About the Church of the Holy Archangels

The Church of the Holy Archangels is an independent ministry in the process of affiliation with the Home Temple under the jurisdiction of Bishop Lewis Keizer.

In form we are part of the Independent Catholic movement, with lines of authority from most if not all of the surviving branches of apostolic succession. We administer the sacraments to any who wish to receive them, without membership or doctrinal requirements and without charge.

We have no fixed body of dogma, but reverence the Master Jesus. We believe his gift to us consisted primarily in spiritual power and transformation, rather than a set of statements of belief.

Our understanding of the spiritual world is not bound by any one tradition, but is influenced by many traditions, including orthodox Christianity, Gnosticism, Vedantism and other Eastern philosophies, and the teaching of various Esoteric Schools.

A Poem

Posted on November 4, 2007 by Reverend Keith

Footnote To Howl
by Allen Ginsberg

Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy!
Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy! Holy!
The world is holy! The soul is holy! The skin is holy!
The nose is holy! The tongue and cock and hand
and asshole holy!
Everything is holy! everybody’s holy! everywhere is
holy! everyday is in eternity! Everyman’s an
angel!
The bum’s as holy as the seraphim! the madman is
holy as you my soul are holy!
The typewriter is holy the poem is holy the voice is
holy the hearers are holy the ecstasy is holy!
Holy Peter holy Allen holy Solomon holy Lucien holy
Kerouac holy Huncke holy Burroughs holy Cas-
sady holy the unknown buggered and suffering
beggars holy the hideous human angels!
Holy my mother in the insane asylum! Holy the cocks
of the grandfathers of Kansas!
Holy the groaning saxophone! Holy the bop
apocalypse! Holy the jazzbands marijuana
hipsters peace & junk & drums!
Holy the solitudes of skyscrapers and pavements! Holy
the cafeterias filled with the millions! Holy the
mysterious rivers of tears under the streets!
Holy the lone juggernaut! Holy the vast lamb of the
middle class! Holy the crazy shepherds of rebell-
ion! Who digs Los Angeles IS Los Angeles!
Holy New York Holy San Francisco Holy Peoria &
Seattle Holy Paris Holy Tangiers Holy Moscow
Holy Istanbul!
Holy time in eternity holy eternity in time holy the
clocks in space holy the fourth dimension holy
the fifth International holy the Angel in Moloch!
Holy the sea holy the desert holy the railroad holy the
locomotive holy the visions holy the hallucina-
tions holy the miracles holy the eyeball holy the
abyss!
Holy forgiveness! mercy! charity! faith! Holy! Ours!
bodies! suffering! magnanimity!
Holy the supernatural extra brilliant intelligent
kindness of the soul!

About The Church of the Holy Archangels

Posted on April 20, 2007 by Reverend Keith

The Church of the Holy Archangels is an independent ministry in the process of affiliation with the Home Temple under the jurisdiction of Bishop Lewis Keizer.

We have no fixed body of dogma, but reverence the Master Jesus. We believe his gift to us consisted primarily in spiritual power and transformation, rather than a set of statements of belief.

The Life and Times of Satan

Posted on March 16, 2007 by Reverend Keith

In the collection of sources that went into the Bible, there were several different perspectives regarding Satan and the role of evil in the world. In fact, the book of Job is an all-out argument right in the pages of scripture between several of these competing views. Israel was in a unique position to experience and ponder the problem of evil because they lived in a land that was a crossroads between Egypt on one side and Asia and Mesopotamia on the other. During much of their history they were constantly conquered or invaded by one ambitious empire after another.

Before this period, God’s attitude toward Abraham and his descendents is one of unqualified benevolence:

Now Yahweh said to Abram, Get out of your country, and from your relatives, and from your fathers house, to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation. I will bless you and make your name great. You will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you. All of the families of the earth will be blessed in you. (Genesis 12:1-3 WEB)

God continues to bless Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in spite of their personal failings and problems.

The “Prophetic” View

As Israel began to experience repeated conquests by their neighbors, a religious question arose. If God promised to bless Israel and give them their land as a possession forever (see Gen 13:15), why were they often conquered and subjugated by their neighbors? The answer that developed has been called the “Prophetic” view of good and evil. God blesses Israel when they obey him, but he is prepared to punish them when they do NOT obey him.

Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse: the blessing, if you shall listen to the commandments of Yahweh your God, which I command you this day; and the curse, if you shall not listen to the commandments of Yahweh your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which you have not known. (Deuteronomy 11:26-28 WEB)

Remember that Deuteronomy was written long after the fact. The Deuteronomist (possibly Jeremiah) was looking back at Israel’s history from the perspective of repeated periods of suffering. Also notice that the blessings and curses are entirely physical, in there here-and-now. For example:

“I command you this day to love Yahweh your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, that you may live and multiply, and that Yahweh your God may bless you in the land where you go in to possess it.” (Deuteronomy 30:16 WEB)

The reward for obedience to God was not heavenly happiness. It was life, possessions, and posterity. Physical prosperity and happiness was the sign of God’s favor. Physical misfortune was the sign of God’s displeasure.

Also at this time, the concept of “Satan” began to occur in scripture. We are used to thinking of the serpent in the garden of Eden as the first appearance of Satan, but this is a later association. In the primitive original story, the serpent is only a serpent. “Satan” originally meant simply “adversary”. For example, in 1 Samuel 29:4, The Philistines are worried that if they take David into battle with them against Israel (David is serving the Philistines at that time) he will turn on them in battle and become a “satan” (an adversary).

God sends angels as “satans” to either oppose or test various individuals. In Numbers 22, for example, God sends an angel as a “satan” against Balaam, to prevent him from cursing Israel.

Gods anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of Yahweh placed himself in the way for an adversary [Hebrew = “satan”] against him. Now he was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. (Numbers 22:22 WEB)

In one case, God himself acts as the “satan”. We read:

Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1 WEB)

But in a parallel version of the text, we read:

Again the anger of Yahweh was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them, saying, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2 Samuel 24:1 WEB)

Was it Satan, or Yahweh, who moved David to number Israel? It was God, acting as an adversary (satan) against David. He was, in other words, testing David.

Satan as God’s Prosecutor.

By the time the book of Job is written, the view is beginning to shift again. There have been various religious reforms in Judah and Israel, and even during periods of religious righteousness, the people continue to suffer from invading armies on several sides. Physical misfortunes don’t seem to be confined only to the wicked. The good suffer also. The book of Job addresses this issue.

Job, whom we are told is an entirely righteous man, suffers horrible calamities. He looses his children, his livestock, his health. His friends, echoing the prophets and the book of Deuteronomy, insist that if Job is suffering, he must have done something to anger God.

Is it for your piety that he reproves you, that he enters with you into judgment?
Isnt your wickedness great? Neither is there any end to your iniquities. (Job 22:4-5 WEB)

What Job’s friends don’t know, of course, is that Job is suffering at the hand of “Satan”. Instead of being just an occasional role filled by whatever angel is convenient, however, the role of “Satan” now seems to be a full-time position. Satan is seen as the chief prosecutor of the court of heaven. He is still an honored member of the “sons of God”, the highest angels. But his role is now to seek out unrighteousness and bring it to God’s attention for punishment, and to test even the righteous with trials.

Now it happened on the day when God’s sons came to present themselves before Yahweh, that Satan also came among them. Yahweh said to Satan, Where have you come from? Then Satan answered Yahweh, and said, From going back and forth in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. Yahweh said to Satan, Have you considered my servant, Job? For there is none like him in the earth, a blameless and an upright man, one who fears God, and turns away from evil. Then Satan answered Yahweh, and said, Does Job fear God for nothing? Haven’t you made a hedge around him, and around his house, and around all that he has, on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. But put forth your hand now, and touch all that he has, and he will renounce you to your face. Yahweh said to Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your power. Only on himself don’t put forth your hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of Yahweh.
(Job 1:6-12 WEB)

We see here the beginnings of what will come to be called the “Apocalyptic” worldview. The good can expect to suffer in this life as a test of their faith. God will eventually make things right. In Job God shows up personally in the last chapter in a “personal” apocalypse, and makes everything right. But Job also begins to hint at the fact that not everything may end up justly resolved in this life. The unwarranted suffering of the righteous may require rewards AFTER this life.

For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: (Job 19:25-26 KJV)

These rewards are still seen in terms of a physical resurrection. They are still physical rewards – but postponed until the resurrection.

The Apocalyptic View

After the Babylonian captivity, the returning exiles rebuilt Jerusalem in a spirit of religious purification and reform. The Torah was codified and followed rigorously. And yet in spite of unprecedented religious purity and righteousness, Judea soon experienced some of the worst persecution of its history at the hands of the Seleucid Empire. Antiochus, ruler of the Empire, prohibited Jewish religious practices, and punished any demonstrations of Jewish piety with unprecedented cruelty. Jewish scriptures were burned and even women and children tortured and killed for refusing to sacrifice to pagan idols.

During this period, the “Apocalyptic” worldview came to full flower. It seemed obvious that a righteous God would not willingly order such atrocities toward the pious simply as a test. Borrowing perhaps from the Zoroastrian dualism to which they had been exposed by the Persians, the Jews began to see Satan not as the prosecuting attorney of heaven – but a fallen angel in total rebellion against God. This idea of fallen angels begins to appear in Daniel, which was written at the time of the persecutions of Antiochus. An angel is sent to Daniel, but is delayed due to having to fight off the “prince” (a fallen angelic governor) of Persia.

But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; but, behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me: and I remained there with the kings of Persia. (Daniel 10:13 WEB)

This is also one of the first mentions of Michael the Archangel. The introduction of angelic names and hierarchies – also a favorite topic of the Persians, would proliferate in later years.

Daniel is also filled with apocalyptic visions. God would eventually destroy the kingdoms of the world and set up his own. Until then, the righteous could expect persecution, because of the evil angelic powers – but God would reward them in the resurrection. For example, in 2nd Maccabees, an inter-testamental writing from this period, we read of seven brothers who were tortured to death for refusing to violate religious law. He says to his tormenters:

So when he was ready to die he said thus, It is good, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God to be raised up again by him: as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to life. (2 Maccabees 7:14 KJVA)

We begin to see that God will not only reward the righteous in the resurrection, but punish the wicked. This theme is amplified in another intertestamental writing, 1 Enoch.
Then I looked and turned myself to another part of the earth, where I beheld a deep valley burning with fire. To this valley they brought monarchs and the mighty. And there my eyes beheld the instruments which they were making, fetters of iron without weight (or of immeasurable weight) Then I inquired of the angel of peace, who proceeded with me, saying, For whom are these fetters and instruments prepared? He replied, These are prepared for the host of Azazeel, that they may be delivered over and adjudged to the lowest condemnation; and that their angels may be overwhelmed with hurled stones, as the Lord of spirits has commanded. Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel shall be strengthened in that day, and shall then cast them into a furnace of blazing fire, that the Lord of spirits may be avenged of them for their crimes; because they became ministers of Satan, and seduced those who dwell upon earth. ( 1 Enoch 53: 1-6)
Here we have the concept of a hell of burning fire. Satan also has been “promoted” to the head of the fallen angels.

The Gnostic View

Things continued to be difficult for the Jews under the Roman Empire, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD. This event crushed the hopes of the most pious Jews. In a world that at times seemed utterly evil, some of the Jews began to question the wisdom of God in permitting such a situation. Combining influences of earlier philosophies, Jewish and Christian Gnostics took the next step past the apocalyptic viewpoint. The righteous suffered, said the Gnostics, not because evil was a test permitted by a good God, and not because a powerful fallen angel was on the loose opposing a good God. The righteous suffered because the God who had created the material world itself and all the powers that controlled it was an EVIL God (or at best, an incompetent one). This “Demiurge” had been created by a cosmic accident. He had incompetently created the world and ruled over it, demanding worship and obedience. To a number of these Gnostics – Satan basically WAS the God of the Old Testament. Satan had created the world and given the Old Testament law – demanding worship as the one and only God.

But above him was a TRUE God, of complete goodness and pure light. The true God, taking pity on the tortured creation of the Demiurge, had sent messengers into the world to show the way to escape from the clutches of the evil God of the material world.

The Apocryphon of John describes this incompetent creator:

"Now the archon who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas, and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come.”

The Gnostic equating of Satan with the Demiurge or god of this world has it’s echos even in the New Testament writings

I will no more speak much with you, for the prince of the world comes, and he has nothing in me. (John 14:30 WEB)

For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the worlds rulers of the darkness of this age, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
(Ephesians 6:12 WEB)

in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the Good News of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn on them. (2 Corinthians 4:4 WEB)

We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
(1 John 5:19 WEB)

The Gnostic view also regarded the next life as entirely spiritual. The physical world was evil, and so a physical resurrection made no sense.

Summary

To review, then, the conception of Satan has undergone considerable change in Biblical and extra-biblical writings, going hand in hand with a change in worldview and the perception of Evil. These changes can be summarized as follows:

The conception of Satan:

Primitive: An occasional role of God or his angels.
Prophetic: God’s official prosecutor.
Apocalyptic: A cosmic rebel against God.
Gnostic: The evil or incompetent creator of the world.

Conception of evil:

Primitive: An occasional fact of life.
Prophetic: God’s punishment.
Apocalyptic: Part of Satan’s civil war.
Gnostic: The primary nature of the material world.

Conception of rewards/punishments

Primitive: Earthly – unconditional
Prophetic: Earthly – conditional
Apocalyptic: Future earthly – conditional
Gnostic: Future spiritual – conditional

States of Consciousness

Posted on December 11, 2006 by Reverend Keith

What is the place of symbols in spirituality? Myth and symbol have an important role in nourishing the human spirit. I’m very comfortable myself with “sacramentalism” – with using items in the physical world as symbols of and vehicles of divine power, grace and knowledge. This might be a good time to bring up the different “states” of consciousness that can impact spirituality.

Studying the record of mystical experiences over time and across cultures, we find that there are basically four different “states” of mystical experience that are available to all people. These manifest as “peak experiences” of four general kinds. However, in spite of the similarity of these states as they are experienced by different people – the states will be INTERPRETED according to the level that person is at, spiritually. Here’s what the four states look like:

Nature mysticism. This state is experienced as a profound sense of the unity, aliveness and wonder of the natural world and our connection to it. The whole world seems alive with beauty and meaning. We also feel a unity with all other human beings. People can often be pulled into this sort of state while gazing at the night sky, for example, or climbing a mountain. It is a spiritual state often associated with such paths as new-age paganism or Native American spirituality but is also seen in the writer of the psalms and St Francis of Assisi.

“Subtle” mysticism (or “deity” mysticism) This state corresponds in some ways to the dream state. People experience visions and apparitions. Angels, spiritual guides, gods and other non-material beings are seen, and reality becomes fluid and dream-like. The person becomes aware of a “higher” spiritual order behind the world of form and substance. This spiritual state has examples in many spiritual paths – from Ezekiel to Carlos Castaneda to Paul on the road to Damascus.
“Causal” mysticism (or “formless” mysticism). In this state, external objects and even spiritual objects fade and one is immersed in an infinite abyss of light, love and formless, timeless emptiness. This is also paradoxically a fullness – or an abyss so deep that all fullness is within it. You are one with this fullness and light, and experience it as your true self. There are many examples of descriptions of such states from the Gnostics, the Sufi, the Cabbalists, the Buddhists, the Christians mystics such as Eckhart, etc.
Non-dual mysticism. This state unifies the others. One sees the manifest world of things and forms as an expression of the formless emptiness – and one sees in the formless emptiness the potential for all the manifest forms, physical and spiritual. You are the vast emptiness in which all manifest forms arise and fade, and you are the forms themselves.

One’s “God view” can change considerably in each of these states. A form or symbol of God that is highly meaningful in the subtle state can become trivial or even an impediment in the causal state. In the non-dual state, God is seen in all the symbols as well as in the emptiness devoid of symbols.

Gemstones of the Archangels

Posted on September 17, 2006 by Reverend Keith

There are many many different lists of archangels and their corresponding associations. Here is a list of archangels used by Doreen Virtue in her angel work, together with their correspondig gemstones:

Jeremiel amethyst

Raphael emerald or malachite

Chamuel greel fluorite

Uriel amber

Metatron watermelon tourmaline

Zadkiel lapis lazuli

Raguel aquamarine

Raziel clear quartz

Jophiel pink rubelite (or other dark pink crystal)

Azrael calcite

Ariel rose quartz

Gabriel citrine (or copper)

Michael sugalite

Sandalphon turquoise

Haniel moonstone

Yes, that seems to add up to 15, which isn't a number I'm familiar with, but when working with angels, expect a lot of variation in the information.

The Latest Home Temple Questions

Posted on September 16, 2006 by Reverend Keith

>1. What are the seven spirits of God?

Actually, there is some disagreement about that. The Home Temple uses the menorah, not because there are any specific spirits that are invoked, but because of its association with temple Judaism. However, there is some indication in scripture that the temple menorah was associated with “the seven spirits of God” Revelation 4:5 "From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder. Before the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits of God." Since the temple menorah had seven lamps, this seems like a reasonable association. As to what the “seen spirits of God” actually ARE, speculation abounds. They may be seven aspects of the Holy Spirit (See Isaiah 11:2) or seven archangels, or seraphim or cherubim. Or they may represent the seven (anciently known) planets. Or all of the above. For example, they could represent angels who also govern planetary bodies who are also associated with specific aspects of God's spirit. If anyone has the definitive answer, I don't know it yet.

>2. Do the three bases of the menorah have the same symbolic meaning as the three candlestands in a Masonic Lodge?

Unfortunately, I was careless with the preceding answer. There are FOUR bases on the stand and FOUR kabbalistic worlds. So the answer would be no. However, for the record, Bishop Kiezer is active in a modified and synthesized form of Masonry called Pansophic Freemasonry which is open to both genders. I know little about it and have not yet participated in it. I only say this only to make it clear that I don't expect he'd be in the least adverse to appealing to Masonic symbolism if the occasion warranted.

>3. How does Jesus Christ fit into the Shema Israel?

He's not specifically mentioned in that particular prayer. “Hear oh Israel – the LORD thy God, the LORD is one” For that matter, he's not mentioned specifically in the Lords Prayer. But he's clearly central to the Liturgy.

>4. In re your description of the resonators of the power of the ritual, is this what is meant by vibrations?

I don't think I actually used that word. I said: “An emphasis is placed on the musical tones and specific sounds intoned, as these are believed to be important resonators of the power of the ritual” What I meant is that specific musical tones and vocal sounds are believed to have various spiritual effects which augment the other spiritual benefits of the Mass. This is a rather complex field in which I am only a neophyte. I hope to improve my knowledge of it.

>5. Do you ever actually hear a voice or voices at your liturgy, or is everything that takes place interior?

No, I haven't. The only time I've quite distinctly heard an actual disembodied voice, that I recall, was during a morning family devotional. We were quite throughly Roman Catholic at the time, and several of us heard a rather resonant “Amen” after the Fatima prayers during the Rosary. It was a bit startling. I've often had inner impressions of various sorts during prayers and liturgies, but except for that occasion nothing on the physical plane.

>6. Is the nacham a ritual of Judaism from the Kabbalah or from the time of Christ?

I'm afraid I don't know if the gesture itself is ancient or recent. “Nacham”in Hebrew indicates repentance or submission to God. The right arm (representing the ego or lower self) is placed across the chest touching the left shoulder, and covered by the left arm touching the right shoulder while making a slight bow. This indicates the submission of our personal will to that of God. I'm told by several from the Eastern Rite that this is how they receive communion – which is ironic, as it is the gesture adopted by the modern Western Rite to indicate “I'm not receiving communion, just give me a blessing”.

>7. Your understanding of the nature of sacraments is actually much better than the understanding a lot of Catholics hold, though it is the same understanding that is taught in our catechism.

Thank you.

>8. According to Gershom Scholem, I believe Merkabah mysticism was being taught at the time Christ walked the earth. Kabbalah, however, is from the Middle Ages. The Roman Catholic Church condemned the mysticism borrowed from the Kabbalah.

Traditional Jewish practitioners, of course, believe the concepts of the Kabbalah date back to Adam, but it certainly didn't exist in present form till the middle ages. On re-reading, I see how my sentence on this was confusing. Jesus, the early Jewish mystics, and the early Jewish Gnostics had access to a body of mystical teaching which by that time was called Merkabah, and which only later became the seed for the more extensive concepts of Kabbalah. Although the Roman Catholic condemnations don't persuade me, as I find many Kabbalistic concepts very helpful and profound, I'd be interested in reading them.

>9. Are ascended masters what Catholics call saints?

The concept is similar and there is probably some overlap in the groups, but ascended masters are primarily those of various esoteric traditions who are believed to have achieved great spiritual progress and enlightenment, and who guide and help humanity. The concept is, I believe, primarily a Rosicrucian/Theosophical one.

>10. What is the difference between theurgy and magic?

As I understand it, Theurgy is the work of using instruments or vehicles of divine power to achieve divine purposes – particularly union with God. Some esotericists would describe the Mass as an example of Theurgy. Magic tends to indicate that the instruments, vehicles and purposes of the operation may be less than divine in some way. Some would say that Theurgy is always under the umbrella of “Thy will be done”, whereas magic is more of a direct imposition of the human will. However, at some levels it is more difficult to distinguish the two, as the Higher Self is an expression of the divine.

>11. I have downloaded and printed Dr. Keizer's book on Wandering Bishops. In there he refers to C. W. Leadbeater as a saint. I'm sure you know that he had some difficulties with a young boy, or with several young boys, depending upon the source of reference. Yet Dr. Keizer has labeled Leadbeater a saint in the book. While it is true that we have had bad popes, we have not canonized them.

Actually, I only recently became aware of Leadbeater, and about the accusations against him I only know what I could quickly Google. Leadbeater is by no means a “saint” in the sense of having passed through a complex canonical process proving his heroic virtue – having his own feast day – being mentioned in the prayers of the Mass – being invoked for intercessory prayer, etc. No such process exists for the Independent movement. As far as I can tell, Kiezer uses this term informally and generally meaning “mystic” – someone advanced in esoteric knowledge and ability. Leadbeater certainly was this. However, Bishop Keizer only labels Leadbeater a “saint” in one of the photos, and in the text says that he was “…more scientist than saint”. If the worst of the accusations against him are correct (and I have no way of knowing that they are) then he certainly should not be regarded as heroically virtuous. I understand that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't canonize the Borgia, but there have certainly been several individuals who have not made it through the process (or partially through the process) without considerable opposition and accusation. I'm sure you can think of a couple names.

>.12. Have many Catholics joined the Home Temple Movement? Have former Catholic priests joined the Home Temple Movement?

I know of some Catholics that have joined. I know of several people who were ordained in other jurisdictions and denominations who have joined, but I'm not directly aware of any Catholic priests. But as I said, this is a small, home-church movement, and I don't know the exact number who consider themselves affiliated.

More questions on Home Temple…

Posted on September 15, 2006 by Reverend Keith

My previous answers generated a number of additional questions from Carrie. Isn’t that the way of things? Let me see if I can manage an answer to them. This time I’ll just quote, rather than paraphrasing the questions.

>1. Other than praying in Hebrew, what do you mean by "Jewish and Kabbalistic elements" that you have added to the liturgy?

The training liturgy, rubrics, vestments and accoutrements of the Home Temple include the following:

1. The chalice and paten we use initially are the cup and plate used in a Jewish seder.

2. The stole worn is the Jewish prayer shawl, or tallit.

3. A seven-branched menorah is used on the altar. In addition to the seven candlesticks representing the seven spirits of God, the menorah rests on three bases which are taken as representing the three kabalistic worlds.

4. As mentioned, many of the regular prayers of the Mass are done in Hebrew. For example, “Holy, Holy, Holy” becomes “Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh”.

5. In addition, several traditional Jewish prayers are encorporated, for example, the “Shema Israel” (“Hear, oh Israel”)

6. An emphasis is placed on the musical tones and specific sounds intoned, as these are believed to be important resonators of the power of the ritual.

7. A number of prayers are added and wording adapted to a more mystical understanding of the Mass as a union of our hearts with the heart of God and Christ.

8. Several traditional gestures and postures (such as the “nacham” – crossing the hands over the chest) are added.

These elements are part, as I said, of the training Liturgy. After being ordained, priests are given a great deal of independence and allowed to use whatever liturgy, vestments and Mass accoutrements they wish. They are perfectly free, for example, to use the full traditional Latin Rite regalia and say the Tridentine Latin Mass.

There are several purposes to having these elements in the training Mass which improve the quality of whichever liturgy is eventually used. First of all, Jesus was (if you’ll pardon me stating the obvious) Jewish. Understanding his spiritual traditions is critical to understanding what Jesus taught. The early Jewish Merkabah mysticism, with which Jesus was very likely involved, is the spiritual ancestor to the Kaballah, and many of the concepts were passed down to it.

Secondly, the training Liturgy teaches (would that the Liturgical reformers in the RC understood this) that Liturgy operates through symbols of spiritual power. Sounds, smells, gestures and movements all convey spiritual meanings above the understanding of the conscious mind. Introducing too much mental noise and discursion –such as lengthy sermons – into liturgy only disrupts the spiritual flow. Even having too much vernacular language encourages mental, rather than spiritual participation. The purpose of Liturgy is primarily to nourish the spirit, not the mind. The Home Temple training liturgy teaches this to the student.

>2. Is Martinism, and the Home Temple Movement in particular, a Jewish Movement?

I understand that you are anxious for information on Martinism. Unfortunately I have little to give. I am not myself involved in Martinism. Bishop Kiezer, – who is a virtual walking encyclopedia regarding the western mystery traditions, schools and orders – has, I believe, gone through at least some of the Martinist degrees, as well as those of most of the other initiatic schools. He has synthesized his information into an initiatic school in which Home Temple students are encouraged (but not required) to participate – the Temple of the Holy Grail (or T.H.G.) I have received the initiation and several of the first “empowerments” of this order, but am not qualified to tell you which concepts were derived from which initiatic schools or which elements (if any) are particularly Martinistic. Bishop Kiezer does offer an online class in the Western Mystery Tradition which probably covers Martinism at least in broad outline, and I intend on eventually taking the class when time and finances permit. It is available at www.wisdomseminars.org

I would guess that the reason many of the initiatic orders have an interest in Judiasm is that the earlier Merkabah and later Kabalistic mysticism of Judiasm was borrowed upon heavily by western and Christian mystics from shortly after the time of Jesus. Jesus himself was very likely acquainted with these concepts. Jewish mysticism was incorporated into both Jewish and Christian Gnosticism, and later by most other western mystery schools.

The Home Temple priesthood training puts a lot of emphasis on Jewish language and thought – because this is the only way to hope to recover the full meanings of many of Jesus' teachings.

>3. Do you have a congregation, or do you perform liturgy for just your own family?

I am recently ordained, so until now I have only performed the liturgy for family and close friends. We will probably start to branch out to a slightly larger group now. If the home church arrangement becomes too cramped we can rent some space – but I don’t expect we’ll ever be a very large group except perhaps for special events.

>4. Since you don't embrace doctrine, how does the Movement develop a moral code, and how do you enforce it?

It’s hard to answer this one briefly, but I’ll try. First of all, on the level of the ordained priesthood, there IS a basic code of ethics which all priesthood students must agree to and sign, which can be found here: http://www.hometemple.org/Ethics.htm This very basic level of ethical conduct is primarily designed to keep the Home Temple free of legal difficulties and open scandal. Violations are investigated by a court of Bishops, and anyone found guilty of violating them will have their charter and ministerial credentials revoked and be removed from any association with the Home Temple. Evidence of any crimes will be turned over to authorities.

Part of the code of ethics is that priests are bound to not allow to go unchallenged the physical or emotional abuse or violation of people or other living things or the commission of crimes. Beyond a well-defined crime, however, one is left to one’s inner guidance regarding personal and social evils and one’s response to them.

The Home Temple encourages an evening contemplation of the day’s actions and deep meditation upon beneficial changes in behavior. Fundamentally, the whole point of a Gnostic or illuminated approach to spirituality is an inner transformation. An enlightened individual doesn’t need to be told not to abuse children or commit acts of violence. It is virtually impossible for the enlightened individual to behavior in any way but for the greater good of all. Anyone who requires a multi-volume encyclopedia of moral theology to know right from wrong probably won’t be attracted to the Home Temple.

>5. Since you don't wish to be under the jurisdiction of Rome, why are valid orders and valid succession important?

In the first place, valid orders aren’t simply an invention of Rome. They represent a powerful spiritual endowment from Jesus. Priesthood is a real power to effect real spiritual change which is transmitted at ordination. Sacraments are not simply symbols. They transmit actual spiritual grace and power. A comprehensive and valid lineage of priesthood is the assurance that this spiritual endowment is actually being transmitted.

In the second place, INVALID orders present obstacles to attempts by apostolic churches to cooperate, confederate or unify. While this goal is always illusive, it remains a fond hope of many.

>6. Do members of the Movement practice channeling and attempt to evoke spirits?

First of all, your question would only pertain to the Temple of the Holy Grail. The Home Temple priesthood does not require participation on the THG and instruction is confined to the strictly sacramental. However, since I’ve done some work with THG, I’ll answer from that perspective.

Channeling is taught to be dangerous and spiritually immature and destructive. I have not run into any practices I would describe as “evoking spirits”. Angels, Ascended Masters and such are INVOKED, or called upon for assistance, but not called up and commanded. There are operations with aquasters, elementals and similar things which would probably qualify as, at the minimum, theurgical if not magical.

>7. What should those of us on the outside looking in make of the fact that Eugene Vintras is in the Martinist line of succession, since Vintras has had some rather startling accusations lodged against him?

Well, I’m not aware of him being in our line of apostolic succession. Our primary lineages are found here:

http://www.hometemple.org/twolines.htm

Bishop Kiezer has an excellent .pdf book on the various lineages of the Independent movement (Wandering Bishops: Apostles of a New Spirituality) available free for download on this page (scroll down a ways)

http://www.hometemple.org/Publications.htm

I think you would actually find it quite helpful in your research. The book is quite frank about some of the problems with the movement as well as its successes.

But to answer the question in the generic – I would expect you to think about a disreputable Independent Bishop about the same way I think of a Borgia Pope – a flawed or even evil individual who could, nevertheless, occupy or transmit a valid office. If we hold that priesthood and the episcopate must be transmitted only by GOOD people, then we have a big problem. First of all, just HOW good? Can a murderer who still has orthodox beliefs transmit them? What about a kind charitable person who is also somewhat heretical? How is the person in the pew supposed to know if the priest officiating at their Mass, or baptism, or marriage is “good enough” and was ordained by a bishop who was “good enough” and that the chain of “good enough” people goes all the way back to Jesus unbroken by a scoundrel?

Logic, our knowledge of divine mercy, and western canons thus have laid out that a schismatic, excommunicated, heretical bishop can nonetheless transmit valid orders – and that the priest at your parish can still provide a valid sacrament, even if the priest is secretly a terrible sinner or closet heretic.

I fully understand that these answers probably raise yet more questions, which I'll be happy to attempt to answer if you can be patient with the pace.

Victory Over Self

Posted on July 28, 2006 by Reverend Keith

It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell

Evil and the Hierarchy of Being

Posted on July 27, 2006 by Reverend Keith

While thinking about the issue of Gnosticism and the problem of evil, I suddenly had what was (to me at least) a very powerful “ah ha” moment. Of course, once written down and shared, it will probably seem mundane or even stupidly obvious. But at the time it was like a bolt of lightening from heaven.

The insight was this: Whatever the literal truth or falsehood – Gnosticism is actually a very perceptive metaphor on the problem of pain and evil. It hit me as I was reading something in a Gnostic text and realized it was very similar to something both Robert Pirsig and Ken Wilber had said. Both these writers point out a particular hierarchy of being – one I think we would all agree with. You can divide it up in more than one way – but it goes something like this:

The Hierarchy of Being

The foundational structures of the cosmos are physical – in the sense of being governed by chemistry and physics. Then there are biological structures built from the physical. Then there are social structures built from the biological. Then there are the mental structures of ideas that are built from social dialogue. You can add a layer of spiritual structures, but since that will be an item of dispute, let’s just lump it in with mental for the moment. Each of these structures is built on the preceding ones. Biological systems use physical systems. Social systems use biological systems (people) and physical systems (technologies). Mental systems use social systems (communal dialogue), biological systems (our brains) and physical systems (the neurochemistry of the brain).

Contrary Purposes

Now for a critical observation – each of these levels have entirely different – even contradictory – purposes, laws and goals. For example, entropy (The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to devolve into a state of inert uniformity and disorder) is a fundamental principle of the physical cosmos. But biology is in a state of war with entropy. Biology is a system for increasing the order and energy in the small local pocket of it’s own system. Biology has its own laws and goals – which center on the survival of the individual organism and its reproduction at the expense of all else. But at the social level, these biological goals – unchecked, become evils. Societies may choose to sacrifice their own individual members for the good of the society – if they threaten the social stability, for example. Then from these societies and their interactions, systems of ideas arise. And what a society may see as “good” for its survival and prosperity (slavery for example) the arising system of ideas may see as evil. In the West, we have a developed a system of ideas which demands that we tolerate (for the sake of the IDEA of liberty) the existence of certain things which may pose a danger to the social order – reformers or crackpots as the case may be.

The point is, at each point in the hierarchy of being, the “good” and “evil” of the lower rungs on the ladder may be (and often ARE) very contrary to the “good” and “evil” of the higher rungs. Let’s take a bad genetic illness like Harlequin Baby Syndrome. From our point of view in the social and particularly mental spheres of being, this seems quite obviously evil. It is hideous and causes great physical and emotional suffering. On the other hand, from the point of view of biology, it’s not bad at all. Genetic variability is what drives the whole process. If we didn’t have a thousand mutations or genetic combinations that resulted in death and pain, we wouldn’t have the one that turned proved to be useful in some particular way. Suffering and death are simply failed experiments that weed out unfit genetic combinations.

The higher levels cannot normally disregard the rules and laws of the lower levels. They simply find ways to work around them or compromise with them to achieve their purposes.

Spiritual Metaphors

Let’s return to the Gnostic metaphor, then. The Gnostics saw the god of creation, the demiurge or “half-maker” as a somewhat ignorant figure, full of arrogance, petty jealousy and capriciousness. From the ideas above, we could say that the demiurge represents the physical/biological systems, as seen from the point of view of the mental/spiritual systems. It’s interesting that as gnosticism developed from its earlier roots, the demiurge was increasingly seen as not just immature and ignorant, but positively EVIL, along with the material world he organized. Orthodox Christianity has been more reluctant to condemn the material world, but still tries to insist that God governs the whole cosmos in accordance with the higher (mental/spiritual) notions of “good”. The idea that “good” changes from one level to the next would probably rub the wrong way and be seen as making morality “situational”.

A Symbolic Example

This idea of good and evil changing from one level to the next has an interesting illustration in world symbology – specifically the symbol of the snake. Ken Wilber points out that serpents can be seen as symbols of good OR evil in many different religions – including Christianity. For example, the serpent represents Satan in the garden on the one hand, but when Moses raises up a serpent on a pole to heal the Israelites, it is taken to be a symbol of Jesus.

In Hindu/Buddhist symbolism, the snake represents Kundalini energy – the basic life/god force of the cosmos, which works it’s way up the energy centers or “chakras” of the human body as it spiritually progresses. It’s starts at the base of the spine, at a center representing the physical systems, and works it’s way up to above the crown of the head, representing the highest spiritual centers. Wilber points out that when the snake symbol is used as representing “evil” it is seen at the lower levels of the body (the typhonic gods, for example, or the goat-god baphomet), and at the higher levels of the body, it represents “good” (Buddah and other deities are seen with cobras shading the crown of their heads). It is not that the physical levels are “bad” – they are only seen as bad when we fixate on or descend to the lower physical/biological or social levels as the expense of the mental/spiritual levels.

More Refinements

The categories I have been using, by the way, need not be divided so broadly. Within each level of being, there may be many sub-levels. For example, there are many types and classifications of social and mental systems. A new and higher social or mental system may find its notions of “good” and “evil” quite different from an earlier one.

Implications

How do we view the problem of evil from this hierarchical perspective? What looks to us humans as “unnecessary suffering” from our perspective is usually the “good” of a lower order interposing itself in our own “good”. Theoretically, of course, it could always be the good of a higher order interposing itself in our own “good”. For example, our programs of selective breeding produce species that, while they serve our purposes nicely – are actually LESS fit for survival. If biology had an independent mind and could speak, it might accuse us of corrupting things. Which brings up another point. A lower level is utterly incapable of reacting according to the “good” of a higher level. If there are levels of being above our own – we might be quite unequipped to understand “good” and “evil” with respect to them – until we reach that level ourselves. In fact, if the system I have mapped out here has any predictive value, it would probably say that at the next level, the “goods” and “evils” of our MENTAL or philosophical/religious systems are quite incidental to a much greater spiritual good. The angels or higher beings may be as unconcerned about the truths of our philosophies and dogmas as we are unconcerned with “corrupting” natural selection by breeding prize milk cows.

If we look at God as being present at every level of this hierarchy, working within it – we are simply faced with the fact that there are different ideals of “good” at different levels of being.

“Evil” is simply the interplay of different levels of “good”.

The Perennial Philosophy

Just another PathsToKnowledge.com site

Tag Archives: angels