Skip to content

The Certainty of the Shroud

March 22, 2015


The above article is worth a read. We could point out a few areas where more is needed, but we understand that there is not enough space given to share. *The writers must decide which points to emphasize and how this is done. This is also true of churches/parishes. As society changes, each group must decide where to invest their time and money. Even though we are not of Religion,  we in SPIR understand how this is, and even why believers continue in their prescribed fellowship modes. We believe every person is in a place spiritually (some Gnostic believers understand this as planes), and many are bound to the practice of Sunday service with Scripture or Bible Study during the week, along with the many other activities such as community service initiatives and drives.

From the article:

“Speaking from our self-assigned pulpits of certainty, we tell the world how to live. Many Christians want to establish a theocratic state, even though our history as rulers is tragic.”

We would like to address this in a way that, unfortunately, too many Christians find offensive: Christianity, as Institution, staged its wars to do what for what? POWER-CONTROL-WEALTH through property (wives, disciples, money, laws …) within a System of Belief (instituted doctrines). Schism is/was necessary for what? Growth … movement … maturity. This is a necessary understanding in the advent of Prophesy, and this is ongoing. God and man evolve in this Advent Understanding. To insist in the stifling of this is to subjugate, which brings us back to the inception of the Institution as a domineering control force ( a type of caliphate or pontiff). As one in gnosis, we believe that one cannot have Christ within and still commandeer for institutional alliance. This is not saying that the idea of using the “institute” cannot be of purpose for understanding Christ; it is saying that institution in and of itself (including its titles) is not Christ, cannot be  … God … Spirit, and what is perceived within the mandates of this is not the authority of the Spirit.  In other words, brand and titles of religious affiliation, institutional affiliation, are not endowed with the power to articulate Spirit. To one like us, it is like watching a child pretend at something he is too young to understand, know, be … and to give the toddler the steering wheel to drive a bus, for example, can be a seriously dangerous foray. History is evidence of this.

Christianity fights with its own negligence, deception, ignorance … subjugation. It is its own ally; it is its own enemy, and the people fall somewhere in all of this swell.


A few years ago I had a dream, and in this dream I was shown these words: there are two paths to truth. Sometime later, I had a dream, and in this dream I stood before a wooden sign with a picture of a waterfall on it. On both sides of this sign was a narrow path covered over with foliage, and both paths led to a higher point where the waterfall existed, and I was aware that at some place on that climb, the two paths converged and became one near the waterfall. I looked to my far left, and I saw that the hill I was on dropped down to a paved road.

Some might see Christianity at a crossroads, but this would need to be explained in terms of the roads: what are these? where do these lead? why four paths leading in opposite directions, or coming together to one point. One might even think of the four corners of the sheet in Peter’s vision (Acts). One might see the sign of the cross (+). One might even look at this as Prophesy.

And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. (Revelation)

And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (Revelation)

*Gog and Magog referring to man and his mind (place of—)

*the wind being the Holy Spirit.

The two paths in my dreams refer to the South and the East. Symbolically speaking, these are common man and Spirit. The East is of Spirit. North and West then become what? Ally or Enemy to South and East? Of course everything has an opposite, even if one cannot ascertain its origin.




In the comment section of essay License to Lie, we posted Hendrik Parker’s, The Roman Catholic Church, A Critical Appraisal. The following is from page 286 of this critical appraisal.

… prophetic religion and priestly religion  … We see a distinction being made already in the Old Testament, in books such as Isaiah, Amos, Micah, Zachariah and Psalms. Prophetic religion puts emphasis on justice and mercy; it is of moral character, whereas the priestly (sacerdotal) religion puts emphasis on sacrifice and ritual (Micah 6: 6-8). Priestly religion tends to oppose change, reform and support the status quo; it is usually in alliance with the socio-political establishment. The prophets spoke in the name of God denouncing  injustice and oppression and demanding justice and mercy. The priests persecuted the prophets and the two groups were often in conflict.

Jesus stood in the prophetic tradition …


First, we commented in other places in SPIR on the need for new Theologians to come forth and give critical appraisal, exercising their right to speak on the condition of the Institution. These may not have a clean bill of health, but that does not mean these don’t have an obligation (a responsibility) and a desire to voice as needed. God shows no partiality, and if gifted academic awareness …… Remember, no one person has the fuller truth on what is God, but to demonstrate the return in something like what we see illustrated in the Parable of the Mina. Gift is not to be stifled—buried—because it is necessary in its day (that Advent of Evolution). What is interesting is that we see some of what Parker defined as the Jesus Tradition (the prophetic) in Theologians schooled in the priestly religion, but in those Mystical,  stifled by the establishment. These are sad affairs. Here is where we need the Mystic to do as he has always done … speak out and not conform to stagnant rule, or succumb to the beds of the Patriarchal. We still hear today that it is a man’s world, and we understand this as an imbalance.

Rapport on the condition of the established morality and ethics of the day is in desperate need of movement.

Now …  as one not of Religious Establishment, we don’t view Parker’s verse here as fully cogent on Truth, but this does not mean his sharing is wrong. For his place, it holds value, and likely has value for many others. What is necessary, however, is the continuous in this critique … keep moving within these exercises on important discussion, but do not get caught up in the socio-political mess.

Also … we don’t confine prophetic to Religion as we experience Prophesy as active, and moral theology is not where we find voice to ignite. Spiritual Ethics is an understanding where and how we engage … because morality defines in a manner subjugated … we feel, but in Society today there are crossovers … where 9 years ago this was not as pronounced. We also shared that it is not necessary for a Theologian to be “installed” in Religious Establishment to voice. He is not a figure for the Religionists to manipulate. He can be of his own views and still have clarity.

A lot brought forth to consider … Today is the day for the ESSENCE of the Spirituality of Christ to voice, and to be heard in the test of our mobility to come into greater understanding on not only the Gifts of the Spirit, which are kinetically linked with Spirit Art, but also to come into awareness on What is God.

Man is adolescent in his understanding on God.





Peace and Love







*And what of this?

“The BBC’s Gideon Long, in Santiago, says that before the allegations surfaced, Father Karadima was one of the most respected and influential priests in Chile.”

—how easily people can be fooled. and those poor, poor children used … and abused … and no PRIEST OR PASTOR considers that their stories are real? that their trauma is real? Maybe these men and women aiding these criminal acts don’t deserve children  … maybe it is not safe for them to be in charge of children … hmm? I can testify from my own personal experiences that many priests and pastors lack awareness, compassion and sense!

They do not even speak out against this crime! How very tragic.

  1. opheliart permalink

    Chile Exposes Pope Francis – Will Philly, NYC &/or DC Be Next? Is A Council Near?
    Christian Catholicism

    Jerry Slevin

    Pope Francis’ and the discredited ex-pope have permanently failed with their over hyped and false slogan of “zero tolerance on sexual abuse”. Increasingly, outraged Catholic parents and grandparents are not buying the “papal bull” anymore. They are instead closely watching Francis’ hypocritical actions now, not his empty promises. Catholics are even shouting down their bishops in church, with some violence, as early Christians also sometimes did to bad bishops. Political leaders are also watching this closely, as the Francis’ “Hollywood like facade” fades fast.

    Click here to see a BBC video of what is fairly described as a “near riot” — the unprecedented Chileans’ angry protest recently against Pope Francis’ choice of Bishop Barros, alleged to have silently witnessed sexual abuse by his mentor, famous Chilean priest, Fernando Karadima. Francis named Barros to head a small diocese that is close to Argentina and to an active volcano. Francis misjudged. The sex abuse volcano has erupted. See the extraordinary pictures here, Pubimetro , and also the shocking second video of everyday Catholics protesting here, YouTube .

    Bishop Barros is apparently part of a broader priest sexual abuse culture, that may have even included, according to reported allegations, a former Chilean Jesuit superior. Francis likely knew and knows some of the key culprits, since Argentina’s and Chile’s Catholic and Jesuit organizations are tied closely. For the broader Chilean abuse situation and Francis’ Chilean connections, please see Jason Berry’s comprehensive description, “Chilean cardinals close to pope stained by abuse cover-ups“, here,

    [National Catholic Reporter]

    “I hold the Pope responsible,” said Juan Carlos Cruz, a 51-year-old journalist who is one of the accusers of Barros.

    “This contradicts everything the Pope has said. He was aware of the situation but named [Barros as bishop] anyway,” Cruz told reporters. “We were accustomed to getting slapped in the face by the Catholic Church [in Chile], but getting slapped by the Pope himself is the saddest part. …”, Cruz reportedly added. (my emphasis)

    As the Chilean abuse volcano was blowing the top off the abuse cover up, top researcher, Betty Clermont, was releasing her extraordinarily thorough and revealing new analysis, Pope Francis and the Dirty War: Keeping the Record Straight – Part I and Pope Francis and the Dirty War: Keeping the Record Straight – Part II . Her well documented essays, in my view, blow the top off some key episodes in Francis’ calculated and uninspiring (at best) relations with the murderous Argentine military earlier.

  2. opheliart permalink

    to all Nations …

    I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

    —Is it a racist remark about ME if a commenter attacks Christ? if he tells lies about Christ? if Christ liveth in me …. and commenters accuse Christ of murder and other atrocities, making disparaging and demeaning comments—-is he attacking me? does he tell lies about me? how is this different from anti-semetic remarks? if I am OF the BODY of Christ no differently than a group of men and woman claiming they are Jewish or Black … how is it permissible for commenters to attack WHAT I AM … but not permissible for commenters to make racist remarks about others?

    Who loses their job when they attack me by making demeaning comments about Christ? Who is called out on racism? dishonesty?

    The Religionists call themselves all kinds of things: Catholic, Orthodox, Presbyterian, Methodist …
    I am not of Religion … I make no claim on Christianity as Christ never made a claim on Religion for HIS PURPOSE—
    And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?
    If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

    17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

    18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

    19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

    FOR FLESH AND BLOOD DID NOT REVEAL THIS TO US … therefore, it is not flesh and blood of man we become.

    *Take care what you claim as TRUTH.

    • opheliart permalink

      25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul: 26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass , that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. 27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.

      to seek Saul … not Paul? There is no indication that the people preaching were of Christ. Why? Where do we see indifference? In … came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. Antioch—name of TWO CITIES.

      What we are looking at here is mind and heart—man and God. IN UNITY? The passage in Acts is highly SYMBOLIC … can Christians understand this Spiritual Symbolism?

  3. opheliart permalink

    our governments would be wise not to call men holy father … this shows favoritism … partiality … and is offensive to one believing in God as Spirit. it shows favoritism to the DOCTRINE of the roman catholic church—its god. and those politicians OF this doctrine—believing it as Truth? how can these men and women demonstrate impartial service if they FAVOR the god of roman dominion through a religion called roman catholicism? you see evidence of the roman pontiff’s preference in his most recent voice: the ordination of the bishop in chile
    how is this a safe and proper service to the health and well being of the people in chile? it screams favoritism … hypocrisy and disservice.
    0 tolerance regarding clergy sexual abuse?

    “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16″You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17″So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.…

    • opheliart permalink

      we are not fooled by the two cities … the mouth that speaks from two sides

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: