My Jury duty experience

This week was my turn to serve my community as a jurist. Several things about the experience is worth, in my opinion, sharing and venting about. The county needed to sit two juries this week, so summoned a total of 256 citizens to choose from. 75 of us showed up. The rest were sited for contempt of court and fined $500.00 each. (Do the math! That’s quite a chunk of change…) My concern with this lack of civic responsibility is it is one of the complaints one hears… ‘The jury was crooked… The system just sucks! The criminals run the court house and can get away with anything!’ If less then a third of citizens who are summoned respond, what does that say about the citizenry?

The case was 27 counts, each read aloud which took about 23 minutes, of anal, oral and vaginal assault on a child under the age of 13. The little girl was 7. The initial crime was perpetrated by her father. As far as I am concerned, after her outcry to a friends mother she did not know, nearly every other adult around her should have been charged with something… She told her “granny” (the perps mother) how her daddy was hurting her, who told her she was not to say that. She told her mother, who is dumber then a box of cornflakes her daddy put his “deal in her private part and it hurt” who asked her Mother in law what to do… She finally told a stranger. We were given testimony from law enforcement, counselors, forensic interviewers, SANE medical person, her mother- We saw recorded images of the pretty little girl, fine and loquacious describing, in awful exacting detail all her father did to her- where, how, what, when- Including the threats that if she told or yelled out, he would do it harder. We were shown letters she brought to her counselors from home saying her father didn’t really do it, that it was someone else… this after her mother took her to jail to visit her father… And her grand mother told her she was the cause of the family turmoil– Imagine the life of this girl! She should be watching cartoons and riding her bike- which was also used as a threat against her by her father- She would perform oral sex on him, or he would throw away her bike.

We were preparing to hear the little girls testimony, when we were asked to leave the room. A while later we returned to the court room and were informed the father had decided to opt for a plea. I think it was because his lawyer could probably see that even though we as a jury were not allowed to discuss the case, even with each other, our expressions alone did not bode well for his client- making the baby sit in front of all of us and testify could not help.

Each count was worth 12.5 years. He plead to one count and said he wouldn’t make his daughter testify. The judge took it and tacked on her (the little girls) current age, which is 10, and the years he had been molesting her, which was 3. He is 36 years old. She (the judge) is fairly positive he will serve all 25 years, since any early parole will need to go through her. The girl will be 35.

Part of me wishes we, the jury, could have meted out the penalty, as he would not ever see the light of day outside- but the human part of me agrees that the girl had been through enough.

I have had many emotions these past few days. Anger. Sadness. Pity. Violence. Shock. Dirty. Disgusted. Helpless. And that’s just living in it for 3 days as an observer. This is the kind of case that you really can’t come away from feeling clean. Or even good.

I hope the girl stays in therapy and that what ever is left of her childhood is safe. We were told her mother and grandmother will be keeping her. They who told her she had it wrong, that it must have been someone else. They who told her to write a book about how much she loved her daddy and give it to her therapist to help get him home. They who took a victim to visit her abuser every week for 3 months until the state caught them.

My god. What can we do for these children?

More on Halloween

Introduction

It happens every year, on the last night of the October month. From the darkness of the streets all around the world, strange ghoulish creatures emerge and walk amongst us, gathering with the evil spirits, demons, and……….. fairy princesses? That's right. We all know Halloween. A fun filled, exciting, energetic, and sometimes frightful night when people of all ages stroll down the lane, adorned with all manners of costume and fancy dress. Young children go from door to door, saying the magic words and receiving scrumptious candy in return.

Wild parties are in full swing all the way till the next morning, while others prefer to celebrate Halloween in a more traditional manner.

But, what is the “traditional” manner?

How did the generations before packaged candy and store bought costumes celebrate it? What exactly is the meaning and purpose behind the well known symbols such as the Jack-o-lantern?

We all know that Halloween did not originate in the US, but what was it like before?

Halloween has a rich and complex history, compiled from several different cultural traditions and celebrations. Several historians agree that researching into the origins of Halloween, can be a rather difficult task.

Origins:

It is a well known fact, that most modern celebrations and holidays, have usually not just originated from one single ancient custom or tradition alone. It takes a large compilation that has been growing and developing throughout history, incorporating many different cultures and beliefs, into one.

The origins of Halloween are difficult to trace, and even today many countries celebrate it differently from the more popular way, and even have different titles for basically the same holiday.

On this note, let me make you aware, that it is probably impossible to track and list every single tradition that was incorporated into Halloween.

Samhain

From what historians can gather from research, one of the earliest contributors to our modern day Halloween, is the ancient Celtic pagan festival, Samhain. Samhain (pronounced “sow-en”) was an agricultural celebration that marked the end of summer, also marking the harvest of the summer crops. Around this time, wheats, corn, barley, and livestock were brought in to be stored for the bitter winter months to come. It also was considered, a night of supernatural mayhem, when the dead would revisit the earth, and dark spirits would emerge from the shadows and run amuck.1 2

It at first, was considered to be the “Celtic New Year”, but recent debates have put that theory to question.

Several cultures from several time periods most likely celebrated this festival, due to speculation that the Celtic druids were among the first to practice it. And of course, the Celts later spread out to become many other nations. With time, different traditions were most likely added into the intricate weave work of the festival.

Because of this, many historians have found it rather difficult to pinpoint the exact practices at certain periods. It has always been a very frustrating search. We can only guess how far certain aspects go back.

The custom of ritualistic bonfires is one which has seemed to go on for quite a few centuries, and still lives even today in some countries and in different holidays. Bonfires were used by the Celts as protection against the evil spirits that roamed, while also serving as a guide home to the recently departed. Two bonfires could also be built close to the other, and the members of the community would walk themselves as well as livestock in between them as a symbol of purification.3 We have accounts from many ancient Roman sources, such as Julius Caesar, Diodorus, Strabo, and Pliny the Elder, who mention several rituals that involve such practices, but mainly concerning human sacrifice weaved within.4

Now, the concept of human sacrifice around Samhain is not completely factual, since none of the old Irish folklore speak of such deeds, nor the writings of St. Patrick, who had succeeded in introducing Christianity to nearly all of pagan Ireland.5

But the idea is certainly not entirely ruled out. It is quite possible that the druids did engage in human sacrifice, but if they did, it seems that it was not a common practice.

Because of the firm belief that the barrier between worlds was thin around Samhain, many who celebrated it prepared their homes to ward off unfriendly demons and imps, and to receive the friendly spirits of the departed. Food was set out for them, the house kept warm with fires (which usually were lighted after the local bonfires), poetry and stories were performed to entertain them, and the doors were not locked.6

Similar customs were observed in England, on All Souls Day.7

Divination is a common folklore custom which has lasted throughout much of history, and still survives in more rural places in the world which still keep such practices alive. Usually, several methods were used to determine rather important or critical things such as the success of the next crop, the identity of a future spouse, or perhaps how much riches one could expect in their life.8 Today, these customs in mainstream culture are no longer seen as vital, but are used as trivial party games for entertainment.

On that subject, it is interesting to note how much more “trivial” the old customs and traditions have become to modern man. With such advancement in technology and with so many considering the belief in “spirits” to be nothing more than fairy tale, our society today no longer truly realizes the importance of such old practices that they take for granted.

Most of us no longer grow our own food and raise our own livestock, having the convenience of the grocery market. The people of old did not have these things, and used such celebrations as Samhain to mark these events that were vital for survival.

All Saint's/Souls Day

All Saint's Day, sometimes known as All Hallows or Hallowmas is basically what it sounds like. It is a day to commemorate all saints, known and unknown to the world. Halloween falls the day before, hence why it is sometimes referred to as “All Hallows Eve”.9

All Souls Day, which falls the day afterwards, on November 2, is surprisingly similar in customs to All Saint's Day, however placing more emphasis on all departed souls.

We mention these particular holidays due to the fact that they are closely tied to Halloween, and have in a small way contributed to it.

Now then, it has always been highly debated on whether or not Halloween is actually a pagan, or Christian holiday. The fact of the matter is, it is highly likely that the pagan festival of Samhain, was established long before the Christian tradition of All Hallows Eve, and Hallowmas, a.k.a, Halloween and All Saint's Day.

However, the name, “Halloween”, was of Christian origin. It literally means, the evening before All Hallows Day. Therefore, if you wanted to get really technical…… oh never mind.

The traditions and customs of All Saint's Day are generally very basic, though the way they are preformed usually differ from country to country. This also applies to its sister feast day, All Souls Day. As a matter of fact, they both are nearly identical in their customs and themes. The term “Hallowtide” is used to connect all three of the celebrations, Halloween, All Saint's Day, and All Souls Day.

I am going to directly quote two articles concerning the subject, since I feel this woman put the bare facts quite nicely. From there, I will present other theories and little tidbits.

“This feast that we know as All Saint's Day originated as a feast of All Martyrs, sometime in the 4th century. At first it was celebrated on the first Sunday after Pentecost. It came to be observed on May 13 when Pope St. Boniface IV (608-615) restored and rebuilt for use as a Christian church an ancient Roman temple which pagan Rome had dedicated to "all gods", the Pantheon. The pope re-buried the bones of many martyrs there, and dedicated this Church to the Mother of God and all the Holy Martyrs on May 13, 610.

About a hundred years later, Pope Gregory III (731-741) consecrated a new chapel in the basilica of St. Peter to all saints (not just to the martyrs) on November 1, and he fixed the anniversary of this dedication as the date of the feast.

A century after that, Pope Gregory IV (827-844) extended the celebration of All Saints to November 1 for the entire Church.

The vigil of this important feast, All Saint's Eve, Hallowe'en, was apparently observed as early as the feast itself.

Ever since then — for more than a millennium — the entire Church has celebrated the feast of All Saints on November 1st, and, of course, Hallowe'en on October 31.

It is a principal feast of the Catholic Church. It is a holy day of obligation, which means that all Catholics are to attend Mass on that day.”10


“The tradition in the Church of having Masses said for the dead began in the earliest times. The pre-Christian Roman religion, which held that some form of life continued after death, gave votive offerings to the gods for the dead at three specified times: the third, seventh and thirtieth day after death. This practice of praying for the departed on these same days was adopted ("inculturated") by the early Christians — and continued in the Church for nearly 2000 years: the Church offered Masses for the deceased person on the third, seventh and thirtieth day after death.

Beginning in the year 998, All souls — the "faithful departed" — were officially remembered in the Church's prayers on the evening of November 1, and with Requiem Masses, Masses for the dead, on November 2. All Souls Day is now a feast of the universal Church. (The word "requiem" is Latin for "rest".) Following the Second Vatican Council, all Masses celebrated on All Saints day observe that feast, not "All souls". Three Masses may still be said on All Souls Day. The first two are Masses for Burial, and the third is a Mass for the Dead. Black vestments may be worn on this day.”11

When we look back on all three of the celebrations of Hallowtide, we realize that all three share very similar characteristics, mainly that they all are based around honoring the dead. The ancient Celts would remember their dead through the customs I have mentioned in Samhain. All Saint's Day was created to honor all saints and martyrs. And All Souls Day is in remembrance of all faithful departed. Another well known holiday that comes to mind in this context, is “Dia De Los Muertos”, or more popularly known as “Day of the Dead”.

I mentioned earlier that the customs are fairly basic. In my search I have found it difficult to find a wide variety of practices for the feast days. All Souls Day, however, seems to have a few more than its sister holiday. Church attendance is an important part of Hallowtide, as well as visiting the graves of loved ones and taking time to remember them. The basic plan right there. But, in Spain, another tradition is the performance of the play Don Juan Tenorio on All Saint's Day. In the Philippines, communities will visit the graves of relatives and spend the day there, bringing food and…. well, basically have a picnic of sorts.12

All Souls Day, on the other hand, not only has most of these elements, but also has been closely connected with many pagan practices that are extremely similar, such as the ones I have mentioned in Samhain. In most of Europe, such customs as leaving out food for the dead, lighting candles and leaving them on the windowsills, and making special “soul cakes” were practiced, particularly in England before the Protestant Reformation.13 We can also find some fragments of the famous “Trick or Treat” ritual beginning here, with the practice of Soul Caking, which involved beggars and children going from door to door, asking for alms or specially prepared “soul cakes”, which involved reciting a rhyme asking for “mercy on all Christian souls for a soul cake”. It was believed that with each cake consumed, a soul would be released from purgatory.14

In England, the rituals of Hallowtide came under attack during the sixteenth century, from Protestants who were disturbed by the notion that the living could influence the fate of the dead, or vice versa. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer attempted to abolish the ringing of the bells for the dead in 1546. But Henry the 8'th refused to sign the edit, believing it might jeopardize a potential rapprochement with France and the Holy Roman Empire. His more Protestant son, Edward the 6'th, had fewer reservations. His royal commissions successfully enforced a ban in 1548, with only a few parishes defying the injunction. The rituals of Hallow mass were revived briefly under his Catholic successor, Mary, but they were services commemorating the dead were dropped from the litany of 1559.15

In what you could call a small retaliation of the Catholics, the holiday known as “Bonfire Night” of “Guy Fawkes Day” was established, which is the next avenue we shall explore.

Guy Fawkes Day

November 5'th….1605… a group of Catholic conspirators attempt to wreck havoc upon the Protestant English State by blowing up the Palace of Westminster, also known as the Houses of Parliament. Months of preparation have gone into this, the Gunpowder Plot. However, a letter has been sent to Lord Baron Monteagle, a Catholic supporter who was to attend the opening ceremony for the building, in hopes that he would take heed and not attend. This letter was shown to authorities, and in the early morning of this fateful day, the conspirators were apprehended.16

This day, was made a day of celebration, in honor of the English “freedom” from the Catholic Church. It is still celebrated today, though with a few changes for more politically correct reasons.

We make mention of this holiday, to note some of the similarities to our modern Halloween, as well as its connection to Halloween when it skipped over to America with the Irish immigrants. The traditions have generally remained unchanged. English citizens would build bonfires, dress rag dolls and even themselves as tatterdemalion “Guys” and would beg for money to purchase fireworks.17 The tradition of burning effigies of “Guy” and Pope Paul V fell out of the holiday, except it is still a common practice in the city of Lewes, where the it seems to have a little more meaning. The rowdy, devilish, prank-like atmosphere of Halloween was slightly influenced by this celebration in my opinion, and many historians seem to agree. Guy Fawkes Day was already well established in America, and especially Canada when the Irish migrated during the Potato Famine of the 1840's.

Legends and Symbols

We shall now take a closer look into some of the symbols associated with Halloween, and the myths that began them. Today we see so many various figures that have been tied with the holiday, in a whole manner of interpretations. They are everywhere, in stories, movies, party decor and even are brought back to life through costumes. The undisputed king of them all, would have to be the Jack-o-Lantern.

This legendary symbol of Halloween, has been present for centuries, though started out simply as hallowing out a vegetable (turnips mainly), so that they may be used as lanterns. I am not entirely certain of the exact meaning behind the early tradition. However, it did not take on the name of the Jack-o-Lantern until quite later. 18 The name itself is related to several meanings, one of which is the name of a man in an old Irish legend, who's tale is now the most popular description for the custom of carving pumpkins. Jack was a greedy, lazy, yet clever Irishman, who tricked the devil into keeping him out of hell. But because of his rather mean nature, he was not permitted into heaven, and the devil kept his promise of not permitting him entrance into hell. There are several different versions of this story. In one, Jack is thrown a coal from the bitter and angry devil, and he then put it into a hallowed turnip, doomed to wander the underworld as a ghost with that one coal to light his way. In another, Jack ingested the coal, lighting his entire head into flames. This version would (in a weird way) explain the appearance of most characters who seem to share characteristics of the legend. Another legend of similar characteristics, is that of the blacksmith Will. He too leads a wicked life, and is not permitted into neither heaven nor hell, and is given a coal to light his way, which he uses to guide foolish travelers into bogs to drown. This legend was sprouted from the Will o' the wisp phenomena, in which strange ghostly lights can be seen flickering over bogs and lakes.19

The Jack-o-Lantern, also seems to be seen as the “Spirit of Halloween”, as seen through it's popularity, and through characters given that title usually having a carved pumpkin for a head.

Another quite well known figure we see, is the typical vampire, or to be more specific, the infamous Count Dracula. We all know him. He began as a character from the novel written by Bram Stoker in 1897, and was then swept up into the world of Hollywood to become a world famous icon, in a version of the story that was a tad different in a few ways, but none the less, left quite an impression on American culture. The vampire itself, has gone through many changes throughout history. Tales of blood drinking beings are found in nearly every culture around the world, each different in some way or another, and have been in folklore for centuries past. The Babylonian Lilu, a nocturnal demonic spirit, would hunt for babies and/or pregnant women. In India, the vetalas, a ghoulish-like creature, was known for it's trait of hanging upside down in trees in cemeteries. The hopping corpse of China, was also similar, though would feed on life essence as opposed to blood. 20 Well. Call them what you want, but ask a random person on the street what they think a vampire is, and you will most definitely get the romanticized, stereo-typical version, now the dominate definition thanks to Bram Stoker, Bela Lugosi, and Anne Rice. Dracula has been credited as one of the most played roles in movie history, with an estimated 160 films as of 2004 with that character as the main.

Two other phenomenally popular Halloween characters that stand alongside the Count in the world of monster horror, are Frankenstein's Monster, and The Wolf Man. Frankenstein's Monster, was sprouted from another famous horror novel, written by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelly in 1818, entitled, Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Mary was a young, intelligent writer, and her and her husband were challenged by George Gordon Byron while on vacation at his estate, to a horror story writing contest. Mary complied, writing her story based upon a dream she had had, which she described in these words:

“My imagination, unbidden, possessed and guided me, gifting the successive images that arose in my mind with a vividness far beyond the usual bounds of reverie…I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together—I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an uneasy, half-vital motion…What terrified me will terrify others; and I need only describe the specter which had haunted my midnight pillow.”21

This tale of the terrors of playing god, was later adapted into one of the classic monster motion pictures of Universal Studios, though hardly resembled the original idea in any way. Shelly's monster, was much more intelligent and thoughtful in her novel, unlike that in the movie, and the storyline had several drastic changes.

The Wolf Man, was another character made popular by the movies, but the legend itself is quite ancient. Werewolves (or shape shifters if you will), like vampires, have been seen all throughout history, and have different appearances and habits depending on the cultures. But usually, shape shifters are seen as merciless and thoughtless, prone to devouring any living thing in its way without hesitation. The victim seems to completely take on every animalistic trait, including a supernatural surge in strength and agility. Transformation has always been portrayed as a painful process, in movies and stories.

Though it is perhaps not among the most well known of Halloween legends, The Headless Horseman is yet another eerie figure I would like to mention. His story was simple. A Hessian mercenary, hired by the British during the American Revolutionary War, who lost his head during battle. In the short story itself, written by Washington Irving, a pompous school master, Ichabod Crane, is transferred to the little Dutch settlement of Tarry Town, New York, in a secluded glen named Sleepy Hallow, where he falls for the wealthy Katrina Van Tassel, but finds competition with the town bully, Brom Bones. At a Halloween party, Brom scares Ichabod with a local ghost story about the Headless Horseman, saying that he roams the forest which Ichabod must cross through that night to get home. Needless to say, he runs across the “ghost”, and is never seen again. It is not ever made clear what happened to him, or if it actually was the ghost. The legend of The Headless Horseman later was adapted into a Disney Cartoon, and a horror/comedy by Tim Burton.

Other symbols connected to Halloween, have deep roots in death, magic, mystery, horror and legend. From out study of the old pagan Samhain, it is quite obvious that it contributed to these aspects, though in a way has been tainted into a more horrific light, as opposed to the honoring and respect of the dead. Ghosts and ghouls, skeletons and mummies, demons and witches. They all hold these attributes.

But in this sea of terrifying visions of the creatures of night, is the commercial aspect of our Halloween, which gives the whole thing a sense of fun and excitement, as well as thrills and even comedy on occasion. It is my opinion, that now one can really not live without the other. The ancient, bone chilling tales of old combined with the modern, truly create an enjoyable holiday.

From Age Old Customs to

Commercialized Fright Night.

We have now come to much more recognizable areas. The fogs of uncertainty in our search are slowly clearing, and we now will be mostly addressing Halloween's evolution in America, where all of these different celebrations are thrown into one giant cauldron, and blended with other new ingredients to create what we know today.

Introducing!

“Halloween did not become a holiday in America until the 19th century, where lingering Puritan tradition meant even Christmas was scarcely observed before the 1800s. North American almanacs of the late 18th and early 19th centuries make no mention of Halloween in their lists of holidays. The transatlantic migration of nearly two million Irish following the Irish Potato Famine (1845–1849) brought the holiday and its customs to America.”22

Because of the deep rooted Protestant and Puritan religion of early America, Halloween was widely rejected and many Irish/Scottish immigrants were persecuted for its celebration. Private indoor parties with family and friends continued however, and eventually, the upper class societies made efforts to cast it as an honoring of their heritage, rather than a night of “supernatural customs”. This, is where the more party-like atmosphere of modern day Halloween came into play. It was made more “respectable” through masquerade balls, dances and poetry.23

So, Halloween was now celebrated in three different ways. First class politicians and the wealthy would have grand parties, almost completely throwing the old traditions out the window. Middle class citizens continued to have nice, quiet gatherings in the home, keeping many of the traditions alive, such as bobbing for apples and several of the divination games. And last but not least, the third class working families, who brought out the more rough side of the holiday with pranks that ranged in mischief and brutality.

Now, put all of those three ways of celebrating it together, and we get the basic blueprints of our beloved Halloween.

The Problem with Pranks

As we have noted, pranks seemed to become a part of Halloween at an early age in America, and it is highly likely that it might have been a part of the more ancient celebrations. I'm quite sure there was an occasional group of young boys throughout history that would delight in causing trouble on this night. The great thing about creating mischief on Halloween, (especially back in the days when superstitions where much more serious and taken quite literally) was that you wouldn't get into too much trouble. Many stories about fiendish fairies and devils running about the place and causing havoc, where a great cover up for much more “mortal” mischief makers.

Hardcore Halloween revelry was never really a problem until the late nineteenth century. Before then, it was mostly tolerated, yet monitored by police officials none the less. Eventually, things just got out of hand. Things such as throwing bags of flour at passing citizens, or tearing down a fence or two where usually passed over, maybe with a stern warning, but “tricks” such as oiling railroad tracks, lighting up huge bonfires, or throwing stones at people could land you in serious trouble.24

There are many grisly stories concerning the action taken against more serious pranksters. By the twentieth century, the police were much more strict on how “merry” you could get, and several respectable communities and societies fought for a more safe Halloween. This is what led America, into making such traditions as Trick-or-Treating, Halloween parades and parties, and harvest festivals, into the main events for the holiday.

These activities were designed so that everyone could participate and have fun, and it worked for the most part, to make Halloween much more “family” oriented.

Did this remove the more “spooky” atmosphere out of Halloween?

Many seem to think so.

But all in all, it is my opinion, that Halloween improved with rules.

Costumes, Candy, Commercialization

Although wearing costumes and the famous Trick-or-Treat tradition did not really take firm root into Halloween until the twentieth century, many aspects of it have been seen all throughout history and culture, from the gruliks and skeklers of the Shetland Isles, who would dress themselves in animal skins and entertain those they begged from25, to the “souling” traditions of Medevil Brittan. Even the begging of money for fireworks on Guy Fawkes Night holds similar characteristics. But ultimately, it had never been done exactly like it's done today.

The “treats” also have obviously changed over the centuries, though in some more rural parts of the world, more wholesome, natural food is still handed out. Before the convenience of packaged candies and chocolate bars, things such as seasonal fruit, nuts and even money where given.

But with every nationwide holiday, comes those who only can see dollar signs.

By the twentieth century, Halloween was well ingrained into American culture, and commercialization began, quite possibly with Halloween postcards, which were most popular between 1905 and 1915, and sported hundreds of designs. “Dennison Manufacturing Company, which published its first Hallowe'en catalog in 1909, and the Beistle Company were pioneers in commercially made Halloween decorations, particularly die-cut paper items. German manufacturers specialized in Halloween figurines that were exported to America in the period between the two world wars.”26

Mass production of Halloween costumes and candy did not really happen until the 1930's, and the famous “Trick-or-Treat” tradition did not become a permanent and central part until the 1950's, when it was created to try and draw children's attention away from causing pranks as we noted earlier.

I now make mention of the “Poisoned Candy Scare” of the 1970's and 80's, an event which frankly was blown way out of proportion. Why do I mention it then? Because I found this description to be very profound concerning the psychology of the matter, despite it being minor.

“The original festival of Samhain, as Santino notes, was fundamentally a pagan holiday, focusing on the passage of the recent dead from this world to the next. As Christianity replaced older religions, these spirits were transmuted from neutral or good beings to evil ones, and the season became a rich one for the telling of supernatural legends. To some extent, as Degh has found, this storytelling tradition remains very strong in rural America, though it now incorporates non supernatural horror stories and anti-legends in which frightening events are exposed as hoaxes or misperceptions of mundane objects. The season's marginality has recently brought forth two complexes of legends and beliefs in which deranged or sadistic adults of this world, not supernatural spirits, endanger children. These complexes include real-life “ostensive” actions, in which people act out (or seem to act out) such narrative scenarios. The earlier of these is “The Razor Blade in the Apple,” involving children who receive poisonous or booby-trapped trick-or-treat goodies from strangers; it appeared during the mid-1960's. The later complex, “The Satanic Child Sacrifice,” described cults who planned to abduct and murder a young child on Halloween as part of a ritual ceremony; this showed up sporadically in the mid-1970's before becoming a nationwide panic in 1987-88. The precise origin of the razor blades legend is unclear, though it was given impetus by three nationally publicized cases in which poisoned treats were actually found.”27

Interesting to note, however, that most of the real cases never seemed to involve any sort of “Satanic activity”.

By the 1990's, Halloween was well on it's way to becoming one of the biggest money making holidays for the commercial industry. A whole manner of various items were being created, ranging from simple window stickers to elaborate fog machines. Many ancient legends were incorporated and used as symbols, as we have seen, which have now become Halloween mascots so to speak.

Halloween, grew.

Hollywood Halloween

With such an intriguing, mysterious, dark and thrilling holiday such as Halloween growing more and more popular in the American culture, it was no surprise that the entertainment industry decided to jump into the fun. Bone chilling novels and comics have been an important part of the modern Halloween for decades now, receiving immense popularity and adding more to the visions of the public. But nothing every added permanent visions like the mother of entertainment, Hollywood. Horror movies have gained quite a vast amount of fame, and the genre itself is viewed as a must see around this time of year. This being said, it is a little difficult to give a detailed definition of a “Halloween movie”, since there are so many horror films out there today. Well, because of this factor, I am only going to make mention of the most popular, most Halloween related films.

And I believe it is fitting, to begin with the cult classic of 1978, Halloween.

This independent horror movie, captured millions, and did surprisingly well, becoming a model for future slasher film makers. Even more surprising, was the fact that Halloween really did not have an excessive amount of visual gore, yet managed to be terrifying none the less. The directing style of John Carpenter resembled that of the thriller master Hitchcock, making the mood much more intense. Originally, the movie was going to be titled, The Babysitter Murders, but was soon changed, due to the notion that this would take place on Halloween. The plot goes as follows.

On October 31, 1963, six-year-old Michael Myers stabs his sister Judith with a kitchen knife at their home in Haddonfield, Illinois. He is sent to Smith's Grove-Warren County Sanitarium and placed under the care of psychiatrist Dr. Sam Loomis. Loomis suspects that there is more to Myers than meets the eye and plans to have him committed indefinitely. At the age of 21, Myers escapes from Smith's Grove while being transferred, and returns to Haddonfield with Loomis in pursuit.

In Haddonfield, on Halloween Day, Myers stalks seventeen-year-old Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), and she catches several glimpses of him watching her. That night, Myers kills three of Laurie's friends who are in the house across the street from where Laurie is babysitting two children. She soon discovers what has happened and escapes with her life from Myers, but is attacked nearly three more times, throughout which she has stabbed him with a knitting needle, a clothes hanger, and a knife. Loomis eventually shows up and shoots Myers six times, causing him to fall over the second story balcony, but his body is gone, leaving wonder and suspense at the very end.

The idea of a never dieing Myers, was used to symbolize the eternity of evil. In the movie, Dr. Loomis makes several comments on how he found the boy to be “simply pure evil”. Rather unrealistic if you believe in causality, but hey…. who ever said movies had to be realistic? Many have psychoanalyzed the meaning behind the film, with such theories as it being prejudice against women, or notes on how Laurie's murdered friends are more “sexually active”, however she (obviously a chaste and modest girl) manages to survive. Whatever happened to people just “watching” the movies?

Anyway, this film sprouted seven sequels, all of which featured more gore, were on bigger budgets, and generally were not as popular and respected as their predecessor. They delved deeper into Myer's history, and deeper into Halloween, with mention of Samhain on numerous occasions. But none could replace the first

The next is a group of films that I vaguely mentioned before, which is appropriately titled as the “Universal Monster Classics”. This would include such movies as The Phantom of the Opera, Dracula, Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, The Bride of Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. It is interesting to note that nearly all of them are based upon well known novels, though usually were adapted so much that they barely resembled them anymore. But these films, are now seen as the defining versions of these legends.

Though it is seen as more of a Christmas film by fans, Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas holds deep overtones of Halloween. The main character is the king of Halloween town after all. The film was sort of a tribute to Burton's love for both holidays, which is obvious from the whole concept itself. Jack Skellington, a.k.a Jack the Pumpkin King, is depressed with his role, and accidentally stumbles across Christmas, and falls in love with it. He then attempts to take control of the holiday, but ends up wrecking it, since he will still always have a lingerin love for Halloween deep within his heart….or… bones…

Conclusion

With such immense growth in a rather short period, it poses rather wondrous questions to me. How much bigger will it get? What more can be added to Halloween? What new traditions shall be weaved into the already immense fabric of this ancient celebration, and how will old ones be kept? What light shall our descendants see it in? I suppose we shall never know. Or…. shall we? If you believe in the afterlife, and if you are one to believe that the spirits really did roam the night to visit those upon earth, then perhaps we shall all catch a glimpse of how it shall evolve after all….

And now, comes the end of our journey. I hope to have provided some interesting information on the truly fascinating, mysterious, and widely celebrated world of Halloween.

 

Footnotes:

1 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 11, 12

2 Philip Robinson, Halloween, and Other Festivals of Life and Death (The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1994) 10

3 Wikipedia article, Samhain

4 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 14, 15

5 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 17

6 Tad Tuleja, Halloween, and Other Festivals of Life and Death (The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1994) 82

7 Wikipedia article, Halloween

8 Wikipedia article, Samhain

9 Wikipedia article, All Saints Day

10 Helen Hull Hitchcock, Women for Faith & Family Website, All Saint's Day (Copyright 2000)

11 Helen Hull Hitchcock, Women for Faith & Family Website, All Souls Day (Copyright 2000)

12 Wikipedia article, All Saints Day

13 Wikipedia article, All Souls Day

14 Tad Tuleja, Halloween, and Other Festivals of Life and Death (The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1994) 82

15 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 27

16 Wikipedia article, Guy Fawkes

17 Tad Tuleja, Halloween, and Other Festivals of Life and Death (The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1994) 84

18 Wikipedia article, Jack-o-Lantern

19 Wikipedia article, Will o' the wisp

20Wikipedia article, Vampire

21Wikipedia article, Mary Shelly

22 Wikipedia article, Halloween

23 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 51

24 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 58

25 Nicolas Rogers, Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night (Oxford University Press, 2002) 41

26 Wikipedia article, Halloween

27 Bill Ellis, Halloween, and Other Festivals of Life and Death (The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1994) 24, 25

Title derived directly from Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night by Nicolas Rogers.

The Life and Times of Satan

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
 

 

 

A Cause for Anger

In an earlier piece, I argued that Matthew 5:22, which (in the King James) says we should not be angry WITHOUT CAUSE – is actually better in the modern translations, which say that we shouldn't be angry AT ALL.

Ok, so what’s actually wrong with anger? What if you’re only angry over evil things in the world that a good person SHOULD be angry about? Let’s analyze that a bit.

The root of anger is a very primitive fighting response. It is the body’s way of preparing to defend ourselves against immediate threats to our body. It causes a surge of hormones in the body, such as epinephrine, cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenaline. These are responses to threats or danger. Depending on the threat, our disposition, our other hormonal levels, etc – this hormonal/emotional response may motivate us to fight, or to flee. We may experience fear, or anger. They are simply the two sides of the same coin – the physiological response to a threat. Their purpose is to help us to run fast… or to hit hard. In natural conditions, they are also momentary. They make brief, enormous demands on the body structures and systems for the sake of survival. The body recovers from these demands when the fight or flight is over, in the relaxation response.

These physiological responses are probably still useful, but in an increasingly limited set of circumstances. Most of us may be in a “fight for your life” situation once or twice in a lifetime. Those who are in such situations often, such as soldiers or police, learn to control their anger. While rage may help get an ordinary person survive an extreme physical conflict – in the long run it interferes with a trained, calculated response to aggression, such as a soldier or police generally needs to employ.

Unfortunately, we have a problem – the ego. Our egoic mind constructs an elaborate mental image of ourselves. And it will trigger the body’s emotional fear/anger/stress mechanisms if it perceives any threat to our elaborate self-concept. This self concept includes our imagined status, our self-appointed roles, our country, our religion, etc. This is how thousands of Muslims can find themselves in a screaming, raging hormonal stew – fully prepared by their biology to immediately defend themselves against a rogue mastodon … over an old Pope quoting some obscure Byzantine emperor from a podium.

And since the ego spends more time in the imaginary past and present than in the here and now, the egoic threats don’t even have to be actually present. We can simmer over past wrongs that are no longer a threat. We can fume over possible events in the future that may not even happen. And 99 percent of these simmerings and fumings will be about things that are no direct threat to our actual physical person at all.

Because our ego is so large and complex, and because the combination of all imagined past and imagined future pseudo-threats is so numerous – many of us spend most of our lives in a state of – if not actual anger – at least borderline fear and stress. As a result, the enormous stress demands we make on the body – which are supposed to be momentary, become chronic. And chronically high levels of fear, anger and stress hormones are catastrophic to our health. They can cause high blood pressure, impair thyroid function, and disrupt our blood sugar levels (leading to obesity or possibly diabetes). They cause impaired mental function, decreased bone density, impaired immune system. They contribute to cancer, heart disease, stroke… sound familiar? The spigot of hormones, intended to save you from immediate physical danger will, if left running, KILL you.

So is there an appropriate time for anger? Yes. When you or someone you are responsible for is in mortal peril. And that’s about it. So if you really want to believe that Jesus says only someone who is angry with his brother WITHOUT CAUSE is in danger of judgement – fine, but realize that the only proper CAUSE for anger is that your brother is running toward you with a weapon threatening to kill you. If you insist on living in perpetual anger – realize that you are in danger of judgment. If nothing else, it will be the judgment of your body, which will collapse under the strain of trying to support the need to defend your own ego.

Angry Without Cause?

I recently ran across a “King James Only” sort who complained that one example of the evil of modern translations was the removal of the words “without cause” from Matthew 5:22. In doing so (this individual thought) these translators were trying to deprive us of our right to be righteously angry.

[img_assist|nid=125|title=Anger Management|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=83]Purely as an illustration for others, and not because I think this person will actually pay attention to a word I say, let me comment on Matt:5:22, which reads in part (in the King James)

Mt 5:22 "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment”

Before getting into the texts, let’s notice how very UN-helpful this bit of advice is. Was there ever a violent, angry, abusive person who didn’t think they had a very good CAUSE for being angry? Many of them even manage to get their victims to enable their anger by brainwashing them into believing that they somehow had it coming – that they DESERVED the abuse. Speaking as a formally trained theologian Wink let me simply remark… this is cow dung.

Interestingly, many of the newer versions of the Bible, the ones to which some of the idolitors of the King James so angrily object Wink – word it as follows:

“But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court” (NASB)

“But I promise you that if you are angry with someone, you will have to stand trial.” (CEV)

“But now I tell you: whoever is angry with his brother will be brought to trial” (TEV)

“But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment” (RSV)

“But, I, say unto you, that, every one who is angry with his brother, shall be, liable, to judgment” (Rotherham)

“But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[a]will be subject to judgment” (NIV)

“But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be in danger of being judged” (BBE)

 “But I tell you, everyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment” (Holman)

“But I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment” (ASV)

 “But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment.” (Douay)

None of these, you will notice, uses that phrase “without cause”. Some of these, by the way, are hardly new. The Douay is almost as old as the King James. The RSV has my personal endorsement as being generally the most precisely translated version. There are a few slightly newer version which follow the KJV text on this one, such as Youngs, Darby, and versions of the KJV such as the NKJV.

Why do so many modern versions omit this phrase? Is it because they are satanically perverting the Word of God. Please…. It’s because a lot of the earliest and best manuscripts of the New Testament don’t’ have this phrase. The phrase wasn’t taken out by satanic conspirators. It was added in by scribes who just couldn’t imagine not having an excuse to get angry. This particular issue is not a new one at all. Scholars have been aware of the alternate reading for centuries. For example:

 "The Greek manuscripts do not contain sine causa.[without cause]" (Augustine of Hippo – Retractions i.19.4)

“Some codices add without cause. However, in the genuine codices the sentence is unqualified, and anger is forbidden altogether.” (Jerome on Matthew)

 Erasmus, the very scholar who PRODUCED the compiled Greek edition that the King James scholars used for their translation, noted that we must continually improve our scholarship by using the best manuscripts:

"You cry out that it is a crime to correct the gospels. This is a speech worthier of a coachman than of a theologian. You think it is all very well if a clumsy scribe makes a mistake in transcription and then you deem it a crime to put it right. The only way to determine the true text is to examine the early codices."

Yes, isn’t it ironic that Erasmus and the scholars who produced the King James were accused of doing the very same kind of tampering with scripture that current idolators of the King James accuse modern translators of doing.

There are, of course, hundreds of manuscripts of the New Testament. Many of the later manuscripts are grouped into regional “families” of texts, which tend to agree with one and other. In this case, the text family known as “Byzantine” as well as two famous codexes Bezae and Washingtonienus, include the phrase “without cause”. The two codexes are 4th to 5th century, and most of the Byzantine texts are much later.

By contrast, omitting the phrase is supported by the texts of codex Sinaitucus and Vaticanus (of the Alexandrian family), dated to the 4th century. This is supported by the remarkably early papayrus fragment P67, which dates to 200 CE and contains Matthew 3:9, 15; 5:20-22, 25-28.

In this case, removing “without cause” seems justified because the earliest manuscripts (in one case dramatically early) support removing it. It was very likely NOT in the original manuscript, and by retaining it, we would only perpetuate a scribal error or insertion. However, nearly every manuscript that omits the words has a footnote indicating that some manuscripts include “without cause”.

Jesus didn’t say it folks. Are you going to adjust your thinking to conform with what Jesus said, or adjust what Jesus said to conform with how you’d prefer to behave?

More questions on Home Temple…

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.

Sermon on Worry

Near the end of his life, Mark Twain said: "I am an old man and have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened.” How many hundreds of hours have we spent agonizing over possible problems that never actually happened?

 

Ralph Waldo Emerson said it more poetically:

 

"Some of your hurts you have cured,

And the sharpest you still have survived,

But what torments of grief you endured

From the evil which never arrived."

 

The Peanut's character Charlie Brown is notorious for this kind of worrying. Eventually he said, “I’ve developed a new philosophy. I'm only going to dread one day at a time".

 

The Master Jesus doesn't want us to dread the future. Not even one day at a time. He wants to introduce us to the "Perfect love which casts out fear." He tells us in his teachings not to fear the future. Now the version of this we have in Matthew is a bit confused. It makes Jesus into Charlie Brown. Jesus says there, “Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.” Now I’m pretty sure that this isn’t a very good rendering of what Jesus actually said. Jesus never focused on troubles and he would hardly advise us to do so. I suppose if he had, we could make a fortune marketing the “Don’t Worry About Tomorrow” Christian day-planner. It wouldn’t have a calendar – just a page that says “Today’s Troubles”.

 

I suspect what happened was that some poor neurotic scribe a hundred years after Jesus read Jesus’ statement to “not worry about tomorrow” and thought “How can Jesus be serious? How can we not worry about tomorrow?? Oooohhh – it must be because there are so many horrible things to worry about TODAY!!” He apparently doesn’t notice that two verses earlier, Jesus tells us not to worry about TODAY either! Here’s how Bishop Keizer renders this entire teaching in the Simple Word of the Master Jesus:

 

“Therefore, do not WORRY (!) or say, what will we eat? Or, what will we drink? Or, how will we be clothed? For your Heavenly Father knows you have need of all these things. But seek first the guidance and justices of God’s INNER kingdom, and all these things shall be added unto you. Therefore do not fear the future; rather, entrust the problems of the day in prayer to the Father, and then act on Heaven’s guidance. For the transformed present will produce a transformed future.”

 

The Master Jesus wants our attention in the here and now. In the present moment – the only moment where we can actually change anything. The past doesn’t exist. The only contact you have with the past is in your memories – in the present moment. The future doesn’t exist. The only effect you have on the future is caused by your actions right here and now, in the present moment.

 

Does this mean we SHOULDN’T use an appointment calendar? No, that’s not what it means at all. It’s fine – even helpful, to use “time” for practical purposes. Who do you think worries more about tomorrow – the person who consults their appointment book and knows they have three appointments tomorrow – or the person who doesn’t HAVE an appointment book and THINKS they may have appointments tomorrow. The person without the appointment book may spend hours trying to remember where they are supposed to be and at what time, or making calls to find out.

 

Even if you aren’t consciously thinking about your appointments and things to do – if you don’t have a good planning and appointment system, your commitments will always be there in the back of your mind or in your subconscious, giving you a faint feeling of anxiety as your mind tries to keep track of everything. So the purpose of organizing your plans and appointments isn’t to worry about the future, it’s to NOT worry about the future. Once your mind knows that your commitments are captured in some external system that it knows you will check when you are supposed to – it can relax, and let you focus back on the present moment.

 

Of course, if organizing and reorganizing your day becomes your hobby – if you spend more time organizing than actually DOING, then you’ve let your organizing pull you away from the present moment.

 

So let’s get back to the present moment. Because the present moment is the gateway to the Kingdom of Heaven

 

I’m going to make a statement that may seem extreme, but I ask you to consider it carefully. Almost all of our worry, fear, stress, frustration and anxiety comes from refusing to accept the present moment as it actually is.

 

Next time you’re worried about a relative or stuck in a traffic jam, notice your feelings. At the bottom of your frustration you’ll find a deep feeling of resentment and hostility against the reality of the present moment. When we worry about the future, what are we really doing? We may be rebelling against the fact that our reality has uncertainties in it. Or we are unhappy with our present reality and want to focus on our plans for the future – but they’re not coming fast enough. There are too many setbacks. We’re not getting out of this terrible present situation as fast as we’d like to. Or perhaps we fixate on the past to escape the present moment. We linger in the sweet sadness of memories of a past that we prefer to our current situation.

 

We fight and we resist and we run away from the only thing that actually exists – the present moment.

 

Why do we resist it so?

 

Well, one thing that may worry us is an idea in the back of our minds that if we accept the present moment, and are content with our current situation – we’ll never get out of it. We’ll be stuck here. Forever. We think that with our discontent we can bribe or threaten God into changing things for us. But if we let him think we’re content – he’ll just let us languish. That doesn’t say a lot of good things about our image of God, does it? It sounds like the kind of God who if we ask for bread will give us a rock. But it is love and gratitude that open the windows of heaven, not discontent.

 

If we drop our resistance to the present moment, does that mean we are stagnant? That we can’t change? Of course not! It means that our change begins with an objective, loving assessment of out situation as it really is. It’s like a person who falls into quicksand. By resisting – by flailing around like a lunatic – we only sink deeper – because our activity is irrational – not productive. But if we keep ourselves calm – if we don’t resist the reality of our situation, then we can plan our escape more efficiently. And the universe will help us. Perhaps we will notice a branch nearby that we can grab. Something we wouldn’t have noticed if we were flailing around. Perhaps we can explore the quicksand and find a gentle handhold or toehold somewhere. And we make progress.

 

The next time you find yourself in the grip of worry, or resentment or anger some other strong negative emotion, try this exercise – completely surrender to the present moment, including all its risks and possibilities. Don’t resist. Know that everything is just as it must be for the moment. Suspend your judgment of other people, or the situation or yourself.

 

What you will find is that a space opens up in the spiritual atmosphere. There’s a feeling like a fresh breeze blowing away your problems. You may still feel anxiety or some other emotion – but you won’t be lost in it. You won’t BE worried – you’ll be a person aware of experiencing a feeling of worry. And that’s a much different feeling. And when you do, you’ll find that your emotions will settle down. Negative emotions like worry don’t like to be watched. They’re bashful. Be the witness of your emotions instead of being possessed by your emotions.

 

Let’s come back to the present moment again. There is another reason we run away from the present moment. This reason is rooted in the nature of our being. It’s a metaphysical reason. That doesn’t mean it’s weird or complicated. Just the opposite. It means it’s so basic it’s sometimes hard to see.

 

The Master Jesus says that the Kingdom of God – God’s dominion or God’s dimension – is within you – within each of you. If you could reach down to your innermost nature, your heart of all hearts – you will find the presence of God. Your innermost essence – is God’s essence. That is the secret of all secrets. That is the core of all mystical teaching – the root of all true religion.

 

But this inner kingdom is hidden from us. It’s covered up by huge amounts of emotional turmoil and mental noise. Anyone who has seriously tried to practice meditation knows that – even when you don’t want it to – the mind keeps spewing out thoughts like some unwanted television set that’s impossible to turn off.

 

Eckhart Tolle tells a story of sitting on a bus next to a woman who was mentally disturbed. She was talking to an imaginary person in a loud and often hostile voice. Lots of profanity. She was a running stream of conversation. Later as he washed his hands in public bathroom, Eckhart thought to himself “I’m sure glad I’m not like that woman” – and the man at the sink next to him gave him a strange look. Then Eckhart realized he hadn’t THOUGHT the phrase to himself – he’d actually said it out loud!

 

We’re all “crazy people”. We all have a running stream of mostly useless, mostly repetitive thought going on in our minds all the time. The only difference is that the “normal” people manage not to let it come spilling out of their mouths – at least MOST of the time.

 

A lot of those thoughts are hopes and plans, and especially worries, about the future. They pull us like a strong swift current away from our grounding in the present moment. And it is in the present moment, and only there – that we can find the gateway into the inner kingdom of God.

 

You won’t find the Kingdom of God in some grandiose plan for the future.

 

You won’t find it in some cherished memory of the past.

 

God, your inner nature – is reality. And there is only one point of contact we have with reality – that pinpoint gateway – that eye of the needle, between the remembered past and the imagined future. The doorway to the kingdom of God that fills up the reality of the present moment.

 

Be in the present moment. Don’t think about it. Experience it. Surrender yourself in a complete and loving acceptance of the present moment, and the door begins opens to you. And behind the door is the essence of the Godhead, the Buddha Nature, closer to you than you are to yourself.

 

And as you become more at home in the present moment, you realize that you ARE the present moment. It is timeless. It has no past and no future. It is only now – eternally now. Forms and manifestations come and go. They appear in the field of Now and then they disappear – but the Now remains, and YOU remain – at peace in the vibrant energetic emptiness of God – wanting for nothing, worrying about nothing.

 

And here’s the paradox. When you seek first God’s inner kingdom, all the rest falls into place. The universe aligns itself to your purposes because you are aligned to the universe. Just at the moment when you begin to lose your desperate grasping after the external things of the world, the things you need begin to come to you almost without effort. And you can enjoy them fully – free of worry, because when they go, as all finite things do, they don’t take a part of you with them. You are connected to the source of all manifestation.

 

This is the kingdom of God, and the home country of all mystics. It’s a place where worries and problems subside, because you are no longer at odds with the purposes of God manifesting in your life. Many teachers of different traditions have commented on this.

 

Listen to the Catholic mystic St. Theresa describe it:

 

Let nothing trouble you / Let nothing frighten you

Everything passes / God never changes

Patience / Obtains all

Whoever has God / Wants for nothing

God alone is enough.

 

The Indian Guru Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj said:

 

"You are all drenched for it is raining hard. In my world it is always fine weather. There is no night or day, no heat or cold. No worries beset me there, nor regrets. My mind is free of thoughts, for there are no desires to slave for."

 

And here’s one of the most famous quotes from “A Course In Miracles”

 

"Nothing real can be threatened.

Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God."

 

Put aside the unreality of your worries about the future, your longings for the past, your impatient desires. Surrender to the reality of this present moment.

 

And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

 

Amen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Map of Consciousness – David Hawkin

The following chart of consciousness is taken from David Hawkin’s book Power Vs. Force

 


God-view Life-View Level Log Emotion Process
Self Is Enlightenment 700–1,000 Ineffable Pure Consciousness
All-Being Perfect Peace 600 Bliss Illumination
One Complete Joy 540 Serenity Transfiguration
Loving Benign Love 500 Reverence Revelation
Wise Meaningful Reason 400 Understanding Abstraction
Merciful Harmonious Acceptance 350 Forgiveness Transcendence
Inspiring Hopeful Willingness 310 Optimism Intention
Enabling Satisfactory Neutrality 250 Trust Release
Permitting Feasible Courage 200 Affirmation Empowerment
Indifferent Demanding Pride 175 Scorn Inflation
Vengeful Antagonistic Anger 150 Hate Aggression
Denying Disappointing Desire 125 Craving Enslavement
Punitive Frightening Fear 100 Anxiety Withdrawal
Disdainful Tragic Grief 75 Regret Dispondency
Condemning Hopeless Apathy 50 Despair Abdication
Vindictive Evil Guilt 30 Blame Destruction
Despising Miserable Shame 20 Humiliation Elimination

Evil and the Hierarchy of Being

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”.