Tomberg and Anthroposophy

[Federica]

This cuts short any attempts to twist Rudolf Steiner's throat to make him spit in hindsight what he never intended or said. I was not even searching for this. I was scrolling Substack. And someone's quote rolled forth, from GA 187 - How Can Humanity Find the Christ Again?: The Entrance of Christianity into the Course of Earth Evolution, 24 Dec 1918. The underlined is precisely what Cleric said.

Let us fight for the true, the future Spirit of Christianity, fellow humans, wholly, and beyond all half-hearted half-nesses. Let us look forward to Christmas in the right way, as depicted here. Let us find the Christ again.

The mood of the present time is not likely, perhaps, to create in many people that depth of inner feeling of which legends and sagas speak when they refer to the Christmas Holy Nights, when the soul that is prepared for it is able to have some experience of the spiritual world. You know one such impressive legend from the performances given here, that of Olaf &Åsteson. Many similar things point to Christmas time in the same way.

It is clear, not only to a more thoughtful student of the human heart, but to anyone who observes in the external world the general spirit of our time, that a Christmas mood, a Christmas impulse, must now be sought anew by mankind. What lives in the celebration of Christmas, in the thought of Christmas, must take hold of the human soul in a new way. Just think, dear friends—in order to realize the broader aspects of our contemporary religious and spiritual mood—how little inclination there is at this time to contemplate the Christ as such, to direct the eyes of the soul to Him.

People often believe they are speaking about the Christ, and yet you will find they have made hardly any distinction between Christ and God the Father except in name. While it is true that for many believers the Christ still stands at the center of their religious creed and that beside Him all else of a divine nature loses its luster, nevertheless we have seen for some time now the rise of a theology that has really lost the Christ, that speaks of a God in general even when Christ is meant. The specific quality that is essential when the human heart looks up to Christ needs to be found again. And perhaps the most worthy celebration of the Christmas Festival at this time is actually to inscribe in our souls how mankind can find the Christ again. Many historical facts of the evolution of mankind will first have to be considered—in the spiritual scientific sense—if a true impulse is to be reawakened that will lead human souls to Christ.

The Christmas Festival can not only remind us, as is intended, of the entrance of Jesus into earth life, but it can also point to the birth of Christianity itself, the entrance of Christianity into the course of earth evolution. And so let us today direct our spiritual vision primarily to what might be called the Christmas of Christianity itself, the entrance, the birth, of Christianity within the sphere of the earth. The external facts are known, of course, but our knowledge of them needs to be intensified.

Christianity came into the world in the person of Christ Jesus, into the midst of the adherents of the Old Testament. We can observe the phenomena that occurred among these people when Christianity was born. We see how they were externally divided into two separate currents, that of the Pharisees and that of the Sadducees. It is necessary to view all these things henceforth in a new light. When we consider the general course of development of an individual or of humanity itself—indeed, the course of the entire earth—this will become increasingly clear to us if we conceive it as a continual balancing between luciferic and ahrimanic forces. But that is merely the designation we use; there has always existed among the deeper natures of humanity a consciousness of the actual existence of Lucifer and Ahriman and of the condition of balance between them. Fundamentally, the contrast of the Pharisaic element and the Sadducean element in the ancient Hebrew evolution was nothing else than the contrast of ahrimanic and luciferic elements. Jesus, coming into external earth life, entered the balancing stream. He entered earthly existence at that place for which the most important designation up to the time of the Mystery of Golgotha was that Solomon's Temple had been built there. In a certain sense we can only understand the nature of Solomon's Temple if we are able to perceive it in contrast to the Christianity then being born. It is well-known how quickly after Christianity came into being Solomon's Temple was destroyed, so far as external existence is concerned. This memorial of the earlier evolution out of which the spirituality of Christianity arose was destined to exist no longer at the place from which that spirituality streamed forth. The nature of Solomon's Temple and the nature of Christianity present a strong contrast. Solomon's Temple embraced in marvelous, magnificent, sometimes gigantic symbols all that was contained in the world conception of the Old Testament. It was an image of the entire universe so far as this could be represented by the ancient world conception, in its conformity to law, in its inner structure, in its permeation by divine-spiritual beings. It was nonetheless an image of the universe that in a certain sense and in one direction was extraordinarily one-sided. That is to say, the Temple was a spatial image of the universe, an image that made use of spatial forms and spatial relations to express the mysteries of the universe. But for those who viewed it in the spirit of the Old Testament, its symbolism was endowed with life.

We see, on the one hand, in the Judaism of the Pharisees and Sadducees, the externalization of what had been given to humanity through the Old Testament; on the other hand, we see in the symbolism of Solomon's Temple the means of deepening the life of Old Testament humanity. It might be said that what has flowed into the entire Old Testament revelation came to expression in these two directions: one outward, exoteric, in the Judaism of the Pharisees and Sadducees; the other esoteric, through what was represented in the mysterious symbols of Solomon's Temple. And from this exotericism and esotericism sprang what became Christianity.

This Christianity was at first, at the time of its birth, unknown to the world at large, to that world in which lived the spirituality of the humanity of that time, namely, the Greek world. Within the expanding Roman empire in which the Mystery of Golgotha was being prepared through the birth of Jesus, it was not known what a momentous Event had taken place among the Jewish people. Nothing was known of the significant Event that constitutes the meaning of the earth. Nevertheless, although the humanity of that time allowed it to pass unnoticed outwardly, the most sublime Event of our earth evolution, inwardly the Christianity that was coming into being was connected with what was then considered the whole world.

In what ways, dear friends, was it connected? The meaning that Christmas conceals is revealed later in the Easter conception. What then is the important aspect of Easter that really intensifies the meaning of Christmas? It is the contemplation of the Savior of mankind Who died on the cross: the cross with the dead God. The intention and the deed originated in humanity: to put to death the God Who had appeared in their midst. The profound magnitude, the full power, of this thought should again enter into human souls. Contemplation of the deed by which the God Who appeared on earth was killed by men: this should be put into language by which it can be understood. Let us try to do this, at least from one point of view.

When we look upon the Mystery of Golgotha, we find it to be a great world-historical confluence of spiritual streams that had been present in the ancient Mysteries. (You know this from my book, Christianity as Mystical Fact.) What had taken place in the ancient Mysteries as the sacrificial rite, the rite of initiation, what had taken place in the temple with, one might say, limited importance, was now set out on the great stage of world history; it now took place in the realm of our entire earth existence. In a certain sense, the initiation of humanity itself was brought out of the temples and presented as historical event before the whole world.

Now let us ask: what were the thoughts of someone permitted to take part in the initiation rites of the ancient Mysteries—when these still possessed their true significance? Through his preparatory instruction such a person knew with certainty that what is directly apparent in the external world of the senses, and what can be comprehended by the human intellect, is a world of mere phenomena, a world of appearance. He knew that what a human being experiences immediately in his environment during his waking hours between birth and death is only the outer view, the phenomenal display, of an inner reality, and that in ordinary life this inner reality is concealed. In the Mystery rite itself such a person sought true reality in what streamed to him, as it were, from the depths of existence, in what could be drawn out and separated from the merely phenomenal, illusory existence. Someone who took part in the ancient Mysteries could always say to himself: When I walk through the world and see external nature, it is illusion. When I experience this or that in the world, it is illusion. When I do any kind of work for the world, it is illusion. But when I am permitted to take part in the holy acts of the Mysteries in the Temple, then something happens that is truth, not illusion. Something is drawn forth, so to speak, out of the illusory existence of the world and transformed into a sacramental act; and this act contains exact truth in contrast to the illusion.

If we wish to be quite clear concerning this view of the Mysteries, we must compare it to the view prevailing today in our materialistic age. We must understand that all that is called reality today in this age of materialism was regarded as illusion in the conceptions belonging to the Mysteries; while, for example, the sacramental act performed as the initiation rite, which most people today consider “fantastic”, was esteemed by those acquainted with the Mysteries as the only reality in life. Such an act, therefore, was not performed at random, but at certain times when it was believed that something of the true nature of things might push through the phenomena of outer life and, as it were, be captured through the act. It has often been mentioned that one such important rite consisted in showing the sacrifice of the God, the death of the God, and His resurrection after three days. This pointed to the fact that to someone who penetrates more deeply into the external world, death can reveal the true nature of this world, that reality must be sought beyond death.

Think of all this entering human souls from the content of the Mysteries at the beginning of our Christian era, expressing the most important fact in world phenomena! Someone in that era pondering on the course of our earth evolution would have been able to say: “In ancient times it was possible for man to learn something about the divine-spiritual world through atavistic initiation science. It was formerly revealed to man out of earth evolution itself. That time is now past. The time has come when nothing more can be drawn from the content of this world to guide us to the divine-spiritual world. This world has lost its divine-spiritual life.” That is what such a soul would have said. Where must one look for the meaning of evolution for earth-humanity? Where was the real meaning of the earth at the time when Christianity came into being? Where was the expression of what was willed in man's innermost being at that time? At Golgotha on the cross. It was Death! What formerly had gushed forth from earth evolution for human salvation, was itself dead. To the soul that penetrated more deeply into cosmic reality, an earth impulse, the most profound of all earth impulses, was given at the time of the birth of Christianity, in the contemplation of the dead God.

Only when experienced in this way does the full magnitude appear of the matter with which we are here concerned. The ancient world conception, the ancient world-wisdom had flowed into Solomon's Temple; but it no longer held anything of what had made it great. Something new had to enter world evolution. And so in the course of time the destruction of Solomon's Temple and the rise, the birth, of Christianity exactly coincided. Solomon's Temple: a spatial symbolic image of the content of the cosmos; Christianity, comprehended as a time-phenomenon: a new image of the cosmos. Christianity is not something that appears as a spatial image, as in the case of Solomon's Temple; one only understands Christianity if one grasps it in images of time. One must see that earth evolution proceeded as far as the Mystery of Golgotha; then the Mystery of Golgotha intervened; then, through the Christ pouring Himself into humanity, evolution moves on in this way or that. Its deeper content is not to be equated in the remotest degree with anything appearing in spatial images, not even in the gigantic, magnificent spatial images of Solomon's Temple. Nevertheless, Solomon's Temple, as also the inner aspect of Pharisaic and Sadducean life, contained the soul of the world consciousness of that time. The soul of the world consciousness two thousands years ago was to be found in Old Testament Judaism. Into this soul was laid the seed of Christianity, a new seed that, while growing out of all that may be expressed in space, can only be expressed in time. The becoming following the existing: that is the inner relation of Christianity that was then being born to the soul element of the world of that time, to Judaism that was embodied in Solomon's Temple, which later collapsed. Christianity was born into the soul of ancient Judaism.

As Christianity sought the soul in Judaism, so it sought the spirit in Hellenism. The Gospels themselves, as transmitted to the world (I refer only to what has been handed down), have in the main passed through the Greek spirit. The thoughts through which the world could think Christianity are the spiritual wisdom of Greece. The first apologia of the Church Fathers appeared in the Greek tongue. Just as Christianity was born into the soul that for the humanity of that time lived in Judaism, so it was born into the spirit provided by Hellenism.

Romanism furnished the body. It was Romanism that at that time could provide an external organization for concepts of empire. Judaism soul, Hellenism spirit, Romanism body—body, of course, in the sense that the social structure of humanity is body. Romanism is in reality the forming of external inclinations and institutions; the thoughts concerning external institutions live within them. It is the corporeal element in historical existence, the corporeal element in historical development. Just as Christianity was born into the soul of Judaism and into the spirit of Hellenism, so it was born into the body of the Roman Empire. Superficial people even think that everything contained in Christianity can be explained out of Judaism, Hellenism and Romanism. In the same way, indeed, that materialistic natural scientists believe that everything in a human being is inherited from parents, grandparents, etc., ignoring the fact that the soul comes from spiritual regions and only puts on the body as a garment: so these superficial people like to say that Christianity consists of what in actual fact it has only put on as an outer garment. The essence of Christianity entered the world, of course, with Christ Jesus Himself; but this Christianity was born into the Jewish soul, into the Greek spirit, and into the body of the Roman Empire. That, in a sense, is the birth of Christianity itself, viewed in the light of Christmas thought.

It is important not to accept these facts as mere external theories, but to relate them deeply to our thought of Christmas, to learn what their significance really is in relation to the newborn Impulse that is now entering world evolution with the Spirits of Personality—as I explained here recently.3 Indeed, dear friends, anything new that purposes to enter into the course of world evolution must first struggle through what remains of the old. This is precisely the mystery of world-becoming, that on the one hand there is a normal, progressive evolution; on the other hand, retarded luciferic and ahrimanic forces interfere with it and modify it, but also in a certain sense support it as it advances. I have often called attention to the fact that we cannot escape this ahrimanic-luciferic force; we must look straight at it calmly, and face it consciously. On no account must we simply submit to these things unconsciously. From world impulses shadows remain behind that continue to have an effect even after something new has come into existence; but their luciferic and ahrimanic character must be recognized. This ahrimanic-luciferic element must accompany evolution, but it must not be accepted in an absolute sense; its luciferic- ahrimanic character must be perceived. Something shadowlike has remained behind from Solomon's Temple, something shadow-like also from Hellenism, and something shadow-like from the Roman Empire. Nearly two thousand years ago it was self-evident that from these three—soul, spirit, and body—Christianity was born. But soul, spirit, and body could not immediately disappear; they remained in a certain way as after-effects. Now is the time when this fact must be clearly understood and when the completely unique character of the Christ Impulse itself must be realized.

A shadow remains behind from the most important extract of the esoteric Old Testament, from the Mystery of Solomon's Temple; a shadow remains from Hellenism; also one from the Roman Empire. We must learn to distinguish the shadows from the light. It will be mankind's task from this present time into the immediate future to differentiate between the shadows and the light in the right way.

We see the shadow of the Roman Empire in Roman Catholicism. This is not Christianity; it is the shadow of the ancient Roman Empire into which Christianity had to be born. In its forms there continues to live what had to be built up at that time as a framework for Christianity. But we must learn—humanity must learn—to distinguish the shadow of the old Roman Empire from Christianity. The essence of Christianity is not to be found in the organization of the Catholic Church, or indeed of any of the Christian churches. One sees in their hierarchical aspect what existed and developed in the Roman Empire from Romulus to the Emperor Augustus. The illusion arises only because Christianity was born into this body.

In this sense Solomon's Temple has also remained as a shadow. The Mysteries of Solomon's Temple have—with a few exceptions—been completely absorbed into the Masonic and other secret societies of the present time. As the Roman Church is the shadow of the ancient Roman Empire, so what continues to exist in these societies—however strongly they assert to the contrary, even to the extent of excluding Jews—is the shadow of ancient Judaism, the shadow of the esoteric Jehovah-worship. Again the shadow must be distinguished from the light. Just as the shadow expressed in the perpetuation of the Roman Empire in the Catholic Church, in the churches generally, must be distinguished from the light shining in Christianity, so the element into which Christianity had to be born as soul must be distinguished from the shadow that continues to work in societies founded on symbolism that is reminiscent of Solomon's Temple.

The Greek spirit into which Christianity had to be born—in spite of all the beauty of Hellenism, in spite of its esthetic and other important content, in spite of the influence it has upon us—has left its shadow as the modern world conception of the cultured humanity that has brought this fearful catastrophe4 upon mankind. When Hellenism existed with its world conception, it was something different. Everything, dear friends, is right in its own time. If something is taken in an absolute sense, and carried on after it has become antiquated, it then becomes the shadow of itself. And the shadow is not the light; it may change suddenly into the opposite of the real thing. Aristotelianism still shows something of the greatness of ancient Greece. Aristotle in modern raiment is materialism. Christianity was born into the Jewish soul, the Greek spirit, the Roman body; but the three have left their shadows behind. The challenge sounds through our time, like the call of an angel's trumpet, to perceive the true facts, to look through the shadows to the light.

Truly, anyone who ponders over this present moment in time, who considers impartially, without prejudice, what has brought about the fearful, distressing events of recent years, surely cannot help wondering whether some sort of light can be sought that would shine into the darknesses of earth in a different way from those lights which most people still wish to regard as the only ones. One should find the will to look for a way through the shadows to the light. For the shadows will assert themselves. They will become effective through people who perhaps have endured little themselves of the great suffering of humanity at the present time, who have no sympathy, or very little, for the terrible agony that has flashed through the world, agony that is itself proof that many of the thoughts which have appeared were destined to be shipwrecked. One who tries to examine with deeper understanding what is really not difficult to see today, one who has the resolute will to look without prejudice at what is happening today among men, will feel an impulse to seek the light. He should attach some importance to this impulse in his soul, not listen to those who—depending on the place they occupy—wish only to defend one of the ancient shadows, but listen to his own soul; it will speak clearly enough if only he does not let its voice drown under the external assertions of the shadows.

If today one looks compassionately at what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen, one will be able to see a strange figure standing before men: a distortion of the truly human form, in garments woven of shadows, a figure uniting in itself in its thoughts, sensations, feelings, and will-impulses what has put humanity on a wrong track and gives every promise of taking it farther on the wrong track. Deep within what is happening outwardly dwell those three shadow-thoughts that have been described.

Whoever learns to see that figure in garments woven of shadows, has prepared himself in the right way to look at something else: to look at the tree that can illuminate even today's darkness with its lights. Whoever is pure in heart and does not allow himself to be misled by the threefold shadow-existence—antiquated symbolism, antiquated ecclesiasticism, antiquated materialistic science—will see what wills to shine in the darkness as a real Christmas tree, and lying beneath it the Christ-Jesus Child, illuminated anew by the Christmas light. This is the real aim of our anthroposophically-oriented science of the spirit: to seek the Christmas light, so that the Jesus Child, Who entered the world first to work and then to be understood, may gradually be understood; to illuminate in a modest way the greatest of all events in Earth existence.

As retreived from the Rudolf Steiner Archive.

[Kaje977]

Hi Kaje,

This opens what seems to me a quite different angle of discussion, about the distribution or concentration of spiritual forces across the earthly crust, and in concomitance with sacred places and churches... I personally don't feel there is much I am able to comment on it, but I wonder, what do you think about the main discussion - about the Catholic project?

I must clarify, I haven't been following the entire discussion, only the last few pages (and the very early pages, where I replied), so I only respond intuitively, if you all don't mind : -) So, everyone, bear with me in case if I misunderstood anything.

In my view, the Catholic project (as I understood it) is a major undertaking, but like Cleric said, I also see the problem of whether it makes sense to delay the process of evolution, because there is a danger that this project will end up in a state of stagnation again. We see this, for example, in the Anthroposophical Society. With the exception of a few individuals, there has been little real progress because people are too fixated on "Steiner's word" instead of approaching the exercises consciously and developing themselves, and worse then that "Steiner Intellectuals" go on and teach others (workshops) these exercises or their own (purely theoretic) exercises. You can imagine the danger of damage arising out of this. It's not very different from people having no background in chemistry and then teaching others how to mix certain chemicals together, without realizing that X might have an extremely explosive reaction. I'm not saying that Steiner is incorrect or wrong, what I'm saying is basically that people cling too much on the words of what someone said to confirm their own fossilized thought process, rather than living through it on their own. I'd say "Spiritual Intellectualism" is one of the nastiest traps one get stuck into, it's probably worse than being a materialist, if I'm honest. Because you rightfully cognize a Higher World, but your fossilized thinking is so habituated such that it attempts to break it down into fragmentary components to fit it together like puzzle pieces, and hoping the result to make sense. And it doesn't even have to happen in verbalized thought, but basically in a certain Soul State in which fragmentation simply "feels" more sympathetic to us. If it goes unnoticed, it turns into a blind-spot and basically leaves your Thinking consciously aware of the Higher Worlds, but your Soul is still entrapped within reductionism. In this way, you already know there's more, but feel hopeless because "all prayers seem to be unanswered" or "there's nothing that enriches my experiences". That's the Soul speaking here. It's worse than being a Materialist, in my personal experience. And the dangerous slippery slope to fall back into Materialism is given too.

This is why I found Cleric's post about Pneumatosophy, Psychosophy and Anthroposophy very crucial here. And in fact, the current Soul state in most of Western civilization is actually the reason why people try to re-awaken their Soul and look for anchors, such as Catholicism, because they cannot really anticipate the idea that those values do not require any institution or dogma to be lived. It's no coincidence that my generation (Gen Z) seem to find meaning again in Catholicism. They all already know there's more, and you can even notice that there is a clear shift in many debates, more away from materialism and reductionism towards more holistic thought. But for the latter, most wish for that certain Soul State that would come along with it, the feeling of "feeling one with everything" or "The Soul conviction of spreading love" or "The Soul feeling the way like it did when it was a child" (although, I'd say, many feel that way), of having their prayers answered. This is why we see "fights" about this, rather than trying to just living it. The fight exists, because the Soul doubts. If there is no doubt, there is no reason to fight. We often fight, because deep down (Soul) we actually don't believe what we defend, while our Ego clearly has all the arguments ready and takes it from its Thinking which knows. (Tomberg is appealing in this sense, because it does somewhat open up the Soul)

The fight against the other, is more than often just a fight against ourselves. As soon as I attempt to convince someone with X, I already try to convince myself of something that I myself are in doubt with or want to feel superior about. Not necessarily within Thinking, but often within Feeling. I have the egoic wish for my other to see the world the same way as I do, but ultimately I don't actually see it that way (I lie to myself), so I really just wish for the other person to actually see it (unlike me) and then look what that person tells me in order to confirm to myself that what I defend really has meaning. Although most won't admit it, this is really what's happening in many debates. This is also why a debate can never be "neutral" in this sense. It's an oxymoron. (And understandably, it's also why it's so difficult for a teacher to teach. In fact, nowadays becoming a teacher is an academic discipline, but it entails so much more than that. Many teachers are, in fact, not suited to be teachers) So, in that sense: Someone who has found their appropriate Soul State, will no longer fight or engage in debates, convincing others. They'll put out the crumbs for others to see, they will teach others to become more consciously aware of their Thinking, thus allowing that person to make a conscious decision about their own world views instead of forcing a decision (or world view) upon them.

A growing number of Gen Z'ers defend Christianity and Catholicism, vigorously, while acting very differently and au contraire to its values. Same with the anti religionists who preach Social Justice, but act au contraire to their own High Ideals. We witness a culture war of debates of how to live (aka talking about living) correctly rather than people actually just fucking living the values instead, in real-time, right now as we speak. Sorry for the wording, but I need to "pin" it down this way, to really bring across the extreme lacking "Will To Act/Do" of things nowadays. We see this with all the performative acts of love recorded on camera, but we all know they aren't like that when the camera is off and no one's looking. We see it with animal shelters, animals being deliberately hurt (off-camera) and then recorded to claim how they found it in the wild and help them (yes, this really happens). We see it how almost everything is being treated humorous nowadays, boiled down into a meme to cope with uncomfortability (See the "Gen Z is the most unserious generation" phrase). We see it with any kind of social interaction and how social media completely smudged it by treating every tiny aspect of human behavior as a "red flag".

This is the issue currently. Everything feels... fake and artifical, or only used as a means to an end for egoic purposes, not because of conscience or authenticity, internally. Whether it's kindness, humor, love, dating, creativity, social interaction, etc. It all feels like as if the virtual world made its way into reality, and also forces us to more and more question everything around us. "Is this AI?", "Is this real?", "My world feels like as if I'm the only one getting it, while everyone else is a NPC", etc. People become more aware of their surroundings, they stop taking things for granted, they become more aware of their own due to anxiety fueled by Social Media (see "red flags"). But the lack of proper Soul States turns this new-found awareness into nihilism and hopelessness. "If everything is artifical, what purpose do I have still? I am aware of my body now, of my microexpressions in my face, my body movements, etc. I'm aware of the artificats that AI-generated images and videos have, I know all this, so this knowledge sucked out the mysticism of things. What is left for me to find then?". Many people nowadays want to feel like as if they're in a movie or be the main character, limerence and the like, everything is becoming "performative" for others to witness. Understandably, some people are really fed up with this. They look for authenticity, and often the old can be that anchor. But the authenticity is always there, it's just wishing to be practiced and lived. If it were that way, there would be no necessity to look for the Church or the like. But I still understand that this authenticity feels completely lifeless, dead without the Soul enrichening it. It feels like a void act, as if it had no meaning. Even if I were to anticipate the depth of what my kind action might cause in the long-term, to the Soul it might still feel meaningless. Then we end up repeating old habits, ignore our conscience and are back in "normal mode".

While Thinking is aware, the Soul remains stagnated, thus we're unable to move and actually spread that awareness outside. See an Elderly person trying to walk over the street? Your conscience (Soul) speaks to you (if it isn't fully rigidized yet) to help them, to go over and help them over the street. And even if your overthinking anticipates: "Oh what if they don't like being helped? What if they yell at me?" it never is wrong to ask. See trash lying on the sidewalk? People often just walk by, but what about just doing that very short act of picking it up and putting it in the trash can? ("No, I don't like picking up trash of other people. But I will still complain that everything's cluttered", "No, I don't want others to think of me being poor", "No, I don't wanna pretend to care about the world, but I will still complain about global warming and no one doing anything", etc)

The Catholic project could only work if it were guaranteed that the Church would also follow the course of spiritual evolution, that'd be ready (at any point in time) to even abandon itself, sacrifice itself, if necessary. But this is precisely where I also think that the cat bites its own tail (the clock is ticking), because the Church follows its dogma. When it does so, its hands are tied, so to speak. Let's look at the possibility of same-sex marriage, for example. To this day, the Catholic Church invokes the Bible to prevent such marriages. This is not to say that we must necessarily "demand" this change, because marriage, even if it is a sacred union, is not necessary in order to live happily together and if we go further, even marriage is institutional. But my point is the Catholic Church still struggles with this issue today, partly because tradition and dogma stipulate that marriage is only possible between a man and a woman. I know I'm opening a provocative can of worms here, but I deliberately chose a controversial, polarizing topic to illustrate a point: With minor changes that do not fundamentally alter the "core" (or perceived core) of the Church, the project would certainly work, and the Church would go along with it. However, as soon as more radical restructuring takes place that changes the core of the Church, resistance will quickly arise. And it would delay the process of evolution. But then the question is: Yes, how can I save these people while keeping the Church intact? I could strategically infiltrate and change the dogma so that the Church eventually accepts the new circumstances. But then what? Then there will again be people who will be attentive and notice this, resist it, and the Church would once again split into various splinter groups that want to return to their anticipated true values. So, both intellectually and visually, there would be fragmentation in which (taken to its extreme conclusion) everyone would have their own little mental model of the church if this process continued indefinitely. Yes, technically while this would still be a better step towards freedom than being clung to a large monopolized institution, the individual itself clings to their own personal mental model, they're still not free. So, there is no guarantee that the Catholic Project would really work out.

As I said earlier, I see good reason why this return to Catholic values (which is very noticeable in my generation, Gen Z; I myself have in the past months rediscovered a lot of Catholicism, even though I was never baptized) has become possible, because the current state of (primarily Western) society is increasingly eroding, hedonistic, and feeling completely meaningless: An excess of pornography, sexualization wherever possible, fetishization of the most banal things, health and fitness are there, but have been turned into pure commerce (i.e., there is no sanctity in it, you just train to “look good”), mental health is occupied by self-made gurus and also marketed, AI slop and the hollowing out of human creativity, fears of jobs being replaced, etc. In other words, we are currently experiencing a very clear process in which people are increasingly realizing that they are being removed from life piece by piece, which automatically leads them to search for meaning in life. So I can understand why there is currently a counter-culture trend in which people are returning to Catholic values (or any kind of idealistic values (e.g. artistic)), because they realize that this era had its advantages and that these were not appreciated enough historically and culturally, or they are coming to the realization that, although not everything was better back then, people treated themselves like temples in terms of their souls and their selves: If God created us in his image, then it is only sensible and right to treat ourselves as sacred, because when we defile ourselves, we defile God. This means that people are "searching" for soulish values in something that once embodied them to a certain extent, and that was the Catholic Church. If we disregard the problematic aspects of the Church, then it is not primarily about the actual Church as it existed in past centuries, but rather a form of archetypal Catholic Church that represents these specific spiritual values. But then I see the question: Do we really need an institution or a Church for these values? Since modern Men generally think in such mental models, they seek an anchor for these values, i.e. an external justification. They need a concentrated force that makes them feel secure in living these values. But I also see the problem in this: values become dependent on an institution. If the institution suddenly ceased to exist tomorrow, if it lost its Egregore, we would have exactly the same situation. So the problem is only shifted. Values must be lived from within, from oneself. Without institutions, without dogma, without clinging to and being dependent on powerful egregores, etc.

[Federica]

...

Thanks, Kaje, great post! Really helpful to get a sense of the general feeling of an entire generation, as you have described in vivid pictures. All you say makes sense to me.

[AshvinP]

The Catholic project could only work if it were guaranteed that the Church would also follow the course of spiritual evolution, that'd be ready (at any point in time) to even abandon itself, sacrifice itself, if necessary. But this is precisely where I also think that the cat bites its own tail (the clock is ticking), because the Church follows its dogma. When it does so, its hands are tied, so to speak. Let's look at the possibility of same-sex marriage, for example. To this day, the Catholic Church invokes the Bible to prevent such marriages. This is not to say that we must necessarily "demand" this change, because marriage, even if it is a sacred union, is not necessary in order to live happily together and if we go further, even marriage is institutional. But my point is the Catholic Church still struggles with this issue today, partly because tradition and dogma stipulate that marriage is only possible between a man and a woman. I know I'm opening a provocative can of worms here, but I deliberately chose a controversial, polarizing topic to illustrate a point: With minor changes that do not fundamentally alter the "core" (or perceived core) of the Church, the project would certainly work, and the Church would go along with it. However, as soon as more radical restructuring takes place that changes the core of the Church, resistance will quickly arise. And it would delay the process of evolution. But then the question is: Yes, how can I save these people while keeping the Church intact? I could strategically infiltrate and change the dogma so that the Church eventually accepts the new circumstances. But then what? Then there will again be people who will be attentive and notice this, resist it, and the Church would once again split into various splinter groups that want to return to their anticipated true values. So, both intellectually and visually, there would be fragmentation in which (taken to its extreme conclusion) everyone would have their own little mental model of the church if this process continued indefinitely. Yes, technically while this would still be a better step towards freedom than being clung to a large monopolized institution, the individual itself clings to their own personal mental model, they're still not free. So, there is no guarantee that the Catholic Project would really work out.

Thanks for these considerations, Kaje.

There is an interesting issue to explore in the bold. As your post highlights, the core task of our age is not to change the bodies of spiritual truth - words or institutions - but the consciousness of those who inhabit and utilize the bodies (which also resurrects the ancient values embedded within those bodies, but in a new individualized and spiritualized form). The former is comparable to those who imagine they can morph their personality and attain a certain degree of spiritual freedom by 'gender transition' or by sculpting their physical bodies in certain ways. I think we all see the fatal flaw in this approach - no amount of tweaking the external characteristics of the body will make it into a pliable instrument of the creative Spirit, and in fact, such tweaking often leads to unintended consequences that make it a less suitable instrument.

When we think about the 'Catholic project' (which is probably not a great term for it, but it is what has stuck here), it is often imagined as a 'body modeling project' for the Church. It is imagined that advanced souls need to sneak into the Church ranks and begin giving it new rules and dogmas to follow, whose contents are more aligned with spiritual realities along the depth axis (like reincarnation, for example). But this wouldn't change a thing; it only pushes the problem back, as you correctly point out (also for the AS). In a certain sense, we can only maintain this vision of 'the project' when we fail to perceive the true spiritual nature of the bodies (the dogmas, sacraments, etc.), and therefore imagine the Church (or whatever organization) will only become a vehicle for higher development once it is transitioned from male to female, once it is given a botox injection, once it is grown a new limb, and so on.

It helps to perceive this issue clearly if we go right to the original source of the Church dogma - the scripture itself. For example, we find verses like this:

"And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation."

Does anyone imagine that we can tweak the word-bodies above, model them differently, and that body tweaking will help souls attain consciousness of the depth axis? That we can modify the word-bodies to connote a different meaning in human souls, more related to multiple lives and a gradual participatory inner process of 'appearing the second time'? Probably not. In fact, such body tweaking is often tried through various new translations that keep popping up, hoping to capture the 'essence of scripture' more precisely. Speaking for myself, however, one of the most profound experiences of inner development is when the same word-bodies that we are familiar with begin to come alive within the soul and reveal their depth axis. It is when we can freely approach a verse like above (in its wider context, of course) and see the spiritual reality of multiple lives shining through the words, which, at a flattened intellectual level, almost seem to mean the exact opposite.

We should appreciate that the bodies of the world already exist; they have wisely crystallized out of many ages of spiritual evolution, out of the coordinated and symphonic work of many beings. Neither the physical body nor the astral (institutional) Church body is itself the source of dogmatic sense-conditioned thinking, rather the latter takes its shape and preserves its corpse (as if mummified) through our selfish soul states and corresponding inability to live with our consciousness within the intuitive streamlines of meaning anchored by the bodily organs. Once we begin to attain such a living consciousness, we realize that even our default incapacity to concentrate and meditate is rooted in such soul states. That is why resources like KHW and MoT are indispensable for our age - they don't seek to tweak the existing bodies with new shiny and updated features, but to purify the soul of its selfish conditioning, which continually obscures the depth axis of the existing bodies.

As long as we imagine that we can run away from the Church body into either solitude or some other organizational body (like AS), and thereby attain a free spiritual life, we are subconsciously clinging to the body modeling project. Then, like you said, we project what we are clinging to onto the other and engage in endless debates on that basis. We become increasingly militant about modeling the body in the 'right way' instead of the 'wrong way'. But this is not what is implied by the 'Catholic project' as someone like VT imagines the future role for the Church, as its institutional body is subtly permeated by Christian Hermetic knowledge of the depth axis (and, exactly as you say, VT emphasizes it can never be about abstractly debating and convincing others of spiritual realities). The project is rather about inviting souls into new and increasingly selfless states of consciousness from which they can recognize how they are already living with and immersed in wisdom-filled bodies. And this is obviously the spiritual scientific project as well, as rooted in PoF and KHW, which invites us to transform our perception of the existing World Content through soul catharsis.

[Federica]

...

You were navigating plain West, but now you are giving the rudder a 45 degrees shift towards North. Still bringing the bodies into your argument, but now the direction is adjusted and what primarily counts are not the bodies and their cosmetic operations, but the inner work. Yes, that's good!

[AshvinP]

If we disregard the problematic aspects of the Church, then it is not primarily about the actual Church as it existed in past centuries, but rather a form of archetypal Catholic Church that represents these specific spiritual values. But then I see the question: Do we really need an institution or a Church for these values? Since modern Men generally think in such mental models, they seek an anchor for these values, i.e. an external justification. They need a concentrated force that makes them feel secure in living these values. But I also see the problem in this: values become dependent on an institution. If the institution suddenly ceased to exist tomorrow, if it lost its Egregore, we would have exactly the same situation. So the problem is only shifted. Values must be lived from within, from oneself. Without institutions, without dogma, without clinging to and being dependent on powerful egregores, etc.

I will add a brief comment here as well, which I think speaks to your intuitive observation above.

As souls introduced to a free path of inner development, it is only natural for us to wonder whether such things can be carried out 'on our own', so to speak, or within very loose groupings. If it were only a matter of 'values', in the sense of engaging with moral ideas and ideals at the intellectual level (or slightly imaginative level), then it seems perfectly plausible that this can be cultivated independent of any institutions. And for some souls whose karmic circumstances are such that they have been blessed with intense self-discipline and moral orientation independently of any religious institution, an even deeper connection with the spiritual worlds may be possible. Yet, precisely for all the reasons you mentioned above about the modern age, such souls have become few and far between (I certainly don't count myself among them). Most souls are dependent on institutional life and are only in the process of becoming further entangled, such that they can only feel inwardly secure within a group-soul atmosphere. Even for those of us who feel relatively independent of any religious institution, the fact is that our willing-feeling-thinking still takes its course from institutional forms and practices across the centuries, without which it would lack any significant content. Then it becomes a question for such souls: which institution-bodies across the modern landscape can potentially be leveraged for fostering 'ethical individualism' (in the sense of PoF) from within their existing structures, reversing the flow of this deepening dependence (and, again, we should never lose sight of how we are included among the dependent souls, even if we feel differently at the surface)?

There is a fine line between institutional (intellectual) support and dependence, which is why the introspective-meditative element is critical for the soul to feel how its intellectual thoughts about spiritual reality are the precipitating crystals of deeper imaginative activity. This element is introduced through consistent work with resources like PoF, KHW, and MoT. I am not too familiar with Bardon like you are, but I'm sure his Hermetic exercises also cultivate this critical element. Once we get a lucid feel for that inner process, we have attained a solid 'armor of light' that protects against excessive dependence on the content of our institutional-intellectual life. That doesn't mean our work is done and we can now glide to the higher worlds on the back of institutional forms, because the armor of light needs to be continually replenished with our meditative work (like the waterfall that continually streams). Yet we now also have a basic foundation of trust toward the institutional forms we engage with, and we don't need to be constantly fearing how they are conditioning us for the worse. We can begin to perceive the latent potential in these forms and how they can be worked with for the benefit of, not just our personal spiritual development, but the whole of human development.

I am reminded of Steiner's report from the Akashic Record on how Jesus went to visit the Essene community, where the 'faithful remnant' of the Jews were cultivating an intense spiritual life through initiatory practices. It quickly dawned on him that this community had become like a quarantine zone for healthy souls, while the inner epidemic rot was continuing to spread across human civilization. This secluded community even contributed to the rot by forcing the demonic spirits out into the wider world. That is why he could not remain in this seemingly independent, free-wheeling initiatory community but continued on to his redemptive mission for the entire Earthly landscape, from which the institutional forms of Christianity were born. He recognized the reality that nothing within the Earthly organism is truly independent of anything else. We shouldn't fall into the same trap as the Essene community, as if Christ never came, sacrificed, and permeated the Earthly body with new life. We are in a very similar position to that community in the modern world, as your post demonstrated. There are considerations for Earthly evolution beyond the walls of our meditation rooms and esoteric communities that we cannot afford to ignore any longer. 

I have found it very instructive here, as usual, to look toward the example of Steiner (which sometimes speaks louder than the particular content of his teachings about the Church). With respect to the religious life, it is apparent that Steiner felt quite strongly that different methods of enlivening and deepening inward orientation needed to be tailored for a religious renewal in the wider cultural landscape, than those which were characteristic of his spiritual scientific lectures. He repeatedly emphasized how the existing bodies of cultic life can be adopted and leveraged to restore this inner orientation, which once existed for the Church faithful, once we begin to understand them from the proper perspective. He even mentioned to some of the CC priests how this cultic life may initially benefit (for them and others) from continuing to unfold within the traditional Church body. I shared some of these quotes before, but here are a few more from GA 346 that can help us feel the general example he was setting and emphasizing in this domain.


https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA346/En ... 05v02.html
"Today, in the Catholic Church, anyone who enters the church can see the Holy Sacrament, which remains only a symbol of what it once was. But once upon a time, only the one who could see in the Holy of Holies the radiance of the sun in the substances kept there was truly a priest. At that moment, his insight was opened to the apocalyptic.

Then came those mysteries of which the Mass of more recent times is a reflection. For in a very complicated way, the Catholic Mass, the Armenian Mass and other masses have come into being from the semi-new mysteries. Despite having become externalized, these masses still carry the full initiation principle within them. In these semi-new mysteries, what can be perceived by man when the Word awakens inwardly in him takes the place of the presence of the gods in the old mysteries and the forces sent by the gods in the semi-ancient mysteries: the Word, the magic Word, the Word in which inwardness resounds, the Word that goes to the deepest knowledge of the inner essence of speech. For in the time of the semi-new mysteries, there was the cultic language, that cultic language of which the last remnants still exist in the individual religious denominations, in which everything is based on rhythm, on the inner understanding of the speech and on the understanding of the inner penetration of the sounds of speech from the priest's mouth into the human heart. The magic Word, the cultic Word, spoken in a holy place, was the first step up to the gods, and then to the divine powers."


https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA346/En ... 06v02.html
"The transition from the second, semi-ancient mystery epoch to the third, partly new mystery epoch was a large one. In ancient times fathers experienced things in their physical body. This involved an intensification of its activities. The sun priests of the second epoch experienced an enhancement of their etheric or fluidic body. When a priest intoned cultic words in the third epoch he experienced the streaming of divine spiritual forces in his astral body. The astral body of the average person was only a mediator of consciousness to a very slight extent. At the beginning of the third epoch a priest could still say: when I speak magical cultic words, a god is speaking in me. However later on this awareness diminished. The new consciousness which arose was unaware of the astral body's activities. Today, ordinary consciousness is completely oblivious to the latter. The verbal content of the ritual gradually became something which made qualified people aware of the gods' presence, whereas unqualified people were unaware of what was connected with the intoned words. The latter was increasingly the case for a large number of priests who were active in Catholicism.

Hence it gradually came about that the act of consecration of man or mass became something that the priest celebrated, although he himself was not present in it. However, one cannot celebrate with words or intone words which have aery beings incorporated in them in such a way that there is no spirituality there. Spiritual things immediately appear whenever something material is being shaped. And so if an act of consecration is celebrated with real cultic words by even the most unworthy priest, his soul, may be absent but something spiritual is present. So the fact is that if the liturgy is correct, the believers who are listening to it are participating in a spiritual event under all circumstances."


https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA346/En ... 09v02.html
"We already have people today who are being trained in an apocalyptic way; but they are being apocalyptically trained so that they receive their training of the will in a way which is oriented specifically towards the Roman catholic church; these are the Jesuits. There is something very apocalyptic about the Jesuits' training and exercises. The Jesuits' exercises involve a training of the will, which always underlies the perception of apocalyptic things. Hence anyone who takes a real priesthood in the sense of a Christian renewal seriously today has to keep this training of the Jesuits in mind.

He must understand the Apocalypse so that he can find the right impulse for his will in it, whereas although the impulse for the will which was given by Ignatius of Loyola was wonderful, it was very one-sided, and it has become Ahrimanically hardened today. For Ignatius of Loyola is a good example of how wrongly we can look at the world if we don't gain knowledge of it in a spiritual scientific way.

People ascribe the present development of the Jesuits to Ignatius of Loyola. But it no longer has anything to do with him. Ignatius of Loyola reincarnated a long time ago, and of course he has separated himself from the movement completely, for he lived as Emanuel Swedenborg; and so the Jesuitic movement has become completely Ahrimanic since then. It is no longer connected with Ignatius and it is active in an Ahrimanic way. Here you have a kind of shadowy counter image of what you must train yourself to do, when you take apocalyptic things into your ego in the way I mentioned, so that your ego becomes' a sum of active forces which are also apocalyptic."

[Kaje977]

Thanks for these considerations, Kaje.

There is an interesting issue to explore in the bold. As your post highlights, the core task of our age is not to change the bodies of spiritual truth - words or institutions - but the consciousness of those who inhabit and utilize the bodies (which also resurrects the ancient values embedded within those bodies, but in a new individualized and spiritualized form). The former is comparable to those who imagine they can morph their personality and attain a certain degree of spiritual freedom by 'gender transition' or by sculpting their physical bodies in certain ways. I think we all see the fatal flaw in this approach - no amount of tweaking the external characteristics of the body will make it into a pliable instrument of the creative Spirit, and in fact, such tweaking often leads to unintended consequences that make it a less suitable instrument.

Hello Ashvin : -) Thank you for your reply. I can talk a little bit about transgenderism (sorry for the off-topic) from second-hand experience, because a relative of mine (niece) identifies herself in the social role of a man. Of course, I respect this decision even though I find it to be misguided too. As I said before, it is not my job to convince others of what is true and right and what is false and wrong. However, I notice that these decisions are often not really made consciously, but rather due to institutional dependencies, circles of friends, certain emotional dependencies (such as depression), envy or similar factors. And that is precisely where I see the main problem. I know very well how she behaved during her childhood. She always played with boys, had little contact with girls of the same age, and was quite tomboyish. Interestingly, the decision to undergo gender reassignment was made relatively early on, as soon as she came into contact with certain queer groups of friends. She never had many friends in her life, but suddenly she was welcomed by the group, they talked about identification and similar issues, and in connection with the depression she was suffering from, the answer seemed to be that her (social) gender did not match their biological gender. It may be that she had always suffered from this and never found the answers, and now she has found them in that community, or it could be that she just wants to belong to a group of friends, queer, so to speak, being a new identifying feature in order to belong somewhere. The main issue is that one makes these decisions without considering the other options, the own instruments they possess and a possible knowledge which might change their opinion. If it's too late, they will later end up regretting their decision, wishing to have known better.

The case with the biological sex is pretty much straightforward and clear, but gender can be different in regards to the other bodies. The gender of the material body, that is to say, its sex, is determined by its chromosomes and expressed by its primary and secondary sexual characteristics at birth. This is unquestionable (although for some institutions it is, unfortunately). The genders of the etheric body, astral body (although I'm not sure here on that one), and mental sheath (technically speaking, we don’t have a fully developed body on the mental plane yet, but the sheath functions as the first draft of one) are determined by structures on their own planes. That is to say, the genders of your etheric and astral bodies and your mental sheath may or may not be the same as the gender of your material body. In that sense, one understands why repeated masturbation of men (with feminine etheric bodies) tend to feel weaker, whereas women, who do the same, often feel clogged and congested due to their etheric bodies being masculine. Ejaculation on the material plane, is a receptive process on the etheric. Without a female companion (or a masculine etheric body), the man cannot be provided with etheric energy. He ends up feeling weak upon ejaculation. A female lacking a male companion, ends up feeling clogged, because the etheric energy cannot be drawn out and received. It's quite interesting, but not talked about often, admittingly due to moral standards. But I think this could be very crucial information in regards to the present culture surrounding dating, sex, masturbation, pornography, gender, etc.

For example, people with gender dysphoria seem to perceive (not just imagine or fossilize) missing body parts or perceive having such certain parts. While materialism is tapping in the dark here, the etheric perception might clear things up: It's possible that there is the increasingly occurence of some people becoming aware of their etheric body, and hence witness a mismatch between their physical appearance and their inner space and etheric body. This is materialism in a nutshell, because the material, the physical is being understood as the only real thing to most people nowadays, hence they do not get the idea that there's actually nothing wrong with them, they simply became aware of their etheric body being the opposite gender (at least in regards to the lower parts of the etheric body, the upper parts are pretty much identical with the physical body). Interestingly, I also found Steiner talking about this. Maybe that could explain a lot of this transgender phenomena. Unfortunately, as polarized as the topic is nowadays, you only find extremes in these situations, but I do believe that these people genuinely suffer from the new-found awareness. And now one can see how evil the whole gender-affirming industry truly is. It's not that these people are all living in a fantasy bubble and industries just try to indulge their fantasies and illnesses, but rather that these people actually perceive something higher in themselves, but are then seduced into surgical procedures by other people who are materialistic, because they already consider this higher perception to be wrong because it is not identical to the physical. That's much worse!

Now imagine altering and sculpting the physical body in such a way to closely align it with the etheric perception of oneself (which actually isn't possible, it's like trying to chase your own tail; As soon as you modify the physical appearance, you already mutilate the etheric body in a certain way), and you can imagine how it brings that natural harmony completely out of balance. Even if the goal might have good intentions (e.g. it's not just envy, but a genuine unpleasant feeling, aka "gender dysphoria" and you would truly feel better and happier afterwards), it will confuse the situation even more, because the physical body is not truly independent of the other bodies. Of course, losing a limb will not cause the etheric body to suddenly be altered, but over time the etheric extension (aka the "phantom feeling") will recede to the extension of the physical leftover (the nerve ends). Thus, gender-affirmed surgery isn't really "affirming" at all, it might change your physical appearance, but ultimately you're also altering the functions of the subtle bodies, in the worst case, make them behave inconsistently with eachother.

Admittedly, even though transgenderism is currently being viewed with increasing (and justified) criticism, it is at least remarkable that people there recognize that there are certain cultural and social (often blind spot-like) constraints with regard to one's own gender. They recognize that biological gender and social embedding do not necessarily have to coincide. On the contrary. As a man, you can also behave femininely, and as a woman, you can also behave masculinely. The crucial problem, as you also mentioned, is that although people have come to realize that their own (social) perception does not correspond to what is normally expected of people with male or female gender, they are now simply starting to “switch roles” or create a completely new role (e.g. new social genders). More precisely, the new genders are actually only sociological terms, but people want to give them a hint of biologism. For example, take the term "bigender". The term reflects the observation that there are people who (depending on the situation and context) can assume two different social gender roles: For example, in friend group A, one behaves in a masculine manner and embodies typical (e.g. Western) anecdotes of masculinity, while in friend group B, one behaves in a feminine manner and embodies typical anecdotes of femininity. Well, is a new term really necessary for this? And does it really make sense to merge two areas (biological and sociological) into one term? Basically, we are all a little bit "bigender" every day, since we all have both aspects (feminine and masculine) within us, there is no "pure" social man and "pure" social woman. And culturally, there are quite even more differences. There is no need for a new term for this; it only creates new pigeonholing. But the perceptions, the phenomenology people with genuine gender dysphoria experience, is real. They just don't know how to deal with it, and are then lured by these institutions to go through gender-affirming surgeries. That's the true evil here. People becoming aware of their subtler bodies, but then lured back into physical surgeries.

When we think about the 'Catholic project' (which is probably not a great term for it, but it is what has stuck here), it is often imagined as a 'body modeling project' for the Church. It is imagined that advanced souls need to sneak into the Church ranks and begin giving it new rules and dogmas to follow, whose contents are more aligned with spiritual realities along the depth axis (like reincarnation, for example). But this wouldn't change a thing; it only pushes the problem back, as you correctly point out (also for the AS). In a certain sense, we can only maintain this vision of 'the project' when we fail to perceive the true spiritual nature of the bodies (the dogmas, sacraments, etc.), and therefore imagine the Church (or whatever organization) will only become a vehicle for higher development once it is transitioned from male to female, once it is given a botox injection, once it is grown a new limb, and so on.

Ahh, I see : -) Now I understand more precisely what is meant by that, so I hadn't imagined the Catholic Project differently from you at all. Exactly, of course I also see a problem in that, because the infiltration would also fail sooner or later, as there will always be people who want to preserve the old values at all costs, which tends to lead only to further fragmentation of the institution.

The project is rather about inviting souls into new and increasingly selfless states of consciousness from which they can recognize how they are already living with and immersed in wisdom-filled bodies. And this is obviously the spiritual scientific project as well, as rooted in PoF and KHW, which invites us to transform our perception of the existing World Content through soul catharsis.

That makes sense to me : -) So, if I understood correctly, the former sounds a lot like psychosophy, whereas the latter sounds like pneumatosophy. Is that correct? The question then arrises: Will both of these projects exist separately, indepedently, or will they have to unify at some point? From what I read from Cleric's response, it seems like that the spiritual scientific project sounds like the more reasonable way to go with. The other project, seems like a more light, or soft version of the spiritual scientific project, basically not throwing one into the cold water, but allowing them to make the first taps into the cold water.

[Michael]

Greetings, all. This is my first post on the forum, and I just want to share how grateful I am to have discovered your conversations and to be able to follow this discussion in particular from my inbox. Thank you. I have only made it through the posts from mid-October so I apologize if what I am about to share covers themes that have already been discussed. This biographical sketch of Valentin Tomberg, however, may shed light upon some of the immediate post-war phenomenological realities permeating VT at the time he chose to join the Church. The outline is written by Pedro-José Martinez, an anthroposophist whom Judith von Halle described as "one of the few people I know and whom I trust to make a spiritual assessment of the current [coronavirus] situation" in her book The Coronavirus Pandemic II: Further Anthroposophical Perspectives. The original essay in Spanish can be found here: http://www.revistabiosofia.com/valentin ... ograficos/. A subsequent essay on Tomberg's The Four Sacrifices of Christ can be found here: http://www.revistabiosofia.com/v-tomber ... de-cristo/. Reading this outline I was reminded of Goethe's thinking: "We labor in vain to describe a person's character, but when we draw together his actions, his deeds, a picture of his character will emerge." We could also substitute "character" for "project" to understand what one is really striving towards with their whole life. I have asked ClaudeAI to translate the essay and bold the sentences that were originally in all capitals.

Valentin Tomberg: Biographical Notes

One of the key figures of Christian esotericism of the 20th century has undoubtedly been Valentin Tomberg, a controversial figure within the anthroposophical movement and practically unknown in Spain. Throughout different articles I'm going to provide elements for a better knowledge of his work and person, beginning with an outline of his biography.

From my point of view, the greatest contribution of Valentin Tomberg has been in the field of esoteric Christology or Christosophy, expanding what was contributed by Rudolf Steiner, especially in the field of the current Etheric Manifestation of Christ. I believe that both works, by Rudolf Steiner and Valentin Tomberg, continue and complement each other in pursuit of the Knowledge of the Entity of the Logos Christ Jesus, in His gradual Union with the Evolution of the Earth and humanity.

Valentin Tomberg was born on February 27, 1900 in Saint Petersburg (current Russian Federation). His father, a high-ranking civil servant, was of Swedish origin. Due to this, the son was baptized in the Evangelical (Lutheran) Church; however, the world of the Orthodox Church was not unknown to him, as his mother, of Russian nationality, introduced him to it.

Tomberg enjoyed an excellent school education, learning, at an early age, Greek and Latin; and in his home German, English and French, the latter with special fluency thanks to a French governess (in addition to Russian, Swedish and the Baltic languages). Later he learned other languages, both ancient and modern (Sanskrit, Hebrew...).

Already as a high school student, at the age of 15, **he came into contact with Rosicrucians, Theosophists and other Russian esoteric groups. At 17 years old he became acquainted with the work of Rudolf Steiner, which made a deep impression on him.** At this time he began to work consistently on the path of spiritual instruction, "not without lacking results" (as he would write on July 28, 1920 to Rudolf Steiner). Also around this time he began studies in History and Philosophy.

His father died at that time, his mother was shot before his eyes by Bolshevik patrols during the Soviet revolution. His only brother, older than him, was reported missing. Valentin Tomberg fled to Tallinn (Estonia), working as a civil servant, teacher, farmer, pharmacist and artist (as he writes on July 24, 1924 to Rudolf Steiner). With this he was able to finance new evening studies in the subjects of Comparative Religion Studies, Philosophy and various languages. Thus at 24 years old, due to his knowledge in the field of languages, **he obtained a job position in the General Directorate of Posts of Estonia**.

The evening hours, after work, he dedicated to the continuation of his education and to collaboration in the Branch of the Anthroposophical Society in Tallinn. Its members immediately noticed the seriousness of his aspirations and his precocity, **electing him, being only 25 years old, as their guide. Shortly he became a member of the School of Spiritual Science (First Class). In the following years he was appointed head of this, being elected later General Secretary of the Anthroposophical Society in Estonia**.

During the years 1930/31 he published a great number of articles, especially in anthroposophical magazines such as **"Anthroposophy, Weekly Magazine for a Free Spiritual Life"** and in **"Das Goetheanum"**. With this he created a considerable circle of readers, many of the then competent anthroposophists opened a friendly correspondence with the "young scholar." He wrote as an anthroposophist and as a well-educated connoisseur of the Eastern spiritual world, both of Eastern Christianity and its esoteric variants, as well as of non-Christian occultisms such as Chinese, Mongolian and Hindu; and of their fateful influences—among others those of Bolshevism in Russia.

Several contributions were also dedicated to biblical themes, being perceptible in them the main motive that underlies his always deeper expositions: **the revivification of intimate union with Christ through spiritual understanding of His being**. Up to here the path walked by Tomberg was that of a truly very gifted anthroposophist, with great aspirations, accepted everywhere.

Being 32 years old, something was realized in him—in a surprising way—a transformation of very deep character that shook him extraordinarily: **his spiritual eyes and ears were opened, that is, he began to perceive directly the world of spiritual beings that surrounded him, entering into conscious contact with them**.

He experienced that a spiritual entity had "submerged" into his being. He affirmed: "...I have been able to experience something great—in the authentic sense of the word—because great is the spirit of the Cosmos that in radiant certainty has opened to the awakened soul..."

With these words, collected in a letter of July 12, 1931, he addressed opening all his confidence to Marie Steiner (widow since 1925 of Rudolf Steiner); at that time she maintained a determining position in the direction of the General Anthroposophical Society...

On September 28, 1932 he showed Marie Steiner his cordial gratitude for a letter of hers, also describing in his writing the processes that had occurred in the Anthroposophical Society of Estonia and his personal life circumstances.

He affirmed: "...as for the Class and the questions related to it, I feel obliged to speak with you as soon as possible. I really have much to report, about what I have come to know through a special disposition of destiny, and also regarding what concerns our spiritual Movement"..."I ask you to believe me, that it is not about anything personal, but about Contents, which I consider so Important that I cannot describe them to you by letter. I am also convinced that from certain parts everything possible will be done to prevent a meeting with you. But I want to put everything on my part, doing everything possible to travel to Dornach—even if only for two hours—...I only have to ask you to grant me two hours of your time. This time it is truly necessary"...

This conversation, requested by Tomberg, never took place. He felt a deep recognition before the person and work of Rudolf Steiner. In his prologue to "Considerations on the Old Testament" he writes: "...the author owes to Rudolf Steiner **everything that could become knowledge in him. Everything he has to say is rooted in the work of Rudolf Steiner**." In the same attitude of deep recognition, Tomberg addressed Marie Steiner, thinking and hoping to find in her the essential quality proper to Rudolf Steiner, but to this hope only followed disappointment.

Valentin Tomberg came to the conviction that in the Anthroposophical Society there was more than enough knowledge and research; however **the essential, Christ, could easily disappear from the field of vision. His contributions were directed to orient men toward Christ and open new sources to the knowledge of His reality**. In his lectures he was bringing more and more the Bible to the area of consideration.

In November 1933 he began the publication of his main anthroposophical work: **the twelve Considerations on the Old Testament, the twelve on the New Testament, and sixteen on the Apocalypse** (of which only three are preserved). (All these cycles are published in German by Achamoth publishing house).

These Considerations were directed to friends with anthroposophical formation. They appeared in the form of hectographs (the current photocopies), and could be acquired at his address at their cost price. These Considerations were based on the Christosophy of Rudolf Steiner. However, they were not limited to the characteristic methods of other anthroposophical authors, after Steiner, who establish union relationships between the different writings and lecture cycles of Rudolf Steiner, offering "proof" of each statement through citations from this source.

Valentin Tomberg also referred, from time to time, to the source of Steiner's work, **but he spoke from his own spiritual research**. For Tomberg it was not about making the work of the "master" understandable but the Bible, opening **the source of its hidden truths (although always in close union with what was contributed by Steiner)**. This personal contribution was interpreted as an attack on the authority and exclusive significance of Rudolf Steiner; and to what was considered an "attack" they felt obliged to respond.

The central organ of the Anthroposophical Society, the newspaper called "The Goetheanum," published immediately after the appearance of the first Consideration on the Old Testament (on December 18, 1933), a sharp refutation: "...those who read completely the written word of Rudolf Steiner and only those, are the preservers of the anthroposophical way of thinking, where souls are present in the intimate process of thinking the thoughts of Rudolf Steiner there is a direct influx from the Spiritual World..."

According to these arguments, **a direct communication with the Spiritual World through a new initiate would not be necessary**, because if not, the group dedicated to Social Sciences in the Goetheanum would lose all its meaning (words of Roman Boos, leader of the Social Sciences Group).

Tomberg suffered in Dornach a rejection from different instances of the then governing bodies of the Anthroposophical Society. Speaking about all this would require a broader framework than what this biographical introduction offers. It should be said that this rejection often took **the form of slander and defamation of his person**.

Valentin Tomberg did not allow himself to be disturbed by this and continued his publication work. Among anthroposophists there was a faithful circle of readers who understood the seriousness, sincerity and deep significance of his work. Also in the Anthroposophical Societies of Great Britain and Holland (which had temporarily separated from Dornach), and in "dissident groups" of the German Society, he found warm interest in his work. Tomberg had a great friendship with Elisabeth Vreede, who had been expelled from the Executive Board in Dornach. He was also united in great friendship with Karl Heyer, Jurgen von Grone, Emil Leinhas and George Adams.

In 1938 he moved to live in Rotterdam, Holland, leaving the Baltic Countries, due to the Soviet threat and the delicate health of his wife, Maria Demski. In Rotterdam he continued his work, exposing it in different circles and meetings. To this time belong the cycles "Inner Development of Man" and "The Four Sacrifices of Christ and His Return in the Etheric World."

Various events should be mentioned here about what happened at this time, which, again, would exceed the intentions of this article. Suffice it to mention that Dr. Zeylmans van Emmichoven, president of the Dutch Anthroposophical Society at that time, viewed with some distrust the esotericism of Valentin Tomberg (of which he was punctually informed, through a person who participated in the intimate work circles, in which Tomberg sometimes offered information about karmic aspects, appearing in them affirmations that Zeylmans rejected).

Another of the motives that triggered the conflict with Zeylmans van Emmichoven concerns the moment when Valentin Tomberg gave a lecture on Adolf Hitler **and on the occult powers that operated through him. Tomberg saw in Hitler a Satanic figure, one of the seven degrees of revelation of the Antichrist**. This had not yet become, in 1939, sufficiently evident, and **to Zeylmans it seemed unserious to affirm such things**. The Dutch anthroposophists were in truth very far from sympathizing with the Nazis, but nevertheless it seemed exaggerated and out of place to them **to speak in that way about the head of state of a neighboring country**.

Zeylmans called Tomberg to tell him that his activity was not desired, affirming that the Mission of Holland consisted in the penetration and deepening of the works of Rudolf Steiner and in putting his suggestions into practice. He criticized Tomberg saying that he presented things that did not come from Steiner's work, and that therefore he could not know at all. He also reproached him that his exaggerated accent on Christosophy **diverted the Dutch from their task directed toward social praxis**. Here we find again arguments of the same nature as those he had to hear in Dornach.

After this conversation with Zeylmans, Tomberg returned to the circle of his friends saying: "he has expelled me." Tomberg left the Dutch Anthroposophical Society. With this his activity as a lecturer also ended, working only from then on **in a small circle of friends, offering teachings that led in an ever-growing depth, to the being and working of Christ**.

In 1943 he had several meetings with Emil Bock, then leader of the Community of Christians. The main theme was the future of this, especially the conditions that could lead it to significant activity after the war. Perhaps at that time Tomberg considered the possibility of preparing himself as a priest of the Community. These conversations remained without result. Again we touch here on a topic that would require a broad exposition, having to renounce it due to the character of this article.

Thus Tomberg was **rejected on three occasions by the anthroposophists**. All these experiences were very painful for him, however his mission in life had been determined to be carried out in a large and significant field of action. He was convinced that religious worship had been undervalued in its significance of **making heaven take root on earth**, for this reason he entered in 1943 into the Orthodox Church, to which, due to his ancestry and inclination, he found himself closer. But again a conflict appears: **the priest did not accept his world of esoteric thoughts**, especially that of reincarnation, even denying him the sacraments. Tomberg then leaves the Orthodox Church.

In September 1945 he found himself again in Holland, working as a translator within the framework of the search service for relatives residing in a camp of "Displaced Persons"; people who had been scattered and homeless, far and wide across the battle fronts. After significant and open conversations with the priest of the camp, **he invited him to become part of the Catholic Church, without Tomberg having to submit and lose his spiritual freedom** (as anthroposophists often imagine).

In the following years we find Tomberg in Cologne, where he completed in a very brief time, studies and a doctorate in Law and published different writings on **questions of Philosophy of Law and Law of Peoples**. He also gave numerous lectures in the ecclesiastical environment and listeners of them preserve a memory full of enthusiasm and gratitude. The experience of the postwar years led Tomberg to the conviction of the importance that the Church had for uprooted men. **He also saw how it strove to offer them material, soul and spiritual help**. He also warned of the great danger that Europe ran after the war, the influence of Soviet communism. Facing it he considered that the Catholic Church would also have to play a very important role.

Here, perhaps, we should pause in the path of this exposition, because Tomberg's entry into the Catholic Church was a great surprise to most of the people who knew him. Some understood from the beginning the reason for this decision, others, not understanding it from the start, avoided falling into quick judgment of this decision. They chose to weigh the reasons before forming a judgment. Others simply did not understand, without seeking more reasons. Finally, we must mention the people who always opposed him, finding now in this fact the motive to accommodate in their criticism the qualifier of traitor. **Tomberg, the traitor. And this image has been maintained in these opposition circles to our days**.

For a certain group of anthroposophists, Tomberg appears as a traitor to Anthroposophy. Given these circumstances, I invite the reader to consider everything mentioned in this article about his biography, before issuing a definitive judgment. He tried to seek dialogue for more than 10 years—and the three rejections he had to experience in his purpose. I invite the reader to know Tomberg's work in order to draw their own conclusions.

There could be other points of view regarding this "betrayal," that is, whether the Anthroposophical Institutions previously mentioned **did not betray the essentially anthroposophical and Christic impulse that Valentin Tomberg was exposing**. Let us refer again to the possible reader of his work, to verify or not the accuracy of such affirmations.

Tomberg also worked in the postwar years in the German city of Mullheim. **His task was the reestablishment of the People's Schools**, a German institution in charge of the dissemination of learning and culture. Here he worked until 1948. Subsequently and due to his competence in the field of languages and his informed political judgment, **he was provided a job at the BBC. His work consisted of listening to Russian news broadcasts and reporting on it to the governments of Great Britain and the United States**.

After living a short period in London, he acquired a house in Reading, next to the Thames, where he had at his disposal, for his studies, the university library. After his retirement in 1960 he dedicated himself entirely to his written work.

In this brief biographical overview it is necessary to point out the importance that the person of his wife, Maria Demski, had in Tomberg's life. Being for him a faithful and understanding companion throughout his entire life path. He died on February 24, 1973 in Mallorca—within the framework of a rest vacation on the island. His wife, Maria, died shortly after in a Reading clinic, as Tomberg had predicted some time before.

The greater and more complex an individuality is, the more difficult it is to trace biographical lines about it. This article is based on biographical texts about Valentin Tomberg coming especially from Martin Kriele's book "Anthroposophy and Church"—not translated into Spanish. Texts from two articles by Harrie Salman, recently published in anthroposophical magazines such as Lazarus and Novalis, were also selected.

Special acknowledgments to Jesús López, translator of Tomberg's work into Spanish and from whom I have taken the basis for this article; which I complete with a literal contribution of his: "...the author of this work had the opportunity to read during the last years a part of Tomberg's correspondence belonging especially to the conflictive period of Dornach and to the time of conversations with Emil Bock. As well as to maintain continued conversations with the editor of his work, Willi Seiss. Serving the memory of all this to give form to these biographical notes. (Completed in the city of Stuttgart in the month of August 1996).

"...The Spirit is not known from where it comes nor where it goes, it is only distinguished by Its Inspirational Flow..."

In upcoming articles I will be exposing Tomberg's work.

**Pedro-José Martinez**

[AshvinP]

Thanks for these considerations, Kaje.

There is an interesting issue to explore in the bold. As your post highlights, the core task of our age is not to change the bodies of spiritual truth - words or institutions - but the consciousness of those who inhabit and utilize the bodies (which also resurrects the ancient values embedded within those bodies, but in a new individualized and spiritualized form). The former is comparable to those who imagine they can morph their personality and attain a certain degree of spiritual freedom by 'gender transition' or by sculpting their physical bodies in certain ways. I think we all see the fatal flaw in this approach - no amount of tweaking the external characteristics of the body will make it into a pliable instrument of the creative Spirit, and in fact, such tweaking often leads to unintended consequences that make it a less suitable instrument.

Hello Ashvin : -) Thank you for your reply. I can talk a little bit about transgenderism (sorry for the off-topic) from second-hand experience, because a relative of mine (niece) identifies herself in the social role of a man. Of course, I respect this decision even though I find it to be misguided too. As I said before, it is not my job to convince others of what is true and right and what is false and wrong. However, I notice that these decisions are often not really made consciously, but rather due to institutional dependencies, circles of friends, certain emotional dependencies (such as depression), envy or similar factors. And that is precisely where I see the main problem. I know very well how she behaved during her childhood. She always played with boys, had little contact with girls of the same age, and was quite tomboyish. Interestingly, the decision to undergo gender reassignment was made relatively early on, as soon as she came into contact with certain queer groups of friends. She never had many friends in her life, but suddenly she was welcomed by the group, they talked about identification and similar issues, and in connection with the depression she was suffering from, the answer seemed to be that her (social) gender did not match their biological gender. It may be that she had always suffered from this and never found the answers, and now she has found them in that community, or it could be that she just wants to belong to a group of friends, queer, so to speak, being a new identifying feature in order to belong somewhere. The main issue is that one makes these decisions without considering the other options, the own instruments they possess and a possible knowledge which might change their opinion. If it's too late, they will later end up regretting their decision, wishing to have known better.

The case with the biological sex is pretty much straightforward and clear, but gender can be different in regards to the other bodies. The gender of the material body, that is to say, its sex, is determined by its chromosomes and expressed by its primary and secondary sexual characteristics at birth. This is unquestionable (although for some institutions it is, unfortunately). The genders of the etheric body, astral body (although I'm not sure here on that one), and mental sheath (technically speaking, we don’t have a fully developed body on the mental plane yet, but the sheath functions as the first draft of one) are determined by structures on their own planes. That is to say, the genders of your etheric and astral bodies and your mental sheath may or may not be the same as the gender of your material body. In that sense, one understands why repeated masturbation of men (with feminine etheric bodies) tend to feel weaker, whereas women, who do the same, often feel clogged and congested due to their etheric bodies being masculine. Ejaculation on the material plane, is a receptive process on the etheric. Without a female companion (or a masculine etheric body), the man cannot be provided with etheric energy. He ends up feeling weak upon ejaculation. A female lacking a male companion, ends up feeling clogged, because the etheric energy cannot be drawn out and received. It's quite interesting, but not talked about often, admittingly due to moral standards. But I think this could be very crucial information in regards to the present culture surrounding dating, sex, masturbation, pornography, gender, etc.

For example, people with gender dysphoria seem to perceive (not just imagine or fossilize) missing body parts or perceive having such certain parts. While materialism is tapping in the dark here, the etheric perception might clear things up: It's possible that there is the increasingly occurence of some people becoming aware of their etheric body, and hence witness a mismatch between their physical appearance and their inner space and etheric body. This is materialism in a nutshell, because the material, the physical is being understood as the only real thing to most people nowadays, hence they do not get the idea that there's actually nothing wrong with them, they simply became aware of their etheric body being the opposite gender (at least in regards to the lower parts of the etheric body, the upper parts are pretty much identical with the physical body). Interestingly, I also found Steiner talking about this. Maybe that could explain a lot of this transgender phenomena. Unfortunately, as polarized as the topic is nowadays, you only find extremes in these situations, but I do believe that these people genuinely suffer from the new-found awareness. And now one can see how evil the whole gender-affirming industry truly is. It's not that these people are all living in a fantasy bubble and industries just try to indulge their fantasies and illnesses, but rather that these people actually perceive something higher in themselves, but are then seduced into surgical procedures by other people who are materialistic, because they already consider this higher perception to be wrong because it is not identical to the physical. That's much worse!

Now imagine altering and sculpting the physical body in such a way to closely align it with the etheric perception of oneself (which actually isn't possible, it's like trying to chase your own tail; As soon as you modify the physical appearance, you already mutilate the etheric body in a certain way), and you can imagine how it brings that natural harmony completely out of balance. Even if the goal might have good intentions (e.g. it's not just envy, but a genuine unpleasant feeling, aka "gender dysphoria" and you would truly feel better and happier afterwards), it will confuse the situation even more, because the physical body is not truly independent of the other bodies. Of course, losing a limb will not cause the etheric body to suddenly be altered, but over time the etheric extension (aka the "phantom feeling") will recede to the extension of the physical leftover (the nerve ends). Thus, gender-affirmed surgery isn't really "affirming" at all, it might change your physical appearance, but ultimately you're also altering the functions of the subtle bodies, in the worst case, make them behave inconsistently with eachother.

Admittedly, even though transgenderism is currently being viewed with increasing (and justified) criticism, it is at least remarkable that people there recognize that there are certain cultural and social (often blind spot-like) constraints with regard to one's own gender. They recognize that biological gender and social embedding do not necessarily have to coincide. On the contrary. As a man, you can also behave femininely, and as a woman, you can also behave masculinely. The crucial problem, as you also mentioned, is that although people have come to realize that their own (social) perception does not correspond to what is normally expected of people with male or female gender, they are now simply starting to “switch roles” or create a completely new role (e.g. new social genders). More precisely, the new genders are actually only sociological terms, but people want to give them a hint of biologism. For example, take the term "bigender". The term reflects the observation that there are people who (depending on the situation and context) can assume two different social gender roles: For example, in friend group A, one behaves in a masculine manner and embodies typical (e.g. Western) anecdotes of masculinity, while in friend group B, one behaves in a feminine manner and embodies typical anecdotes of femininity. Well, is a new term really necessary for this? And does it really make sense to merge two areas (biological and sociological) into one term? Basically, we are all a little bit "bigender" every day, since we all have both aspects (feminine and masculine) within us, there is no "pure" social man and "pure" social woman. And culturally, there are quite even more differences. There is no need for a new term for this; it only creates new pigeonholing. But the perceptions, the phenomenology people with genuine gender dysphoria experience, is real. They just don't know how to deal with it, and are then lured by these institutions to go through gender-affirming surgeries. That's the true evil here. People becoming aware of their subtler bodies, but then lured back into physical surgeries.

Thanks, Kaje, what you describe above is aligned with my understanding of these cultural phenomena as well, across seemingly disparate domains of life. Practically all of it can be traced to a growing perception of the spiritual foundations among the modern intellect-imagination, but an inability to meet these perceptions in their native element, and therefore only understanding these perceptions insofar as they intersect with familiar sensory experiences and concepts about reality. Such a lack of intuitive orientation can only lead to increasingly pathological ways of both embracing the perceptions and conservatively reacting to them.

When we think about the 'Catholic project' (which is probably not a great term for it, but it is what has stuck here), it is often imagined as a 'body modeling project' for the Church. It is imagined that advanced souls need to sneak into the Church ranks and begin giving it new rules and dogmas to follow, whose contents are more aligned with spiritual realities along the depth axis (like reincarnation, for example). But this wouldn't change a thing; it only pushes the problem back, as you correctly point out (also for the AS). In a certain sense, we can only maintain this vision of 'the project' when we fail to perceive the true spiritual nature of the bodies (the dogmas, sacraments, etc.), and therefore imagine the Church (or whatever organization) will only become a vehicle for higher development once it is transitioned from male to female, once it is given a botox injection, once it is grown a new limb, and so on.

Ahh, I see : -) Now I understand more precisely what is meant by that, so I hadn't imagined the Catholic Project differently from you at all. Exactly, of course I also see a problem in that, because the infiltration would also fail sooner or later, as there will always be people who want to preserve the old values at all costs, which tends to lead only to further fragmentation of the institution.

The project is rather about inviting souls into new and increasingly selfless states of consciousness from which they can recognize how they are already living with and immersed in wisdom-filled bodies. And this is obviously the spiritual scientific project as well, as rooted in PoF and KHW, which invites us to transform our perception of the existing World Content through soul catharsis.

That makes sense to me : -) So, if I understood correctly, the former sounds a lot like psychosophy, whereas the latter sounds like pneumatosophy. Is that correct? The question then arrises: Will both of these projects exist separately, indepedently, or will they have to unify at some point? From what I read from Cleric's response, it seems like that the spiritual scientific project sounds like the more reasonable way to go with. The other project, seems like a more light, or soft version of the spiritual scientific project, basically not throwing one into the cold water, but allowing them to make the first taps into the cold water.

Yes, I suppose it can be characterized that way, and I would say that psychosophy and pneumatosophy must be unified (or harmonized) to bear fruit for the Earthly spectrum, just as the body-soul-spirit should work in harmony. We could revisit a Steiner quote that Cleric shared when outlining these distinctions.


"Indeed, many of us will say: we strive for two things on our way through the spiritual-scientific movement. First: to penetrate that reasonably which spiritual science gives us. Secondly: because we apply to our souls the spiritual-scientific methods, as they are outlined to us, for example, in the book How Does One Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds, we strive for getting the perception of the spiritual world already during our physical incarnation. But some will say: definitely only to some, only to few it is allotted by their karma to reach the spiritual world consciously in this incarnation. Indeed, everybody would and does come into the spiritual world in certain sense who only applies these rules; but noticing that he is in it; taking notice on it is more difficult than entering it. Some people are prevented from being aware in which way they are in the spiritual world even if they are really in it. Because they are unable to apply that fine, intimate attention on their experience. One would like to say, everybody who applies the instructions given in the book How Does One Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds enters the spiritual world with his self after a relatively short time, but — he does not notice it. Just concerning such a consideration I have to stress repeatedly that the reasonable understanding of that which is given in spiritual science does not depend at all whether anybody himself beholds in the spiritual world."


I also discussed that inability in a post about premature incarnations in the spiritual evolutionary process. It's a simple way of putting things, but I think it resides at the heart of why so many of us become mired at the stage of 'Anthroposophy' ("The intuitive life experienced when the full spiritual life intersects with the embodied spectrum - body and intellect") and fail to bring the spectrums of psychosophy and pneumatosophy into focus. It's why so many Anthroposophists (or spiritual thinkers in general) remain with decked-out mental tableaus of Cosmic evolution but fail to grow into self-similarity with the beings who animate this evolutionary process they are contemplating.

When we work meditatively through a resource like MoT, we cannot fail to feel its immense overlap with the inner process of KHW. We can see that many of the essential exercises and descriptions are practically echoed in VT's meditations. That doesn't mean he copied Steiner, of course, but that they were drawing on shared inner experiences and wisdom with respect to the modern Christian initiatory path. ("Christian" in the sense that everything we are gradually working on is felt to revolve around the being of Christ and the archetypal stages of his path into, through, and from the Earthly spectrum). It is exactly these exercises that cultivate the ability to 'notice' that we are already in the spiritual worlds with our thinking, feeling, and willing. It is a process of, not only focusing cognition on archetypal themes, but also perfecting the soul's moral character such that it freely develops a loving interest in and reverence for the transpersonal texture of its inner volume. We should be clear that no pneumatosophy is possible without that profound moral orientation.

So KHW-MoT it is still psychosophy in the sense that we are exploring the spiritual intents driving Cosmic evolution insofar as they intersect with our bodily senses, intellectual gestures and concepts, and living imagination (soul wisdom). Yet we are also lucidly aware that we are dimly stretching our feeling and will-imbued imagination into the spiritual worlds, probing the inner perspective of archetypal beings. We attain recognition that our intellectual and imaginative gestures, used to explore the meaning of the spiritual perspectives, are taking shape through these same spiritual perspectives we are exploring (we can feel the recursive quality of our inner gestures). There is no separating out this foundation from the 'spiritual scientific project'. The latter can only remain flattened to the embodied spectrum of thoughts, feelings, and impulses if it doesn't also integrate a path of moral (will) development. I see the 'Catholic project' as one of many ways in which the soul can leverage existing institutional forms to simultaneously pursue moral development and spiritual scientific knowledge, which will especially benefit souls who are drawn to a religious path and would otherwise take little notice of genuine esoteric science.

[Rodriel Gabrez]

I would like to take advantage of my lower position here to ask you a question, Rodriel, which would otherwise get unasked. You have previously called yourself "no great seer", and stated that much of Steiner's results of spiritual-scientific inquiry is "still unverified content" for you. You have also said:

Another thing I try to do, even when speaking to Anthroposophists, is to limit my communication of the esoteric to things I am able to personally corroborate. Though I do sometimes forget to do this, I make an effort to make clear where I am merely paraphrasing Steiner vs where I am speaking from a place of personal certainty.

Could you please make that effort for us now as well, with referece to your statements above? Are your drawing this understanding of the forces of corruption and nonbeing and this interpretation of how they were subtly negotiated by Tomberg in veiled but pedagogic key, from your own personal research and certainty, or are you adhering to, and elaborating on, the conceptions and contents of some other spiritual inquirer? Certainly, it can't be aswered that these conceptions are drawn from Tomberg's work, because ascertaining what Tomberg thought and meant is the very inquiry whose disputable results you are presenting us with in this thread.

You would like to know by what authority I have attained the perspective expressed. As has been remarked previously in this thread, spiritual scientific discussions can't be conducted that way if the participants wish to avoid getting endlessly caught up in disputes about either "who is the greater seer" or who has most correctly paraphrased the master. This speaks again to Tomberg's insights (in MoT and elsewhere) into the 5th major arcanum, The Pope. Cleric has provided a good example of the spiritual scientific approach, asking not for the cosigning authority of my assessment but instead saying that he "cannot agree" with it. His ensuing explanation then provides me an opportunity to enter into dialogue, using his insights as a means of first clarifying what I did and did not mean and then of building toward a shared understanding.