Higher church, grail, Kingdom of God

And remember that there are no churches the grail knights attend in those stories. An isolated chapel, a hermitage, usually to encounter someone who can give them information they need. But no churches. Grail Knights are not churchians. Remember also that they operate in a sort of in-between world. There's a little bit of the Valhalla thing where they can fight and be wounded, yet be cured of their wounds. Knights die and reappear later. Maybe just a forgetful author, or maybe an intentional detail.


What ties it to Jesus and His army and the Kingdom of God is you are a soldier in that army and you are on the battlefield when you enter that self-remembering realm. That third state of consciousness and higher emotion realm. As Man #4 and eventually #5.


Without the armor of God though you are vulnerable.


Once there though you are able to be used, to be helpful, to be effective for the goal of the Kingdom of God when you are on that spiritual battlefield. And you can't know what is happening in the way flesh and flesh senses know what is going on around them. You can just be a knight *staying on your horse*, dealing with whatever friction comes your way, overcoming, moving on. The effect you have on the battlefield will be more than you can discern. The effect on others, etc.


In the higher world you manifest as something else. Your will you as that higher manifestation will have is God's will. You can see now how God's will *is* your will. The more that higher body develops the more Real Will becomes conscious. So think of yourself moving and acting down here while your higher body is moving acting up there. You want your higher body to be under the influence of God's will. Real will. It will be, if you are truly in the third state down here, and staying on your horse (emotion, higher emotion). - C.


ps- As I was writing this post I was thinking of Don Quixote as well as Grail Romance. There is school connection there. Don Quixote depicts the type of the person who is pathetic in the face of the world once they move on. Cervantes took a different approach, and perhaps it depicts different things than Grail Romance is intended to depict, but seen in this light you can see it as a school document. The connection Cervantes has with Shakespeare in the minds of literary critics going back is significant. Just a little aside. It may be good to have Don Quixote in you to draw on when you go through the process of true separation from the world which all the above assumes.

pps- There is also the confusion among the most biblical of theologians as to how to differentiate the visible church and the Kingdom of God. It's a matter of scale and development.



From: c. t.
To:
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: a prayer book and rambling notes and qoutes

Yes, and also the real metaphor of the Grail knight depicts the Man #4 (and #5) experience. That is both solitary (the trackless forest) and community (when levels are transcended and the community of the Grail Castle is reached). The Round Table still depicts the worldly level. They have to ride off on adventure, stay on their horse (higher emotion), meet friction (fights, not get thrown) overcome and transcend levels of reality. - C.

From: S
To:
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:56 PM
Subject: RE: a prayer book and rambling notes and qoutes

Man number 4 means conscious development, so I imagine the church of man number four would in some way mean a connection (even like what we have here) between others who are on that path. Not necessarily "Groups" in the Gurdjieff Foundation kind of a way but the genuine meaning stated in Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three are assembled in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
Its interesting that its such a small number. It suggests gathering for genuine reasons, to talk or share ideas, rather than for a sense of community in the hundreds and all that goes with that.
This is church for man number #4
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:58:50 +0100
Subject: Re: a prayer book and rambling notes and qoutes
From: quickeningspirit
To:
CC:

I can easily agree with the religions of Man 123 idea. It's the interactions and energies at work between these that I was mostly looking at.

Also, I'm equally uneasy in an Anglican service as Catholic - I'm not sure I've ever experienced Orthodox, but that doesn't matter. There is even something (well numerous things) I find very attractive in each of these.

You make the subject interesting, if it's a question, what does the Man #4 Branch look like? This might be a mystery. It can't have the same solid footprint for the same reason that G spoke of the Work as belonging to the Slyman.

On 27 October 2011 22:38, c. t. wrote:

Preliminary reply (on a tiny keyboard)... Might not we be well-served to think of the issues involving church and church branches under the rubric of Man #123 and Man #4? I've written this before, but it's a big subject, central really to everything we discuss and do in our everyday lives. It is so obvious that Eastern Orthodox is the Man #1 branch. Roman Catholicism is the Man #2. And Protestantism is the Man #3 branch.

We then have to acknowledge that Protestantism has a controlling presence among the three. Resented by the other two. That is because intellectual center has to control, to a basic degree, emotional and instinctive/moving/sex center. And IC's standard has to be sola Scriptura.

So being truly balanced we'll seem more Protestant. So from there we move into what the Man #4 'branch' looks like.

This is why we have interest in the two other branches. The music, the practices.

Obviously the Work is the language of the #4 level. What do you think on this thus far? - C.




On Thu Oct 27th, 2011 2:06 PM PDT quickeningspirit wrote:

>I have a book titled A Method of Prayer by Eugraph Kovalevsky. It's a Praxis
>book, same publishers as Mouravieff. It's essentially part of the
>French/Russian Orthodox tradition. Anyway, an aside.
>
>It covers.
>the Jesus prayer - which was my original interest in buying it
>the Lord's prayer
>commentaries by the 'fathers'
>
>In the section on the Lord's prayer the author explains that the Lord's
>Prayer is THE Christian Creed. It belongs to the Faithful. While the Creed
>eg Nicene (*I believe in one God ...*) was intended for catechumen (novice
>Christians/beginners) - and not until they were 'illuminated' were they
>initiated into the Lord's Prayer. In Church service, catechumen and
>'outsiders' departed after the Creed, and the doors closed. A practise
>symbolically maintained by Roman Catholics and something the author appears
>to hold in such regard that he'd like the practise reinstated. (It's already
>sounding weird.)
>
>It's an interesting book but flicking through it, I'm continually reminded
>of the issues that led to the Reformation. This is one thing that I don't
>understand, speaking more broadly, the Orthodox tradition stakes its
>legitimacy on grounds of an unbroken tradition whilst claiming Western
>civilization is disconnected. There is this claim that the western Christian
>aims at moral perfection whereas the true and obviously Orthodox
>understanding is for a life of theosis. What is this tradition that is so
>important to the orthodox? If I accept it then it is the chain of conscious
>beings, and C influence. What I don't accept is that it exists in a Church,
>though perhaps G thought Mt Athos had it? Praxis website/Robin Amis promote
>and sell this general view:
>
>http://www.praxisresearch.net/cart_product.cfm/prod_id/36625/bk/1/tid/264
>http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/theosis-english.pdf
>
>"We now live in an age where Western civilization
>lives and acts contrary to its Christian heritage, yet it
>still believes that it knows about Christ and His Church.
>The West fails to appreciate that over one thousand years
>separate it from this tradition. As a result, the West’s
>perception and understanding of Christ and His Church
>has become clouded."
>
>"Theosis is personal communion with God “face to
>face.” To the Western mind, this idea may seem incomprehensible,
>even sacrilegious, but it derives unquestionably
>from Christ’s teachings. Jesus Christ was the
>fulfillment of the messianic dream of the Jewish race;
>His mission to connect us with the Kingdom of God
>– a Kingdom not of this world."
>
>If you look into it you'll see that Orthodox types don't really understand
>the protestant position. They are confused by the multiplex of denominations
>and the lack of any tradition. I think they feel cornered. They don't
>generally disagree with the Protestant critique of Roman Catholicism but
>they consider dependence on the Word a flaw (they attack Sola Scripture)
>that has led to endless personal interpretations which result in Jehovah's
>Witnesses, Methodists, Baptists, Wesley and, Calvinists, etc. This diverse
>range of interpretations within the protestant world is perceived within the
>Orthodox as a sign of grand vanity. They are appalled by Calvin's
>Institutes.
>
>What I see and the description on the treatment of catechumen above points
>up how the Word was controlled through an elite administered liturgical
>practise. And, although that book is so evidently christian and concerned
>with God and Jesus Christ, and the mysteries therein, I still get this
>background taste that this could be any of a dozen mystical eastern
>teachings on holiness.
>
>I suppose it's just a very different thing to something like Berkhof. I read
>one orthodox critique challenging Sola Scriptue by drawing attention to the
>body of theology that protestants rely on ... how hazy! Tho I can see a lot
>of value and use in this prayer book, and in the Orthodox church too, but
>I'm not convinced they have what they claim to possess. They certainly don't
>know anything about what they critique and they don't understand how the
>Holy Spirit works either.