UNDISCOVERED GENIUS

A commentary on the history, contexts, and meanings of the word "genius," in addition to articles on other related subjects and many new era Christian sermons.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Advent in Fairyland

Advent in Fairyland

Today is Thanksgiving Sunday, and I want to thank God I don't have to give a Thanksgiving sermon. I know, I know, gratitude is one of the highest states of mind we can enjoy, and drawing attention to it on a special day is not a trivial pursuit; however, with the coming of Christmas I think I am going to have other fish to fry, or turkeys to bake, sermonwise. 

Advent and Thanksgiving always come about the same time, and, this year, I am more interested in observing the religious holiday than the national holiday. Nevertheless, in looking back at the year gone by, nothing could solemnize the day more than to fill our hearts with prayers of thanksgiving for the incalculable gifts of grace that have been showered on us over the past year. Holiday--that means, "Holy Day", and I would like to solemnize the day with meditation and communion.

As you know, since the beginnings of Christianity in the Catholic church, a different spiritual significance has been assigned to each Sunday of the year. If my calculations are correct, today is the LAST day of the church calendar, a good day to say good-bye to things--a good day to prepare for the newness of life that comes whenever spirit revisits the flesh. As we finish out this year, we can look back (maybe even on Thanksgiving) with gratitude; we can see the things that were good and we can see the things that were not so good. In preparing for preparing, we ought to take a good long look at the things that were not so good, and try to sweep them out before the visitation of the Lord graces our humble dwelling place.

From Wikipedia:
"In Anglican churches the Sunday before Advent is sometimes nicknamed Stir-up Sunday after the opening lines of the Book of Common Prayer collect for that day. In the Roman Catholic Church since 1969, and in most Anglican churches since at least 2000, the final Sunday of the liturgical year before Advent has been celebrated as the Feast of Christ the King. This feast is now also widely observed in many Protestant churches, sometimes as the Reign of Christ."


So, according to the church calendar, we should feast today in preparation for the fast that begins next week. Next Sunday is the first of the four Sundays of Advent, the period of sacrifice and preparation for the coming of the Christ. We need to impose some kind of rigorous discipline on ourselves to help us  concentrate on this idea: out with the old, in with the new. For, whatever else may be said of it, it cannot be denied that Christmastide is a time of renewal, and a certain amount of garbage must be taken out before the new can take its place in our lives.

It's just not possible to be a human being and not, (over time), fill up a hefty-sized garbage can of leftover junk--waste matter--that was not part of the program but got stuck to us anyway. Think about the accumulated trash that clutters your life; ask yourself if you really need any of it, or if you are just hypnotized by it dancing glitter; try to free yourself from its thrall, and come before the lord naked and open. Advent is the time of preparation, (purification, say), for the coming incarnation of spirit into the material plane; it is a time of a mental bracing of our egos against the devastating breath of God that wipes away the old and ushers in the new; the rod and staff of the Shepherd. So, even though the official first Sunday of Advent isn't until next week, I want to get the preliminary background on Advent out of the way today, so that next week we can focus on the spiritual resonance of the so-called first day of the church year.

Today's sermon's inspiration was an offhand remark made in Wikipedia concerning Theosophy and angels:

"It is believed by Theosophists that nature spirits, elementals (gnomes, undines, sylphs, and salamanders), and fairies can be also be observed when the third eye is activated. It is maintained by Theosophists that these less evolutionarily developed beings have never been previously incarnated as humans; they are regarded as being on a separate line of spiritual evolution called the “deva evolution”; eventually, as their souls advance as they reincarnate, it is believed they will incarnate as devas."


So, according to Steiner, if you develop your third eye, you can see fairies, a kind of low-class angel. I was thinking how this fairyland is so much more visible to youngsters than it is to grown-ups; after all, what kid doesn't understand and believe in the tooth fairy, or Santa Claus? Perhaps the use of the third eye is more native to innocence than to the jaded worldly perspective. Maybe it is just this, as I heard a Waldorf teacher once declare:

"All human nerve cells, in order to properly transmit chemico-electrical signals to the muscles, and so forth, are protected by a kind of insulation material called myelin sheathing. The growth of myelin sheathing around the nerves in the brains of young people being is not competed at birth; in fact it is not completely finished until, say, the age of eight or nine."


This leaves the tender brains of children, in their formative years, exposed--unprotected from the subtle electromagnetic influences that radiate all around us, all the time, but which are invisible to our grown-up perceptual apparati. As we get older all our physical equipment becomes more and more stiff and inflexible, and we have to find other ways to move from one consciousness state to another, in particular, to pre-conscious states. Indeed, the spontaneous sensitivity of children to magical realities comes from their ability to freely cross over boundaries of different mind states. As my son Emlyn once said, when he was two: "I fly with the angels at night in my bed."

I was thinking that the magic of Christmas involves a self-willed descent into a primitive mind state in which beings who live on the borders of our reality are more apparent, more glowing with astral resonance, and more connected to the subtle terrains of super-mundane existence. Perhaps this is a good thing, as it connects us to higher worlds; but perhaps all the sugar-plum fairies and Santa's elves are just some phenomenological trash we need to get rid of. This brings us to Advent:

Advent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Advent (from the Latin word adventus meaning "coming") is a season observed in many Western Christian churches, a time of expectant waiting and preparation for the celebration of the Nativity of Jesus at Christmas. It is the beginning of the Western liturgical year and commences on Advent Sunday, called Levavi. The Eastern churches' equivalent of Advent is called the Nativity Fast, but it differs both in length and observances and does not begin the church year, which starts instead on September 1.

The progression of the season may be marked with an Advent calendar, a practice introduced by German Lutherans. At least in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran and Methodist calendars, Advent starts on the fourth Sunday before December 25, the Sunday from November 27 to December 3 inclusive.
Latin adventus is the translation of the Greek word parousia, commonly used in reference to the Second Coming of Christ. For Christians, the season of Advent serves as a reminder both of the original waiting that was done by the Hebrews for the birth of their Messiah as well as the waiting of Christians for Christ's return.

Traditions
The theme of readings and teachings during Advent is often to prepare for the Second Coming while commemorating the First Coming of Christ at Christmas. With the view of directing the thoughts of Christians to the first coming of Jesus Christ as savior and to his second coming as judge, special readings are prescribed for each of the four Sundays in Advent.

From the 4th century the season was kept as a period of fasting as strict as that of Lent (commencing in some localities on 11 November; this being the feast day of St. Martin of Tours, the fast became known as "St. Martin's Lent", "St. Martin's Fast" or the "forty days of St. Martin"). The feast day was in many countries a time of frolic and heavy eating, since the 40-day fast began the next day. In the Anglican and Lutheran churches this fasting rule was later relaxed, with the Roman Catholic Church doing likewise later, but still keeping Advent as a season of penitence. In addition to fasting, dancing and similar festivities were forbidden in these traditions. The third Sunday in Advent was a Rose Sunday, when the color of the vestments was changed and a relaxation of the fast was permitted. The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches still hold the tradition of fasting for 40 days before the Nativity Feast.

In many countries Advent was long marked by diverse popular observances, some of which still survive. In England, especially in the northern counties, there was a custom (now extinct) for poor women to carry around the "Advent images", two dolls dressed to represent Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary. A halfpenny coin was expected from every one to whom these were exhibited and bad luck was thought to menace the household not visited by the doll-bearers before Christmas Eve at the latest.

In Normandy, farmers employed children under twelve to run through the fields and orchards armed with torches, setting fire to bundles of straw, and thus it is believed driving out such vermin as are likely to damage the crops. In Italy, among other Advent celebrations, is the entry into Rome in the last days of Advent of the Calabrian pifferari, or bagpipe players, who play before the shrines of Mary, the mother of Jesus, the Italian tradition being that the shepherds played these pipes when they came to the manger at Bethlehem to pay homage to the infant Jesus.

In recent times the commonest observance of Advent outside church circles has been the keeping of an advent calendar or advent candle, with one door being opened in the calendar, or one section of the candle being burned, on each day in December leading up to Christmas Eve."


In The Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis spoke of the rhythmic succession of Holy days of feast and fast, under the general subject of Man's need for variety in unity; he said that the return to an immemorial theme was an archetypal aspect of Human spiritual anatomy, and helped put him in touch with the divine. Indeed, the symbologies, associated with feast days, evoke a particularized mind state that is able to find the universal in the individual.

As to the quality of Advent as time for spiritual "cleaning house, and preparation" the following quote from A Grief Observed, concerning the rhythm of death and rebirth is of interest:

"My idea of God is not a divine idea. It has to be shattered time after time. He shatters it Himself. He is the great iconoclast. Could we not almost say that this shattering is one of the marks of His presence? The Incarnation is the supreme example; it leaves all previous ideas of the Messiah in ruins. And most are "offended" by the iconoclasm; and blessed are those who are not. But the same thing happens in our private prayers."


I confess, as much as I enjoy the healing, restorative energy of Christmas, I usually do feel pretty shattered for awhile somewhere in there. Revisiting the past and kissing it good-bye will do that to you. And making yourself receptive (in preparation) can make you fragile; your ego's guard is down, and you feel fragile, and weak, and incapable. But it is this very fragility that allows spirit to gain a foothold, inviting it to imbue the non-resisting flesh with heavenly light.

By the way, this passage (from C.S. Lewis' Letters to an American Lady, Dec. 29, 1958) is fun:

"Just a hurried line...to tell a story which puts the contrast between our feast of the Nativity and all this ghastly "Xmas" racket at its lowest. My brother heard a woman on a bus say, as the bus passed a church with a Crib outside it, "Oh Lor'! They bring religion into everything. Look - they're dragging it even into Christmas now!""


It must be admitted that there is an enormous amount of junk that Christmas brings in with it--so much it is hard to see, like the lady on the bus, the forest for the trees. The good news is that: however much of the stuff that symbolizes Christmas, hanging from every streetlight on  every corner, attempts to trivialize the eternal into invisibility, there is still discernible, at heart, the spiritual truth, the WORD, that brought it all into being. Martin Luther will have something to say about this further down, but we begin our section of Luther quotes with this from the CLASSIC FAITH FOR MODERN TIMES website; this is from the Sermon for the First Sunday in Advent; Matthew 21:1-9 preached by Martin Luther in 1521.

"If you believe in Christ and in his advent, it is the highest praise and thanks to God to be holy. If you recognize, love, and magnify his grace and work in you, and cast aside and condemn self and the works of self, then are you a Christian. We say: "I believe in the holy Christian church, the communion of saints." Do you desire to be a part of the holy Christian church and communion of saints, you must also be holy as she is, yet not of yourself but through Christ alone in whom all are holy."


The words "magnify his grace and work in you" sounds a lot like developing the third eye; the act of will that "magnifies" grace must involve a consciousness state that rubs against the borders of fairyland. When the angel came to tell Mary she was to bear a Holy Son, "her soul did magnify the lord".  Perhaps the good news magnified itself in her soul? Maybe it was a team effort? In any case, there is in Advent time a feeling that we can somehow "pump up the volume" of spiritual transmissions, and more easily make contact with higher magical planes.

This is from a Luther Sermon on the Nativity that he preached in 1530:

"The inn was full. No one would release a room to this pregnant woman. She had to go to a cow stall and there bring forth the Maker of all creatures because nobody would give way. Shame on you, wretched Bethlehem! The inn ought to have been burned with brimstone, for even though Mary had been a beggar maid or unwed, anybody at such a time would have been glad to give her a hand. There are many of you in this congregation who think to yourselves: "If only I had been there! How quick I would have been to help the baby! I would have washed his linen! How happy I would have been to go with the shepherds to see the Lord lying in the manger!" Yes you would! You say that because you know how great Christ is, but if you had been there at that time you would have done no better than the people of Bethlehem. Childish and silly thoughts are these! Why don't you do it now? You have Christ in your neighbor. You ought to serve him, for what you do to your neighbor in need you do to the Lord Christ himself."



Again from the Luther Sermon for the First Sunday in Advent:

"14. Thirdly be says:"Behold." With this word he rouses us at once from sleep and unbelief as though he had something great, strange, or remarkable to offer, something we have long wished for and now would receive with joy. Such waking up is necessary for the reason that everything that concerns faith is against reason and nature; for example, how can nature and reason comprehend that such an one should be king of Jerusalem who enters in such poverty and humility as to ride upon a borrowed ass? How does such an advent become a great king? But faith is of the nature that it does not judge nor reason by what it sees or feels but by what it hears. It depends upon the Word alone and not on vision or sight. For this reason Christ was received as a king only by the followers of the word of the prophet, by the believers in Christ, by those who judged and received his kingdom not by sight but by the spirit-these are the true daughters of Zion. For it is not possible for those not to be offended in Christ who walk by sight and feeling and do not adhere firmly to the Word."


"With this word he rouses us at once from sleep and unbelief." Advent rouses from sleep energies that lie latent within us all year, waiting for the right combination of archetypal and higher spiritual symbologies to motivate them into action--action on our hearts. As mentioned above, the truth of the Word is at the bottom of all the glitter and gleam of Christmas images. The kids may be able to see Santa's elves, and the ruby slippers may transport us to Oz, but the WORD is the razorlike ray of light that exposes all the dross in its true nature and leaves visible the TRUTH behind the phenomena.

The following article, Advent, the Human Season, by Eugene Cullen Kennedy develops the theme of Advent symbology; in particular, it mentions the role of candles in symbolically representing the themes of the season:

"Advent is a season made for imperfect people, all of us, in other words, trying to maintain our balance as we scramble up the final slope of the shadow seamed mountain of the year. Advent's climb leads us to a view of the far reaches of the heavenly but in a profoundly human way. We pass through its weeks as we stroll by a succession of Christmas windows, surprised by images of ourselves superimposed on the displays, behold, as the angel of Christmas might say, this is what you really look like in everyday life.

Perhaps that is why the knowing liturgy allows us to view ourselves by candlelight so that we can gradually revise our self-images softened by its glow and be born again to a more homely, more human, and more livable understanding of ourselves.

These candles placed regularly along our climb toward the top of the year also embody the truth about the calling that transcends our occupations and professions. By their very nature, as we by ours, the candles let their substance be consumed by giving light, no matter how brief or flickering. These illuminations weave the weeks of Advent together by their symbolization of the Mystery of the Light of the World toward whose celebration they lead.

These tapers, like the Christmas windows from which our avatars stare back at us, also illuminate how, as psychiatrist Harry Stack Sullivan expressed it, "we are much more simply human than anything else." We are called to give off the great human signal of the season to all the searching and the lonely in the growing winter darkness, come over here, there's plenty of room, we all belong to the same family.

Advent is from the Latin that means "to come to," catching the period's significance as an ongoing journey, the being "in via," or "on the way," as our spiritual lives were described by ancient Christian writers.

The word "Advent" is a plum pudding of meanings, for it signifies a "coming or arrival, especially of something awaited or momentous." We are aware of the biblical mystery of this long awaited coming but there are no feelings more familiar to men and women than those generated by our hellos and our goodbyes, by our longing for union and suffering separation, for our looking forward to comings or arrivals of all kinds, from graduations to weddings, to birthday parties and family reunions.

Perhaps this wonder, that Advent underscores as it recognizes its utter humanity, is most powerfully experienced everyday before our eyes. As Joseph Campbell expressed it, "The latest version of Beauty and the Beast is taking place right now on the corner of Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street." That is the Christmas-like wonder repeated when lovers find each other in the airport crowd as they first did, against all odds, in the great shouldering crowd of the world itself.

If we travel far enough back in the origin of words we find a distant root of Advent in gwa that means "to come" but that is also linked to "welcome" and "guest." This archeological dig of words helps us grasp the many layers of the Advent Mystery and of how, in its illumination of our natures, it overflows with sacramental manifestations of what it means to be human.

Advent allows us to rediscover not the sour version of a puritanical religion that is hard on humans but is one of living mystery and wonder. We feel this mystery in greater and lesser ways in all the comings and goings of this time of the year. We are all on the way to someplace else or are restlessly waiting for someone to come to us; we are suffused in the small mysteries of these defining human transactions that reveal the heart of our humanity.

It also underscores all that is wondrous even in the more homely aspects of being human. We are always on journeys of one kind or another and the whole mystery of our destiny is repeated every time we leave home for work, take up an unfinished task, or dream about the future. There is nothing more human than our setting up camp only to break it at dawn and set off for another that seems filled with more promise or more challenge for us.

These all fit with Advent's pilgrimage that, as we reflect on it, puts us on a track that intersects with the Divine journey to the very same destination, to the "end," as Chesterton wrote, "of the wandering star," to becoming human that is the fathomless Mystery of Christmas."


Again from Luther's Sermon for the First Sunday in Advent; Matthew 21:1-9, 1521.


"24. Again, it is not by virtue of your power or your merit that the Gospel is preached and your king comes. God must send him out of pure grace. Hence, not greater wrath of God exists than where he does not send the Gospel; there is only sin, error and darkness, there man may do what he will. Again, there is no greater grace, than where he sends his Gospel, for there must be grace and mercy in its train, even if not all, perhaps only a few, receive it. Thus the pope's government is the most terrible wrath of God, so that Peter calls them. the children of execration, for they teach no Gospel, but mere human doctrine of their own works as we, alas, see in all the chapters, monasteries and schools.




25. This is what is meant by "Thy king cometh." You do not seek him, but he seeks you. You do not find him, he finds you. For the preachers come from him, not from you; their sermons come from him, not from you; your faith comes from him, not from you; everything that faith works in you comes from him, not from you; and where he does not come, you remain outside; . . ."


In these two paragraphs Luther affirms the idea of salvation through grace. In the context of Advent, the coming of the Son is the grace for which we pine and wait, chosen, as we are, by the great plan of pre-destination, devised by God before the foundation of the world. This idea has brought me, once again, to a point of disagreement with Matin Luther: as we have discussed in our previous presentations on the subject of free will versus good works, there is a very thin line separating the chosen from the choosers--one may PREPARE to be chosen, and thus may CHOOSE TO BE CHOSEN. This has led me to the only salient point I have to make today. First to review some of the points made in the sermon on "Many Are Called but Few Are Chosen":

In After Many a Summer, Aldous Huxley writes:

"There must also be the recollection which seeks to transform and transcend intelligence. Many are called, but few are chosen--because few even know in what salvation consists. . . . Only a few are chosen because it is only the few who choose to hear and heed the call – they choose to be chosen."

"In CHOOSING we are CHOSEN.

To bear the cross assigned to us is never easy--if it were easy they would call it something else. Suffering is how we choose, or, rather, it is the suffering that validates our choice, because only by suffering is our will tempered, is our test passed. Some sacrifice is necessary; we exchange our suffering for spiritual rewards, we give up what is given us in exchange for what was ours before the world began.

Thus the WILL to choose, and choose over and over again the virtuous path, is the key to being chosen."


We are chosen through grace, but the preparations we make to receive the gifts of grace are good works which work on us from the inside out. As the Grace of God approaches in the raiments of Christmas, we know it will be ours, but we also know that the more worthy we make ourselves, the greater will be the gift--we take what we can get, and we get what we can take. We look forward to the coming of the Christ with longing and anticipation, but also fear and trembling because we think that we may not have done enough to deserve this great coming. Undoubtedly we haven't. Let us pray.

Jesus help us prepare to prepare. Assault our stubborn hearts with rays of love that break us down. Let us try to look at life from the bottom up, and rise with the phoenix and the dove to heavenly heights. Amen.

Equal to the Angels II

Equal to the Angels II

The scripture, "He is not God of the dead, but of the living," was the springboard for the three-part sermon of which we have already heard the first and second parts. Two weeks ago, we heard from George MacDonald, commenting on the sacred physical body; last week we took a closer look at Jesus' peripheral comment about the body after death--the "angel" body--we talked about angels in different cultures and religions, mostly by way of description, and we suggested several different ways of thinking about the phenomenology of angels. This week we will hear what Rudolf Steiner has to say about the subtle spiritual bodies, and the way angels help us channel divine reality into the physical dimension. As, when I read the George MacDonald sermon, I will be reading not all, but a lot from The Work of the Angels In Man's Astral Body A Lecture By Rudolf Steiner, Zurich, 9th October, 1918.

For the purposes of this presentation, we don't need to repeat very much of the scripture we have been using--this much is plenty:

Matthew 22:30
30For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.


Mark 12:25
25For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.


Luke 20:34-36
34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry , and are given in marriage :
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage :
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.


In order to get into Steiner, a few introductory notes are in order. Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), was a German philosopher, mystic, writer, and teacher. He founded both the Theosophical Society, and the Waldorf School. The impact of these two entities, worldwide, has been prodigious, both in terms of the activities and publications of the Theosophical Society, and in terms of the thousands of Waldorf schools that offer alternative education to children in a world in which public education is in serious decline. I became aware of Steiner when I got a job teaching violin at a Waldorf school in Santa Cruz. The very rigidly regimented teaching process implemented by this school was kind of a turn-off, but when I read some of Steiner's work, I realized I had found another powerful man of spirit--someone I could learn from.

You will soon see that much of Theosophy deals with occult subjects. My father-in-law used to make fun of occult jargon, calling it "gobble-dee-gook". At a superficial first glance, it might easily be so considered, if it were not for the fact that, as mentioned last week, occultists are quite scientific in their explanations for these phenomenologies. They may ultimately be wrong, and they may definitely be accused, (as in the case of all dogmatists), of putting the cart before the horse, but they are NOT flaky.

In the following statement from last week, we suggested a definition of the word "occult":

Angels, like magic, fall into the category of the "occult" or "knowledge of the hidden", and are therefore outside the general realm of "seeable" subjects. Thinking about angels can be a mere academic exercise, they being generally unseen, and largely unfelt. Of course, if we can learn to enter into a conscious dialogue with angels (note the word "conscious"), as in prayer or meditation, then we can get a whole new slant on the thing, discover a new dynamic that drives the relationship into matters of immediate real (rather than theoretical) significance, matters either spiritual or mundane--you can never predict. However, in such ecstatic dialogues the angels rarely talk about themselves.


Hence, a discussion of angels cannot be considered "helpful" in any direct way, since any delving into occult subjects, (delving into the phenomenology of the mysteries, you might say), may only be considered to be of mere intellectual interest. We have said many times that verbal descriptions of spiritual reality can only amount, ultimately, to pretty fictions, that satisfy our inquiring minds but which do not actually convey any real truth. Occult jargon can only hint at what must REALLY be the case, by pointing our minds in the direction of the great mysteries without truly getting around them. The way we reduce the great mysteries into tales of magic must be comical to higher beings.

The great thing about Jesus is that He threw away all the magic and superstition of His culture and presented a clear, practical, Earthbound philosophy of life. This is not to say that Jesus was not aware of the magic and superstition of His age, nor is it to say that something of that magic and superstition is not true--it is merely to say that Jesus was always pointing at something beyond the phenomenological baggage of the occult sciences, at something more immediate, and, ultimately more powerful.

Nevertheless, this occult discussion is interesting indeed, and is likely provoke a thought or two that may actually prove to be helpful after all--by focusing our mental attention on an issue, our hearts may follow and contribute their transcendental understanding to the problem.

The following Wikipedia summary gives a general overview of Theosophy in general, and of Theosophy's dogmatic views on the subject of angels in particular. This will lead directly into the following Steiner piece on angels. Both this article and the Steiner speech are crammed with jargon that is characteristic of most so-called "New Age" writing. We will pass over definitions of much of this jargon, since most of it is defined in the text to follow. Needless to say, like the disclaimers at the beginnings of movies that say, "The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect. . . blah blah blah,": but these ideas are pretty mainstream now, the New Age having substantially become the Now Age; and, as to their contribution to our attempts at "creating a pretty fiction" and calling it true", they make a lovely bouquet of details that lace around the central truth like ballerinas.

From Wikipedia:
Theosophy

In the teachings of Theosophy, Devas are regarded as living either in the atmospheres of the planets of the solar system (Planetary Angels) or inside the Sun (Solar Angels) (presumably other planetary systems and stars have their own angels) and they help to guide the operation of the processes of nature such as the process of evolution and the growth of plants; their appearance is reputedly like colored flames about the size of a human. It is believed by Theosophists that devas can be observed when the third eye is activated. Some (but not most) devas originally incarnated as human beings.

It is believed by Theosophists that nature spirits, elementals (gnomes, undines, sylphs, and salamanders), and fairies can be also be observed when the third eye is activated. It is maintained by Theosophists that these less evolutionarily developed beings have never been previously incarnated as humans; they are regarded as being on a separate line of spiritual evolution called the “deva evolution”; eventually, as their souls advance as they reincarnate, it is believed they will incarnate as devas.

It is asserted by Theosophists that all of the above mentioned beings possess etheric bodies that are composed of etheric matter, a type of matter finer and more pure that is composed of smaller particles than ordinary physical plane matter."



What follows is a lengthy excerpt from The Work of the Angels In Man's Astral Body A Lecture By Rudolf Steiner, Zurich, 9th October, 1918, Translated by D. S. Osmond with the help of Owen Barfield.

This lecture is regarded as one of the centerpieces of the so-called "New Age" thinking, even though it was composed in 1918. Its main purpose in the context of this sermon is to suggest a relationship between the physical body and the "equal unto the angels" body of Luke 20.

Moreover, it is a work of prophecy: as Steiner says later in the text, spiritual enlightenment promotes clairvoyance; thus, the things he says and predicts in this lecture can only be the result of a spectacular clairvoyance. We all experience little snatches of clairvoyance every day when we go to pick up the phone before it rings, or set out a dinner plate for company we didn't know was coming. Well, Steiner had a BIG talent for this, and I wouldn't say that if I didn't feel that, in a way, some of the things Steiner looked forward to, (almost a hundred years ago), seem to me to have come true. We will comment further on this at the appropriate place in the following material.

Now the Steiner:

". . . To arrive at a clear conception of these things, we must above all consider in greater detail the nature of man himself. In the sense of Spiritual Science, the members of man's being, beginning from above downwards, are: Ego, astral body, etheric body — which latterly I have also called the body of formative forces — and physical body. The Ego is the only one of these members in which we live and function as beings of spirit-and-soul. The Ego has been implanted in us by the Earth-evolution and the spirits of Form who direct it. Fundamentally speaking, everything that enters into our consciousness enters it through our Ego. And unless the Ego, as it unfolds itself, can remain connected — connected through the bodies — with the outer world, we have as little consciousness as we have during sleep. . . .

But if you study the description of these bodies given in the book, An Outline of Occult Science, you will realise by what a complicated process this fourfold constitution of man came into being. It is not evident from the facts presented in that book that Spirits belonging to all the Hierarchies participated in the formation of the three sheaths of man's being? Is it not evident that our threefold sheath composed of physical body, etheric body, astral body, is extremely complicated? It is not simply that these sheaths owe their origin to the co-operation of the Hierarchies; the Hierarchies are still constantly working within them. And those who believe that man is merely the apparatus of bones, blood, flesh and so forth, of which natural science, physiology, biology and anatomy speak, have no understanding of his nature.
If we genuinely study these sheaths of man, we realise that spiritual Beings of the higher Hierarchies are working together with wisdom and set purpose in everything that takes place, without our being conscious of it, in our bodily sheaths. . . .
What are the Angels — the spiritual Beings nearest to men — doing in the human astral body in the present cycle of evolution?

. . . What is there to be said in the general sense when it comes to answering a question such as this? It can only be said that spiritual investigation, when earnestly pursued, is not a matter of juggling with ideas or words, but works its way into the actual sphere where the spiritual world becomes perceptible. . .

What are the Angels doing in our astral body? Conviction of what they are doing can come to us only when we have achieved a certain degree of clairvoyance and are able to perceive what is actually going on in our astral body. A certain degree at least of Imaginative Knowledge must therefore have been attained if this question is to be answered.

It is then revealed that these Beings of the Hierarchy of the Angels — particularly through their concerted work, although in a certain sense each single Angel also has his task in connection with every individual human being — these Beings form pictures in man's astral body. Under the guidance of the Spirits of Form (Exusiai) the Angels form pictures. Unless we reach the level of Imaginative Cognition we do not know that pictures are all the time being formed in our astral body. They arise and pass away, but without them there would be for mankind no evolution into the future in accordance with the intentions of the Spirits of Form. The Spirits of Form are obliged, to begin with, to unfold in pictures what they desire to achieve with us during Earth-evolution and beyond. And then, later on, the pictures become reality in a humanity transformed.

Through the Angels, the Spirits of Form are already now shaping these pictures in our astral body. The Angels form pictures in man's astral body and these pictures are accessible to thinking that has become clairvoyant. If we are able to scrutinise these pictures, it becomes evident that they are woven in accordance with quite definite impulses and principles. Forces for the future evolution of mankind are contained in them. If we watch the Angels carrying out this work of theirs — strange as it sounds, one has to express it in this way — it is clear that they have a very definite plan for the future configuration of social life on earth; their aim is to engender in the astral bodies of men such pictures as will bring about definite conditions in the social life of the future.

That is the one principle in accordance with which the Angels form the pictures in man's astral body.

[Sidebar:
Simple, direct, practical, social, just like Jesus. The idea of clairvoyance is of particular interest to artists, because we all know that some significant percentage of what we create is given to us, transmitted through us without much act of will on our part. If this higher mind material can go out into the world and impress on people a vision of "a very definite plan for the future configuration of social life on earth", then art has served its spiritual purpose. A purpose manifested through the creation of IMAGES.]


But there is a second impulse in the work of the Angels. The Angels have certain objectives in view, not only in connection with the outer social life but also with man's life of soul. Through the pictures they inculcate into the astral body their aim is that in future time every human being shall see in each and all of his fellow-men a hidden divinity.

Quite clearly, then, according to the intention underlying the work of the Angels, things are to be very different in future. Neither in theory nor in practice shall we look only at man's physical qualities, regarding him as a more highly developed animal, but we must confront every human being with the full realisation that in him something is revealing itself from the divine foundations of the world, revealing itself through flesh and blood. To conceive man as a picture revealed from the spiritual world, to conceive this with all the earnestness, all the strength and all the insight at our command — this is the impulse laid by the Angels into the pictures.
The bestowal on man of complete freedom in the religious life — this underlies the impulses, at least, of the work of the Angels.

And there is a third objective: To make it possible for men to reach the Spirit through thinking, to cross the abyss and through thinking to experience the reality of the Spirit.

. . . These events can be characterised in greater detail, for to know what the Angel is doing is only the preparatory stage. The essential point is that at a definite time — depending, as I have said, upon the attitude men themselves adopt it will be earlier or later or at worst not at all — a threefold truth will be revealed to mankind by the Angels.

Firstly, it will be shown how his own genuine interest will enable man to understand the deeper side of human nature. A time will come — and it must not pass unnoticed — when out of the spiritual world men will receive through their Angel an impulse that will kindle a far deeper interest in every individual human being than we are inclined to have to-day. This enhanced interest in our fellow-men will not unfold in the subjective, leisurely way that people would prefer, but by a sudden impetus a certain secret will be inspired into man from the spiritual side, namely, what the other man really is. By this I mean something quite concrete — not any kind of theoretical consideration. Men will learn something whereby their interest in every individual can be kindled. That is the one point — and that is what will particularly affect the social life.


[It is worth interrupting the flow of this discourse to emphasize something about the word "concrete": as I have repeatedly stated, Jesus was nothing if not practical--He really wanted a heaven on earth. It is nice to see Steiner taking the same attitude: he wants the message of the angel to help us live here on Earth.

Furthermore, in regard to the afore-mentioned prophetic aspect of this piece, I feel that a good case can be made for the proposition that the reality of the world wide web constitutes "a far deeper interest in every individual human being than we are inclined to have to-day." In other words, it appears to me that, almost a hundred years ago, Steiner saw a heightened understanding of MAN, of himself, as a natural side-effect of the huge information explosion that has been made possible by the internet. True, the world is pretty messed up: there are pockets of serious problems in many places; but there are also numerous positive trends that I think will take hold soon enough, and usher in an age of peace.]

Secondly: From the spiritual world the Angel will reveal to man that, in addition to everything else, the Christ Impulse postulates complete freedom in matters of religions life, that the only true Christianity is the Christianity which makes possible absolute freedom in the religious life.

And thirdly: Unquestionable insight into the spiritual nature of the world.
As I have said, this event ought to take place in such a way that the Spiritual Soul in man participates in it. This is impending in the evolution of humanity, for the Angel is working to this end through the pictures woven in man's astral body.
But let it be emphasised that this impending event confronts the will of man. Many things that should lead to conscious awareness of this event may be and indeed are being left undone.

But as you know, there are other beings working in world-evolution, beings who are interested in deflecting man from his proper course: these are the Ahrimanic and the Luciferic beings. What I have just said belongs to the divinely-willed evolution of mankind. If man were to follow the dictates of his own proper nature, he could not very well fail to perceive what the Angel is unfolding in his astral body; but the aim of the Luciferic beings is to tear men away from insight into the work of the Angels. And they set about doing this by curbing man's free will. They try to cloud his understanding of the exercise of his free will. True, they desire to make him good — for from the aspect of which I am now speaking, Lucifer desires that there shall be goodness, spirituality, in man — but automatic goodness, automatic spirituality — without free will. Lucifer desires that man shall be led automatically, in accordance with perfectly good principles, to clairvoyance — but he wants to deprive him of his free will, to remove from him the possibility of evil-doing. Lucifer wants to make man into a being who, it is true, acts out of the spirit, but acts as a reflection, as an automaton, without free will.


[Sidebar: I had a lovely "Aha" moment when I read that bit about free will. You will remember that we have discussed free will in detail in past weeks, and have pretty much agreed that free will is one of the human qualities that is most like God. When I read that Lucifer wants to have "automatic spirituality — without free will", I thought of so many works of fiction that describe the ultimate evil as regimented conformity: the Empirial troops in Star Wars, the soldiers of the Wicked Witch of the West, (Yo-Hee-Ho, Yo-Ho), the Stepford Wives, and that chilling scene in A Wrinkle in Time when all those kids march outside their houses at once, and bounce their balls together in perfect unison, etc. Indeed, the aura of evil that emanates from the Glennallen High School was vastly intensified when they put up that horrible fence that makes the place look like a cage, a prison. Proseletyzing Jehovah's witnesses should think about the magnanimous, tender-hearted Satan who really, like them, only wants what's best for us--he wants to nurture and protect us, enfold us in his loving arms--as long as we do it his way; as long as we are willing to give what up what is most ourselves. Such a deal.]

But the Ahrimanic beings too are working to obscure this revelation. They are not at pains to make man particularly spiritual, but rather to kill out in him the consciousness of his own spirituality. They endeavour to instill into him the conviction that he is nothing but a completely developed animal. Ahriman is in truth the teacher par excellence of materialistic Darwinism. He is also the great teacher of all those technical and practical pursuits in Earth-evolution where there is refusal to acknowledge the validity of anything except the external life of the senses, where the only desire is for a widespread technology, so that with somewhat greater refinement, men shall satisfy their hunger, thirst and other needs in the same way as the animal. To kill, to darken in man the consciousness that he is an image of the Godhead — this is what the Ahrimanic beings are endeavouring by subtle scientific means of every kind to achieve in our age of the Spiritual Soul."


Here ends the reading of the Steiner lecture.

I find the idea of angels planting "pictures" in our heads to be one of those fascinating but obvious-when-revealed, "Well, duh!" insights. Of course good angels put good pictures in our heads--just as bad angels put bad pictures in our heads! Well, duh!

But the notion of PICTURE evokes ideas of conceptualization, memory, and projection of ego that lead to spiritual considerations. One common synonym for "picture" is: icon. An icon is more than a "representation" of a spiritual reality, it is a FOCUS of a spiritual reality, in the same way, on a more modest scale of course, that the Christ Consciousness is a FOCUS of the Mind of God. This passage is laden with implicit significance:

. . . we must confront every human being with the full realization that in him something is revealing itself from the divine foundations of the world, revealing itself through flesh and blood. To conceive man as a picture revealed from the spiritual world, to conceive this with all the earnestness, all the strength and all the insight at our command — this is the impulse laid by the Angels into the pictures.

"To conceive man as a picture revealed from the spiritual world" is to attribute to Man the ability to channel divine reality into the physical. The medium is the MIND, able to receive and maintain in consciousness an IMAGE, divinely inspired and transmitted for the edification and transformation of Mortal Men into Sons of God. I'm sure, if Steiner speaks rightly, that angels prefer to relay their messages through the human astral body because of the sympathy (the having-something-in-common-ness) between the astral body and their own subtle bodies. Must it be, then, that an angel imprints a picture on the face of another picture?

Can this angel body, then, be thought of as a "picture"? Are we to surrender our physical bodies, so sound and solid, in exchange for a flimsy little PICTURE--a momentary static electric charge? Or is the idea to be taken in the opposite sense, that Man's physical body is a mere picture, a formal articulation of divine intelligence and energy--energy that cannot be contained by any formal design, pattern, or shape? Last week we heard George MacDonald insisting that a body, matter in of some degree of fineness, was really necessary, if we were to continue thinking of God as a good guy. Remember? "What kind of God would create us and then not let us get together in heaven for parties and chamber music concerts?" Perhaps MacDonald didn't think quite enough about the concept of "IMAGE"--image as icon or focus of heavenly light. Perhaps the exalted body he imagined was just a plop in the cosmic stew, no less real or eternal than anything else, but always subject to change, transformation, transcendence. I wonder if he ever gave serious to thought to this idea: that the egoic essence of the image is contained in the selfless non-image.

The idea of non-image has been invading my thoughts a lot lately, as I contemplate the angel body, and these other types of finer bodies described by Steiner. Even though the new physics has discovered many different grades of matter density, (neutrinos and the like), using the density of matter as a way of describing the difference between the physical body and the angel body seems like a pseudoscientific way of describing something beyond science. Nevertheless, we must admit that the quality of our devotions in spiritual practice may be described, at different times, as areas on a continuum that is not fixed, and not finite. Sometimes we are a "plop" on the surface of the boiling stew, and sometimes we lose ourselves in the stew.

In C.S. Lewis' Till We Have Faces, a temple is described in which are situated two statues, representations of a lower and a higher goddess. The lower goddess, Ungit, is a great, round stone, of no particular shape; as the blood offerings trickle down its sides, the observer may see a face, or faces, or no face in the uninflected gray. The higher goddess is a white marble Grecian statue, beautiful, articulate, focused. A peasant woman has just come in and said prayers to Ungit, the lower goddess, and, as she is leaving, the the onlooking queen stops her:

"Has Ungit comforted you, child" I asked.
"Oh yes, Queen" said the woman, her face almost brightening, "Oh yes. Ungit has given me great comfort. There's no goddess like Ungit."
"Do you always pray to that Ungit," said I (nodding toward the shapeless stone), "and not to that?" here I nodded towards our new image, standing tall and straight in her robes and (whatever the Fox might say of it) the loveliest thing our land has ever seen.
"Oh, always this, Queen," said she. "That other, the Greek Ungit, she wouldn't understand my speech. She's only for nobles and learned men. There's no comfort in her."


The representations in this temple are very different faces of a single goddess, different phases of a single identity. Although the outer form of these representations are quite unlike each other, they both tend toward the same spiritual essence. Likewise, an artist has materials at his/her disposal which are of a contrasting character but which offer a similar opportunity to create synthetic works which integrate the various articulate voices of man into one great symphonic chorus.

The temple of art, usually thought to be inhabited by an exclusive brotherhood of high priests with nothing to say to the lowly men of earth, might become a popular emporium of enlightenment if composers could find a way to speak to the common man's higher mind by way of his/her lower referential vantage point. But why should they? Why might not the common man create his own music out of his own common materials? Is this possible? Does an association with a language automatically enable one to create discourses in that language? In Man and His Myths, Joseph Campbell makes the following insightful comment:

"There's an old romantic idea, in German, das Volk dichtet, which says that the poetry of the traditional cultures, and the ideas, come out of the folk. They do not. They come out of an elite experience, the experience of people particularly gifted, whose ears are open to the song of the universe. These people speak to the folk, and there is an answer from the folk which is then received as an interaction. But the first impulse in the shaping of a folk tradition comes from above, not from below." (p. 107)


This passage indicates that, traditionally, the task of creating art for the folk has been willingly shouldered by a trained elite; the passage implies that no matter how much the folk need to have their basic spiritual identities expressed, they cannot do it themselves—they need the help of experts. It is therefore incumbent upon the most gifted of our generation to speak to the people of their ultimate identification with super-personal reality. Those with the gift of articulation naturally feel responsible for their brothers and sisters who cry out in their dreams for someone to help them understand who they are, for someone to give them a jingle, a catch-phrase, a hook by the door to hang their identities on for awhile, to assuage their deep ontological insecurities. It's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it. Perhaps this is the angel's job.

The point here, is that: there are many levels of existence, like rungs on a ladder, or floors in an apartment building. The eternally now, changeless God lives on every floor, but the quality of our personal experience of God on every floor is different. Maybe our job is to move up the ladder, maybe our job is to just take in the whole ladder--I don't know.

Several times, in the above quoted material, angels are referred to as links between God and Man. Thus, there is one more hair to split: is the angel the link, or is it the message, the image, the picture? Does the picture have a will of its own, or is it fixed, defined, mortal? It is easy for me to imagine myself as an image, but I always keep sensing that connection with something deeper than the image, the source of the image, the shape without a shape.

I think it must be to this formless shape that our earthly bodies propend--that after these puny earthly dust balls fall apart, there will emerge a far more perfect representation of the spiritual identity that makes me me and you you. Now, we see this picture in a glass darkly, but then: there will be no distance between us, between me and you, nor between yourself and yourself. But, for now, always the picture, the IMAGE is necessary for the mind to grasp and contemplate in time. And with each layer of snakeskin we shed we get closer to the TRUE form, the formless form, the essence, the heart.

Let us pray:
Jesus, we stand silenced with awe before the vast cosmic structure you have given us to live in. We don't expect to make sense of most of it, but, thanks to the ideas, the forms, the pictures of divine reality you send down to us, through the angels, we can glimpse, even with vague human eyes, the glorified bodies our spirits will inhabit, indescribable heaven world which one day is to be our haven and home. Amen.

Monday, October 31, 2011

Equal to the Angels I

Equal to the Angels I

The scripture, "He is not God of the dead, but of the living," was the springboard for the three-part sermon the beginning of which we heard last week, and the second part of which we hear today, and the third part of which we will hear next week. Last week we heard George MacDonald's comments on the sacred physical body. Today we will examine, close-up, Jesus' peripheral comment about the body after death--the "angel" body. Next week we will hear what Rudolf Steiner has to say about the subtle spiritual bodies, and the way angels help us channel divine reality into the physical dimension.

In Luke 20:36 Jesus says, "for they are equal unto the angels." I thought that looking at angels, for a bit, might give us some hint as what our equal-to-angel bodies might be like. It is hard to resist drawing parallels and comparisons between physical bodies and angel bodies. However, angels, like magic, fall into the category of the "occult" or "knowledge of the hidden", and are therefore outside the general realm of "seeable" subjects. Thinking about angels can be a mere academic exercise, they being generally unseen, and largely unfelt. Of course, if we can learn to enter into a conscious dialogue with angels (note the word "conscious"), as in prayer or meditation, then we can get a whole new slant on the thing, discover a new dynamic that drives the relationship into matters of immediate real (rather than theoretical) significance, either spiritual or mundane--you never know. However, in such ecstatic dialogues the angels rarely talk about themselves.

Hence, a discussion of angels cannot be considered "helpful" in any direct way, since any delving into occult subjects, (delving into the phenomenology of the mysteries, you might say), may only be considered to be of mere intellectual interest. We have said many times that verbal descriptions of spiritual reality can only amount, ultimately, to pretty fictions, that satisfy our inquiring minds but which do not actually convey any real truth. Occult jargon can only hint at what must REALLY be the case, by pointing our minds in the direction of the great mysteries without truly getting around them. The way we reduce the great mysteries into tales of magic must be comical to higher beings. The great thing about Jesus is that He threw away all the magic and superstition of His culture and presented a clear, practical, Earthbound philosophy of life. This is not to say that Jesus was not aware of the magic and superstition of His age, nor is it to say that something of that magic and superstition is not true--it is merely to say that Jesus was always pointing at something beyond the phenomenological baggage of the occult sciences, at something more immediate, and, ultimately more powerful.

Nevertheless, this occult discussion is interesting indeed, and is likely provoke a thought or two that may actually prove to be helpful after all--by focusing our mental attention on an issue, our hearts may follow and contribute their transcendental understanding to the problem.

For the purposes of this presentation, we don't need to repeat the complete scripture passage from last week--a short excerpt will suffice:

Matthew 22:30
-34
30For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
31And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God:
32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."
33And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching.



Mark 12:25-27
 
25For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
 26And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
 27He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.


Luke 20:34-40

34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry , and are given in marriage :
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage :
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
37 Now that the dead are raised , even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living : for all live unto him.
39 Then certain of the scribes answering said , Master, thou hast well said .
40 And after that they durst not ask him any question at all.


Today's Wikipedia sampling is lengthy, and some of it is off topic, but it is all interesting--I cut quite a bit out, but there is still plenty of information here:

Angel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Angels are spiritual beings often depicted as messengers of God in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles along with the Quran. The Hebrew and Greek words originally mean messenger, and depending on the context may refer either to a human messenger (possibly a prophet or priest, such as Malachi,) or to a supernatural messenger, such as the "Mal'akh YHWH," who (depending on interpretation) is either a messenger from God, an aspect of God (such as the Logos), or God Himself as the messenger (the "theophanic angel.")

The term "angel" has also been expanded to various notions of spiritual beings found in many other religious traditions. Other roles of angels include protecting and guiding human beings, and carrying out God's tasks. The theological study of angels is known as angelology.

[Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) was the first occult writers to claim to have been in constant communication with angels. Many of his comments are worth recording; on the subject just mentioned about the different classes of angels, Swedenborg says:

"There are angels that receive more interiorly the Divine that goes forth from the Lord, and others that receive it less interiorly; the former are called celestial angels, and the latter spiritual angels."

On the subject of man's after-death angel body he says:

"In the spiritual body moreover, man appears such as he is with respect to love and faith, for everyone in the spiritual world is the effigy of his own love, not only as to the face and the body, but also as to the speech and the actions. . .
That every man after the life in the world lives to eternity, is evident from this, that man is then spiritual, and no longer natural, and that the spiritual man, separated from the natural, remains such as he is to eternity, for man's state cannot be changed after death."

On the general topic of "talking to angels" he says this:

"I am well aware that many will say that no one can possibly speak with spirits and angels so long as he lives in the body; and many will say that it is all fancy, others that I relate such things in order to gain credence, and others will make other objections.
I have often talked with angels on this subject, and they have invariably declared that in heaven they are unable to divide the Divine into three, because they know and perceive that the Divine is One and this One is in the Lord."




Philosophy

Philosophically, angels are "pure contingent spirits."Philo of Alexandria identifies the angel with the Logos as far as the angel is the immaterial voice of God. The angel is something different than God Himself, but is conceived just as a God's instrument. According to Aristotle, just as there is a First Mover, so, too, must there be spiritual secondary movers. Thomas Aquinas (13th century) expands upon this in his Summa contra Gentiles and Summa Theologica.

Judaism
The Bible uses the terms מלאך אלהים (mal'akh Elohim; messenger of God), מלאך יהוה (mal'akh YHWH; messenger of the Lord), בני אלהים (b'nai Elohim; sons of God) and הקודשים (ha-qodeshim; the holy ones) to refer to beings traditionally interpreted as angels. Later texts use other terms, such as העליונים (ha'elyoneem; the upper ones). Scholar Michael D. Coogan notes that it is only in the late books that the terms "come to mean the benevolent semidivine beings familiar from later mythology and art. . . Coogan explains the development of this concept of angels: "In the post-exilic period, with the development of explicit monotheism, these divine beings—the 'sons of God' who were members of the divine council—were in effect demoted to what are now known as 'angels', understood as beings created by God, but immortal and thus superior to humans. . .

Medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides explained his view of angels in his Guide for the Perplexed II:4 and II:6:

...This leads Aristotle in turn to the demonstrated fact that God, glory and majesty to Him, does not do things by direct contact. God burns things by means of fire; fire is moved by the motion of the sphere; the sphere is moved by means of a disembodied intellect, these intellects being the 'angels which are near to Him', through whose mediation the spheres [planets] move... thus totally disembodied minds exist which emanate from God and are the intermediaries between God and all the bodies [objects] here in this world.


According to Kabalah, there are four worlds and our world is the last world: the world of action (Assiyah). Angels exist in the worlds above as a 'task' of God. They are an extension of God to produce effects in this world. After an angel has completed its task, it ceases to exist. The angel is in effect the task.
Famous angels and their tasks:
• Malachim (translation: messengers), general word for angel
• Michael (translation: who is like God), performs God's kindness
• Gabriel (translation: the strength of God), performs acts of justice
and power
• Raphael (translation: God Heals), God's healing force
• Uriel (translation: God is my light), leads us to destiny
• Seraphim (translation: the burning ones), sing and praise God
• Malach HaMavet (translation: the angel of death)
• Satan (translation: the adversary), brings people's sins before them
in the heavenly court
• Chayot HaKodesh (translation: living beings)
• Ophanim (translation: arbits) Guardians of the Throne of God

[Sidebar: It is an interesting idea that an angel may come into existence to deliver a message from God, and then wink out of existence once the message has been delivered. It sounds kind of like getting a letter from God, a telegram, or maybe an email that, like on Mission Impossible, self-destructs after ten seconds. I doubt that any created thing ever ceases to exist, but it is easy to imagine an angel body dissolving into the mind of God after its message has been delivered. It reminds me of something a friend of mine in L.A. said to me years ago concerning life after death; he said, "I think of us all as bits of information--you can't destroy information!" I'm sure that angel body, having served its purpose as a focus of information, does not cease to exist, but merely changes, in terms of ego resolution in the Divine Consciousness, to a different value. Might it be possible that, ultimately, when we don our own angel bodies, that they may melt into the mind of God like a bubble in a pan of boiling pudding rises to the surface, gives a cheerful "plop", and then sinks back down into the stew? The "plop" is the link between spirit and the physical world; having "plopped" do we take our little message back with us under the wave, and nestle in the bosom of the father?

Something like this idea is expressed in this quote from Emmanuel Swedenborg:

"Destruction was effected after visitation, for visitation always precedes."

On a related topic he says:

"The angels taken collectively are called heaven, for they constitute heaven; and yet that which makes heaven in general and in particular is the Divine that goes forth from the Lord and flows into the angels and is received by them. . . The Divine of the Lord in heaven is love, for the reason that love is receptive of all things of heaven, such as peace, intelligence, wisdom and happiness."]




Christianity
Early Christians inherited Jewish understandings of angels, which in turn may have been partly inherited from the Egyptians. In the early stage, the Christian concept of an angel characterized the angel as a messenger of God. Angels are creatures of good, spirits of love, and messengers of the savior Jesus Christ. Later came identification of individual angelic messengers: Gabriel, Michael, Raphael, Uriel, and Satan/Lucifer. Then, in the space of little more than two centuries (from the third to the fifth) the image of angels took on definite characteristics both in theology and in art.

Many Christians regard angels as asexual and not belonging to either gender as they interpret Matthew 22:30 in this way. Angels are on the other hand usually described as looking like male human beings. Their names are also masculine. And although angels have greater knowledge than men, they are not omniscient, as Matthew 24:36 points out.

The earliest known representation of angels with wings is on the "Prince's Sarcophagus", discovered in the 1930s at Sarigüzel, near Istanbul, and attributed to the time of Theodosius I (379-395). From that period on, Christian art has represented angels mostly with wings, as in the cycle of mosaics in the Basilica of Saint Mary Major (432–440). Four- and six-winged angels, drawn from the higher grades of angels (especially cherubim and seraphim) and often showing only their faces and wings, are derived from Persian art and are usually shown only in heavenly contexts, as opposed to performing tasks on earth. They often appear in the pendentives of church domes or semi-domes. Saint John Chrysostom explained the significance of angels' wings:

"They manifest a nature's sublimity. That is why Gabriel is represented with wings. Not that angels have wings, but that you may know that they leave the heights and the most elevated dwelling to approach human nature. Accordingly, the wings attributed to these powers have no other meaning than to indicate the sublimity of their nature."

In terms of their clothing, angels, especially the Archangel Michael, were depicted as military-style agents of God and came to be shown wearing Late Antique military uniform. . . Other angels came to be conventionally depicted in long robes, and in the later Middle Ages they often wear the vestments of a deacon, a cope over a dalmatic; this costume was used especially for Gabriel in Annunciation scenes—for example the Annunciation in Washington by Jan van Eyck.



Latter Day Saints
Adherents of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (generally referred to as "Mormons") view angels as the messengers of God. They are sent to mankind to deliver messages, minister to humanity, teach doctrines of salvation, call mankind to repentance, give priesthood keys, save individuals in perilous times, and guide humankind.

Latter Day Saints believe that angels are the spirits of humans who are deceased or who have yet to be born, and accordingly Joseph Smith taught that "there are no angels who minister to this earth but those that do belong or have belonged to it." As such, Latter Day Saints also believe that Adam (the first man) is now the archangel Michael, and that Gabriel lived on the earth as Noah. Likewise the Angel Moroni first lived in a pre-Columbian American civilization as the 5th-century prophet-warrior named Moroni.

Joseph Smith, Jr. described his first angelic encounter thus:

While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor.

He had on a loose robe of most exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen; nor do I believe that any earthly thing could be made to appear so exceedingly white and brilliant....

Not only was his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond description, and his countenance truly like lightning. The room was exceedingly light, but not so very bright as immediately around his person. When I first looked upon him, I was afraid; but the fear soon left me.


Islam
Angels (Arabic: ملائكة , Malāʾikah; Turkish: Melek) are mentioned many times in the Qur'an and Hadith. Islam is clear on the nature of angels in that they are messengers of God. They have no free will, and can do only what God orders them to do. An example of a task they carry out is that of testing individuals by granting them abundant wealth and curing their illness. Believing in angels is one of the six Articles of Faith in Islam.


Bahá'í Faith

In his Book of Certitude Bahá’u’lláh, founder of the Bahá’í Faith, describes angels as people who ‘have consumed, with the fire of the love of God, all human traits and limitations’, and have ‘clothed themselves’ with angelic attributes and have become ‘endowed with the attributes of the spiritual’. 'Abdu’l-Bahá describes angels as the ‘confirmations of God and His celestial powers’ and as ‘blessed beings who have severed all ties with this nether world’ and ‘been released from the chains of self’, and ‘revealers of God’s abounding grace’. The Bahá’í writings also refer to the Concourse on High, an angelic host, and the Maid of Heaven of Bahá’u’lláh's vision.


When I saw that my angel sermon had too much material in it for a single Sunday, I was forced to ask myself, "What was the point of today's presentation?" The real stuff comes next week, with Rudolf Steiner, but so far, today, I have not made any salient points about angels, other than to describe how they are regarded by different cultures, and to suggest that, on the cosmic continuum of material density, angel bodies area a ways down the list from physical bodies. Perhaps that is the incipient message after all.

Earlier this morning, I introduced the topic of angels as an "occult" subject of "hidden knowledge", implying that there is a kind of private, exclusive quality to it that requires you to have an "Official New Age Membership Card" to understand it. Then I turn around and point out that every religion you can name, nearly every philosophy, every culture not only acknowledges the existence of angels, but has elaborate theories as to the hierarchical organization and cosmic responsibilities of angels. I can't imagine how all this information came into being, unless angels are not so hidden after all.

The way God speaks must be qualitatively different for every person, but I'm sure that every one here has had the very real experience of talking to God. Does thinking that you are never actually in DIRECT contact with God, but always going through a medium, a filter, you might say--does that thin barrier compromise the quality of the communication? Does using a telephone to reach someone far away make the communication less valid? Dare we crave a MORE DIRECT contact with the Father? Maybe--later.

For now, I suggest that angels, just like every other article of the spiritual discipline, may become a part of our lives by PAYING ATTENTION. No matter whatever else you have to say about occultists, in general, you have to grant them this: they pay attention--they seek significant knowledge in subtle disguises, they search for sign, and make much of little. To be sure, as in any field of knowledge, this kind of fussing may end up obscuring the big picture, but nobody said that detailed understanding has to be a bad thing. Many times a noticed detail can lead us around a corner into whole nother world of big pictures.

Clearly, sensitivity to angels is one more discipline we can engage in as we try to develop an overall sensitivity to the superphysical. If we are not sharpening our skills in this area every day, we cannot be properly be said to be walking the spiritual path--what must the spiritual path be if not exploring elements of spirituality, hidden or not hidden, which bring us closer to God and to our realizing our spiritual destinies as we may. If our bodies become like angel bodies after death, then that makes angels like relatives--like cousins or brothers-in-law. I'm always willing to reach out to someone, especially if it is all in the family.

Let us pray: Jesus, Lord of all, thank you for your gifts of spirit which take so many forms we cannot count them. Thank you for lending us your heavenly telegraph, also the wings. Amen.

God of the Living

God of the Living

The scripture, "He is not God of the dead, but of the living," was the springboard for today's sermon, but it will lead us into several distantly related terrains; it is a sermon in two parts, the one today dealing with the physical body, and next week dealing with the "angel" body.

Now, you will have noticed, over the past several months, that I am, in a general way, an historian. I have used these sermons not primarily as a soap box for my own views on matters of spirit, but have also presented many, sometimes conflicting, views taken from contemporary, and historical sources; we have enjoyed large sections of text taken from Martin Luther, William Faulkner, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Aesop, just to name a few, and, of course, our old standby, C.S. Lewis. The sad news is that there will be no C.S. Lewis today; instead we will hear, in its entirety, a sermon written by George MacDonald.

George MacDonald (1824-1905) was a congregational minister cum novelist and short story writer: one of a group of 19th century writers who explored the world of fantasy and magic. MacDonald's work has been the inspiration for many 20th century writers of fantasy, such as W.H. Auden, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Madeleine L'Engle, but his chief disciple was good old C.S. Lewis. The fantasies of MacDonald and Lewis are journeys into an astral plane of dreamlike, fairyland realities evoked by the ancient magic; and yet there is always a clear and compelling Christian resonance. Indeed, it is the broadminded acceptance of religious principles and expressions, taken from outside the mainstream of conventional Christian thought, that drew me to C.S. Lewis in the first place; and you will be able to identify some of this broadmindedness in the MacDonald sermon I am about to read.

Now, the scriptures:

Matthew 22:23-34


 
23The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question,
24saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother.'
25Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother.
26So too the second and third, down to the seventh.
27After them all, the woman died.
28In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her."
 29But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
30For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
31And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God:
32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."
33And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching.



Mark 12:18-27


 18Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,
 19Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
 20Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed.
 21And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise.
 22And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also.
 23In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife.
 24And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?
 25For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
 26And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
 27He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.



Luke 20:27-40


27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,
28 Saying , Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die , having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children.
30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless. 31 And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died .
32 Last of all the woman died also.
33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she ? for seven had her to wife.
34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry , and are given in marriage :
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry , nor are given in marriage :
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
37 Now that the dead are raised , even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living : for all live unto him.
39 Then certain of the scribes answering said , Master, thou hast well said .
40 And after that they durst not ask him any question at all.


Now begins the Sermon by George MacDonald, largely without interruption:

The God of The Living

He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.--ST LUKE 20: 38.
It is a recurring cause of perplexity in our Lord's teaching, that he is too simple for us; that while we are questioning with ourselves about the design of Solomon's earring upon some gold-plated door of the temple, he is speaking about the foundations of Mount Zion, yea, of the earth itself, upon which it stands.

Hear my first interruption: This startling opening "he is too simple for us" resonates with a point I have made repeatedly: Jesus is always giving us down-to-earth, how-to-live advice. His words can be kind of like a crystal ball that you can look into, and get lost in, but the bottom line of His teaching is always pretty much right up front. Jesus' commitment to Earth, to Peace on Earth, to Heaven on Earth, is foremost. One wonders if there was not an anti-intellectual strain running through Jesus--there must have been if He so highly prized innocence. Anyway, this opening points to the focus of MacDonald's sermon--the immediate, obvious, physical.


If the reader of the Gospel supposes that our Lord was here using a verbal argument with the Sadducees, namely, "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; therefore they are," he will be astonished that no Sadducee was found with courage enough to reply: "All that God meant was to introduce himself to Moses as the same God who had aided and protected his fathers while they were alive, saying, I am he that was the God of thy fathers. They found me faithful. Thou, therefore, listen to me, and thou too shalt find me faithful unto the death."

But no such reply suggested itself even to the Sadducees of that day, for their eastern nature could see argument beyond logic.

I love this remark about the eastern mind's ability to transcend logic--it's all in the language, I'm sure.


Shall God call himself the God of the dead, of those who were alive once, but whom he either could not or would not keep alive? Is that the Godhood, and its relation to those who worship it? The changeless God of an ever-born and ever-perishing torrent of life; of which each atom cries with burning heart, My God! and straightway passes into the Godless cold! "Trust in me, for I took care of your fathers once upon a time, though they are gone now. Worship and obey me, for I will be good to you for threescore years and ten, or thereabouts; and after that, when you are not, and the world goes on all the same without you, I will call myself your God still." God changes not. Once God he is always God. If he has once said to a man, "I am thy God, and that man has died the death of the Sadducee's creed," then we have a right to say that God is the God of the dead.

"And wherefore should he not be so far the God of the dead, if during the time allotted to them here, he was the faithful God of the living?" What Godlike relation can the ever-living, life-giving, changeless God hold to creatures who partake not of his life, who have death at the very core of their being, are not worth their Maker's keeping alive? To let his creatures die would be to change, to abjure his Godhood, to cease to be that which he had made himself. If they are not worth keeping alive, then his creating is a poor thing, and he is not so great, nor so divine as even the poor thoughts of those his dying creatures have been able to imagine him. But our Lord says, "All live unto him." With Him death is not. Thy life sees our life, O Lord. All of whom all can be said, are present to thee. Thou thinkest about us, eternally more than we think about thee. The little life that burns within the body of this death, glows unquenchable in thy true-seeing eyes. If thou didst forget us for a moment then indeed death would be. But unto thee we live. The beloved pass from our sight, but they pass not from thine.

This that we call death, is but a form in the eyes of men. It looks something final, an awful cessation, an utter change. It seems not probable that there is anything beyond. But if God could see us before we were, and make us after his ideal, that we shall have passed from the eyes of our friends can be no argument that he beholds us no longer. "All live unto Him." Let the change be ever so great, ever so imposing; let the unseen life be ever so vague to our conception, it is not against reason to hope that God could see Abraham, after his Isaac had ceased to see him; saw Isaac after Jacob ceased to see him; saw Jacob after some of the Sadducees had begun to doubt whether there ever had been a Jacob at all. He remembers them; that is, he carries them in his mind: he of whom God thinks, lives.

I want to emphasize this point: we exist in the Mind of God, hence our Divine Identity is merged with His in a glorious synthesis of matter and spirit. None of the succeeding arguments mean anything without this in mind.


He takes to himself the name of Their God. The Living One cannot name himself after the dead; when the very Godhead lies in the giving of life. Therefore they must be alive. If he speaks of them, remembers his own loving thoughts of them, would he not have kept them alive if he could; and if he could not, how could he create them? Can it be an easier thing to call into life than to keep alive?

"But if they live to God, they are aware of God. And if they are aware of God, they are conscious of their own being: Whence then the necessity of a resurrection?"

For their relation to others of God's children in mutual revelation; and for fresh revelation of God to all.--But let us inquire what is meant by the resurrection of the body. "With what body do they come?"

Surely we are not required to believe that the same body is raised again. That is against science, common sense, Scripture. St Paul represents the matter quite otherwise. One feels ashamed of arguing such a puerile point. Who could wish his material body which has indeed died over and over again since he was born, never remaining for one hour composed of the same matter, its endless activity depending upon its endless change, to be fixed as his changeless possession, such as it may then be, at the moment of death, and secured to him in worthless identity for the ages to come? A man's material body will be to his consciousness at death no more than the old garment he throws aside at night, intending to put on a new and a better in the morning. To desire to keep the old body seems to me to argue a degree of sensual materialism excusable only in those pagans who in their Elysian fields could hope to possess only such a thin, fleeting, dreamy, and altogether funebrial existence, that they might well long for the thicker, more tangible bodily being in which they had experienced the pleasures of a tumultuous life on the upper world. As well might a Christian desire that the hair which has been shorn from him through all his past life should be restored to his risen and glorified head.

Yet not the less is the doctrine of the Resurrection gladdening as the sound of the silver trumpet of its visions, needful as the very breath of life to our longing souls. Let us know what it means, and we shall see that it is thus precious.

Let us first ask what is the use of this body of ours. It is the means of Revelation to us, the camera in which God's eternal shows are set forth. It is by the body that we come into contact with Nature, with our fellow-men, with all their revelations of God to us. It is through the body that we receive all the lessons of passion, of suffering, of love, of beauty, of science. It is through the body that we are both trained outwards from ourselves, and driven inwards into our deepest selves to find God. There is glory and might in this vital evanescence, this slow glacier-like flow of clothing and revealing matter, this ever uptossed rainbow of tangible humanity. It is no less of God's making than the spirit that is clothed therein.

We cannot yet have learned all that we are meant to learn through the body. How much of the teaching even of this world can the most diligent and most favoured man have exhausted before he is called to leave it! Is all that remains to be lost? Who that has loved this earth can but believe that the spiritual body of which St Paul speaks will be a yet higher channel of such revelation? The meek who have found that their Lord spake true, and have indeed inherited the earth, who have seen that all matter is radiant of spiritual meaning, who would not cast a sigh after the loss of mere animal pleasure, would, I think, be the least willing to be without a body, to be unclothed without being again clothed upon. Who, after centuries of glory in heaven, would not rejoice to behold once more that patient-headed child of winter and spring, the meek snowdrop? In whom, amidst the golden choirs, would not the vision of an old sunset wake such a song as the ancient dwellers of the earth would with gently flattened palm hush their throbbing harps to hear?

All this revelation, however, would render only a body necessary, not this body. The fulness of the word Resurrection would be ill met if this were all. We need not only a body to convey revelation to us, but a body to reveal us to others. The thoughts, feelings, imaginations which arise in us, must have their garments of revelation whereby shall be made manifest the unseen world within us to our brothers and sisters around us; else is each left in human loneliness. Now, if this be one of the uses my body served on earth before, the new body must be like the old. Nay, it must be the same body, glorified as we are glorified, with all that was distinctive of each from his fellows more visible than ever before. The accidental, the nonessential, the unrevealing, the incomplete will have vanished. That which made the body what it was in the eyes of those who loved us will be tenfold there. Will not this be the resurrection of the body? of the same body though not of the same dead matter? Every eye shall see the beloved, every heart will cry, "My own again!--more mine because more himself than ever I beheld him!" For do we not say on earth, "He is not himself to-day," or "She looks her own self;" "She is more like herself than I have seen her for long"? And is not this when the heart is glad and the face is radiant? For we carry a better likeness of our friends in our hearts than their countenances, save at precious seasons, manifest to us.

Who will dare to call anything less than this a resurrection? Oh, how the letter killeth! There are who can believe that the dirt of their bodies will rise the same as it went down to the friendly grave, who yet doubt if they will know their friends when they rise again. And they call that believing in the resurrection!

What! shall a man love his neighbour as himself, and must he be content not to know him in heaven? Better be content to lose our consciousness, and know ourselves no longer. What! shall God be the God of the families of the earth, and shall the love that he has thus created towards father and mother, brother and sister, wife and child, go moaning and longing to all eternity; or worse, far worse, die out of our bosoms? Shall God be God, and shall this be the end?

Ah, my friends! what will resurrection or life be to me, how shall I continue to love God as I have learned to love him through you, if I find he cares so little for this human heart of mine, as to take from me the gracious visitings of your faces and forms? True, I might have a gaze at Jesus, now and then; but he would not be so good as I had thought him.

I'm sure that this crack about getting bored with Jesus has a trace of ironic humor in it, but still, it definitely crosses some line in terms of 19th century English dogmatics. It seems to raise the point that we are all, even Jesus, creations of a single conscious entity, and in that cosmic Mind, we are all equally real and equally loved.


And how should I see him if I could not see you? God will not take you, has not taken you from me to bury you out of my sight in the abyss of his own unfathomable being, where I cannot follow and find you, myself lost in the same awful gulf. No, our God is an unveiling, a revealing God. He will raise you from the dead, that I may behold you; that that which vanished from the earth may again stand forth, looking out of the same eyes of eternal love and truth, holding out the same mighty hand of brotherhood, the same delicate and gentle, yet strong hand of sisterhood, to me, this me that knew you and loved you in the days gone by. I shall not care that the matter of the forms I loved a thousand years ago has returned to mingle with the sacred goings on of God's science, upon that far-off world wheeling its nursery of growing loves and wisdoms through space; I shall not care that the muscle which now sends the ichor through your veins is not formed of the very particles which once sent the blood to the pondering brain, the flashing eye, or the nervous right arm; I shall not care, I say, so long as it is yourselves that are before me, beloved; so long as through these forms I know that I look on my own, on my loving souls of the ancient time; so long as my spirits have got garments of revealing after their own old lovely fashion, garments to reveal themselves to me. The new shall then be dear as the old, and for the same reason, that it reveals the old love.

This passage is of tremendous significance to the creative artist who constantly seeks to clothe spirit in fresh garments, garments whose single purpose is to update the physicalization of spirit in the drifting sands of time, to find a NOW that is subtly different from the preceding NOW.


And in the changes which, thank God, must take place when the mortal puts on immortality, shall we not feel that the nobler our friends are, the more they are themselves;

(This was always a big point in C.S. Lewis. He insisted that, by giving up yourself to God's will, you found found your own true will.)

that the more the idea of each is carried out in the perfection of beauty, the more like they are to what we thought them in our most exalted moods, to that which we saw in them in the rarest moments of profoundest communion, to that which we beheld through the veil of all their imperfections when we loved them the truest?

Lord, evermore give us this Resurrection, like thine own in the body of thy Transfiguration. Let us see and hear, and know, and be seen, and heard, and known, as thou seest, hearest, and knowest. Give us glorified bodies through which to reveal the glorified thoughts which shall then inhabit us, when not only shalt thou reveal God, but each of us shall reveal thee.

Today George MacDonald will pronounce the benediction. Let us pray:

And for this, Lord Jesus, come thou, the child, the obedient God, that we may be one with thee, and with every man and woman whom thou hast made, in the Father.


Amen.