THE “NEW GOSPEL OF INTERPRETATION”

Sections: General Index Present Section: Index Present Work: Index Previous: IX - The “Woman” is Not a Woman, But the Soul, and the Intuition Next: XI - The Esoteric and True Doctrine of Divine Incarnation

(p. 32)

The Fall, Brought About by Ecclesiasticism Acting under Satanic

Control, by Means of Depravation of the Spiritual Consciousness

For the Bible, then, in its esoteric and divinely intended sense, the “woman” through whom man falls, and the “woman” through whom he is redeemed, are one and the same, their difference being of condition only. Neither of them is a woman. But both of them imply that principle in man which, as being of feminine nature and potency, the Bible calls “the Woman:” namely, the soul and her faculty of intuition. This is because, as a book of the soul, the Bible deals with principles and addresses itself to the soul, thereby proving its inspiration to be of the Celestial and Divine.

Ecclesiasticism, on the contrary, by its lack of any sense of congruity, its ignorance of principles and of soul-processes, and of the meaning of the Bible symbology, has by its treatment of “the Woman,” proved its inspiration to be of the astral and infernal; so exactly in all respects do its methods reproduce those of influences thus designated. And hence it has come that, instead of seeing that the process of redemption must necessarily be the exact reverse of that of the Fall, and that both must be spiritual, and not personal, Ecclesiasticism has ascribed the Fall to a woman, and thrown the whole blame for it upon her and her sex, affixing to them the stigma of inferiority and servitude, by which ever since they have been

(p. 33)

cursed, and has altogether ignored the fact that the Fall was brought about entirely by itself through its systematic depravation of all that she implies.

Meanwhile, instead of seeking, by ministering to her restoration, to repair the effects of the Fall, Ecclesiasticism has kept her fast under foot that she should not be restored, making her its own abject slave. And it has further confused and obscured man’s perceptions of the truth regarding her, first by making her the physical mother of the man Jesus, instead of the spiritual mother of the Christ in man, – absurdly referring her “virginity” to the body instead of to the soul, and blasphemously depraving man’s conceptions both of the divine method and of his own nature; and next, by identifying her with the Church, meaning itself, doing which it has perverted the Apocalyptic denunciations of Ecclesiasticism to its own glorification. For although it is true that the “Woman” to whose exaltation Scripture ascribes man’s redemption, refers in one aspect to the Church, it is not to the Church as constituted and defined by Ecclesiasticism, but to the Church of the soul collective of man redeemed from the power of Ecclesiasticism by means of his own restored intuition of truth, to the confusion and downfall of Ecclesiasticism.

The rejection of the Intuition by the world of our time has been largely due to the belief that it lays claim to the possession of knowledge acquired independently of experience. The definition which has already been given herein of its nature convicts this belief of error, by showing it to be founded in a complete misconception. For such misconception and its consequences Ecclesiasticism has made itself responsible by its suppression of the truth concerning the soul’s nature and pre-existence, and her consequent opportunities of acquiring knowledge by means of experience. For that which the intuition represents is precisely that positive knowledge which the soul has acquired by experience, concerning

(p. 34)

God, the world and man, during the long ages of its past as an individual entity. And, so far from the knowledge acquired thus and by such organon being monstrous, unthinkable, incredible, or even recondite and abstruse, – so far from its being a mystery, the acceptance and profession of belief in which involve the suicide, intellectual and moral, which Ecclesiasticism exacts of its devotees, it represents man’s own common-sense in its supremest mode. For it is that truth which in his heart of hearts he has always felt and hoped, and almost believed, but which, for the veil of blood cast by his priests over both the universe and his own vision, he was unable to see. For it is that perfect truth and perfect goodness which, but for the assurance of his priests to the contrary, man would have believed God to be.

And it is by means of the “woman,” Intuition, that man attains to his common-sense in this its highest mode. And that it is in very truth the highest mode is because the conclusion which it represents is the agreement, not of all men merely, or of these and all women, but of all parts of man. And being this, it is the agreement at once of the Whole Man, and of man whole, of man sound, and therein – as alone he can be – of man sane. For it is the conclusion, not of a majority, however large, either of men rudimentary by reason of their lack of unfoldment, or of men mutilate through the suppression of that essential moiety of man’s system, the intuition; not therefore of men fast “bound beneath the altar” and “in prison” of their lower elements; not of spiritual troglodytes deep burrowed in the caverns of materiality and incapable of aspiration beyond the nether and corporeal. It is the conclusion of man substantial and real; of man emancipated, free and unfolded in respect of the consciousness of all the manifold spheres and modes of Being wherein the infinite and eternal Plenitude differentiates and distributes

(p. 35)

of Itself in the universe to become individuate in man. It is the conclusion, in short, of man who, recognising God as both the Force and the Substance of Existence, recognises Him as both Father and Mother, and has accordingly sought by the unfoldment in himself of all the principles, properties, qualities and attributes, respectively masculine and feminine, of Being, to become really, because spiritually, “made in the image of God, male and female,” adding to intellect, intuition; to mind, moral conscience; and to will, love; and so representing at once the Whole Humanity and the Whole Deity.

Such is the common-sense, and such are the results, accruing to man through her, the mystic woman of Scripture so contemned and rejected of the world’s priesthoods whether of religion or science; provided only he observe the conditions prescribed in regard to her.

These conditions are those which, as indispensable to man’s attainment of his proper perfection, are predicated of the Christ; as when it is said that “he comes binding his foal to the vine, and his ass’s colt to the choice vine, and washing his garments in the blood of grapes.” Thus mounted and thus cleansed, he rides in triumph as king into the holy city of his own regenerate system. For that which these metaphors denote is the union of the mind’s two modes, the Intellect and the Intuition, in a pure spirit. Fulfilling which conditions, man becomes, it is further said, “a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” For that which this name implies is the perfect equilibrium of these two faculties as king and queen in man’s mental system. Having such mind, man has “the same mind that was in Christ Jesus,” and is “anointed of God,” being suffused of the Spirit, and is no more subject to the limitations of matter. And being thus reconstituted of the elements of his system – its substance and its life – in their divine, because their pure, condition, he is said to be “reborn of

(p. 36)

water and the spirit,” and to have for his parents “Virgin Mary and Holy Ghost,” and to be son at once of God and of Man, and to be “God-Man.” For the being thus divinely generated in man is God while becoming man, and man while remaining God. Such and so simple, obvious, reasonable, and divine when interpreted in its true sense, is the doctrine which Ecclesiasticism has made at once incomprehensible and blasphemous.

It was not alone of the process indispensable to others that Jesus spoke when He said, as to Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again of water and of the Spirit. He declared therein his own generation. For “water and the Spirit,” “water and the blood,” “Spirit and Bride,” “Spirit of God moving on the face of the waters,” “Virgin Mary and Holy Ghost” – all these are but various modes of denoting the same dualism, subsisting in Being, the dualism of Force and Substance, in virtue of which God is both Father and Mother, and creation and redemption are by generation. Both are alike Spirit, for not else could there be congruous relation between them. And being spirit they are living substance, and being living substance they are called “blood” – meaning the divine blood of the divine life, the life which is God, even God’s own self which God is ever shedding alike for the creation, the sustentation and the redemption of the universe. And it is accordingly this spiritual life and substance which the beloved Apostle, who alone discerns and records them – he to whom at last the Christ as the Son of the “Woman,” Intuition, commends his “Mother” – beholds issuing from the pierced side of his Master, the “Christ within,” and not he “after the flesh,” as that chief of mystics and esotericists, the Apostle Paul, plainly declares.

Now, concerning regeneration, this requires to be said here. Being from out of the body, the process must be accomplished, at least in great part, while in the body.

(p. 37)

And being long and gradual, it extends over many earth-lives. The doctrine of a multiplicity of earth-lives, formerly called transmigration and the revolution of souls, and now re-incarnation, was universal in the pre-Christian Churches, and is implicit throughout the Bible, being sometimes explicit also. But Ecclesiasticism, on assuming the style and title of Christian, saw fit to drop it out of notice. The reason is not far to seek, now that the source and inspiring motives of Ecclesiasticism are disclosed. Re-incarnation is the condition of regeneration, making it possible by affording the requisite opportunities of experience. And regeneration is by interior purification; this being the secret and method of the Christ. But the controllers of Ecclesiasticism wanted blood for themselves. So regeneration was shelved to make room for substitution. As the infernals knew, and the event has proved, give men a blood-loving God, and they will deluge the earth with blood to His glory. For “as in heaven” – man’s conception of God – “so on earth.” Man ever makes himself after the image in which he makes his God.

Not that the doctrine of atonement is false, but only that of vicarious atonement. For, as says the new Gospel of Interpretation, emphasising and reinforcing the old Gospel of the Bible, there is no such thing as vicarious atonement; for none can redeem another by shedding innocent blood. Justice cannot be satisfied by the punishment of the innocent for the guilty, but rather is it doubly outraged. No man shall take the sin of another, nor shall any make atonement for his brother’s trespass; but every one shall bear his own sin, and be purified by his own chastisement. To take away man’s suffering is to take away his means of redemption. Only if, through suffering himself, he repent, can he receive forgiveness. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die,” and no other for it. And it comes not finally out thence – from the state of being in which it has

(p. 38)

sinned – until it have paid the last farthing; but returns thither again and again, until it has worked out its own salvation, and is no more liable to sin. This is why, “from Adam to Christ,” from the Fall to the Redemption, there are so many “generations.” They are the steps of the man’s own progress. True, the man, considered as the exterior personality, does not know that he is atoning for the faults of his past lives. Nor is he doing so; for he has no past lives, being renewed at each fresh embodiment. But the man considered as the interior individuality, knows it and his responsibility is according as he neglects or heeds the knowledge, which is the voice of conscience speaking in him. Such atonement constitutes also at-one-ment. For thereby the man is made at one with the Divine Spirit within him, attaining at length the Christ-state. And the principle in virtue of which this occurs in him, and the process thereof, are “Christ.” For by Christ is denoted not only a person, an office, and a state, but also a principle and a process. So that even though man be saved by “Christ,” he is not saved vicariously in the ecclesiastical sense.