The Point Chauds Arabia Mt Experience Pt 3 - Theory Notes
A theoretical statement on spiritual legacy, Consecration and Egregore from a Scientific Illuminist Perspective
Consecration - The Calling - photo courtesy
Please note that, as Tau Michael Bertiaux has held, since June 16, 1979, all major independent lines of the traditional apostolic succession through consecration at that time by Bishop Forest Gregory Barber, all such lines flow to me by virtue of my consecrations by Bertiaux.
Bertiaux, later reconsecrated by Jorge Rodriguez, then also consecrated me. In line with MY FORMER ASSOCIATES AT OTO's Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica, Patriarch Tau Silenus and Primate Tau Apiryon, I hold that there is a distinction between, on the one hand, Spiritual Appointment and Consecration in the lineage of Edward Alexander Crowley (Baphomet XI°) and, on the other, the traditional Apostolic Succession. Both have their importance and validity. In my view, and, in having held both, I believe I can render a rather well informed and detached opinion on this. I held the succession of Baphomet as a Bishop "now and forever" through Consecration by both the Absolute Grand Patriarch of the Ordo Templi Orientis Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica (November 19, 1988). While I am no longer associated with EGC-OTO, I hold with the Augustinian doctrine "once a bishop-always a bishop" though I claim - and would have - no authority within OTO as of late July, 2006. As Tau Silenus recognized me in writing unconditionally as Bishop in writing prior to my becoming an OTO initiate, I maintain I hold the succession of Baphomet. Others are free to disagree; nobody questions my Full Apostolic Succession, which is what counts magically.
The "Baphomet descent" doctrine peculiar to the current OTO management was, in my opinion, a reaction to questions about their own Apostolic Succession, and nothing more, an over reaction at best. I also hold the Latter Day Saints succession through Bishop Conway, and the Doinel Succession through various consecrations. The Honorary Title of "Rabbi" was recently also given me by the Fellowship Assembly, which I accept in the sense of being a "teacher of spirituality" in the Reform Jewish tradition.
It is my own conviction that verifiable spiritual powers are demonstrably attributable to various lineages of spiritual succession, be this the so-called "Succession of the Apostles" (which descends from the ancient Roman State Religion through Roman Christianity), various non-apostolic but similar lines of succession (Latter Day Saints, Doinel Gnostic, New Aeon, et al), or blood lineages as in the hereditary Hindu Brahmins or Hebrew Kohenim, from which I descend. I profess only two fundamental convictions in these endeavors: I advocate Scientific Illuminism, or the method of science employed in pursuit of the aims of religion, and I holds firmly to the conviction that the world as-it-is is sufficiently unsatisfactory that exploration of almost any ethical "out-of-the-box" alternative, however unconventional, is worth the effort. We consider this Tikkun Olam, the attempt to improve the world as envisioned in my native great Hebraic tradition.
I hold also with Tau Michael Bertiaux that "Apostolic Succession" is of enormous value as a continuation of the most ancient priesthoods of Egypt and Rome through the Christian communion and otherwise, and that special mystical powers "objectively" are transferred by consecration in these lineages. This is in line with the concept of a long and powerful egregore, quite apart from any specific belief system. My particular assertion is that this can be objectively verified through scientific experimentation, similar to that performed in parapsychology with spiritual healers.
"The title pontifex was used of Roman Catholic bishops and pontifex maximus of the pope by the end of the 4th century." The continuity from the most ancient spiritual sources should be obvious here, and its historical value in continuity for the New Aeon equally valid, all other considerations and theories aside.
Consecration is obtained by mystical realization (St. Paul, Jules Doinel), the laying on of hands by valid holders of consecration (as in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox tradition), through Election by Bull of a Temple, Lodge or Synod (as in Masonic theories of Elect-Kohenim, Priest Levite, et al), or through initiation (as in Masonic initiation). Consecration is the passing of the power of egregore to transform the profane into the sacred, to transmute the One Energy into healing and the sacraments. While the laying of of hands and the "Road to Damascus" experience are certainly the most dramatic methods of valid transmission (and the most universally recognized), the acid test, as it were, is whether the egregore is or is not passed. If so, consecration has taken place. If not, not. Those who do not understand this, do not understand the essence of the process, and are falling back on dogma or superstition.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
"Apostolic Succession is transmitted in an episcopal consecration by the laying on of hands.
Apostolic Succession is transmitted in an episcopal consecration by the laying on of hands.In Christianity, Apostolic Succession refers to the uninterrupted lines of bishops which are historically traceable back to the original Twelve Apostles.
Apostolic Succession is transmitted during episcopal consecrations (the ordination of bishops) by the laying on of hands of a bishop previously consecrated with Apostolic Succession. Generally, all pre-Protestant Reformation churches including the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox claim Apostolic Succession. Due to the sacramental theology of these churches, Apostolic Succession is considered necessary for the valid ordination of priests and bishops, which are in turn necessary for the validity of several of the other sacraments, including the Eucharist, Confession, Confirmation, and the Anointing of the Sick.
Apostolic Succession is claimed by all of the pre-Protestant Reformation churches, including the Assyrian Church of the East, the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the original Thomas Christians in India, and other Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches. Apostolic Succession is also claimed by the Anglican Communion and some Lutheran churches. However, while the Apostolic Succession of the Anglican Communion is recognized by some Eastern Christian churches, it is not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church.
The Roman Catholic Church further asserts that Jesus Christ gave Saint Peter a unique primacy among the apostles, which has been passed on in the office of the Papacy. Eastern Orthodox theology and ecclesiology teaches that each bishop is equal to the other bishops, even the Ecumenical Patriarch, who is first amongst others, continuing the ancient practice of the church, who considered the Roman Pontiff to be first but not superior to the rest of the bishops.
While many churches within the historical episcopate argue that Holy Orders are valid only through apostolic succession, most Protestant Churches would deny that the apostolicity of the Church rests on an unbroken episcopacy. They generally hold that one important qualification of the apostles was that they were chosen directly by Jesus and that they witnessed the resurrected Christ. According to this understanding, the work of these twelve (and the Apostle Paul), together with the prophets of the twelve tribes of Israel, provide the doctrinal foundation for the whole church of subsequent history through the Scriptures of the Bible. To share with the apostles the same faith, to believe their word as found in the Scriptures, to receive the same Holy Spirit, is the only sense in which apostolic succession is meaningful, because it is in this sense only that men have fellowship with God in the truth (an extension of the Reformation doctrines of sola fide and sola scriptura). The most meaningful apostolic succession for most Protestants, then, is the faithful succession of apostolic teaching. There is, of course, much disagreement among various Protestant churches about the exact content of apostolic teaching. In addition, Protestants state that the teaching of Apostolic Succession did not arise until 170-200 A.D.
It is worth noting, however, that the First of the Epistles of Clement which is commonly dated to the first century and claims to be written by the Church of God in Rome which was established by the apostles presents a belief in apostolic succession as do also the Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch. Also worth noting is the fact that others beside the twelve apostles and Saint Paul are called "apostles" in the New Testament. Also noteworthy is the fact that the Apostle Paul, though given spiritual authority directly by Christ, did not embark on his apostleship without conferring with those who were apostles before him as he notes in his Epistle to the Galatians. By contrast, some Protestant charismatic and restorationist churches include "apostles" among the offices that should be evident into modern times in a true church, though they never trace an historical line of succession or attempt to confer, like Paul, with those who were "apostles" before them. It is frequently the case that the founders or senior leaders of a restorationist church grouping will be referred to as the apostles. Church planting is seen as a key role of these present-day apostles, but the concept of apostolic succession which protected the faith and inter-communion of the Christian churches through the first three centuries of ersecution and cross-cultural, translinguistic evangelism has been lost in these new movements.
Those who hold to the importance of episcopal apostolic succession would counter the above by appealing to the New Testament, which, they say, implies a personal apostolic succession (from Paul to Timothy and Titus, for example) and which states that Jesus gave the Apostles a "blank check" to lead the Church as they saw fit under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. They appeal as well to other documents of the very early Church, especially the Epistle of St. Clement to the Church at Corinth, written around 96 AD In it, Clement defends the authority and prerogatives of a group of "elders" or "bishops" in the Corinthian Church which had, apparently, been deposed and replaced by the congregation on its own initiative. In this context, Clement explicitly states that the apostles both appointed bishops as successors and had directed that these bishops should in turn appoint their own successors; given this, such leaders of the Church were not to be removed without cause and not in this way. Further, proponents of the necessity of the personal apostolic succession of bishops within the Church point to the universal practice of the undivided early Church (up to 431 AD), from which, as organizations, the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox (at that point in time one Church until 1054, see Great Schism), as well Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrian Churches have all directly descended.
At the same time, no defender of the personal apostolic succession of bishops would deny the importance of doctrinal continuity in the Church. These churches hold that Christ entrusted the leadership of the community of believers, and the obligation to transmit and preserve the "deposit of faith" (the experience of Christ and his teachings contained in the doctrinal "tradition" handed down from the time of the apostles, the written portion of which is Scripture) to the apostles, and the apostles passed on this role by ordaining bishops after them.
Roman Catholic, Orthodox theology additionally hold that the power and authority to confect the sacraments, or at least all of the sacraments aside from baptism and matrimony (the first of which may be administered by anyone, the second of which is administered by the couple to each other) is passed on only through the sacrament of Holy Orders, and an unbroken line of ordination of bishops to the apostles is necessary for the valid celebration of the sacraments today. Roman Catholics recognize the validity of the apostolic successions of the bishops, and therefore the rest of the clergy, of the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian, Old Catholic, and some Independent Catholic Churches. Since 1896, Rome has not fully recognized all Anglican orders as valid. The Eastern Orthodox do not universally recognize Roman Catholics, Anglicans, or any other group as having Apostolic Succession. Until the time comes when the practices of the Orthodox Church are unified, the validity of any priest's ordination will be decided by each Autocephalous Orthodox Church.
Neither the Roman Catholic nor the Orthodox Church recognize the validity of the apostolic succession of the clergy of the Protestant churches, in large measure because of their theology of the Eucharist.
In Roman Catholic theology, the College of Apostles received the sacrament of Holy Orders from Christ, making them the first bishops, and the bishops of the world today, as a group (the College of Bishops) have the same role within the church as the College of Apostles did immediately after Christ's ministry. The Roman Catholic Church also holds that within the College of Apostles, Peter was picked out for the unique role of leadership and to serve as the source of unity among the apostles, a role among the bishops and within the church inherited by the pope as Peter's successor today.
While Eastern Orthodox sources often refer to the bishops as "successors of the apostles", strict Orthodox ecclesiology and theology holds that all (Orthodox) bishops are properly successors of the apostles. Eastern Orthodoxy thus makes a distinction between a geographical or historical succession and proper ontological or ecclesiological succession. Hence, the bishops of Rome and Antioch can be considered successors of Peter in an historical sense on account of Peter's presence in the early community. This does not imply that these bishops are more successors of Peter than all others in an ontological sense.
Eastern Orthodoxy is less concerned with the question of 'validity' than Roman Catholicism, which means that Orthodox bishops can consider the merits of individual cases. It should be noted, however, that the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church has specifically stated that Roman Catholic orders are recognized, to the effect that Roman Catholic clergy seeking admission in the Moscow Patriarchate are received without ordination at their existing rank. The historic and normative practice of Eastern Orthodoxy has been to reordain clergymen coming from the Anglican / Episcopal communion, thus indicating the non-recognition of Anglican orders, in somewhat agreement with the Roman Catholic position.
Methodist episcopal succession derives from John Wesley, who was an ordained presbyter of the Church of England but not himself a bishop and thus not officially authorized to consecrate others. Wesley justified his practice of ordaining bishops (which he called "General Superintendents") and Elders (i.e., presbyters) for Methodists in the newly independent United States of America in 1784 by appealing to a perceived need and by citing a minority opinion among the early Church Fathers and an ancient precedent from the Church of Alexandria, which held that presbyters ("priests" or "elders") could, at least collectively, indeed ordain other such presbyters and even consecrate, or "set apart" bishops in certain emergency situations. Based upon this argument, the United Methodist Church understands all of its Elders, not just its Bishops, as being part of an Apostolic succession of the entire body (or "conference") of ministers:
"In ordination, the church affirms and continues the apostolic ministry through persons empowered by the Holy Spirit. (Book of Discipline paragraph 303)"
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that when Christ asked his disciples who they think he is, Peter had the right answer because he prayed and received revelation: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." They believe that when Christ said "upon this rock I will build my church", the rock of which he was speaking was revelation. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints believes that certain aspects of the church will change over time. For example, at one time Christ said not to preach to the Gentiles, and later Peter was given a revelation when it was time to start.
Ordaining a priestess - Arabia Mountain 2008 - photo courtesy
Be kind and have heart and by books from ugotta_have_heart