The eye only sees what the Mind is prepared to comprehend

Promise Me..

2007-04-16T19:01:00.000-07:00

Promise me,
promise me this day,
promise me now,
while the sun is overhead exactly at the zenith,
promise me:

Even as they strike you down with a mountain of hatred and violence;
even as they step on you and crush you like a worm,
even as they dismember and disembowel you,
remember, brother,
remember:

man is not our enemy.

The only thing worthy of you is compassion-
invincible, limitless, unconditional.
Hatred will never let you face the beast in man.

One day, when you face this beast alone,
with your courage intact, your eyes kind, untroubled
(even as no one sees them),
out of your smile
will bloom a flower.

And those who love you will behold you
across then thousand worlds of birth and dying.

Alone again,
I will go on with bent head,
knowing all love has become eternal.
On the long, rough road,
the sun and the moon will continue to shine.

-Thich Nhat Hanh

Sister Awake...

2006-08-22T11:44:00.000-07:00

when the winter was over
she returned there to find him
and her memories filled her with light

she remembered the beauty
she remembered desires
and her memories filled her with light

i am the sun in the flame
cold from the flame turns away
and in these winds came a change
she awakes...

sister walk through these fields of delight
but I want you to know
desperation's the tenderest trap
so gently you go
what will it take
sister awake

when this beautiful cult of desire
has left you for dead
isolation will cradle the lies
of things left unsaid
what will it take
sister awake

and you'll look to the heavens above
and taste it's deceit
these temptations have blinded desires
to sleep at their feet
what will it take
sister awake

and you'll hear them call out your name
invoking the fates
chances are you've travelled too far
in stirring their hate
what will it take
sister awake
awake

- The Tea Party - "Sister Awake" (the Edges of Twilight)

Time

2006-07-27T12:34:00.000-07:00

Well, I almost forgot to check my calendar or rather to mark it- if that's an acceptable thing to do. It's been 3 years since I took over from Iohannes III to lead our little band of rebels, heretics and seekers. Maybe this post is more appropriate in 2 years or even 7 years from now but I thought it was worth making considering the sharp drop off of posting that I've done since leaving my secular employ.

On one hand I say 'Well, it's only been 3 years" and on the other hand "3 years!! Where has the time gone".

There has certainly been enough to keep me busy in 3 years time for good and not-so-good:

The ordination of two priests, one deacon and the appointment of one Bishop
The resignation of one priest and one bishop
The formation of two parishes and the dissolution of two parishes
two weddings, one baptism
A small fistful of doing minor orders
the rewriting of one liturgy

It's not without it's moments, that's for sure- endless nights of frustration- beating my thoughts against the wall of mind that I can't just snap my fingers and fix things, a lot of doing the unpopular thing, finding my legs after stepping out of a tall shadow, wading through a sea of people with questionable intent, dodging the bullets of my detractors, reigning in well-intentioned clergy, sifting through our canon law for clean solutions to problems not envisioned when it was written, facing down the criticism of my own clergy, the on-going attempt to reconcile my personality with 'public life', the intense feeling of a good days work when I've been able to help someone mark a milestone in their life, the tears on the face of the woman who's husband had come so far and I had just ordained, earning the respect of those I personally respect a great deal, having someone say 'If I had a church like yours when I was young, I never would given up on religion', administering communion to a former atheist who had left church behind over two decades ago.

What will the next 2 or next 7 or next 13 years be like? I honestly can't say. So many plans, so many "Plan B"'s- I've got a stellar team and it isn't without there help that we've done what we've done as an organization. Matter of fact, I can hardly take credit for much of it. A good leader knows how to pick the right people and not to meddle overly much, and on that I think I've succeeded but then again, I also think that's the easy job somedays.

Sometimes I hate this job and wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy- other days, I realize he already has it.

A Refutation of Conditioned Thought

2006-02-08T12:43:00.000-08:00

Recently, a little bit ado has been made about H.B. Mar Didymos' comments on 'Neo-Gnosticism'.

In an effort to make clear that which is already clear but indiscernable to some, I feel it best that we address some of his very valid criticism of modern Gnosticism and some of his point which are not valid.

I will address points throughout, quoting the relevant sections.

"Furthermore many modern gnostics have merely replaced the conventional religious terminology of God or the Father with the Secret Father and Heaven for Pleroma."

Of this we cannot disagree, and in fact, this is something that we ourselves have stated two months ago, in the article entitled 'What do Gnostics do'.

What isn't accurate however is the seeming underlying implication that while we have changed the terminology, we hold to views about the 'realities' behind those terms that are not in any way, shape or form, different from those of orthodox Christianity.

We see also that the Thomasine Church employs terms like 'Living Father' etc but we do not assume that they mean the same thing as 'Living God' found in their orthodox counterparts, such an assumption would be inaccurate and without proper information. Nevertheless, it seems to me that there is a refusal on the part of the Thomasine Church to make the same logical analysis of it's counterpart Churches.

"Furthermore, they subscribe to Orthodox Christian pantheism meaning that God is “within” all creation with the exchange of Jesus Christ for the Indwelling Christos"

It must be said first of all, that Orthodox Christians do not ascribe to pantheism. Secondly, neither do we.

In our understanding, the Divine Spark, the 'Indwelling Christos' and all such other terminology are symbolic and allegorical means of framing that which is in essence, non-conceptual. They are symbols designed to point to a state which is present and yet transcendent in the conditioned existance of mortal mankind.

It is, in short, a reference to the original state of being- free from reactionary and conditioned emotional responses, free from the obsfucation of discursive thought, free from conditioned perceptions and cognition. Awareness. This constitutes, as we have said elsewhere the experiential understanding of Self in realization to what we conceptualize as God itself.

The Scriptures of Gnosticism have wisely presented this in terms of the spiritual, no different than Alchemy being a method of relating and communicating ideas about transformation.

"Many neo-gnostics claim that gnōsis exclusively means, privileged “knowledge of the heart” or “insight” about the spiritual nature of God."

We find a similar exclusivity attached to the Thomasine Church's own definition of Gnosis.
If this was not so, we would not be now having this 'discussion'.

"In fact it is here that we learn first hand what the Jesus point to this type of gnōsis. The focus of gnosticism according to these texts is the seeking and attainment of self acquaintance. It is direct and experiential knowledge of ourselves which brings us to salvation. We are not alone in our seeking to understand gnōsis."

There seems to be some confusion on the part of The Thomasine Church, we are not talking about two different things. Experiential knowledge of the self is -identical- to that which we term as "experiential knowledge of God". You say tomato.. I say...

"Gnōsis is therefore a process within our own mind, not on some unverifiable spiritual dimension. Who we are and what we experience is done so through our own mind."

Any claims to unverifable spiritual dimensions by the various Gnostic Ecclesia made by the Thomasine Church are entirely theirs alone.

We utilize the language and allegory of the same to communicate things that step beyond conceptual thought, a device if you will. Nowhere is it claimed as fact the existance of numerous aeons, hells etc.

"The problem arises for the neo-gnostic when they try to limit the definition of gnōsis as “divine knowledge.”

Yes, that may arise for some but not all, if we were indeed limiting the definition of Gnosis to divine knowledge, but we aren't, even if it is one we espouse for reasons outlined above. That claim remains their own.

"They also state that they acquire said knowledge through traditional Christian rituals. "

Liturgy is the making visible of the invisible – it is the direct manifestation of something that is pre-conceptual. There is something that is experienced and -known- via liturgy and ritual and the symbolism of sermons that does not fall within the scope of the conceptual mind. This activity may open a space for the experience of Gnosis.

"Interestingly enough, many of them agree that one does not need outside assistance to achieve this kind of gnōsis. The question then arises as to why they need a church or ecclesiastical hierarchy if the path toward gnōsis cannot be imparted"

I can do no better than to quote my teacher..

"There are three general "traditions" or spiritual "lineages" – the primordial, the experiential and the organizational. The Primordial is the single most important – it is the direct experience of gnosis itself. It forms and informs all else – and is absolutely necessary. Without the Primordial lineage – the other two are dead. The Experiential is the list of techniques that have been found to lead one to the experience of the Primordial. These are not fixed and unchangeable, but when certain techniques have been found to be reliably effective, they are given prominence. This lineage is held by specific *people* who have used these techniques and achieved some level of realization of the Primordial lineage thereby. And they, themselves, received them from someone who used them and achieved realization. And *they* received them from someone who…etc. This is almost as important as the Primordial lineage itself – as without it, there is *no* access to the Primordial lineage. Finally, and least important – though important still – is the organizational lineage. This is what most people think of when they think "church." This is the institutional list of rules and regulations that the *people* who hold and pass on the Experiential lineage access to the Primordial lineage agree to abide by for the sake of preserving the Experiential lineage, and creating a safe and open place to pursue the Primordial.

Without the Organizational lineage – the Experiential Lineage becomes polluted, white-washed, diluted, and worse – disappears. Without the Experiential Lineage, this particular tried and true path to the Primordial Lineage is lost."

If the Sacraments of the Apostolic Johannite Church were removed today, and forever, would we be left without a leg to stand on in the pursuit of Gnosis? Hardly.

We discuss the nature of the condition of mankind, ignorance, awareness, understanding etc. and work on exercises that take the same beyond the realm of theoretical posturing just as often as we gather in community for the liturgy that gives our goals a common point of expression.

Questioning is the beginning of wisdom, and indeed the right questions are more important at times than the answers, however, in order for any such questioning to be valid, they must be made in the spirit of willingness to accept the answers which one finds.

The Thomasine Church has asked, we have answered, we hope any listening to what we have said does not go down the same drain as baby and bathwater alike. In the end, the eye only sees what the mind is prepared to comprehend.

We recognize the nobility of the stated goals, methods and aims of the Thomasine Church and so close with the words of the Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh as reminder for future discussion,

"Remember: man is not our enemy. The only thing worthy of you is compassion- invincible, limitless, unconditional. "

What do Gnostics do?

2005-12-14T00:03:00.000-08:00

What do Gnostics do?

Ideally the answer would be- 'They achieve Gnosis' - but I don't believe this answer can be given in context of modern Gnosticism.

This is a popular question among those that first approach Gnosticism in it's various forms, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem to get a whole lot of answers.

Why?

It seems to me that the answers lie in a variety of places, so I will first give a summary of these and then approach the points in greater detail.

1) While history has afforded us a good deal of material in terms of the Gnostic world-view, it has not afforded us equal detail into the actual practice of Gnostics.

2) Most exploration of Gnosticism today comes in the form of hobby study, academic research and dissatisfaction with existing religious approaches- this is what the newcomer to Gnosticism sees, and this is what they perpetuate.

3) That most 'Gnostics' themselves do not provide through their own work, a coherent praxis towards achieving Gnosis.

All of these points are related.

So now let's begin to examine them in a bit more detail (I say a bit, because I don't want to get overly windy here).

1) While history has afforded us a good deal of material in terms of the Gnostic world-view, it has not afforded us equal detail into the actual practice of Gnostics.

We have countless material outlining the commonalities between Gnostic sects, their views and cosmologies. All of these documents (The Nag Hammadi for example) are the largely the result of the experience of Gnosis.

The material is chocked full of metaphors, symbol sets, wisdom sayings and complex mythologies as to the 'why' behind our present situation. There are endless debates as to whether or not things like the Demiurge or the Archons are to be taken as literal beings or as symbols embodying concepts.

What it isn't full of is -method-. These texts are a result of the paths of those that wrote them- however they do not state how it is they got there (and yes I know there are ritual references, symbolic references etc- what I am talking about is a point blank methodology such as that found in the Eight Fold Path of Buddhism for example. Good examples of texts with practical information are the Greek Magical Papyri, The Books of IEU. )

As such we as Gnostics have followed the historical and 'tradition' expounded example of our forebearers. We know the early Gnostics (many of them at least) adhered to a Sacramental and ecclesial understanding as well as the concept of Initiation. Many early Gnostics were comfortable pursuing their paths within the proto-orthodox and orthodox churches of their day, though holding to deeper interpretations and insights on the nature of what the rituals of 'the Church' entail and what they provide.

Thus it is today that we have, continuing their ecclesial work and the work of later Gnostic communities that have organized themselves along ecclesial lines, Gnostic Churches.

2) Most exploration of Gnosticism today comes in the form of hobby study, academic research and dissatisfaction with existing religious approaches- this is what the newcomer to Gnosticism sees, and this is what they perpetuate.

The appearance of the Nag Hammadi texts has been, in my opinion, both a blessing and a curse. We have a large body of material that has allowed us to take a look at early Gnosticism through the eyes of it's holy texts and not merely through the rabid attacks of the heresiologists and Church Fathers.

However, as I said, I believe this to be, in part, a curse.

While the texts have certainly increased the interest in Gnosticism for the outside world, from the point of view of Gnostics and would-be Gnostics themselves, it has helped create an equally voluminous problem within the Gnostic movement.

Most Gnostics, it seems to me, are not very concerned with the actual achievement of Gnosis itself. The library, the internet and coffee shops are humming with Gnosticism as a topic of hobby study, 'academic' research and also as a vessel for the venting of dissatisfaction with existing religious approaches.

From debates on the meaning behind the Nag Hammadi, to modern applications of 'Gnostic world view', the topic of Gnosticism and Gnosis has largely become that- a topic.

This isn't to say that these things (discussion of meaning, modern applications of Gnostic 'philosophy') are not beneficial- certainly they are, and certainly they are a part of the process we call Gnosis- all wisdom begins with the willingness to ask questions. However, it is the view of this Gnostic that we are coming dangerously close to creating a new orthodoxy devoid of modern experience and revelation and dominated by opinion also devoid of experience

Assuming I am not the only one that sees this problem,. how are -we- as -Gnostics- contributing to this problem specifically, and to a proper modern relevance of Gnosticism and Gnosis generally?

3) That most 'Gnostics' themselves do not provide through their own work, a coherent praxis towards achieving Gnosis.

The answer to my question lies in my third point. Simply put, as a result of our lack of willingness (yes, I know this is a strong term) to actually pursue Gnosis experientially and not just intellectually, we are creating a situation whereby any example we may give to others is sorely lacking in the experiential principle that is behind the whole of Gnosticism- Gnosis itself.

The vehicle of the Gnostic Ecclesia has been a valuable one, it has allowed us to form and work within community and given us points of unity in expression (and thankfully not uniformity)- through it's rituals and it's dialogue-creating environment.

However, it has also given us a crutch- whereby we have transformed signposts into the thing pointed to and exchanged the map for the territory. Why? Because we are forgetting a key
component of Gnostic ritual- That 'Deeper understanding' mentioned above- I will cover this in it's own section.

Don't get me wrong- I am a big supporter of Sacramental Gnosticism (I would not have taken Holy Orders if I did not hold strongly to the value of their presence) but what we seem to forget (for those of us that adhere to Sacramental Gnosticism) is that these things point something greater and are -not- the thing themselves.

Do I think that the experience of the Sacraments as expressed in the modern Gnostic Ecclesia can lead to Gnosis, absolutely- but the key word here is Lead. Lead and not carry, lead and not grant, lead and not bestow.

When something leads, it implies another half, something follows- The Sacraments with their initiatory quality open a path before us, veiled in allegory, symbol and introspection, that we can follow towards the experience of Gnosis. We can only do this however, if we are willing to walk.

If we stop at the Sacraments and an exoteric understanding of the Rites of the Ecclesia and thus a de facto expression that these things alone will lead to Gnosis, then all we have done is exchanged Grace for Gnosis in terms of traditional sacramentology. We run the dangerous risk of presenting a tradition that apes entirely the orthodox expression that we repeatedly say to ourselves 'is not enough'. We swap Father for 'Unknown Father', Logos for Son, Satan for the Demiurge, Heaven for Pleroma and all we have is fringe Christianity that hasn't really left the backyard of orthodoxy, all while claiming to have / threatening to, 'run away'.

The Secret of Intent

What we need to remember about Gnostic scripture and 'tradition' is that these things were attempts to express the inexpressible, not once-off revelations that are bound in stone.
Gnosticism and Gnosis itself has always been about the ever-present 'New-now-ness of that noetic apprehension we call Gnosis' as my teacher once said.

To rest the whole of our gnostic existence on them without individual validation through experience is to simply commit ourselves to another brand of 'faith'- taken at face value and on it's own word.

Now. given the limitedness of historical resources to the methods and approaches of our ancient predecessors, how then should we proceed towards working out the achievement of Gnosis itself.

First we do have to go back to the Gnostic and Ecclesia. I mentioned, and many of you know, that many early Gnostics attended and participated in the ceremonies of their orthodox counterparts. They found value in them because of the particular view they held of them and their effect. So I have had to ask myself- what is this view? Is it simply that when they heard terms like Father, Son and Spirit, they simply replaced in their mind Pleroma, Logos and Pnuema Hagion?

Some might but I think it was deeper than this- much, much, deeper.

If we can draw anything of value from the Gnostic texts, it is in the form of where they intersect. One of the key aspects of Gnostic scripture if not -the- key aspect is the presence of Divine within the being of mankind.

All of the 'origin' texts- Apocryphon of John, On the Origin of the World, The Hypostasis of the Archons etc, are symbolic and mythological explanations and pointers to this reality.

The Kingdom of Heaven is here now, the Pleroma is right here, right now. Your body, your mind, your speech and your actions are inseparable from the Logos. We do not need to look outside of ourselves for that which we seek, we only need to understand experientially that it is already there.

As I have mentioned, all of the rituals of the Gnostic Ecclesia are to lead us to somewhere, and are not to bestow on us something we do not have. All of them, from Baptism, to Confirmation, the Eucharist, to Unction, point to the fact that it is already present.

In the Eucharist for example, is not so much that the elements are transformed into something that they previously were not- the Body and Blood of the Logos but to point that they always were the body and blood of the Logos. It is not the elements so much that are changed but rather it is, or should be, that it is our perception that is to be changed.

(This isn't to say that a change does not take place within the elements and the context of the priesthood but rather that material never ceased to partake in the larger scheme of it's origin. The Gnostic mythology points to the ignorant Demiurge as having fashioned the material universe, but even he has his ultimate origin in that which we called the Fullness. Matter has always partaken of this reality, but is 'merely' clouded over by our lack of perception.

The role of the priest is to rend the veil of ignorance for a short time to allows us to perceive for that duration, the reality underneath- provided with intent, that we are willing to look. It is this perception of reality that overtime wears away the shroud of the Demiurge to see the everpresent Pleroma)

The intent in all these rituals is to remind us of the fact of our Being, to tell us over and over and over, until we remember finally and definitively for ourselves. It is thus that we find the origin of the distaste of the Gnostic for a priesthood- because those that achieve full realization, need no priest. A distinction should be made here between Understanding (Gnosis)and Being (Apotheosis) however. Until such a time whereby we achieve Apotheosis, we must make use of Gnosis and the methods which lead us to Gnosis until the process of Realization is complete. Thus the role of the Ecclesia, as it was for our predecessors, is essential.

When we are mindful of this intention and bring it to bear in all that we do, eventually we find the prayer of the lips transformed into the prayer of the heart- with the above intent and realization at the forefront of our awareness, all acts become Gnostic practices.

Without this realization and intent, you can attend as many Gnostic gatherings and services as you want, and you are still -not- a Gnostic. However with this intent, all acts, all practices become potential acts of Gnosis.

Additional Solutions/Practices in addition to the Gnostic Ecclesia

These can be wide and varied, and need not come strictly from within the Gnostic mythology- my experiences of Gnosis to date have all (save for one) come from within the practice of Ritual Magick.

Does this mean that everyone should take on the study and practice of Ritual Magick? Certainly not. The key thing here is to search, which implies both looking and exploration from a literal testing standpoint. .

Gnosis is the central experience to which Gnosticism points to- but Gnosticism isn't the thing itself- Gnosis can be achieved with the methods of Thelema, Ceremonial Magick , Buddhism and countless other systems.

However if the system is to be valid in achieving Gnosis, it has to provide a way to experientially address the very things that Gnosis itself illuminates.

The natures of Perception, Awareness, Ignorance, the 'Self', the Divine etc.

Questioning is the beginning of wisdom and often the right questions are as big of keys to understanding as any answers we may find.

So what would I recommend as a practical solutions to holes in Gnostic practice?

Begin exploring the techniques that are specifically and historically tied to the pursuit of awareness and spiritual experience- (some examples:)

Hesychasm- The Eastern Orthodox method of contemplative prayer- which combines mantra, posture, and breathing (orthodox christian)

Shamatha/Zazen- Meditation designed to still the mind, and build concentration and awareness (Buddhist)

Centering Prayer - Christian contemplative prayer- having elements in common with the above techniques (orthodox christian)

Assumption of 'Godforms' - Ritual technique and practice designed to not only invoke the qualities of the Divine under numerous forms but also self-identification with the same towards developing and manifesting those same qualities.

These practices work easily with both intent and the development of the same. The limitedness of coherent praxis is only as limited as the understanding you approach it with- all practice, when bearing in mind the reality of our Being, can become Gnostic practice.

Thus though regular usage of these techniques (and others) and if possible working with a Gnostic Church, we can then begin to move towards (if not achieve) Realization. When the Gnostics of the future look back on us to see what -we- did and where it has gotten us- will they see Gnostics who 'knew' through experiential understanding and application or will they see us pointing back further to those who knew before us.

Will we write the scripture of our lives on the papyrus of our paths, with the ink of our actions or point back to the expression of another, devoid of the relevance of the present and essential NOW.

Memory Eternal

2005-11-01T10:37:00.000-08:00

Life is eternal; and love is immortal;
And death is only a horizon;
And a horizon is nothing
Save the limit of our sight.
-Rossiter Worthington Raymond

Traditionally, November 1st and 2nd in the Ordo Kalendar are reserved for All Saints Day and All Souls Day respectively- with All Saints also having an octave (a period of seven days following it). It is this time that we as Gnostics and Christians alike remember those who have cleared the path before us and those who have walked it with us.

Memory can be the strangest of things- more vibrant than life itself, magical in it's quality and elusive in it's nature.

All experience to some degree is ineffable. There is a deeper quality of experience that we cannot transmit to another through human language. To truly know somethings as they are, one must have been there. This is the eternal quality of those who have walked the path with us, we have shared something that transcends communication itself.

Those who have cleared the path for us have made the spiritual, emotional and mental environments where by the traditions and realizations of the past are not just blankly communicated (as if in a holy book or letter) to us but allow us to directly experience and know these things as they knew them by following in their footsteps.

We remember those people that have through heroic virtue and determined action not only brought forth understanding to the present but have brought in such a way that we can experience it as our own- for in some fashion, it really is. But Noetic apprehension and mindful action is something that is not reserved to those of heroic stature, and we also celebrate those beings that have touched us in a unique way. Friends, family, neighbors, even strangers, in their lives who made a profound impact through even simple actions and words.

Indeed it is those 'ordinary' people that shape us and prepare us. Those beings of heroic stature and character became who they were because of the people in their life that made an impact on them in some way.

This is why I am writing today to address both calendar days as one- because the heroic and legendary cannot be separated from the ordinary and 'mundane'- each Gnostic, indeed, each human being, is a hero in the making- saving themselves, transmitting joy and love to each other.

Those who have gone before, those who labour now, and those who will take the torch after we have been fitted to carry the banner of eternity, are One and indivisible.

It is the contrast of the sorrow of forgetfulness that makes the power of Remembrance so encompassing, so important and oddly enough so vitally Now.

We remember especially today those beings that have translated the memory of those who have enriched them into action.

With St. John; St. Valentinus, St. Jacques de Molay, St. Bernard Raymond Fabre Palaprat, and all those who took the reality of memory and made again memory into reality.

I especially personally remember those who laid the stones on my own path, some large, some small:

With Henry de Jong, Grace de Jong, Brett Nelson, Wayne Mitchell and Ken Oliver.

Lord, hear our prayer

+Iohannes

What is your model of the Church..

2005-09-07T19:36:00.000-07:00

You scored as Sacrament model. Your model of the church is
Sacrament. The church is the effective sign of the revelation that
is the person of Jesus Christ. Christians are transformed by
Christ and then become a beacon of Christ wherever they go.
This model has a remarkable capacity for integrating other
models of the church.

Sacrament model

78%

Mystical Communion Model

67%

Servant Model

67%

Institutional Model

50%

Herald Model

39%

What is your model of the church? [Dulles]
created with QuizFarm.com

After having seen the test in action at Rev. Terje's blog.. I had to take the test.

Whom does the Grail serve?

2005-07-31T16:41:00.000-07:00

July 31st, The Holy St. Joseph of Arimathea

From our old books I know that Joseph came of old to Glastonbury,And there the heathen Prince, Arviragus, gave him an isle of marsh whereon to build; And there he built with wattles from the marsh, a lonely church in the days of yore - Idylls of the King, Tennyson

When I returned from Cincinnati a priest of the Apostolic Johannite Church, I was resolved to begin the work of service. My first desire was to form the Parish of St. John's, but this I could not reasonably do because the Apostolic Johannite Church already had one.

(It should also be mentioned that when I was ordained I desired to take the name in religion of John, but this naturally, was already taken. Little did I know that I would one day get my wish, at great price)

The choice of a Parish patron is never a light one, and in my mind should reflect the nature of the community one is looking to build. Having travelled far to complete my studies, being dedicated to the principle of the Graal and the Sacred Flame, and taking home with me the 2000 year torch of ordination, it did not take long before I settled on the choice of St. Joseph of Arimathea.

There were many (many) months of solitary services for the parish I aspired to watch grow. Planting my aspiration firmly in the stony ground of my home, the wait for a sprout was agonizing. I will not lie- there are many times, as I extinguished the candle that represents the Sacred Flame in our mass where I wondered if it would be the last time that flame would burn. I considered giving up many times.

When people think of leadership, they almost always think of those who can best handle crisis and those of virtue and charisma. I have neither of these. Leadership in my mind is more about having the ability to recognize the people possessing these talents and their desire to use those talents rightly, and giving them the freedom and structure to do so.

Thus, it was the salvation of the one-man-band-parish, that I entered into communication with a Mr. Ken Madden. Ken, a former Lutheran deacon, devoted husband and father, was looking for more and it was his hope that he could find it with the echoing halls of my almost-run-aground foray into growing a church.

Our conversations increased and we began meeting over dinners and lunches to talk about the Apostolic Johannite Church and Gnosticism as well as orthodoxy. After attending many services, and with the fire of vocation kindled and kept ablaze by his wealth of christian experience and ministerial work, Ken decided to enter upon the path of Priestly formation.

It was through his force of will that this desire was able to reach and remain planted in my brain. There was a stretch where I was out of communication for many weeks and months. It wasn't that I had ever lost interest in seeing him enter upon his particular path with the Apostolic Johannite Church but rather that I hadn't yet come enough to grips with my own path with the Johannite Church. I had been named the successor to His Eminence, Iohannes III and was nominated to the Holy Episcopacy.

I have oft repeated that idea (which I believe I got from the writings of Crowley which I had read years before) that one's attainment belongs not to oneself, but to those that will come afterward. I had turned inward for a time looking for the mechanism to cope with the forks unfolding on my path, not knowing that the mechanism for understanding the changes that were happening in my own path was sitting at the other end of the line, wondering why I was wasn't writing him.

It was precisely my interaction with Ken that gave light to my failing hopes and vision. No one knows truly the feel of the water, until one gets their feet wet. Struggling with fear and apprehension at my own unworthiness for the office of Bishop, I was made to see the larger path by leading the steps of one who would follow my own.

When I left for Cincinnati for the Friary's Conclave 2002, at which I would be consecrated Bishop of Alberta under the name in religion of Malachi, I now had a reason to return home that was greater than simple obedience to the mind of the Church I had sworn to serve and the trust I had placed in my own Bishop to guide my steps. My path no longer had any vestige of being my own (not that it should have in my priesthood) and for good or ill, both the ground and the bread I would break would be the guide for others to follow.

In time, I had the distinct pleasure of guiding Ken's steps to the foot of the altar, and with the laying of hands, lighting his own torch to carry back home. There, not to be extinguished, but to be planted as a beacon.

While our gnostic community still very small (about 20 people, who never show up all at the same time), it is very strong. This would not have happened without the efforts of Ken (now Monsignor) Madden.

In an odd sort of way, this path has come around to points where it started, though now I have received a role quite more difficult than any of those I had seen myself take on previously. In time, His Eminence retired from the church, and I got to take my name in religion I had originally desired so much (though in circumstances that when I became a Priest, I did not forsee). Also in time, Msgr. Madden, who has done much to assist me on the path, took over the Priest-in-Charge positon at St. Joseph's. When I became Patriarch of the Apostolic Johannite Church, I named him my successor.

In the end of this little ramble, one thing is clear, that while I did get to take the name John that previously had been unavailable, I wouldn't change the name of our parish for anything. It is for me a symbol that shows, that even in the sometimes cold and wintery expanse of the Path, hope lives.

To Guard or Facilitate?

2005-07-04T10:01:00.000-07:00

(This was originally written by The Most Rev. T Iohannes III- having recently re-read it, and knowing that there are many who never have read it, I am reposting it here.

However, I am adding the question of "Which one are you?- and why?)

TO GUARD OR FACILITATE

I suspect that there are two main types of Gnostic Clergy- the Guardians of a Tradition and the Facilitators of a Process. Each is just as deeply sincere in their work and devotion, but their activity and result are much different.

The Guardian of a Tradition sees themselves at the door of the Mysteries- allowing in only those truly dedicated and deserving, and all the while trying to maintain what they received- just as they have recevied it. Without the Guardians of Tradition much would be lost to us today.

The Facilitator of a Process, however, sees themselves as a fellow-worker. A creative investigator, with a focus on the individual and what works for them, rather than on what works for another, or even themselves. Without the Process Facilitators, our Traditions would have died a stagnant death long ago.

The Guardian of a Tradition can very easily develep a well-intended selfishness. This is my Tradition! They can easily find themselves standing at the doorway to the Mysteries and spending all their time keeping people -out-, until to their dismay they turn around and find no one within the Temple.

The Facilitator of a Process can very easily develop a well-intended watering down, until they offer no more than a jumble of pop-psychology with a few Gnostic terms thrown in for good measure.

These two types need each other. Gnosticism needs both. The Guardians of a Tradition, by focusing on the core and essence of our heritage keep the Facilitators from overly individualizing and watering down to the point of unrecognizable uselessness; the Facilitators keep the Guardians from closing the door to new revelation, fresh possibilities, and the new-now-ness of that noetic apprehension we call Gnosis, by constantly reminding us that the individual, and their unique striving to Awaken in this world of sleep is the reason behind it all in the first place.

Let us all hope that one never gains superiority over the other. Let us all pray that they (in spite of how much they may dislike it) are continually forced to listen to, interact with, and balance each other- lest we wake up one day to find our precious jewel either nothing more than the popular material for so many Coffeetable books- or merely the dusty doctrines of long dead men.

From the other side of the Altar II

2005-06-07T08:24:00.000-07:00

Looking back at myself and through myself, at the time, I didn't understand I how I was going to get through this most pivotal moment of my ordination process- The Mass.

All the sections I had read and re-read (I was up til 3-4am the night before reviewing the mass, not only because I wanted to have it right but because a friend of mine who had travelled with me to film my ordination was hooked on Harry Potter and kept the friggin' light on in the hotel room til way too bloody late) had spilled out my system and were no longer accessible. I had forgotten all the rubrics I had tried to drill into my head.

Somehow, it just didn't matter- everything came together as it should. A few minor mistakes but very smooth otherwise.

As I went into the Anaphora, I was overcome with a sense of everything fitting together, and as I began the Eucharist Prayer itself, I became aware of a feeling in my hands of having the sensation of being 'aflame' as it were- but not in anyway that I can accurately describe beyond that.

(This feeling has continued, without fail, to the present day, every time I celebrate the Liturgy)

After moving through other meaningful and powerful portions of the liturgy (too lengthy to describe here), I came at last to communion itself. This portion of my ordination liturgy had two of my most memorable moments in it, one serious, the other humorous. I have often been asked what the greatest moment of my life has been to date and while the verdict isn't in firmly on any single event, Priesthood is right near the top (if not at the top). It wasn't the act of receiving ordination that was the greatest moment in my ordination but of putting it to use.

After the other clergy and I had communicated, I took the chalice down for the congregation (His Eminence had taken the paten as I have a slight tremor in my hands normally, and when coupled with lack of sleep and well, ordination, to avoid accident we decided this would be best).

"Be what you see, Receive what you are!"

With these words I administered the Cup to the people, and while each was a powerful experience in itself- the feeling became moreso when my good friend Scott came forward receive communion. It floored me. While I can not speak to his feelings on the subject, it was a very powerful experience for me. There were many people there that I did not know, but Scott I knew, and it made my experience more relevant in a fashion than it had been up to that point previously.

The humorous part: When I returned to the Altar to begin the cleansing of the vessels, to my dismay I discovered that too much wine had been poured into the Chalice by His Eminence. I now had on my hands a half full chalice of the Blood of the new and everlasting covenant as it were. Except for extreme cases (in the instance of those who cannot receive the host for whatever reason), the consecrated wine is not to be reserved. It had to consumed then and there.

Needless to say, there was a lot of it, and I was trying to consume it in a way that I could receive most of it in one shot, but not in such a way as to 'chug' the Divine mystery, but on the other hand, I didn't also want to have to take multiple receptions, as it would appear like I was having my own casual libation from the Grail.

In the video footage of my ordination, you can see me looking into the Chalice after having taken what seemed like forever to consume the species. I looked into the chalice to find... there was still more left. The look on my face at this point is of course, priceless. With a pleading look of 'help me' I turned my head to my left and implored His Eminence to rescue me from being a glutton for the Lord.

In retrospect- I should have invited the rest of the clergy to assist me right from the get go (or as Scott put it, not been so chincy on the Blood of the Lord when administering communion in the first place :) )

After the post communion prayers and such, I came to the portion where the new priest blesses the congregation. This is another powerful experience that renews itself everytime I do it. It is an honour.

Now, when I ordain new priests, I add to the feeling that I know they are already experiencing and ask them to give me their blessing. It is always something that I and they, never forget.

From the other side of the Altar- Part I

2005-06-06T21:39:00.000-07:00

Approach every Mass like it is your first, and say it like it is your last..

While reading Fr. Iordanvs' blog over at http://egina.blogspot.com/ and reading his reflections and sketches on his own ordination, I began to reflect on my own.

With two nights of three hours of sleep or less behind me, I entered St. Phillip's Episcopal Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. I was overwhelmed with the very present reality of the step I was about to take. No amount of study, no amount of rehearsal, and no amount of meditation, prayer and reflection could prepare me for the sheer power of the event I was to undergo.

All at once it seemed, I was faced with every facet and aspect of my being- my hopes, my dreams, my shortcomings, my failures- and the great sense of my own unworthiness.

There was nowhere to hide, no place in which I could seek refuge from myself. I came face to face with the whole of myself- for good and ill. Those standing on the outside of such an experience may say 'Well, shouldn't you have come face to face with yourself before approaching such a great responsibility'- to them I say "I thought I had" and the power of this day showed me that I hadn't.

Hope flared anew with the readings for the day, one of which was taken from Isaiah:

" Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. "

It was here that my sense of unworthiness was transformed- not into a sense of worthiness or deserving but rather to one of "I am not perfect but I will do what I can, beacuse I know that I can do no other and no less".
I became the poor women of the parable who could only give two coins, but it was the only coins she had. Great or small, I would pour out my last drop. It was with this determination in mind that I approached the ceremony of my ordination proper.

Let the naysayers and the critics proclaim my unworthiness from the tops of the mountains- I thought, if my own feeble efforts could inspire them to give their all in challenge, then at least, in that respect, my ordination would not be a waste and would serve a greater purpose.

Whole entries devoted to the specific elements of the ritual itself could not properly do the experience I had in them, justice. The placing of the stole on my shoulders, the vesting with the chasuble, the reception of the Chalice and Paten.

Once I was ordained and vested, I was then presented to the congregation and then exchanged the sign of peace with them briefly as Iohannes III sent me to greet them.

It was after this, when I began my walk back towards the sanctuary that time slowed down..

Each step felt pronounced, and my focus centered on the Altar, getting nearer and nearer.

Everything I had just undergone, like layers of an onion peeled back to reveal more layers, suddenly became more pronounced and more present. Priesthood is never something that should stand alone unto itself, it gains and renews it's purpose and meaning by exercising it, by making it present through service, by serving. It exists not to serve itself.

Where is part II of Personal Responsibility?

2005-05-30T08:40:00.000-07:00

("..and coming in for Team Heresy": The Rev. Msgr. Ken Madden, Mar Iohannes IV, and the newly-minted Rev. Fr. Iordanvs. )

Warning: This entry has positive overtones and even compliments and should be avoided by those who have a strong aversion to seeing me come across as a 'nice guy' (or attempting to).

Part II will be coming, but if it came now I would just be forcing it as I have a host of other things on my ecclesiastical brain right now.

For now- I want to talk to you briefly about The Rev. Fr. Iordanvs+, better known to the world as Jordan Stratford. I had the distinct pleasure of ordaining Fr. Iordanvs to the Sacred Order of the Priesthood. Having ordained a few priests in my time as a Bishop and the Primate/Patriarch of the Apostolic Johannite Church- I find that this is an experience that never diminishes itself.

Ordination is the passing of a 2000 year old torch, a 'sweet but heavy burden' that remains and abides for eternity. Tu es sacerdos in aeternum.

The ordination of Fr. Iordanvs was a particularily moving experience for me, knowing the dedication and committment of Fr. Iordanvs to answering his Calling. An important factor for myself in examining candidates for the Priesthood is that of 'Are they functioning as a priest in all but name- that is to say, are they teaching, helping, administering compassion etc'. In many ways this was more about the Apostolic Johannite Church answering his Calling than he of his own, because he had already been doing this in fact, if not in name.

Personal Responsibililty - Part One

2005-04-14T09:20:00.000-07:00

Personal responsibility

This is, without a doubt in my mind, the most important point in Jordan Stratford's Ten Points.

If a level of personal responsibility exists in the present and future generations of Gnostics, then we can be assured that Praxis and Caritas get the attention they deserve. After that-everything else in the Ten Points become easy (relatively) to accomplish.

It is all too easy to abdicate our spiritual lives and responsibilities to 'authority' figures and the teachers of the world. People are always looking to be told where to go and what to do, and even why.

Religious and moral traditions are accepted at face value by many. Lacking an understanding of why they do what they do, or even the reasons it was done in the first place, they focus on goals they don't understand, walking paths without knowingwhere they place their feet.

A solid Gnostic communion needs both firm direction and active participation.

A community does not stand firm because each person derives their support and integrity from the people and parts therein connected. It stands because each person and element is a solid-foundation unto itself. The convictions and efforts of the many, abused and misdirected by leaders lacking ethical integrity, sets the whole structure of the community on a dangerous
platform akin to a well built ship being lead by an inept or, worse, corrupt captain.

On the other hand- a leader with integrity and charism for directing an ecclesia, but blindly followed by a community of people whose motivation, spirtual impetus and integrity are abdicated to that leader is equally destined for failure. In this case it is like a poorly crafted ship with a reliable captain. They fail themselves because they lack the enegry derived from
conscious and active participation that would not only enable the vision of the leader to become reality but would ensure that they do not become trapped in the gravity and limitations of that very vision. Conscious and active participation ensures that the experience retains its relevance and vitality- it's "now-newness".

Thus it is incumbent on every gnostic to cultivate and maintain personal responsibility and awareness.

Curiously though, there seems to be little in the way of building strong individual Gnostics, especially with the supposed understanding that such is a key to a better community. When questioned about these things most will naturally say 'Yes, I agree completely'. This is no different than a person who is nodding off and you ask them 'Are you sleeping'- to which they
will straighten up and say " No, I am not. Just resting my eyes" (A similar example is given in P.D. Ouspensky's The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution whereby if you question some one who is non-aware as to the state of their non-awareness, they will become for a short time, aware).

Given the fact that everyone -knows- what has to be done (or at least I would like to think they do, but I am not sure if that optimism is to their credit or mine), why are they not doing it, and what are they doing in the meantime.

Refering once again to Ouspensky's Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution, the point is made that the first step and realization in Awareness is the realization that one was previously unaware. The Gnostic Ecclesia do nothing because this would require an admission that they have been doing it wrong, for a long, long time.

What have the Gnostic Ecclesia been doing all this time? Where has their Awareness and personal responsibility taken them in this time?

The focus to date has been in equal parts a scramble for identity and a scramble for power neither of which has created a dash for integrity.

The scramble for identity has been occurring for years- as more attention is drawn to alternative spirituality, esotericism and gnosticism, there has been a scramble to quickly step in the limelight of this pop culture and say 'That's us, yep, that's us'. Yet when the public turns its face towards the Gnostic Ecclesia, they see something that is confused and disheveled. Roman Catholic Churches with new age and Gnostic terms thrown in for good measure, with little understanding as to what those gnostic concepts really mean on the one hand and not even a sound theological or historical understanding of what their all too apparent Roman Catholic tradition means.

The scramble for power is evident when you read any of the writings on the histories of this movement. A cursory reading of any of them shows how quick each Gnostic group is given to schism, separation and power plays. A deeper reading shows a sad trend towards historical revisionism of the worst kind, manipulating history quietly to support one's jurisdictional
supremacy. Supremacy? What supremacy? The right to call one's church the supreme and foremost exponent of a movement that is confused, cannibalistic and sorely lacking in education?

Is this what they are fighting over?

The lack of pastoral training and personal responsibility has created a gross misunderstanding of the nature of power. Power does not exist to serve itself or it's own ends. Power exists to ensure the better enactment and fulfillment of responsibility. It enables one to serve better, not less.

10 Steps Toward a Gnostic Communion: A Call for Dialogue

2005-04-10T20:13:00.000-07:00

I had the pleasure of talking with Jordan Stratford over at Ecclesia Gnostica in Nova Albion
about his latest entry (the title of which I have repeated for this entry).

He asked me which of the ten points would be the trickiest in terms of accomplishing.
This is simple: Points 2 and 10

Here's why:

Starting with Point 10 first- (point 2 to be done in a separate entry)

10) Praxis and Caritas

We are people, dealing with people. Caritas and Praxis are extremely important. The focus here is on Communion- yet many miss the basic elements of what it really means to have communion with anything.

The success of such a Communion rests in hands of a simple concept: service.

Let's be frank and not kid ourselves here- You cannot separate your own path as a entity to itself, isolated and free from both interference with the world at large and free from giving interference with the world at large. Every change or lack thereof within the human condition and Being has a direct effect, for good or ill, on everything around you.

Your success in understanding yourself or your subsequent failure produces great effect. If we are to get anywhere towards service for fellow man it has to be with the understanding that all achievement and attainment in one's own path does not belong to one alone. If your achievements or attainments are not turned towards the purpose of service, then they are ornamental and without value, merit or benefit- no different than the fig tree cursed by the Master.

There is a trend in Gnostic Churches to view Holy Orders as nothing more than a series of Initiations. Indeed, in many Gnostic Churches you can't be a real or first class Gnostic without such. The laity appear to be at best an audience for playing Church 'dress-up' and at worst, the unwashed and unenlightened distraction at weekly services.

(Even this frank and negative portrayal of many Gnostic groups gives them almost a wholly unfounded benefit of the doubt- that they even have regular services or regular interaction with community.)

Indeed, the Gnostic movement is rife with special events clergy, who attire themselves for every 'Holy Gnostic Synod' and marathon exchanges of filiations and successions, yet in their day to day life seem to forget their holy calling and their purpose.

The people that matter are lost in the inbetween times, the sick that cannot come for communion, the downtrodden and depressed brethren unable to meet basic needs due to unfortunate circumstance, the people who would unburden themselves and their thoughts if only they had an ear that would listen.

These people aren't looking for Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Grand Masters, the Illuminati or even the Rotary.. they are looking for a friend.

If we cannot meet them at this level, then attempting to meet them at any other level is but futile and ultimately self-serving ego gratification.

This means meeting them 'on the level' as our equals (for indeed the Divine Spark makes them such), with a willingness to accept contribution, give contribution and recognize the presence of both. There is no second class Gnostic.

Beginnings

2005-04-10T19:33:00.000-07:00

While I have another blog on another hosting service that deals with friends, family and personal reflections from a basic life stand point, it doesn't seem the type of place to discuss my thoughts on religion, gnosis and such.

This will be that place.