greek-speaking and -educated Jews were syncretizing the myths of the ancient world with Judaism and classical Greek philosophy.

These communities and their ideas greatly influenced Christianity as it later emerged. As Christianity struggled in its first four centuries to distinguish itself from the pagan world, it slowly began to reject some of these Gnostic influences. But most of the people who still favoured these ideas considered themselves devout Christians, not heretics.

Let us not forget that the most common topic in the New Testament – more common than the power of love or redemption or the sacrfice of the cross or even the divinity of Jesus – is that "other Christians are getting it wrong". Paul condemns James as a heretic. Jesus refers to Peter as "Satan".

2) Gnosticism is a lot like Buddhism

Because of Gnosticism's insistence on personal responsibility and ethics, its emphasis on singular prayer, the practice of compassion, detachment from materialism and the striving for enlightenment, it has been called "the Buddhism of the West". The similarities between Gnosticism and Mahayana Buddhism are so strong it has been speculated that there may have been ongoing contact between the two religions.

3) The Gnostic Scriptures are, for the most part, contemporary with Christian canon

None of the four canonical Gospels were written in the first century. Mark was not written by Mark, nor Luke written by Luke. John was written in two distinct phases, the first of which showed significant Gnostic elements, and the latter a retraction and condemnation of those elements. These were based on first century oral traditions which varied greatly from region to region, but did not exist in written form until at least 100 years after the events they describe. Paul is the only first century Christian writer we have, and much of his writings were edited centuries later into the form we have today.

The Gospel of Thomas, for example, is contemporary with the later half of John, and there is some evidence to support that John's later editors were familiar with Thomas. The scriptural authors of the second century were reaching for meaning, using their interpretation what they had heard, their intuition, their creativity, and their yearning for G@d.

4) Gnostics do not hate the physical world

Gnostic scripture frequently invokes favourably the beauty and power of the natural world; the symbolism of pregnancy, midwifery, childbirth, newborns, storms and ripe crops are frequently employed by Gnostic authors. Gnostics do not view the flesh as evil, but rather as temporary when contrasted with the immortality of the soul - a view shared by most if not all Christians.

What Gnostics reject is not the earth, but they system: the artificial world of injustice, prejudice, institutionalization and materialism.

5) Gnostics do not repudiate salvation through Grace

The role of Grace, and of the Holy Spirit, is of paramount importance to the Gnostics. Where Gnosticism differs from Christianity is that Gnosticism says that "blind faith" does not grant salvation. To be saved from the forces of deception and ignorance (maya in Buddhist parlance) one must attain enlightenment: the direct experiential intimacy with G@d that is gnosis. This experience is the birthright of every aware human person.

6) Gnosticism is not elitist

Do Christians distinguish between the saved and the unsaved? Is this elitism? Gnostic teachings frequently reinforce the idea that liberation via gnosis is available to everyone; that such distinction is a matter of reclaiming birthright, of intent, choice, and effort. In fact, Gnostic theology tends to support the idea of apokatastasis, of universal salvation.

7) Gnosticism is not Utopian.

There is nothing in Gnostic scripture to support the idea that Gnostics wish to make "heaven on earth" from human efforts, and no connection whatsoever between Gnosticism and the reshaping of society; neither from fascism nor socialism. There is no "immanentizing the eschaton" in Gnosticism: Rather, this idea is the hallmark of millennialist Christianity.

8) Most basic tenets of Gnosticism are supported by Christian scripture

In fact there is a litany of Christian saints who are blatantly Gnostic; St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, St. Hildegard of Bingen and St. Joan of Arc all described in detail the integrity of their experience of gnosis.

Paul says "The Kingdom of G@d is within you" which is probably the best single summation of Gnostic theology. Jesus says "My kingdom is not of this world" (Jn 18:36).

9) Gnosticism serves as a bridge between world religions

Gnosticism stands at the crossroads of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, representing a common ground. Historically Gnosticism influenced Judaism in the development of Kabala, and Islam in the development of Sufism; it both encouraged and challenged Christianity through its early centuries and contributed profoundly to Christian theology and identity.

10) Gnostic churches are thriving

Gnostics across North America and Europe gather weekly for prayer and Eucharist in forms very similar to orthodox liturgy. We derive inspiration from the Old and New Testaments, and also from Nag Hammadi scripture such as The Gospel of Thomas and The Thunder: Perfect Mind. A vital and growing Gnostic ekklesia is serving in charities, missions and hospitals; writing, crafting, debating and working in coffeehouses and dozens of parishes around the world. Most Gnostics consider themselves Christian, their churches constituting the Body of Christ. Other Gnostics gravitate to the symbolism and traditions of the Divine Feminine in her aspect as Sophia ("wisdom"), the Shekhina ("presence"), and the Holy Spirit.

Despite book-burnings, despite the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition, despite schlock-populism, and despite inane castigations from self-appointed pundits, we are still here; still praying, celebrating, exploring, and asking. Still Knowing.

The Feast of Terra Mater

The earth is at the same time mother,
She is mother of all that is natural,
mother of all that is human.
She is the mother of all,
for contained in her are the seeds of all.
The earth of humankind contains all moistness,
all verdancy, all germinating power.
It is in so many ways fruitful.
All creation comes from it.
Yet it forms not only the basic raw material for humankind,
but also the substance of the Incarnation.


– Hildegard von Bingen

"She feeds first and asks questions later."

"The nourishing quality of the Eucharist, freely offered to anyone who's famished, has always been a central metaphor for me. I don't partake because I'm a good Catholic, holy and pious and sleek. I partake because I'm a bad Catholic, riddled by doubt and anxiety and anger; fainting from extreme hypoglycemia of the soul. I need food. 'O Holy One,' I pray as I savour the host,'as this bread nourishes my body, so may your spirit nourish my soul. Grow strong within me, I pray, and let me live my life in your praise.' God doesn't place conditions on the hungry. She feeds first and asks questions later."


– Nancy Mairs, Ordinary Time , Beacon Press, 1993

[pinched from Another Country]

Da Vinci Prayer Book Cover Sneak Preview

You're Writing a What?

Heaven

I don't need no one to tell me about heaven
I look at my daughter, and I believe.
I don't need no proof when it comes to God and truth
I can see the sunset and I perceive


– LIVE, Heaven

I did not attend Conclave over Easter Weekend. There was a plane ticket, but I did not get on that flight.

There was a "family emergency"; shock, horror, anger, tears, and mourning at the mere threat of the loss of innocence. A reminder of human fragility, and all we cling to is tissue easily torn by archonic forces of suspicion, innuendo, assumption. It was one of the worst experiences of my life. We spent the weekend bruised, shaken, and nauseated.

And yet, in the end, all is well. I clung to my lover and my children, held them as I wept and gave thanks for the dodging of bullets, for this season of passing-over. No damage done, all are well, safe, oblivious and happy. Now the patient work of healing, of restoration.

Ora pro nobis.

Diaconal Ordination of Rev. Scott Rassbach

Many blessings and congratulations to the Rev. Deacon Scott Rassbach of Columbus, Wisconsin, ordained this Easter weekend at St. Joseph of Arimethea Parish in Calgary.

AD SACRVM FLAMMVM

Wearing White for Eastertide

Loveliest of trees, the cherry now
Is hung with bloom along the bough,
And stands about the woodland ride
Wearing white for Eastertide.

– A.E. Housman

Leonardo da Vinci: April 15, 1452

Trickster,, genius, scoundrel, artist, mathematician, ren-punk, alchemist, inventor, ne'er do-well, polymath.

In honour of Leo's birthday, I finished my manuscript.

Happy Birthday, O draconian devil!

Palm Sunday

“The images are manifest to man, but the light in them remains concealed in the image of the light of the Father.”

– Gospel of Thomas

This is the day of the declaration of the light, in mindful provocation – in outright defiant challenge – of archonic Authority. This is the day of knowing who we are, and wherein we have been cast; the day of Identity and Identification.

We each of us today cease to conceal our light, knowing that we are a beacon guiding our enemies – the multitude that is our attachment, our jealousies, our petty preoccupations – to the inevitable destruction of what we know as our lives. The Light of Sophia encourages us, literally gives us the heart to step forward into our identity.

Do we need laurels for this? Do we need medals and diplomas and corporate helicopters to speed us to a satellite-fed press conference? No, we need our humility, our simplicity. We ride into the welcoming throng of Jerusalem on an ass.

The donkey is our everyday self: it is this which transports the Christ-in-us forward into the City of Wholeness, ירושלים. The pedestrian nature of the vessel in no way diminishes the Divinity of the wine.

This is our hour; they will have theirs. Soon there will be a surge in the tide of darkness, and all our hope will be undone; our lives and selves are to be flensed away by overwhelming archonic force. But like Aslan on the stone table, bound beneath the gloating, murderous Jadis, we may yet have a surprise in store, mightn't we?

For contemporary Gnostics, the symbolism of the palm has added significance...

The Gnostics believed in two temporal ages: the first or present evil; the second or future benign. The first age was the Age of Iron. It is represented by a Black Iron Prison. It ended in August 1974 and was replaced by the Age of Gold, which is represented by a Palm Tree Garden.

– Philip K. Dick, Tractates Cryptica Scriptura

Posting will be light over Holy Week as I prepare for conclave at St. Joe's. Blessings.

“I Know Who You Are and Where You Have Come From. You Are From the Immortal Realm."

Yesterday was Gospel of Judas day, the public release of the third-century Gnostic text that has every early-church pundit scrambling for airtime like it was the Da Vinci Code all over again.

Is it an authentic Gospel? Yes.

Did it really happen? No. To be fair, Mark didn't happen either. Deal with it.

If it didn't happen, does it matter? I think so. It's not just insight into theological puzzling in the third century, I think there is some Wisdom here. Of course one reading is not going to do it; I'm looking forward to some time of reflection and absorption.

When he approached his disciples, gathered together and seated and offering a prayer of thanksgiving over the bread, he laughed.

The disciples said to him, “Master, why are you laughing at our prayer of thanksgiving? We have done what is right.”

He answered and said to them, “I am not laughing at you. You are not doing this because of your own will but because it is through this that your god will be praised.”

This gentle chastisement is I think a great lesson. The disciples here are not offering a eucharist, a thanks-giving, because they are not truly thankful. The root of the word is charis, grace (which is why they call it "saying grace") and Grace is not present here. They are, essentially, hedging their bets, trying to please God by going through the motions. Instead of acting through the heart, through the will, they are merely trying to appease some third-party entity, likely out of either rote or some fear of retribution for omission. The Master laughs at how pointless this is; the disciples here are monkeys at typewriters, bashing at keys with little hope of resultant meaning.

But God caused gnosis to be given to Adam and those with him, so that the kings of chaos and the underworld might not lord it over them.

This is from a riff on cosmogeny strikingly similar to that of The Apocryphon of John, which itself is a later Christianization of the Hermetic Poimandres. And of course the line that jumps up and down and says "I'm a Gnostic text!"

But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.

And the payoff. If the crucifixion and resurrection are Divine Plan, then Judas' betrayal is the fulcrum on which all of it rests.

The most interesting part in all of this is the delegation and institutionalization of the role of the Slayer in this myth. In earlier forms it is the Brother who is the Nemesis of the Hero; see how the sociopolitical milieu dictates that in this version, the Nemesis is part of an overarching mechanism of persecution: Judas, the Romans, Pilate – not one character, but an entire kosmos of characters. Judas is the earthly "brother" of Jesus just as Lucifer is the heavenly brother of Michael, but the Judaean backdrop of the story requires that Judas have an entourage including a cohort (100 soldiers), an angry mob, and the entire Sanhedrin.

The New York times has a PDF of excerpts here, and there is a very good National Geographic resource here.

Enjoy.

Sacred Cows Actually Gnostic Gnus?

I love this strip. SpiritPainter consistently addresses God in two ways; when God speaks, it is as a discarnate voice asking patient questions. When the characters speak of God, it is invariably of the Demiurge (as in this example above).

There's also a link on the Sacred Cows site to BritGnostic Poster Boy Tim Freke; are the Sacred Cows actually meant to be Gnostic Gnus?

Apologies for the reformatting; the strip won't fit in my blog colum