Looking Away

Apologies for the lack of posts. A lot has  been happening in the personal life, and also a lot has been churning through my mind regarding the spiritual as well. I should simply say that I feel lately as if I am beginning to move in a different direction.

This looking away from gnosticism that I have been doing, encountering, has been occurring for some time, months and months. It is not so much a rejection of G/gnosticism, as it is a yearning for something that I feel is missing. There are core elements of the G/gnostic ideas and mythos that I will always retain should my path lead elsewhere. When I first personally discovered G/gnosticism, there were ideas and ways of thinking, about god and the nature of the world around us, that struck a chord too deep to be forgotten or easily relinquished.

That being said, I know that my path is unmistakably beginning to shift, although this wasn't clear to me until recently. I have many doubts, and anxieties, but I'll continue to learn and to try to understand, and to ask questions. The examined journey is never easy, but the rewards are rich, if only one has the courage and commitment to embrace it.

Like So Many Theisms

I wanted to highlight some work that April DeConick is doing, which she's posted about over at The Forbidden Gospels Blog. In a post from about a week ago she mentioned that she's considering the potential for introducing new language to describe the field that currently is labeled "gnostic or gnosticism":

My reason for this is not that I do not think that gnosticism existed in the ancient world - in fact I do. But the categories have become so abused, that they have become heuristically meaningless for me as an historian of religion. I can't use them without running into walls.

The category is a huge mess and people use these words whatever-which-way they see fit for whatever argument they want to make. If they don't want a particular text to be gnostic, they will say that it doesn't have this-that-or-the-other characteristic that is gnostic. If they want the text to be gnostic, they will say that it has such-and-such characteristic which is gnostic. And then there is proto-gnostic, which means there are elements of gnosticism here, but not enough to make it gnostic yet.

In other words, there's much baggage associated with the terms "gnostic and gnosticism", and DeConick wants to step out of that box as it is constricting and stifles scholarly work! She goes on to suggest two possibilities:

I'm considering two names for this phenonemon. Transtheism or Supratheism. I like Transtheism because "trans" has two connotations: across and above/beyond. ... Supratheism is also possible, although it may indicate too much of a complete transcendence and separation of the God, as if the otherworldly God has no contact with this world (which is not the case in these systems).

Most recently, in a post entitled "Transtheism it is", DeConick has revealed her choice to move forward with, and why:

I have continued to ponder this terminology, and I have fallen in love with it. What it will allow me to do in terms of analysis is truly astonishing. I wish I had thought about this earlier in my career. To name the type of theism that these ancient thinkers were involved in allows me to cross boundaries and open up discussions of their ideology. I am not going to be restrained by previous research and definitions! The limits are gone.

I'm by no means a scholar, but I find this all very fascinating. Also, DeConick's book, the Thirteenth Apostle (about the Gospel of Judas), is soon to be re-released with a revised edition. I hadn't picked it up yet, and now I'm glad I hadn't. I'll be checking the new edition out as soon as I can.

Book Sale

There was another book sale at the local public library last week, and I made two trips down to check it out. The first trip wasn't very successful. An entire room, a relatively large room that's used for meetings and lectures, was used for the sale. The problem is that the room wasn't large enough for the crowd that showed up on the first day. The prices were cheap, which means that if you get lucky you can find something you're looking for, or even something you weren't but were pleasantly surprised to find, for no more than a few dollars.

During the first trip I searched around and picked up some art books, and the "The Da Vinci Enigma Tarot" by Caitlin Matthews. She's also the author of "Sophia: Goddess of Wisdom, Bride of God", which I have seen recommended before, but have yet to read. It's interesting, but it's missing two of the cards and had a few cards too many. I may try to use some of the excess cards, the internet, a printer, and some tape or glue to resolve that problem.

On the second trip, which was on the last day of the book sale, I was again lucky to find some interesting things. I say lucky, because the book fair lasts a week, and by the end of the week the selection is fairly picked over. Also to note on the last day, they let you stuff a bag with as many books as you can stuff, and you only spend a dollar for the whole lot. You can do this as many times as you like. I picked up three books (others with me picked up several more than three), and on average, I spent pennies for each. The first, "Inward Stillness", by George A. Maloney, S.J. This is a book about prayer and silence with a focus on the "inner" spiritual life. Second, a hardback copy of the Holy Bible, Old and New Testaments. It's red, with red-edged pages and gold-foil on the cover. It's quite nice. Lastly, a copy of the 1979 edition of the Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church. Until recently this copy belonged to a small, but historic Episcopal church in the area. Lately I have developed quite an interest in the Episcopal Church, so I was glad to find this.

All things considered, the trips were productive, although I think they need a larger venue for the next sale. I look forward to delving into the selections I picked up, especially the Book of Common Prayer, if only to feed my curiousity.

Our World May Be a Giant Hologram

...or so says a very intresting article from NewScientist, located HERE. An excerpt:

According to Craig Hogan, a physicist at the Fermilab particle physics lab in Batavia, Illinois, GEO600 has stumbled upon the fundamental limit of space-time - the point where space-time stops behaving like the smooth continuum Einstein described and instead dissolves into "grains", just as a newspaper photograph dissolves into dots as you zoom in. "It looks like GEO600 is being buffeted by the microscopic quantum convulsions of space-time," says Hogan.

If this doesn't blow your socks off, then Hogan, who has just been appointed director of Fermilab's Center for Particle Astrophysics, has an even bigger shock in store: "If the GEO600 result is what I suspect it is, then we are all living in a giant cosmic hologram."

The idea that we live in a hologram probably sounds absurd, but it is a natural extension of our best understanding of black holes, and something with a pretty firm theoretical footing. It has also been surprisingly helpful for physicists wrestling with theories of how the universe works at its most fundamental level.

What's even more interesting is if you read this article and then read Philip K. Dick's "Cosmogony and Cosmology", which PKD wrote in 1978, over at the PTG.

Social Commentary

Merry Christmas!

Changes

Ever so often I like to change the look of the blog. If fact, Seeker of Sophia has been through three major thematic times in its life. I liked the first incarnation. I was quite happy with it, and it reflected something about myself at the time.

Eventually I outgrew it and decided that I could do better. So I did, and I spent some time making the layout much snazzier, in my opinion, and I was very happy with the result. I carried over part of the original theme, the rainbow gradient, light shifted and shown in so many ways, and layered a lotus blossom atop it, to symbolize growth and flowering.

So it is fitting in this time of the year, when the Sun is reborn, when we are celebrating birth of things new, when people are celebrating the changes to come, with hopefulness and faith and effort, both in the world and in themselves, that I have decided to change the look yet again. As with the first two versions of the blog, the layout represents me in a way, perhaps in only ways that I am aware of. It reflects that I am changing, hopefully growing and learning, becoming someone better than myself. All this based on what I have learned and what I continue to seek out, whether that be gnosis, Sophia and Christ, god, something to listen to, a book to read, a meal to eat, a future that I can be happy with, or simply myself.

A Sacred Institution?

Here is an excerpt from an article in Newsweek, regarding gay marriages and the oft-uttered "the Bible says" arguments against them. It turns out that "the Bible says" crowd isn't being particularly factual, although in their defense most of them probably don't realize that. Link to the full article is below the quote:

Let's try for a minute to take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does. Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel—all these fathers and heroes were polygamists. The New Testament model of marriage is hardly better. Jesus himself was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments—especially family. The apostle Paul (also single) regarded marriage as an act of last resort for those unable to contain their animal lust. "It is better to marry than to burn with passion," says the apostle, in one of the most lukewarm endorsements of a treasured institution ever uttered.

Full article is HERE.

Holy Brawl

Greek Orthodox and Armenian monks resort to violence at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. Story from the BBC is here. Bizarre.

Sophia, The Wisdom of God

The above is an icon in the collection of the British Museum. It is a Russian icon from the late 17th century, depicting Sophia, God's Wisdom, along with Christ, the Theotokos ('God-bearer', Mary), and John the Baptist (a.k.a. Forerunner). Here's an excerpt from the site:

Amongst icons of the Mother of God in the collection of the British Museum is a fine icon of ‘Sophia the Wisdom of God’ (cat. no. 25) from the late 17th century. In this icon are represented two widespread versions of the symbolic union of the image of the Mother of God with the idea of Divine Wisdom ‘building her house’, understood as the creation of the earthly church. The image of the fiery-faced winged angel in the centre, according to Novgorodian tradition, arises from the prophecies of Isaiah about an angel of Great Light and the vision of John the Apostle in the Book of Revelation: ‘And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire’ (10:1).

Below is a more recent rendition of the above icon, found here:

Yes, we can?

Oh, yes. We did.

Reputation, Posterity and Cool = Fear

I'd like to share a blog post written by comedian/actor Patton Oswalt, in which he addressed the 2008 graduating high school class of his alma mater. Here's a quote from the post:

I completely ignored the deeper lesson which is do not judge, and get outside yourself, and realize that everyone and everything has its own story, and something to teach you, and that they’re also trying – consciously or unconsciously – to learn and grow from you and everything else around them. And they’re trying with the same passion and hunger and confusion that I was feeling – no matter where they were in their lives, no matter how old or how young.

Full post is here.

Book Sale

Last week the local public library had a book sale of old library books and donated books that were either removed from the shelves, or never made it there in the first place. I didn't know about the book sale until it was almost over, but there were many books of all sorts to be had. The stock was fairly picked over, but I think I managed to find a couple of gems, "Early Christian Doctrines", by J. N. D. Kelly (this edition published in 1978), and "Man and God: Passages chosen and arranged to express a mood about the human and divine", by Victor Gollancz (published in 1951).

Both books are exactly what they claim to be. The Kelly work is, as far as I can tell so far, a comprehensive summary of doctrines, beliefs, and ideas that were formed during the early centuries of Christianity. It is a bit dated, obviously, but I think I'll find it very informative.

The other, "Man and God" by Victor Gollancz, also seems very intriguing at first glance. There are quotes and passages assembled from both the Old and New Testaments, noted Rabbis, the Zohar, Soloviev, Saints of both the Eastern and Western Christian churches including Julian of Norwich and John Chrysostom, Beethoven, Chuang Tzu, Goethe, the Bhagavad Gita, C. G. Jung, John Macmurray, Dostoevsky, William Blake and many others. I think it's remarkable, but I haven't had much of a chance to really get into it yet. If I enjoy it as much as I am anticipating, it should be well worth the pennies I spent on it.

THE BIG GNOSTIC SECRET

...is out, people. The biggest argument that I still see against Gnosticism is that it was secretive. The implication, without fail, is that this was a dirty secret. It was so secretive in fact  some of the various Gnostic groups were known about in their own time, so secretive that there are tomes written by the likes of Irenaeus against them. It's needless to say that it wasn't a very well-kept secret.

What about now? The links to the many gnostic blogs on this page? Those aren't secret. The Nag Hammadi Library collection over at gnosis.org? That's not secret either. In fact, if you're willing to learn about Gnosticism, however broad a category that is, you'll find information plastered ALL OVER the internet. Information is also published in books at your local library or bookstore, and in academic works that may be a touch out of reach for many people, both because of their cost and academic jargon, but nevertheless, they are there. They are not secret.

So what is the real secret? It's not that you can't find the information. The real secret (which also isn't really a secret) is that you probably won't understand the information when you find it. That doesn't make you stupid, and those of us who do think we understand it, in any extent, don't think you're stupid. (We really don't think we're better than you. I'm sorry to burst that bubble.) The truth is, most of us don't fully understand it either and you would be hard-pressed to find a "modern Gnostic" or academic who will claim to. If they do they're probably lying. In fact, the real, REAL SECRET, is in the journey, and the journey only takes on meaning if you're walking it, however that may be. Anyone can walk it. Whether it's a journey that is right for you is for your own determination. Gnosticism is not something everyone will embrace, and it never will be.

Gnosticism is a complex issue, both from the perspective of those who practice it in a contemporary religious form, and for those who spend their lives studying classical Gnosticism and its umbrella of related topics. To make a practice of reducing it to such simplistic buzzwords, "secretive, elitist, dualistic", etc., is at best ill-informed, and at worst disingenuous.

By the way, if you look at all of the links on this page, click on them and see that there is indeed a vibrant modern Gnostic current, you'll see that those arguments aren't really working. "I'm just saying...", as they say.

AFR

I've been listening to Ancient Faith Radio a lot lately. It's an online Orthodox Christian radio station featuring religious chants and music, and occasionally there are spoken word bits about Christian and specifically Orthodox topics. There is also Ancient Faith Talk, which as you might imagine, is mostly spoken word content, although they have music every so often.

I am rather drawn to it, and really enjoy listening to the music. I have an interest in the Orthodox Christian churches that keeps me coming back to the topic, which is one reason I listen to AFR as much as I do. This is all not to the exclusion of my "gnostic understanding" of the nature of things, but there is a beauty about the Orthodox churches that inspires me. Perhaps I am only seeing a romanticized version of the subject, as I am sure there are probably many Orthodox, who knowing my other spiritual persuasions, would be scandalized. Regardless, it's there, and I embrace it as it is. I don't know where this interest will take me ultimately, but I have an idea of where I would like it to lead me.

Regardless, I'll continue to listen to Ancient Faith Radio, and I encourage others to listen to it and perhaps be inspired by the Spirit of it as I have been.

I <3 Dick

In my time away recently I have had the opportunity to, for the first time, read some of Philip K. Dick's books. If you read any gnostic blogs/forums at all, you will (or you should, anyway!) come across mentions of PKD, usually in the vein of how brilliant he was. Having had the chance to experience it for myself, I now have a better appreciation of just how awesome his ideas and his writing were and are. It leaves me wondering what it must have been like to be in his mind.

So yes, I can proudly say that Dick touches me in that special place, and makes me feel all warm and tingly on the inside. Figuratively, of course. More succinctly, "I LOVE DICK!"

Time Away

It's been a few months since the last post. I have been somewhat away, and things have been a little hectic personally, and that has managed to pull me away from Here. I was reading The Gnostic Bible daily, and that was providing some insights I hadn't had before. That has, for now, fallen by the wayside as well. I have been keeping up with bits and pieces from the Logosphere, and reading April DeConick's Apocryphote of the Day entries (all very compelling!) over at the Forbidden Gospels Blog.

I'd like to be more focused during these ups and downs, but I haven't mastered that yet. Things happen, and you put more energy into other things, when there are things that might be more helpful that you set aside, feeling too drained or too "out of it", for the moment, to engage in.

I suppose there is the sense that these things are a luxury. Spending time on the spiritual, on the self-centered (I say that not with a negative tone) journey.. it just feels like there are other things I could and should be doing. Perhaps I haven't learned to integrate the spiritual into my life yet. It's a thing I do, not a thing I am, but that opens the existential can of worms, "who am I?" I don't entirely know the answer to that. I do know that This is important, and that I want to invest myself in it, but sometimes I simply find that the Door is not open. Sometimes I even lose the Door.

If only...

From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God's gifts and the diversity of those who receive them. Within the unity of the People of God, a multiplicity of peoples and cultures is gathered together. Among the Church's members, there are different gifts, offices, conditions, and ways of life. "Holding a rightful place in the communion of the Church there are also particular Churches that retain their own traditions." [LG 13 § 2]

-- Catechism of the Catholic Church, 814

Hot Air In There

My understanding of Gnosticism is modern (and also woefully incomplete). This might seem like a ridiculous statement. Of course my view of Gnosticism would be a contemporary one, with its own nuances and perplexities. It is impossible to comprehend exactly the world of the Sethians or Valentinians et al., and it is difficult to translate their world to ours.

This is why I find that accusations of "gnosticism" (that is, a modern group or idea is labled as "gnostic", as if some great insult has been levied and the reader is now fully aware of the topic's naughtiness) are at best amusing. In these situations gnosticism is always identified as an arrogant, early dualist heresy that had a secret handshake that gave its members supAr secret knowledge, and that it was roundly tapped on the head, scolded and done away with for being the bad little child it was. This definition is, at best, patently dishonest. Those that speak against these things that they have labeled as "gnostic" surely aren't talking about what I'm talking about, and I'd be surprised if most of them had any notion of who Sethians or Valentinians were.

I pause slightly when I come across these things on blogs, tempted by the desire to correct false assertions, and simultaneously held back by the greatness of silence. Some of the things I come across are blatantly ignorant of the subject, while others seem to know just enough to twist gnosticism or gnostic ideas into something totally alien to reality (whatever that is). It is at this moment that I sometimes begin writing in the comment box, succumbing to the temptation to respond. Without fail, however, at some point before I hit submit, something always comes to mind that causes me to forget about my indignation entirely:

...so?

VP Dick Cheney doesn't care about Americans. So I wonder.. if we should disregard the over-whelming majority who disagree with his neocon masturbatory foreign policy, can we also disregard the lesser majority, slightly over half, who put him into the office of Vice-President in the first place and, say, move up the 2008 Presidential elections? Cheney would likely not favor that notion.

This was founded to be a country based on democratic principles, where what the people think and have to say matters. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, "...government of the people, by the people, for the people". It's disheartening that it has become a place where their concerns are casually dismissed by a figure such as the Vice-President as a mere "fluctuation" of a reactionary public. In actuality, the American people are long-standing in their disapproval of this war and the Administration that has mired us in it.

I see the mocking, dismissive smirk of VP Cheney, and I can't help but think of the thousands upon thousands of men and women that have been wounded, died, or wished they had, thanks to this Administration's careless hard-on for war.

The phrase "Vote Bush, Get Dick" has never been more tangible.

Favicon Goodness

I've made a favicon that I can use to replace the default Blogger favicon. Favicons are small images that appear in the address bar, and next to links in a list of bookmarks or favorites, for example. The one to the left is 32x32 pixels and the one in the address bar is 16x16 pixels. This one is heavily inspired (read as: I copied it and made it into a favicon) by this symbol, created by Fr. Jordan Stratford+. I really like what he did with this eleven-fold, "MDCCCXC" cross. It represents "Big G", contemporary Gnosticism (and therefore a certain set of principles that define said beastie, of which I adhere to), which dates primarily to France with the 1890 (MDCCCXC) Restoration.

To download the favicon click here for the .ico (icon file) or here for the .png (image file). Then simply upload it to your server, or an image/file sharing site (Flickr, Picasa, etc.) and copy down the url, which you'll need a bit later. If you're not using your own server, it's probably best to go with the .png version. I uploaded the image via a post to a Blogger test blog of mine, and then opened up the post, right-clicked on the image and copied the location of it to get its url.

To make sure the favicon shows up like it should on your site/blog, you need to link to it in your html. To read some info about how to install a favicon, click here and read the Instructions (ignore the Create your favicon section, unless of course you have an image of your own you'd like to make into a favicon) from an excellent site, Blogger Buster.

Feel free to use it for your own website or blog. Enjoy!