Creeping Corruption

I left the world, so to speak, on January 1st 1979, which is when I went to live in Bath to pursue a life more or less centred on the spiritual path. Over the next 18 years I lived in various places but mostly out of England. When I returned to England in 1996 it was an unfamiliar place to me but I still lived a fairly isolated life, not watching much television and only occasionally reading newspapers, so I didn't realise how much things had changed until my companion in this way of life died and certain events took place which made me decide to go back into the world. That was in 2000. 

Actually, I had a kind of advance warning of the changes in 1997. That was the year my father died, and it was brought home to me how much I respected him even though I often hadn't seen him more than  a couple of times a year since I left home. He was an embodiment of fundamental decency and, though he only went to church on high days and holidays and was not ostensibly a Christian, I think he was one in terms of his behaviour and morals. He had been raised by a devout Methodist mother (his father had died young) who had made him sign the pledge not to touch alcohol at the tender age of 15. Naturally he reacted against that kind of upbringing but the essentials of Christian moral behaviour stuck with him as they did with many of his generation who nevertheless had drifted away from religion.  Now, with every generation that passes, the connection to Christianity is weakened and our attitude to life suffers accordingly.

But it is not my father's death I am referring to. In 1997 Princess Diana also died and the country appeared to go mad, lamenting as though its own mother had gone.  I happen to think that Diana was a wholly negative influence on the national psyche, validating self-concern, sentimentality, emotional over-indulgence and fake caring, but that's not the point I'm making. At her death the English, egged on by the hypocritical media, showed they were no longer the English of yore, and had renounced their traditions for a shallow exhibitionism. It really marked the end of an era.

But it was only when I went back to live in London at the end of 2000 and reentered what you might call normal existence that I realised how the world had changed. I had no idea at how much old values had been overturned and new ones had replaced them. Now these new values have become assumptions and to question them is to show yourself to be a wicked person, at least it is in educated mainstream society.

When you live with a child you don't notice him getting taller, but if you only see him every now and then you do see the difference. I had not been completely ignorant of the changes in the world during my time out of it but I had not realised how thoroughly they had permeated national, indeed human, consciousness.  I sometimes wonder if part of the reason for my removal from the world was to protect me from this indoctrination until I was more able to withstand it.  Because, believe me, it is hard to see through the lies of this world unless you have a solid grounding in something else that shows them up for what they are. Even Christianity has been corrupted.  Not in itself, of course, but in many of the forms it takes in the modern world.

The old story of the frog that is slowly boiled and so doesn’t realise what is happening to it applies here. Humanity is being brainwashed, firstly by the denial of transcendent reality and then by redefining what is good in terms of that denial. The only protection against this is faith in the living God and his human face which is Jesus Christ. I do think it needs a realisation of the personal nature of deity to achieve this because an impersonal spirituality can be made to fit too neatly into modern ideologies, and so be insufficient to enable one to throw off all its lies and illusions

False Awakening

In a recent post on his blog Bruce Charlton made the following point. The original post is here.
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/the-red-pill-must-indeed-be-pill.html

Bruce wrote "Thus, if we challenge only one aspect of the falsehood, while continuing to accept another falsehood, then we are still living in falsehood. Only when all of the foundational falsehoods are challenged simultaneously can we escape the Matrix."

This is a perennial problem in the world of spirituality and religion. We may break out of the prison of materialism and atheism, and adopt a spiritual world view of some sort but this may well be based on illusion. Just because something is called spiritual does not mean it is true. There are many people propagating half truths these days,  partially true but incomplete spiritual speculations emanating from the lower mind. I expect that's always been the case but the problem is greater now because there are so many people who take their spirituality from multiple sources, including not just revealed religion but personal experience and conjecture too, and mix them together to form a subjective version of what passes with them for truth. I admit I do that to an extent myself because there is no one thing that incorporates the full truth in this world, but I would also maintain that there is a big difference between someone who does this under the guidance of an awakened intuition and someone (to be honest, the majority) who does this from the more limited and less spiritually objective position of their own mind and personal preferences.

Continued on  Albion Awakening.

Religion and the Spiritual Path

I was recently challenged on The Orthosphere (in a friendly way I think) about the fact that I don't subscribe to any official form of Christianity.  This is something that I have thought long and hard about, and my conclusions are not lightly taken. They are personal and I would not recommend them to everyone since there is a risk that if you go it alone you will fall into spiritual disobedience and vainglory. Not to mention illusion and deviation from the true path. Nevertheless one must follow where one's inner calling leads.

One of the commentators seemed to compare the effect of my writing on this blog to that of the demonically inspired Weston on the Lady in C.S. Lewis's Voyage to Venus. It's rather disconcerting to find one is being compared to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. But perhaps he meant it sounded too persuasive rather than was spiritually deceptive. I'm not sure, but I do understand the reaction of someone who is trying to hold onto truth in a world in which it comes under fire from every side, and does so by keeping faithful to orthodox religion which is like a rock in a stormy sea by which I mean a sanctuary amidst chaos. And there is nothing worse than someone who seems to agree with you in most things but then suddenly contradicts what you regard as a fundamental truth. A false friend is worse than a declared enemy, and I don't doubt that this is one of the ways in which the devil operates, pretending to be on your side just as a means of leading you astray in the end. 

And yet I have to say I don't see myself in that light. Let me be clear. I do not reject Christianity or think I'm too good for it or even, despite what I've said elsewhere, think I've outgrown it in its essence as taught by Christ. But I find I cannot give my full spiritual allegiance to any church that exists in the world today, and I write for people like me who may have turned away from the Christianity they grew up with because of its perceived shortcomings but still regard Christ as the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Anyway this is what I wrote (slightly revised) in response to my questioners, though it hasn't been put up yet. Here's a link to the post on the Orthosphere (a very good one by the way) with the discussion I am referring to in the comments below.

"I find myself in the awkward position of agreeing and disagreeing with both of you. I don't reject anything of Christianity. I think it is the most important thing to have happened in this world by an immeasurable distance. I regard myself as a Christian, and increasingly so as time goes by.

But, at the same time, none of the forms Christianity takes in the modern world answers all my spiritual questions. Christ does, but the churches founded in his name all seem to lack something. I wish that was not the case. Does this make me arrogant or just someone who thinks that eventually we are summoned to find the truth within ourselves and make it our own?  I don't know but I do know that in my heart I cannot give myself unreservedly to any religion in its modern form, and they are all modern in the sense that they are maintained now by modern people and adjusted, even if in subtle ways, to the modern world.

You say that any religion that can be outgrown is not a true religion in the first place. I see what you mean and I don't disagree but I think religions are a bit like the Sabbath, made for man rather than man being made for them. So they, especially Christianity, of course, contain everything necessary for salvation but there can also come a point at which they are like a suit which begins to pinch a little under the arms and around the waist etc. Does Christianity really contain everything of Christ? Did he not say in John 16 that "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come”? 

But still I am well aware of how an attitude such as mine can lead one into illusion and spiritual narcissism. I see that as a risk I have to take and pray constantly that I may be safeguarded from falsehood and pride.

It might be said that since the Reformation every non-Catholic is a heretic anyway. Once you allow any form of Christianity other than Catholicism or Orthodoxy the cat is out of the bag, surely? But I was not born a Catholic and it would always be something foreign for me as would Orthodoxy. If I converted, it would not be natural and I could not accept all the religion's claims. I was raised in the Church of England but, frankly, that abandoned any realistic claim to teaching spiritual truth long ago. Where do we turn in an age in which all outer forms seem to be crumbling? My only answer is to the living image of Christ in our own hearts together with scripture and religious teaching. But we are not obliged to be restricted to that and God has given us a mind in the heart in order to know him directly ourselves.

I agree that we can't be fully spiritual through our own efforts, only through Christ or the grace of God. But are Christ and the Christian churches necessarily always the same thing? And are we not ultimately required to discover the truth within ourselves? To know truth you must be it, and to be it, it must come from within. All religions at the end of the day are external things or so I believe. There is nothing in this world that is perfect and wholly true other than Christ himself.

I take your comments seriously and I know the risks of a personal approach to spirituality However, when all is said and done, we have to be true to what we feel within ourselves. We just have to make sure it's a true feeling and not a whim or temptation to spiritual pride. Christ is more than any church and cannot be restricted to that. That's my view. I realise it would not be shared by everyone but I think we live in an interesting time when the unfolding of our spiritual nature is the subject of an experiment which can either take us much further forward to a greater future or else leave us lost in egotistic darkness. It's a risk but the gains are worth it if we are true to the reality of God within ourselves. If we are not, well, that's our own fault. It's all to do with personal responsibility."

In conclusion, I would never try to draw anyone away from the Christian religion even though I feel some modern forms of it are not true to the spirit of Christ. I think religion is absolutely essential for the world. Look where we are without it. Deeper in spiritual crisis with every year that passes. I still go to church sometimes but, for me, spiritual truth is primarily an inner thing and I must find it in and for myself, though always seeing it in the light of Christ who is the pole star. Perhaps what this comes down to is the difference between salvation and theosis, the inner transformation of the soul. Religion is very necessary for salvation, there can be no doubt about that, but I believe that if we are truly to become what God intends us to be we have to balance it with an inner awareness that will sometimes have to come first. That, I think, is what both Christ and the Buddha did with the religion of their day, and, though we are clearly not Christ, nor even the Buddha, there is still a sense in which they serve as examples for us to emulate. For Christ doesn't just say follow me. He also says, be like me. This can lead to spiritual pride but it can also be acceptance of spiritual responsibility.

I have learnt, and continue to learn, an enormous amount from religion, and it gives expression to a good deal of what I know, but I am not able to fully subscribe to any church in this day and age. Perhaps that reflects my upbringing and certain experiences I have had, but perhaps too it is the consequence of living in a world that is near the end of an age or spiritual cycle. 

One thing I must point out, though, is that those who do without the external discipline and structural support of a religion must be extra self-disciplined in their spiritual approach or they will drift into shallow waters.

Suffering and Happiness

'For the Lord disciplines those he loves and scourges every son he receives' Hebrews 12:6.

 'Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline' Revelation 3:19

There is the idea that once you adopt a spiritual perspective your life will improve and you will be happier and more fulfilled, maybe even eventually reaching some kind of enlightened state in this world. This is a dangerous illusion that can lead to individuals abandoning the path or taking to it for the wrong reasons and therefore making no progress.

For the fact is that the spiritual path has to do with purging the sinner of his sins or stripping the ego of its egotism, and this is not a pleasant process. You might consider that if you are happier in your outer self as a result of adopting a spiritual mode of being or 'lifestyle' you could very well be on the wrong track completely. For spirituality is not a therapy designed to make you feel better. It is a way of transformation that requires, as any transformation from one state to another must, sacrifice and renunciation, and sacrifice and renunciation are not made without suffering.

Beliefs adopted from New Age or Eastern sources tend to obscure the fact that this world is a training ground for the next. Consequently happiness in this world is not the goal of the spiritual life. That remains, as it is in traditional Christianity, to make one fit for the true life in a higher world. The rewards of the spiritual life are in the next life not this one which is an arena for purification and testing which goes on until death, particularly in the more advanced cases as one can plainly see in the lives of the saints.

Certainly saints are often marked out by their attitude of joy and cheerfulness. No one likes a miserable saint.  But this is because of their acceptance of God's will. It is not because they are happy on a personal level. Indeed, one often finds that the live of saints are full of personal hardship and suffering. Their love of God and spiritual dedication does not lead to rewards so much as trials and tribulations.

This might seem a rather inappropriate post for the Christmas period but forgive me if I seek to strip away the fake joy that goes with a modern irreligious Christmas. Christmas is about truth, and the greater truth that exists beyond the transient joys of this world. We can only be fit for that truth when the falsehood within ourselves is stripped away, and that does require the discipline mentioned in the opening quotations from scripture.

So I hope you had a happy Christmas. But if you didn't particularly enjoy yourself you might comfort yourself with the thought that God chastises those whom he loves. But the only reason he does so is that they may turn more and more to him since it is only in him that our true and lasting happiness lies.

Real happiness lies not in pleasure and enjoyment but listening to the word of God and doing his will.

New Year's Day

An anti-new year message.

http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/new-years-day.html

God is Love and Love is God

Have you noticed that with every year that goes by what were regarded as perfectly normal, indeed healthy, attitudes are becoming tarred with the brush of extremism, and possessing them is seen as the sign of a bad person? I am speaking of such things as love of country, upholding the truth of the natural, proper recognition of the difference between men and women, maintaining of spiritual values and appreciation that some cultures really are better, in an objective sense, than others. All these things would have been believed by every civilized, educated person until relatively recently. Now, none of them are, or none of them are supposed to be. They belong to the old, unenlightened, prejudiced age and must be swept away in the light of the 'higher truth' that humanity is one, and every single unit of it (except presumably the ones that don't believe this) is fully equal to every other one.

In saying this I am obviously not denying that, spiritually speaking, we are all valuable in the eyes of God, and, as growing souls, all equally valuable. In the Christian understanding, a king has no more spiritual worth than the lowest of his servants. He may have but that is not on account of his crown. By the same token, the servant may be spiritually greater than the king, and higher in the kingdom of heaven. In spiritual terms, we are all one in Christ but only when we have all accepted Christ. Only when we have, in full understanding and real contrition, repented of our worldly transgressions and turned to God.

But the spiritual fact that we are all one in Christ does not negate the fact that as souls we are all different (that's the whole point of individuality which is the purpose of creation), and where there is difference there is inequality. That is why the ancients depicted life as a chain of being or a ladder. There is one ladder but it has many rungs stretching from Earth to Heaven, and there are creatures on every rung, those at higher levels being closer to God. Would you say the average sincere believer is spiritually equivalent to a saint? Is a saint equivalent to Christ? Of course not (though the potential to grow is always there), and yet they are all one in God.

The modern view is that it is wrong to love the local and the particular unless, that is, the local and the particular is regarded as having been oppressed in recent times. We are enjoined to love humanity rather than particular expressions of it. But the reality of our nature is that we cannot love the general without first loving the particular. Only he who loves individual human beings, particular men and women, can really love humanity. But if you love particular people then you value some more than others. You cannot love everyone equally. Even Jesus had his favourite disciple.

Similarly with nations. The man who doesn't love his own country cannot love anything. If you are a citizen of the world, you don't love anything. You have an ideology, and ideologies are not built on love. They are built on theory. Indeed, when you scratch beneath the surface you often find that many modern ideologies are actually built on hatred. Hatred of truth and the good. Resentment of the reality of God and the fact of Christ. I know that they are not depicted like this and, quite probably, adherents of these ideologies would not even recognize themselves in that description, but it becoming ever clearer to me that those who reject spiritual truth do so because of an unacknowledged hatred within themselves. Ultimately there are but two forces in the universe, love and hate. Of course, ultimately there is only one which is love, but in our fallen corner of it there is love and rejection of love, and love means first and foremost love of God. If there is no love of God then there is rejection of love even if the rejecter proclaims himself to be acting from love, love of humanity being a prime candidate to justify the rejection of God. But you cannot love humanity if you do not love God because the only source of love is in God and if you have love within you then you must acknowledge the higher power that is its source. If you don't acknowledge, as in recognize, the source of love that means that what you are calling love is not the real thing but some interpretation you have conjured up of it. I repeat. If you have love within you then you must see the truth of God. If you don't see the truth of God then you do not have proper love within you. God is love.

There is no general theme to this post. It's one of my occasional efforts in which I just start writing with no clear idea of what I want to say and see where I go. But if I were to extract a theme, it would be this. We live in a world without love that pretends it acts from love. We are utter fakes and will remain so until we rediscover the truth and reality of God. There is no truth without God, no truth and no love. As long as we deny him, we live a lie and we have no love. God is love and love is God. You cannot have one without the other.