exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Editor's 1-Minute Essay:
return to "Sensibility" main-page
Charlotte Dresser, Life Here And Hereafter: By means of automatic writing, Ms. Dresser received this message from the other side concerning a man who had died some centuries earlier but, upon entering the next world, could not see or hear:
“He was a religious enthusiast, and had pictured the future life in terms of hell-fire on the one hand, [or] ages of bliss on the other. Not finding either [upon crossing over], he conceived the idea that he had somehow missed the way, and was condemned to everlasting solitude. Can you understand what torment this would bring? … [During his time on Earth] he was opposed to anything contrary to his beliefs, and was unjust and oppressive to all who held them… he held the idea that only his way would take one into the realms of bliss in the future life, and he vigorously opposed any other belief… [When he arrived he was able only] to see dimly some of his surroundings. He was not able to see those who were trying to help him, and he could hear nothing. His own thoughts were all the company he had through the long centuries. We do not know just how long the time seemed to him, for of course he had no way of measuring it. But he says he can only express it by saying that it seemed endless.”
sensibility, a dictionary definition: capacity for sensation or feeling; responsiveness or susceptibility to sensory stimuli; mental susceptibility or responsiveness; quickness and acuteness of apprehension or feeling; keen consciousness or appreciation; sensibilities, emotional capacities; capacity for intellectual and aesthetic distinctions, feelings, tastes, e.g., a man of refined sensibilities; the property of being readily affected by external influences.
Summerland will have to wait
The Word Gems site offers much information concerning the pleasant and congenial environment of Summerland. And, while it’s been mentioned, but not highlighted, a certain minimum level of spirituality is required to take up residence in the land of endless summer.
In earlier writings, you’ll find statements, to the effect, that one does not need to be perfect to enter Summerland; that sainthood is by no means required; that an ordinary level of civility and positive-mindedness is sufficient to begin. This is true, but in this writing we shall define that initial requisite minimum level of spiritual development.
some overdue homework to hand in, certain penalties for cutting class
Many will need to spend some time in a dark place before admittance to Summerland is granted. We’ll talk about this in detail, but, as prelude, allow it to be said that – there’s nothing to worry about. If any of us finds him or herself in a dark place upon crossing over, we can leave the same day. The very same day. So, let’s just keep this in mind as we explore this subject of entrance requirements. Again, there’s nothing to worry about. If you want to leave a dark place, you can – the very same day. And we’ll talk about how to do that.
With this established, let’s consider some facts; supplied to us by those on the other side who help new arrivals.
75% of those entering the afterlife will spend at least some small period of time in a dark place
This figure might startle us; but only until we consider how most live their lives here on Earth.
concerning this 75%, some will experience darkness for a few minutes or hours, days or months, but, for some, even for years and (gulp) centuries
Why is this? If we’re able to leave the dark place the same day, then why do some languish there for a very long time? The answer is, they want to stay.
And now we must ask - why would anyone want to stay?
Large numbers choose this because to do otherwise would be an admission that they’d been wrong about a lot of things during their time on Earth. Many are not willing to admit error; right now, they're virtually constitutionally unable to adopt a teachable mindset - they've perverted themselves.
Editor’s note: Think about the people you know who are the rabid political or religious cultists. Can you imagine them changing their minds even if good evidence to the contrary is presented? Not really. They won't even listen for a moment and immediately begin calling you names. And it’s the same over there. Many people, especially the hard-core, would rather suffer in a dark rat-hole for a very long time than admit that they were wrong.
Who sends people to a dark place?
In Dr. Viktor Frankl’s memoirs of the concentration camps, he recounts that new arrivals would be met by an SS officer. This foreboding individual would survey the inmates as they passed by him for review. As they did, in each case, the judging officer would slightly raise an index finger, motioning the hapless to advance either to the right or to the left. In this ominous winnowing process, a separation of “sheep and goats,” each detainee was sent to a work camp – or to the gas.
However, there is no such life-and-death selection at the “gates” of Summerland. It doesn’t work that way. No one stands in judgment of one's deeds – at any time – during our coming eternal life.
Then how? Why do some end up in a “dark closet without walls”? Who decides?
No external judge sends one to a dark place. We ourselves do the sending.
a moral specific gravity
Think of a spinning centrifuge, or maybe a milk-and-cream separator; oil and water might be easier to envision. Different substances naturally separate themselves as each has a particular density or “specific gravity.”
This principle helps us to understand what happens in terms of each going to his or her “own place.” Each person has a spirit, or character, or essence, conditioned by a lifetime of choices, good or not-so-good. We’re all a mixture of these, but there’s a preponderance, a pronounced leaning, one way or another.
A life primarily led by selfishness, fear, closed-mindedness will produce a “dense,” “heavy,” or “darkened” spirit, while the more giving, open-minded, and positively-oriented individual will possess a nature containing much more “light.” And these two general camps naturally separate themselves upon crossing over.
we wrap ourselves in darkness, we take our own darkness with us
Testimonies of teachers on the other side say that the wayward of our world “wrap themselves in darkness.” And so, when they cross over, it’s not so much that they send themselves to darkness, but, more accurately, they take their own darkness with them.
this darkness is more than lights out
It’s not that these untoward are “in the dark” and if only somebody would flick the switch for lights that they’d be ok. It’s more than that. Those who have led self-centered, fearful lives are bereft of normal sensibilities. Stated more clearly – they can’t see or hear!
no eyes to see, no ears to hear
The spiritually damaged or immature have not activated the “soul’s eyes and ears.” Think of it this way. They lived their lives trying so very hard to shut out the truth, any contrary teaching to their small opinions, such that, all this “shutting down” of critical faculties, of higher-grade sensibility, manifests, upon crossing over, as an atrophied capacity to perceive, an inability to see or hear!
Editor’s note: Think of the many times in the New Testament that Jesus used the phrase “if you have eyes to see and ears to hear…” He wasn’t speaking metaphorically so much but was referencing the higher self’s critical sensibilities.
dozens of personal testimonies by those, having crossed over, unable to see or hear
Charlotte Dresser’s Life Here And HereAfter offers a great many reports from those, having crossed over, afflicted with blindness and deafness.
Excerpts of these accounts are presented on the next page.
Please review these, after which additional thoughts and commentary will be offered below.
'he turned on me, then he turned off his nervous system'
Recall George Harrison's version of "Horse To Water." He confronts a friend about a personal problem, suggests that both of them seek for better wisdom, to which the friend responds by "shutting down his nervous system."
Concert for George
Royal Albert Hall
November 29, 2002
Horse To Water
you can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink, oh no, oh no, oh no, a friend of mine in so much misery, some people sail through life, he is struggling, I said, "hey man, let's go out and get some wisdom," first he turned on me, then turned off his nervous system, you can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink, oh no, oh no, oh no, you can have it all laid out in front of you, but it won't make you think, oh no, oh no, oh no
listen to Sam Brown’s sensational version of “Horse to Water” at the Concert for George
if you repeatedly ‘shut down your nervous system’ anytime a friend, or life, or God, or some agent of better thinking confronts you, then don’t be surprised if there’s a dark closet with your name on it when you cross over
The teachers over there say that about 75% of everyone around us stumble through life by “shutting down their nervous system” when a better way is presented.
Think of the thick-and-dark political cultism that besets America these days. Think of the demonization of rivals; the non-cogent shrieking response to anything that countermands the party platform led by Dear Leader. There is no careful weighing of the evidence; there is no thoughtful consideration of alternate views. Instead, it’s all hatred and venom. Anyone “shutting down his nervous system” this way should not be shocked to enter the next world blind and deaf, in a "dark closet with no walls."
Oscar Wilde communicates from a lackluster next-world
The evidence seems very substantial that writer Oscar Wilde offered messages after his transition. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle opined that these missives constitute the best evidence of survival of personality that he’d encountered in more than 30 years of research.
As one reviews a sampling of the communications one is struck by the extremely high level of literary skill, far beyond that which might be produced by an ordinary medium.
See the Documentary by Dr. Keith Parsons on the evidence of Wilde’s efforts to reconnect with planet Earth.
All this acknowledged, Wilde spoke of his surroundings as shrouded in shadows. He was not in a good situation. And he complained about the service work that he was advised to perform. It’s clear that Wilde’s arrogance, a certain disrespect coloring his words, plus an emphasis on the material aspects of existence, had landed him in a place of destitution over there.
And, of course, it’s not just political cultism but all of the brands, including materialistic science. On the “Evolution” page I’ve outlined the gross prevarication, the bold-faced lies, that passes for science these days. And yet radical Darwinism continues to present its defective wares for sale, despite a great and growing number of scientists -- entire conventions at the Royal Society in London with hundreds of scientists attending from around the world -- who point out the errors. Even so, those who disagree with the cultist “Darwin Lobby” are labeled as kooks, half-wits, and also-rans.
Religious cultism is the favorite in this class. And so many of those who end up blind and deaf over there are the victims of The Nice Young Man at Church. My own father landed in this group. I received a psychically-derived message from him which, essentially, suggested, “This is nothing like I thought it would be. The church made a fool of us with all of their bad teaching.”
Charlotte Dresser’s “blind-and-deaf” reports feature testimony from a very diverse group: stoical, hard working farmers, shy sales girls in a shop, medical doctors, teen boys playing football, affable salesmen, conniving businessmen sharks, burdened and overworked housewives, female factory workers, romantic lovers who lost each other, classroom teachers, mystic philosophers, faithful church goers, thieves and criminals, family men, store keepers…
In this unwieldy group we find all sorts of perspectives on how to life live; however, in this confusion, they all have one thing in common:
Every one of them has cultishly latched onto a belief-system as final truth, and in this narrowness, they’ve all “shut down their nervous system.” They know it all, you can't tell them anything, and they're afraid to listen. That’s why they’re blind and deaf when they cross over.
Some will ask, ok then, we should avoid a bad belief-system, but what about a good belief-system?
there is no such thing as a good belief-system
The answer here, I suggest, is that everyone will say, “I have a good belief-system, and it’s all those others that are causing the problem.”
Editor’s note: This ready tendency to quickly absolve oneself of sins became a saying of Dr. Richard Feynman:
However, while this egocentrism is another problem all by itself, it's not the best answer for our question because – there is no such thing as a good belief-system.
See the writings on the “Belief” page. We’re not supposed to have beliefs. To “believe” is tantamount to "planting the flag," to seeing oneself as possessing final truth, and, even a million years from now, we'll never have that. We’ll never have it because there’s a big universe out there, and it’s filled with information, and we possess but mere paltry amount. It will always be so.
What we know, or think we know, is but one grain of sand on an endless beach of ignorance; therefore, whatever is believed to be known must be held lightly, pending, and anticipating, further data. It shall always be so.
Dr. John Wheeler: "We live on an island of knowledge surrounded by an ocean of ignorance. As our island of knowledge grows, so does [our perception of] the shore of our ignorance... At the heart of everything is a question, not an answer."
Instead of “beliefs,” we are to weigh the evidence, with a view toward modifying tentative conclusions as new data comes in. And it will always come in.
Does this mean we can never be sure about anything? No, we can be sure about some things – but not because we've planted the flag, and not because they’re “beliefs.” If something is true it will be substantiated as such from many different directions; in other words, the evidence will continually support the conclusion.
more than drinking the koolaid
The long reach of cultism encompasses much more than crackpot churches. The root idea of cult offers the sense of "cut." This core concept of "cut" leads us to images of refinement and refashioning and, by extension, development, control, pattern, order, and system.
Cultism as systemization finds a ready home in religion and philosophy which seek to regulate and redistill the patterning and ordering of ideas. However, in a larger sense, the spirit of cultism extends to every facet of society. We find it scheming and sedulously at work in politics, academia, family, corporations, entertainment, science, artistry – anywhere power might be gained by capturing credulous and fear-based minds.
See the “cultism” page for a full discussion.
'I gave time and money to the church, and now I'm treated like some kind of criminal'
But how different is this high-mindedness from that exhibited by those who end up in a dark closet. And look at them now! They’ve been with “lights out” for a long time, and they finally have someone to talk to! And what do they do when met by one who seeks to help? They want to fight. They want to be "right." See them prance and cavort, bluster and shout! They're insisting it's so unfair for this to be happening to them. They're a victim of a great injustice. Didn't they lead a respectable life? Didn't they do good works? Didn't they give time and money to the church? "And here I am now, treated like some kind of criminal!" And so now they're really mad and offended. They threaten "legal action" and "you'll be sorry when I get out of this." They're getting more abusive now, begin to insult the visitor, and resort to name-calling – just the way they used to get up on their high-horse and hind legs when they argued politics or religion back on the good ol’ Earth. And now they’ve “shut down their nervous system” but good.
Editor’s note: There is no need to worry about getting stuck in a "dark closet." There is no one, absolutely no one, in blindness and deafness who thinks along the following lines: “If I have injured anyone, then I would be more than happy to make amends, whatever I can do to offer restitution. I want to live a life of service. I want to be willing to help anyone. I want God to be proud of me and to be a worthy member of the Family. I want to do better. I want to leave selfish ways far behind. I am willing to do whatever I need to do to change my old ways and to reflect God’s love in my life.” Anyone who thinks in this general way of positiveness and willingness to learn of God's mind has no need to fear anything - and will not be, or remain, in a dark place.
Editor’s note: Remember what Lana said to Clark about why she was dating a jerk? “He makes me feel safe.” People get into bad relationships and join “the cults” – political, corporate, academic, scientific materialistic, religious – because “they make me feel safe.” An “infallible guru” with “infallible one-true doctrines” promises certainty in a doubtful and dangerous world. And it can make one feel warm-and-fuzzy to trade autonomy and critical-thinking faculties, to "shut down your nervous system," for blind allegiance. But when these confused and angry ones, in their hundreds of millions, cross over and discover themselves without the protection of a saint/god/holy-mother/savior they'd bargained for, they can feel hard done by, and now they want to march the bellicose path.
Is suffering necessary to change?
Art Mokarow 50 years ago would tell us ministerial students that suffering is merely optional. We can change without suffering; but, he added, for most people, it’s the only way for them to change. And this is why a trip to the “dark closet” is not an elective course for the majority. They won’t have it any other way. They need to be seen as "right."
Think of what Herodotus said about “nomos,” about custom and convention, in every society. People live and breathe by what Grandma said 60 years ago. Granted, Grandma was a great person, the best, but she really didn’t know that much, as she, herself, was a victim of local and provincial “nomos.”
the geography of religious tenet
Everyone's culture and society, around the world, has its superstitions and soft-underbelly beliefs. If you were born in the Far East, you might believe that Buddha will meet you in heaven. In the Near East, it might be Mohammed. And in many countries in the West, you might hope that Jesus or Mother Mary, Queen of Heaven, will embrace you, and save you, at time of death. People don’t give up culturally-defined “nomos,” these warm-and-fuzzy irrationalities, so easily.
disillusionment, a doorway to wisdom
For many people, the only way of expunging these cultish beliefs is to suffer their way out of them; to be confronted with the stark reality of the failure of their insubstantial ideas, their fairy-tale views. It's called didacticism in a dark closet.
We can see the true-believer now: she's crossed over - but, what's the matter? "everything's dark! and worse, where is Mother Mary? nowhere to be found, and I even prayed for years that she'd save me in the hour of my death! so what's happening, where is she? it's not what I was taught, this is really disillusioning."
But disillusionment can serve as natural cleansing, a natural realignment of inner thought with outer fact, a natural reality therapy. It can offer a short step, and a doorway, to a life-shattering metapardigm shift.
When Jesus began to heal a blind man, the fellow said, “I see men walking as trees.”
Jesus was an advanced human being with highly developed psychic powers. The things he did, each “miracle,” have been done by others with psychic abilities. There are books on this subject.
However, there’s a story about Jesus healing a blind man in Mark 8:22. But the man did not recover his sight in a moment. It returned to him only in stages. His initial distorted vision prompted him to say “I see men walking as trees.” This story is meant to lead us to an ultimate reality.
What does it remind you of? We came across this sort of thing many times in the excerpts from Charlotte Dresser’s book.
Further, in the Course In Miracles, purportedly a channeled series of lessons from Jesus himself, it is frequently stated that the mature daughter or son of God will “heal the sick and raise the dead.” But this is the “spiritually sick” and the “spiritually dead.” Is this not exactly what Mary, Dee, and Sis were doing?
accessing the inner life
Speaking of the Course In Miracles, so much of it relates to the work of Charlotte and friends. Consider some of the lesson titles from the Course:
I see nothing as it is now.
I am determined to see.
I am determined to see things differently.
I do not perceive my own best interests.
Above all else, I want to see.
Above all else, I want to see things differently.
There is nothing to fear.
My grievances hide the light of the world in me.
My salvation comes from me.
I am spirit.
Let me be still and listen to the truth.
We could go on. Is this not the essence of what Dresser and Company continually asserted to the wayward in “the dark closet”?
Let’s talk of general principles. Recently I was speaking to Adrian about the disingenuity of false teachers on the other side – here too – who preach that they should be listened to because of having received their information from “the highest levels” of the Spirit World.
What’s wrong with this picture? It’s like this: Those on the other side can see, firsthand, the flowers, the birds, the rivers, the meadows – all the glories of nature. And I’m sure they’re correct when the say that it’s far too beautiful to explain to us. However, scenery and landscape is one thing, but an insight into the deeper workings of life and natural law will not be aided by one’s zip code, if you see what I mean.
We met many arrogant false teachers in the “500 tape-recorded messages from the other side.” All of them focused on some external source of life and power - they wouldn’t admit to this, but if you closely analyze what they say, this is their error. There is no such thing as a “higher level” in terms of “when I get there I’ll be very spiritual.” It doesn’t work that way.
in the democracy of death, each will yet learn that credal beliefs offer no salvation nor advantage of any kind; only the 'true self' aligned with God constitutes spirituality
Spiritual wisdom is a function of the soul, a soul attuned to God, and, with that nexus in place, the soul can soar and blossom in any venue, this world or any to come. As Adrian said, “If you go to a good teacher on the other side, all they’ll tell you is to ‘go within.’ They can't really help you. Only you can help yourself by 'opening a channel' to God.”
That's it, of course. The source of life is within you. That’s where we meet God. And while those on the other side have an advantage in terms of appreciating the intense colors of the flowers, they have no advantage at all concerning spiritual discernment.
This means that you, right now, all by your lonesome, starting today, if you go within, and learn how to do this, you can know things that escape the discernment of some who’ve been over there even for thousands of years.
Editor’s note: A favorite teacher is Dr. Joseph Campbell. I sometimes reference his work “The Power Of Myth.” And the question might be asked, why is it that every culture of old, and today, too, has its stories and legends about heroes, larger than life, able to do exploits? However, the answer becomes clear as we learn about how the ego and the “false self” operate. Our lower, immature nature seeks to identify with a “strong father figure.” We do this to find safety and security in an uncertain and dangerous world. And we’ll go through a phase wherein we want to “live under the protective mantle” of some hero, some strong father, some powerful saint, some queen of heaven, because it feels so good to be protected - but only as a child knows security from secondary source. Note: See the article, "Why the world doesn't need Superman."
does it seem too harsh that a young “working on my GED” shop girl should find herself in a dark closet
We’re not overly surprised to see the cheating business sharks called to task, but the boy playing football, or the farmer quietly working his land, or the low-wage shop girl, finding him- or herself in a dark place might seem unfair to some.
But let’s bring to mind that no “SS officer raises an index finger” in judgment against any of us. We do it to ourselves. But how is this possible? What does a shop girl know of cosmic justice and becoming equal to it? What does a young boy playing football, full of grit and gusto, having a jolly good time, know of some eternal code, concerning which seemingly he’s gone awry?
We want to absolve ourselves and say “it’s not fair.” But who is saying this? It’s the ego, the false self. Not the higher, true self.
What does this mean?
In the lengthy 3-part article “The Inferential Life” we learned that a natural code of living, a natural wisdom, even, a natural religion, can be discerned and inferred from the creation and from our own deeper selves. This is true for every human being, even the low-wage shop girl.
Much could be said here but brevity must rule; volumes could be written on this extremely important subject, and someday we shall study them in Summerland in “natural law” classes. But, for today, to begin in a small way, let’s consider something as basic as “The Golden Rule.” It suggests that we can know how to treat others, and to live life, by looking within our deeper selves, thereby discovering what we require. That is, “require” in a general sense that which all human beings require by virtue of having been created human. It comes with the territory.
When we look at what happens to “ordinary” people upon crossing over, we can begin to understand what should have been in place all along. Even in young adults or teens.
We were made in the image of God. This means many things, and hundreds of pages on the Word Gems site have been devoted to this topic, but whatever else it may mean it assuredly means that we were meant to be thoughtful creatures. We were meant to use the mind, the rational faculties given to us. The mind is such a powerful instrument – and this power is multiplied by many factors of ten on the other side – it is so powerful that to live a life of cultish subservience, of self-deception, of allowing base animal impulse to rule, is to countermand an unspoken law of what we are.
We were meant to weigh the evidence, to inductively collect data, to form opinions and judgments gradually, and then only tentatively, pending new information to come. We were not meant to “shift our brains into idle gear” by surrendering autonomy to some Infallible Dear Leader. If we try to do this, we live contrary to natural law; in so doing, we create darkness in our spirits. We weren't created to be somebody else's serf.
How can we know that we’ve set aside a prescribed path? By “going within” and seeing what we’re made of. Even older children can do this. And this is why one’s higher self holds one strictly accountable for not having lived the thoughtful life, the moral-autonomous life – even if one is a teen.
This accountability is demanded – demanded from one’s own higher self – because it’s what we could have done if we hadn’t been so willful, careless, and negligent. In our society today, adulthood is delayed many years by not asking much of teens. In other societies, however, boys might be considered men even at age ten or twelve; and do a man's work even earlier, and they were ready for it, too. Because there’s the capacity for it, even if it’s unused, one’s higher self will demand a certain conduct, even if we try to play the game “I was too young, I didn’t know.” Yes, we might not have known, but that ignorance was by design; we could have known. Lawyers call this the “reasonable man” rule. We are judged in tort law according to what the reasonable man should have known, what he could have known, had he lived conscientiously; that is, for the spiritual person, according to the "inner whisperings" of the deeper self.
“this should not be happening to me”
Those who find themselves unceremoniously deposited into a “dark closet” are usually in no mood for philosophical musing, however, the fact remains that whatever happens to us at transition is exactly what needs to happen for our long-term benefit.
One’s own higher self orchestrates the drama, and there are absolutely no mistakes in the arranging. In other words, to find oneself in a dark place is not some big mistake, a travesty of justice, and “this should not be happening to me.” Rather, it's a precision-crafted, strategically tailored lesson-plan, exactly what should be happening, in terms of providing venue and impetus to finally live a thoughtful, non-egocentric life.
when somebody you know crosses over, speak to them, out loud, they can hear you, if they trust you, you might be able to help them
Notice how often in the Dresser accounts it is stated, “you on the Earth side are better able to reach this person because your vibrations are still in sync, both of the Earth.”
While most of us are not gifted in “automatic writing,” we can communicate with our friends and relatives who’ve passed on. They will hear us. Tell them the hard facts of life. They might not believe you. Tell them many times over a period of time. Tell them to ask for help, to call out for it. Tell them that they can begin to see and hear if they have a heart and mind to want to. You can be part of the rescue effort to help these victims of “the cults.”
In my own family, I was able to help - confirmed by psychic-medium - my Uncle Joe, trapped in a shadowland, afraid of judgment, afraid to go to the light, due to the abusive teaching of Big Religion.
my friend, in so much misery
George Harrison's song, even before the reference to "shutting down his nervous system," alludes to the friend living "in so much misery." Not much changes when egos cross over; not much at all - same misery, different dark closet.
These are the friends that every sane person in Summerland, to one degree or another and in various forms, is committed to rescuing.
revisited: geography is not spirituality
Editor’s note: As I’ve stated elsewhere, some of the channeled afterlife testimonies from persons over there reveal a significant lack of understanding concerning human nature. Some are quite naïve. They think that more information per se will make people better. As such, many of these like to predict that things will be getting better in the world because more and more people will be learning about the afterlife. There were many of these “prophecies” about a hundred years ago, after WWI. They couldn’t have been more wrong, of course, as we view the carnage of the later twentieth century.
How do they make mistakes like this? In the same manner that we might make them. They haven’t “gone within” and discovered both the “true self” and the potential evil of the “false self.”
Here is a classic example of all this. Afterlife researcher Michael Tymn reports on the Spirit Guides who sent messages to Stainton Moses in the latter 1800s:
“William Stainton Moses, an Anglican priest who became a gifted medium, was told by spirits that they overestimated their ability to help out, not anticipating so much abuse and ignorance on our side. Thus, they withdrew.”
This is quite telling: “overestimated their ability to help out, not anticipating so much abuse and ignorance on our side.”
But this was all foreseeable had they studied the Krishnamurti lectures; which is to say, had they studied their own inner persons.
Note, too, that these Spirit Guides considered themselves very advanced and highly evolved. But “geography is not spirituality,” and living in the “seventh heaven” won’t help you a particle to see more clearly.
The point for all of us is that, never be impressed by “I’ve been over here for a few thousand years, and I really know what's up.” It doesn’t work that way, and all of us, each one, can “go within” today and begin to perceive what escapes certain “exalted ones” on the other side.
Editor's last word:
If knowledge of the next world is resisted even by those already inhabiting the next world, then we shall not be surprised if ones still in the flesh attempt to offer rebuttal. They can try. Shall we be impressed?
Counterargument, lame as it might be, tends to center about the following:
“I believe in Mother Mary, she helps me in my life and answers my prayers.”
Well, that's nice, but what's really happening is that you have Spirit Guides who help you, as you allow for help, and it is not Mary who leads you.
“I don’t appreciate my beliefs being called a cult. I don’t belong to a Jim-Jones group. My church is respectable and does much charitable work in the world.”
Cults always define "cult" to exclude themselves. The root idea of “cult” is “to cut,” that is, to pare and refine, to systematize and order. What is being redistilled? A version of reality itself – an errant one, in favor of private agenda of some Dear Leader.
Jim Jones was just an extreme example of drinking the kool-aid. Your church or political party or scientific materialism may be respectable, but only among those led by a subsuming fear of death, which animates every cult. Your church may do much charitable work in the world, but so do many secular organizations (see "CharityNavigator.com"). And there are good people in every group. Charitable work is done in spite of fear-based doctrines, not because of them.
“I think the book by Charlotte Dresser is just someone’s imagination. We know nothing about what happens after death.”
This very charge is a product of imagination. The scientific evidence for the afterlife has been accepted by 20 Nobel laureates, and petty gainsaying by detractors will not overturn what’s firmly known. We understand a great deal about the other side, and only those who fear this knowledge attempt to deny it.
“The doctrine of Mother Mary [or some other deity] has been around for centuries. Who do you think you are speaking against this holy teaching?”
I think I’m a human being, with critical faculties, and as I survey the evidence for this teaching, and a great many insubstantial others, I find there’s much less here than meets the eye.
But don’t worry. No one’s going to force you to believe anything or do anything you don’t want to do. You can believe in Mother Mary as much as you like – until you cross over, and it doesn’t work for you anymore, as you suffer, terrorized, in a “dark closet without walls.”
There's a natural process of education and purification in play here. But why wait until suffering forces you to be more open-minded? Seek the truth now, live in it, and rejoice in what you’ll find to be something far greater than Mother Mary. Find your joy within, and not from any external source.
Mary, dear person that I’m sure she is, has long ago taken up residence in much higher levels of existence, and all of the idolatrous commotion, down here, about her vaunted "sainthood" and "godhood," that she is the real power in heaven, that she is more compassionate than God, deeply, and more than deeply galls and sickens her.
Editor’s note: See historian Kenneth Clark’s survey of how the Mary doctrine arose more than a thousand years after the time of Christ and developed into a new political tool of power-and-control by Big Religion. The early church knew nothing of this pagan idea - mirroring the ancient mystery cults' ubiquitous Queen Of Heaven - and would have quickly disowned it. As one reads the thousands of reports from citizens of Summerland, there is not one word, one atom, of any presence of a deified Mary over there. Here's why:
Clark outlines the rise of Mary in the Church’s pantheon of the gods. “The earliest cult figure of the Virgin and Child of any size is a painted wooden statue in St Denis [Cathedral] which must date from about 1130.” The troubadour-poetry movement began c.1100.
The ascendancy of Mary in the Church was fueled by a general rise of optimism about life itself after the year 1000. Prior to the new millenium, the masses of humankind lived in dread of a Second Coming with a “rule by rod of iron.” When the year 1000 failed to produce a warlord Jesus, it’s as if civilization - what was left of it after the Dark Ages - began to breathe easier. Confidence and hope in the future began to assemble itself and emerge. However, this is only a small part of why Mary became coronated as goddess.
Clark informs us that none of several early cathedrals were dedicated to The Virgin. However, after the construction of Chartres Cathedral, largely completed by 1220,
“the greatest churches in France were [now, suddenly,] dedicated to her -- Paris, Amiens, Laon, Rouen, Rheims. What was the reason for this sudden change? I used to think [said Clark] that it must have been a result of the crusades: that the returning warriors brought back an admiration for the womanly virtues of gentleness and compassion, as opposed to the male virtues of courage and physical strength which they themselves represented. I am not so sure about this now…”
What was happening in Western Europe in the thirteenth century that provided amelioration for the worship of Mary?
Mary's impromptu and sudden deification was part of the Troubadour movement
Dr. Joseph Campbell said this:
"The whole troubadour tradition was extinguished in Provence in the so-called Albigensian Crusade of 1209."
The early 1200s witnessed the extermination by the RCC of the Troubadours [who, from Summerland, inspired “The Wedding Song”], of courtly love, of chivalry, a state of devotion, says Clark - an
“utter subjection to the will of an almost unapproachable woman; this belief that no sacrifice was too great, that a whole lifetime might properly be spent in paying court to some exacting lady or suffering on her behalf -- this would have seemed to the Romans or to the Vikings not only absurd but unbelievable; and yet for hundreds of years it passed unquestioned. It inspired a vast literature -- from Chretien de Troyes to Shelley … [to this day] we still retain a number of chivalrous gestures; we raise our hats to ladies, and let them pass first through doors, and, in America, push in their seats at table. And we still subscribe to the fantasy that they were chaste and pure beings, in whose presence we couldn't tell certain stories or pronounce certain words.”
Clark says that, as one studies the sensuous poetry of 800 years ago, often one cannot be certain if the woman in view is The Virgin or another woman as object of desire! I think the ambiguity is offered by design.
This generalized wave of adoration and idealization of women in the thirteenth century found near-sensual expression in the worship of Mary, suddenly elevated to the throne, now deemed to be “Mother of God, Queen of Heaven.” Before the 1200s, however, this would have been a very new idea, raising eyebrows, not a few. Early Christianity would have quickly rejected this notion as utter heresy.
tool of Satan, origin of evil
The Great Rogue Church, for centuries, had preached, via the "church fathers," that women were second-class, unfit for leadership, tool of Satan, downfall of Adam, origin of sin in the world, cause of Christ's death, and the like. There was even open debate among Church intellectuals as to whether women were "made in the image," meaning, were they, in fact, human beings?!
Tertullian: “And do you not know that you (women) are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert — that is, death — even the Son of God had to die. And do you think about adorning yourself… Eve, expelled from paradise, (Eve) already dead, would also have coveted these things, I imagine!” Tertullian goes on to offer argument that women’s desire for ornamentation might be traced back to the sinning angels that fell from God’s grace.
Jerome: women are the root of all evil.
John Chrysostom: Concerning biblical women, they "were great characters, great women and admirable… Yet did they in no case outstrip the men, but occupied the second rank … the male sex enjoyed the higher honor. Man was first formed; and elsewhere he shows their superiority…. He wishes the man to have the preeminence in every way… The woman taught once [in Eden], and ruined all.”
Council of Elvira: decreed that “a woman of the faith who has left an adulterous husband of the faith and marries another, her marrying in this manner is prohibited. If she has so married, she may not at any more receive communion—unless he that she has left has since departed from this world.”
Editor’s note: Certain writers as “defenders of the faith” attempt to mitigate this draconian record by pointing out that minority sects within the Church offered a kinder, gentler view; also, that there were deaconess offices for women. All this is true, but the fact remains that women were not offered any leadership positions worthy of note and none of these allowed women to teach in terms of public presence. We are more convinced by what actually happened than by spin-doctors’ efforts to rewrite history.
began as one thing, became another
Fast forward about a thousand years after the “church fathers.” Having instantiated a view of the female as agent of the devil and even questionably human, the Church is now confronted with the rising tide of Troubadour influence. Attitudes were changing concerning the value and dignity of women.
What was the Church to do against this growing wave of appreciation of women’s role in society? An "infallible" church could never admit error, and so it responded in a political, Machiavellian way. If it could no longer credibly vilify women, then it would assume the role of “leader of the parade.”
The "doctrine of Mary" began as one thing but developed into another. The Mary-concept was hijacked, taken from the Troubadours.
Despotic Ecclesia adopted the "Mary doctrine" as its own and even claimed authorship of the idea; suggesting that, but for its blessing, Mary could not have been honored - eventually, they made her "queen of heaven," and created all sorts of holy days and rituals for her.
In the two "Weaponized Art" writings, we saw this two-faced political maneuvering, this "leading the parade from behind" tactic, often employed in Church history. See what the Church did in the case of Francis of Assisi; after burning his followers at the stake, they made him a saint - just as they did with Mary, after demonizing all women.
Editor’s note: “The Wedding Song”, a message from Spirit-Guide Troubadours, redresses an historical imbalance in play for millennia, that of patriarchal societies subjugating women. See discussion in this regard including the “Mary doctrine” on the “verse two, part two” page of TWS.