T Polyphilus (paradoxosalpha) wrote,
T Polyphilus

The "Lord's Supper" sans Jesus

Sometimes, when I describe the Gnostic Mass to people, they are confused by the fact that we don't ground our Eucharistic magick in some sort of pseudo-historical institution narrative regarding a Jesus-type savior. And they are certainly puzzled by what value "eating the body and drinking the blood of God" could have for someone who both rejects any sort of conventional piety and spurns the entire enterprise of "theology." ("God" is a rhetorical object only, and theology is the most obtuse and degenerate form of rhetoric. The theologian is infinitely farther from God than the unlettered worshiper.)

In a footnote to The Essence of Christianity (Part II, Ch. XXV), Feuerbach gets at what I take to be a significant mechanism involved in the Thelemic Eucharist:
Man is occupied with himself in and through God. God is the means of human existence and happiness. This religious truth, embodied in a cultus, in a sensous form, is the Lord's Supper. In this sacrament man feeds upon God -- the Creator of heaven and earth -- as on material food; by the act of eating and drinking he declares God to be a mere means of life to man. Here man is virtually supposed to be the God of God: hence the Lord's Supper is the highest self-enjoyment of human subjectivity. Even the Protestant -- not indeed in words, but in truth -- transforms God into an external thing, since he subjects Him to himself as an object of sensational enjoyment.
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened