God is All Good...

Such reasoning only led me to the conclusion that either:

God is not all good - because he either denied his creation access to their true natures, or else put temptation deliberately in their way so that he could exercise his power over them whether they transgressed or not. A God who wishes to keep his creations in the cave of ignorance cannot be all good.

God is not all knowing or else he would have realised that his creature was no fool. "God" is blind to the true nature of his creation, and blind to the fact that he is neither good nor powerful. His name is Samael, the Blind One, and he is evil personified.

God is not all powerful - he could have prevented them from having the longing for knowledge had he wanted to.

Strong words...? Try these on for size:

slavery, genocide, terrorism, poverty, environmental catastrophe, paedophilia, sex slavery, ignorance, squalor, domestic violence, rape, the exploitation of the weak majority by the rich minority, and the inability to free our minds from religious institutions which in order to secure our loyalty must keep us in a state of perpetual fear!

If man is responsible for all this, how can he have been created in the image of a Perfect God? Perfection cannot admit evil or it is not perfection. If God is responsible for this, well, he has one hell of a lot to answer for!

Who created evil? Satan? Perhaps. But who is the Devil and how did he get to have such a hold over us?

There is only one conclusion, that which we have been taught to worship as God, even knowing or perhaps despite the horrifics of the Old Testament and the evidence of our own television screens, is not God. This god is deeply flawed, malicious and insecure, ignorant of his own weaknesses and caprices, jealous of...?

In fact, God is indeed all good etc., but there is another God who perfectly fits this description. And once we realise this, the heaviness of the world, the imperfections of our bodies, the torment of our minds as they strive to make a sense of this life we have been thrown into, all assume their proper place as subservient to our true nature and are allowed to return to our true home, not as the Catholic church will tell you, after death, but in this life. We can be resurrected in the flesh as pure spirit.

Master, when shall the kingdom come? And he answered us straightways: It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying Here it is or There it is. Rather the kingdom of the Father is spread upon the earth. But men do not see it.

You will not find this is the New Testament; you will not even find it exactly as it is written here in the Gnostic Writings. It is an excerpt from The Apocryphon of Jesus the Christ which Kieran in Pilgrimage to Heresy is translating. As far as I know, no such gospel exists, yet the words are pure Gnostic, pure Priscillian, pure Cathar, and they are what I have come to believe in myself.

The world came about by a mistake. For he who created it wanted to make it imperishable and immortal. But he fell short of attaining his desire. For the world never was immortal; nor for that matter was he who made the world.

Who would ever have thought to find Jesus saying these words? Yet in the Gnostic writings they are repeated many times.

The disciples asked Jesus: Lord, when will the New World come? And he answered them: What you look forward to has already come and you still do not realise it.
The disciples entreated him: Lord, how shall we know truth from falsehood?
The saviour answered us thus: woe to those who are captives. For they are bound in caverns. In mad laughter do they rejoice in what they think you see. They neither realise their perdition,. nor do they reflect upon their circumstances. They do not realise that they have dwelt in darkness and death.
Some will say the lord died first and rose up, they are in error for he will rise up first and then die. If you do not attain the resurrection first then you too will die.

First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is...
.

After Priscillian...

With the Sueve occupation of Galicia, Priscillianism was more or less tolerated especially since the rejection of the Trinity was shared by both the Sueves who practiced Arianism and the Priscillianists, although initially, in the opening years of the fifth century, the barbarian invasions of Spain threw the whole Peninsula into confusion as the Sueves were for the most part pagan upon their entry into Spain. But those that followed mainstream Christianity were permitted to worship according to their own practices.

When they founded their kingdom in Galicia in 464, Arianism was the State religion rather than Roman Catholicism. There is nothing to suggest that the Arian bishops at this time were active in suppressing paganism. Priscillianism was tolerated as many of its beliefs were similar in fact to the state religion, and it was not until St. Martin of Braga (not to be confused with St. Martin of Tours), the Apostle of the Sueves, that Priscillianism is seen to be driven back underground. It is only after Recared the Visigoth's conversion to Catholicism in the mid 7th century that we cease altogether to hear anything about the Priscillianists.

But where did they go? Did they simply die out, or be absorbed by the Catholic church, a church notably antipathetic and entirely different to their views?
Or did the movement go underground, only to re-appear as a synthesis somewhere else, somewhere where Priscillianism had had a distinct foothold 800 years before? Did Priscillian survive in the guise of the Good Men?
.

A Revolting Tale Part 2

Having been promised safe conduct, Urraca was allowed to leave. But there’s no saying what will happen under mob rule. The queen was physically attacked, possibly even stripped of her clothes before being able to escape the city. Diego Gelmirez, who seems to have had more lives than a cat, somehow managed to escape the burning tower, we are told, through the mediation of the abbot of San Martín Pinario. But others were less fortunate. In the fracas, at least four people were killed, most likely including members of Diego’s cathedral chapter. The fire was so hot that the cathedral bells melted in the blaze. So says the HC.

Diego and Urraca escaped separately to the hills outside Compostela. Five armies converged upon the city, and the insurgents surrendered.

Not surprisingly, the queen wanted blood! (or large sums of money in lieu of, no doubt). Diego was more moderate. He knew that the point had been made, and more importantly, he was the one who had to put the city back together. Urraca could return to Leon or wherever she chose. The bishop had to stay and live with the aftermath.

A court was convened. The ringleaders were sent into exile and the remainder heavily fined. For a while at least, Diego could breathe easy.
.

The revolt begins...

While Diego Gelmirez was a force to be reckoned with, he had a lot to handle with the bourgeoisie of his diosese. As we have already seen, Arias Pérez and members of the "Brotherhood" had ways of swaying the Bishop of Compostela in their direction against the Conde de Traba. Those members of the town who counted for anything wanted their bishop to consider their needs first, even before the building of their cathedral; and they would go to any lengths to make sure that Diego was aware of their influence with the Queen, Urraca.

Urraca was continuing her fight with the Battler - with occasional so-called "reconciliations": meaning that they recognised for a while that a truce was less expensive than pursuing each other's forced from one side of the north of Spain to the other. The Pope had anulled the martriage on grounds of "consanguinity": that is, they shared a great grandfather and shouldn't have married in the first place. Not, in this author's opinion anyway, that they were getting up to any hanky panky and probably never had, the Battler's view being that a soldier should only associate with men.

In 1116, Santiago was not a very good place to be - not if your name was Diego Gelmirez. The powerful middle class led by Arias Pérez rebelled against the Bishop with the Queen's open encouragement. Things had never been very harmonious between Urraca and Diego Gelmirez of Santiago de Compostela. Urraca still had not recognised Alfonso Raimundez in the way that the Traba lord and the Bishop wanted her to. Urraca was a bulldog and she held on to her kingdom with jaws firmly clenched.

With the Queen's backing, the citizens rose up against Diego Gelmirez and made him a virtual prisoner in his Bishop's Palace. Threats of ex-communication were ignored. The rents from the Cathedral's properties were diverted to the Queen and this left Diego with no real authority in Compostela. The few supporters of Diego circled the wagons.
Something had to give.
Or someone...
.

Things take an unexpected turn (as they do)...

(The photo is taken from the annual Festival of the Moros y Cristianos in Benamahoma, a village in Cadiz province which I love well and retreat to whenever I can. Pilgrimage to Heresy was edited there.)

In December of 1107 a council was convened in Leon. Urraca was confirmed as "Countess of Galicia" in her husband's place. Her father, Alfonso the king was still around but was bedridden and perhaps mentally impaired as well as physically incapacitated. This provided an excellent opportunity for the nobles with influence to exercise just that. Perhaps they reckoned without Urraca's strength (or should I say "womanly wiles?"), but I am getting ahead of myself.

Be that as it may, in the summer of 1108, events were about to endure a tragic turn of fate.

All hell broke loose on the frontier between the kingdoms and the increasing determination of the Moorish Almovarides. The Castillian army was despatched toute de suite to deal with this insurrection with the young Sancho - who was only 15 - at the head. And now the language must take a distinctly medieval turn because Sancho was "dealt a mortal blow".

Alfonso the king was devasted. The light of his aged eyes had been extinguished, perhaps because of a royal decision taken with overconfidence. The ailing king withdrew completely at a time when his kingdom had never needed him more. Clearly some decision had to be taken.

Duke Raimundo (whom Alfonso VI trusted) was dead. His cousin Henry (whom he did not and had reason not to) was married to Teresa, Urraca's illegitimate sister and both lorded it in Portugal. Between them they were a force of power and sedition to be reckoned with. Henry was treacherous. It seems that everyone in medieval times had their own agenda, and Henry and Teresa were no exception. Far from it.

Urraca the true heir (as we would see it today) was a woman, and well, no more need be said about that!

The Almoravides were pressing the frontier big time. The kingdom of Leon-Castilla needed a leader: a man of proven strength, military experience, and strategic capacity.

If the resumes were appearing on the desks of the royal counsellors, Alfonso I, the King of Aragon, called "El Batellador" must have swept all rival claimants into the wastebasket.

He was 36, never married (which in itself was unusual). Established as undisputed ruler of the kingdom of Aragon. He had a great reputation as a soldier and didn't seem to have a lot of time for women. There did not appear to be any illegitimate children scattered around Aragon. (I am tempted to come to a few conclusions here, especially in light of what follows, but I won't.)

Unfortunately, despite his immaculate CV, Alfonso the Battler wasn't well liked by the nobles of Leon, and especially Castilla.

Galicia, no doubt - and perhaps its bishop, Diego Gelmirez - trembled in its 12th century boots.
.
P.S. Comments also taking unexpected turns - of phrase in this case. I am wondering whether they are evidence of alien contact. Do see...

"Ok, so who is going to be King then?"

It is all beginning to sound a bit Monty Pythonesque...

Urraca gave birth in Caldas del Reyes, and if you are planning to walk the Camino Portuguese you will pass through. My recommendation is that you don't. Pass through that is. As of the time of writing there is no albergue there, but, there are some wonderful spa hotels which are not expensive, and soaking in one of the hot pools (and a massage after) is a treat you have deserved. So enjoy. (Recommended: the Hotel Davila.)

It's also a beautiful little town with a Roman bridge. Check out the "other side" of the cross which stands beside it. You'll see something not seen anywhere else and you can look for it from here until well after Padron. An interesting area this in light of the Priscillianist "infestation". (Sic)

Anyway, back to my story.

We left off in 1105. Urraca's child has thrown a...forgive me...Spaniard in the Works. Where before there was no clear legitimate male heir to the throne, now there is and his name is Alfonso, known at that time as Alfonso Raimundez, the patronymic being after his father, Raimundo, Duke of Burgundy, whom we have already met.

Alfonso the king, while perhaps flattered that his grandson had been named after him, still intended to put his illegitimate son, Sancho on the throne. But events were about to unfold that would change all this, and history, forever.

It is interesting to posit what might have happened to the Spanish succession had this half-Moorish boy become king. But history has this nasty habit of being unpredictable and I'll leave that to the historians.

And why? Well, two reasons really.

In 1107 Duke Raimundo the "consort" of the Infanta Urraca was taken ill, and died.

That might not have made much difference to the succession as Sancho remained the Heir Apparent, but don't give up on me just yet.
.