Cult of Tarot Forum

I was quite young when I found out that I feel connected to the Divine Feminine - before i even knew there is such a thing. I was educated in strict Lutheran Protestantism that was eroding in our family - my grandparents adhered to it, my father continued it with inner question marks, my mother rebelled against it. But our whole environment thought the Divine as Father. I didn't question that. As a little girl, I saw God and he looked like a transparent man in a suit, blue and kind. (I had invisible friends, too. God was just one of them.)

I was a young teenager when I went with a group of friends to a retreat our church organized (the community had a little house in the mountains). We went with a young social worker, we sang, prayed, meditated. And in one of these sessions, I had a vision. And it was female figure, dressed in black, sitting in a Gothic window. We painted our visions and I'm so sorry I didn't keep that painting.

Thinking back today I'd say that I saw a Madonna-like vision, a bit like a black-clad Pieta, melancholic and maternal.

Our social worker didn't really know what to do with that vision, it was weirdly Catholic-eclectic-proto-feminist... but I never forgot it. There was a time I felt very attracted to Catholicism, if only for the mariological elements.... but the boss is still a man, isn't he? And for me, the Divine was feminine.

Since then, I have read a lot and discovered that the first works of art of humanity were figurines of women - goddesses? priestesses? we don't know. But it's nearly unthinkable that these figurines were anything else but cult figurines. Our pre-historical ancestors couldn't afford to waste talented workers for some esthetic enterprise. If they made art, it had to have a survival function.

In other mythologies, goddesses play important roles - next to male gods or without them. Goddesses rule the sky, the sea, the earth, the underworld. For many years, I was fascinated with the deep roots of the Divine Feminine, and it gave me a feeling of empowerment and respect for the fact that I'm a woman myself.

As a child, I loved Greek mythology and I still do. Jean Shinoda Bolen's book about archetypical goddesses resonated very much with me.


A nice graphic but one goddess, maybe the one I love most, is missing: Hestia/Vesta, the abstract goddess of the hearth, the domestic and spiritual fire. But the other six are as described in the book: archetypes of feminine power and influence.

Apart from this book, I have always loved Selene and Eos and Hekate, the goddesses of the night. And oh how I loved as a girl the idea of nymphs: that a spirit lives in every tree, bush and well.

Over the years, I tried to learn as much as I could about the beliefs of many different peoples and civilizations.

For my spiritual life, the Divine Feminine has become important. It's not that I see the Masculine as non-Divine - I can't say anything about it because I don't really "feel" it. Probably I'm lacking something

Today, I see the Christian madonna and saints who fascinated me as a girl as continuations of mythological figures and archetypes who live and change their shape through history. I see and feel their energy in the world around me, in the stars and nature and children's faces, but I don't pray to any concrete deity. How bloodless that sounds! when I say that everything has turned into symbol and metaphor for me.

I'm glad that I was steeped in mythology already as a child. I always pitied my students who had to "learn" with Edith Hamilton's book - for many of them, mythology turned into just another topic they needed to pass a test, it never came alive to them. I was lucky that my parents opened the worlds of fairy tales and mythology before my eyes.

I didn't find a tarot deck yet that expressed my feelings, my affinity to the maternal, the feminine, the universal principle. For some t ime, I hoped to find such a deck... there are so many goddess- themed decks... but maybe because it's such a deeply personal matter, i didn't find one that talked to me. Yet.

Society doesn't exactly go out of its way to support this kind of thinking, does it.

And the pity of that is people, especially girls, who don't feel a connection to the Divine Male, are left in the cold spiritually speaking. The female role always seems to be in service to the Divine Male and it's thankless service at that. How lucky you were to have had this connection to the mystical feminine energy. I'll bet that in general a lot more things made sense to you.

I also loved greek mythology which we learned some of in Catholic school but the sub-text was always "isn't this crazy?" We were taught it as if it were from a primitive culture.

I started to get an inkling though when I saw this lady in a book:



The Minoan Snake Goddess.
I mean, she has some agency, no?
I got to see her for real a few years ago when I visited Crete. It felt like meeting an old friend. Really it did.

I saw a film last night that made me think of this thread. The film is fairly new and called Mary Magdelene. Starring Mara Rooney and Joaquin Phoenix. It's a beautifully made film, the most authentic looking and sounding "Jesus movie" I've ever seen. (do not go by the banal formulaic trailer)

In the film they correct a lot of historical inaccuracies, for instance the one made up by Pope Gregory in 591 that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. That story carries through to this day and was just made up by him. Probably to lower her status.

I want to say here that I am, despite a Catholic school education, not a religious person. However I don't think these stories about Jesus are completely made up. I think they have been "creatively" interpreted, but there are scholarly studies from these times that prove the people, kings, times and places etc correspond.

But back to Mary Magdalene's status. Before Pope Gregory disparaged her, it was written and widely accepted that she was an equal of the 12 apostles. In every way. In fact she may have held a higher status being a uniquely sensitive person, highly intelligent and naturally deeply spiritual. She was the only one of them who attended the crucifixion and burial of Jesus and, very importantly, was the one to whom Jesus appeared and spoke to when he "rose". It was she who informed the apostles of this news. This part of the story was changed entirely by the Catholics. And I can tell you as a kid, they always lost me when they got to the Apostles. I just didn't get those guys at all.

And maybe it's all just a story, I just wish we'd been told the real story, the original one, because it's so much better. It's like imagine if the Wizard of Oz was changed to the Tin Man as the main character and Dorothy was just running behind washing everyone's feet. And was just a penitent prostitute who got to hang out with them because they were so kindly. Different story, no?

I heard a podcast recently where a bunch of historians were discussing Mary Magdalene. There has been some effort lately to expose how her story was changed to fit a certain world view and how now there is an effort to correct this. This film is one result of that effort.

But to bring this all back to the original point of the topic of this thread (I hope ), Mary Magdelene is another example of the existence of the Divine Feminine. And another example of how society everywhere and throughout time has not been supportive of that concept forcing those of us with an interest, or who doubt the story we've been told, or who have a feeling something is missing from them, to seek out or seek to be led to the stories we crave to know.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Philip

In different places in the Gospel of Philip, Mary Magdalene is called Jesus's companion, partner or consort, using Coptic variants of the word koinônos (κοινωνός), of Greek origin, or the word hôtre, of Egyptian origin. In this passage koinônos is used. Koinônos has a range of possible meanings: at root, it denotes a "person engaged in fellowship or sharing with someone or in something," but what exactly a koinônos "can share with his or her partner can take many forms, ranging from a common enterprise or experience to a shared business." In the Bible, koinônos is sometimes used to refer to a spouse (Mal 2:14; cf. 3 Macc 4:6), but is also used to refer to a "companion" in faith (Phlm 17), a co-worker in proclaiming the Gospel (2 Cor 8:23), or a business associate (Luke 5:10). The Gospel of Philip uses cognates of koinônos and Coptic equivalents to refer to the literal pairing of men and women in marriage and sexual intercourse, but also metaphorically, referring to a spiritual partnership, and the reunification of the Gnostic Christian with the divine realm. And importantly, there are occasions in the Gospel of Philip when the regular Coptic word for wife is used directly in reference to people who are clearly spouses, suggesting that the term koinônos is "reserved for a more specific usage" in the Gospel of Philip.

The other passage, purportedly referring to Jesus kissing Mary Magdalene, is incomplete because of damage to the original manuscript. Several words are missing. Guesses as to what they were are shown below in brackets. Most notably there is a hole in the manuscript after the phrase "and used to kiss her [often] on her...." But the passage appears to describe Jesus kissing Magdalene, apparently described as "barren" and "the mother of the angels" at the beginning of the relevant paragraph and using a parable to explain to the disciples why he loved her more than he loved them:

As for Wisdom who is called "the barren", she is the mother [of the] angels. And the companion of the [...] Mary Magdalene. [... loved] her more than [all] the disciples [and used to] kiss her [often] on her [...]. The rest of [the disciples...] They said to him, "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savior answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in the darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.

When I was in the fourth or fifth grade, I developed a passion for Greek mythology. I thought it was so cool because they had “girl Gods.” This was both inspiring and affirming.

I have gone in so many directions with my perception of divinity, from an outright rejection of the masculine to a pseudo acceptance of the male God idea, to a devout-ish Christian and now to a much more balanced view.

You see, I believe that the things that compelled me and empowered me before the world had its way are primary to my character...to my Spirit. The inner God/dress knows truth.

I have seen a book that refers to the exclusive use of God in the masculine as synonymous with the creation of a graven image. Huge sin of idolatry there...and a book written by a Christian. I’ll find some cool quotes later.

But in the meantime, I think it is really cool that even in some non-Catholic Christian sectors, we are seeing a bit of the Goddess arising. You can’t cover the feminine face of God forever.

Years ago there used to be a statue similar to this on a street in SoHo, NYC in front of a store, Spring St or something like that, memory fails.

It was like a landmark unto itself, it was so imposing and very impressive.

Anyway, I was always taken with it and the memory of it has always stayed with me.

Artemis of Ephesus:

https://i.ibb.co/jv2DcNB/artemis-ephesus.jpg

Joan Marie wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018, 14:26
In the film they correct a lot of historical inaccuracies, for instance the one made up by Pope Gregory in 591 that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. That story carries through to this day and was just made up by him. Probably to lower her status.

I think it was in the late 1960s that the Catholic Church at last admitted that Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute. So this in no longer in sway in their beliefs. But the damage has been done. She'll carry that label with her for a long time, so long it has been imprinted in people's minds.

What happened is that there are three different Marys mentioned in the New Testament. Pope Gregory decided that there was only one Mary, and that the three mentioned were one and the same. And as one was mentioned as a prostitute, the Three-in-One Mary that they had invented got lumped with that profession.

It's all nonsense of course. But the fact that she is mentioned washing his body along with Jesus' mother, shows that she had a very special place in his life and perhaps even his family. She was the first to see him resurrected. The Catholic church didn't like that idea. They had to get rid of her quickly.