Thursday, August 9, 2007

Constance Cumbey Responds

The following is a response from the author of the book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, Constance Cumbey, to the recent blog posting titled "The Real Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow" which can be found at this link:

Clearly the Jews are equally a target of New Age planners along with Christians -- Catholic and Protestant, and even Moslems. A key strategy is to pit target groups off against each other. One only has to read the Alice Bailey books to see that Jews are the most despised of all the New Age targets. I have made clear links between the Historical Revisionist Movement and the New Age Movement, between Eustace Mullins, Ezra Pound etc and the New Age Movement. The New Agers label the "rainbow" as "antahkarana" or "rainbow bridge between the personality and oversoul.

I do not know you, but your site looks disturbingly like anti-Jewish propaganda to me. Please do not imply that I endorse such. I do not.


In response I should say that I have not implied that Constance Cumbey endorses anti-"Jewish" propaganda. Neither have I written anything about Ezra Pound or Eustace Mullins, which begs the question, what do these things have to do with what I have written? This wouldn't be an attempt to imply an endorsement of Pound, Mullins and New Ageism from me, would it? Perhaps Mrs. Cumbey will extend me the same courtesy which she asks for herself.

I will make clear that I do see virtue in the practice of historical revisionism in it's best form, which is the reassessment of historical people, places and events in light of new evidence. I fail to see how any person who honors truth could be opposed to this concept. To reject it would be to allow propaganda and errors which often become part of the established historical record to remain set in stone. If Cumbey is opposed to historical revisionism, that's her right, but to imply that historical revisionism is directly connected with the New Age movement is disingenuous at best, and to those who know better, it's rather a joke.

I should add, since Cumbey has brought it up, that I find Ezra Pound's poem "With Usura" to contain insight which today's "Christians" should aspire to, but that's hardly an endorsement of Pound's Gnostic tendencies or affiliations; W. B. Yeats and the Golden Dawn, for instance.

I must say I don't enjoy writing this response. I found Mrs. Cumbey's book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow to be informative when it was first published in the early 80's. I had no idea what direction Mrs. Cumbey's research had taken since that book was published. Surely, she could be forgiven for not making the connection between the rainbow and the Noahide movement of Judaism (which predates Alice Bailey by millenia) 25 years ago when reliable information on the occult and Judaism was more difficult to come by. But that's not so much the case today.

Since Mrs. Cumbey has written a response to my blog posting on the Noahide movement and it's symbol, the rainbow, I must assume that she has read it, but in her response she has studiously ignored the content of that posting including the quotes from the Talmud, Mishneh Torah, the Encyclopaedia Judaica, a joint Rabbinic Council-Pontifical Commission document, U.S. laws and presidential proclamations, news articles and video clips cited, choosing instead to imply that it's all just "anti-'Jewish' propaganda" and expressing concern that she may be associated with it. Fear not, Mrs. Cumbey. It's clear to me now that you have no fellowship with the kind of research conducted here, and I wouldn't think of associating your work with it.

I do hope that you will give the matter further consideration, however, lest the true hidden danger of the rainbow remain hidden to your readers.

P.S. I do realize that there are anti-"semitic" elements within occult movements, Mrs. Cumbey. Anti-"semitism" is a very important tool of the rabbis and Zionists. Consider this: is it likely that the world would have extended the Zionists a blank check to build a "Jewish" state called "Israel" on someone else's land--to kill and drive off the land's occupants--if the Nazi persecutions had not taken place beforehand? I highly doubt it. Many have called Hitler the true founding father of the "Jewish" state and as ironic as it may seem on the surface, I find no fault in that statement.

Whatever anti-"semitism" that exists in occult movements of the West, whether real or mocked, most often serves the purposes of the Zionist movement. The Nazi movement is the strongest case in point. Most Western occult movements (Masonry in particular, with it's fixation on the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem) are Zionist at the core.

And it is plain to see that occultists pair target groups off against each other, as you say. One only need observe how Skull and Bones member, George W. Bush and his Zionist handlers have pitted "Judeo-Christians" against Muslims in a misnamed "war on terror" which is in reality a war on Amalak, the eternal enemy of the rabbis, and a war for Israeli dominion in the Middle East.

I hope that you will consider your own point more deeply. As the traditions, cultures and religions of the world--mostly Christendom--are broken down, the tradition of Judaism is being simultaneously built up. As sovereign nations around the world are being slowly dissolved into large unions, a "Jewish" nation is simultaneously being unnaturally propped up at astronomical expense to outside sources. The Christian nations that are having their soveriegnty and religion robbed from them are forced to finance the building of a "Jewish" state. If the New Age movement is the true force behind the deChristianization of the West, the fruit of it's labor certainly seems to benefit the "Jewish" state. How could this possibly take place if the "all-powerful" New Age movement were truly against it?

Anti-"Jewish" quotes from Alice Bailey are interesting at most to me, Mrs. Cumbey. I am a Christian, and Jesus Christ said that it's by their fruits that you will know them, not by their rhetoric.


Constance Cumbey said...

As a Christian, how do you read St. Paul's admonition to "Boast not against the branches . . .?

Constance E. Cumbey

Constance Cumbey said...

As a Christian, how do you interpret the Apostle Paul's admonition to "boast not against the branches," referring to the Jews?

Constance E. Cumbey

Maurice Pinay said...

In [Romans 11] 19-24 Paul derives further motives for humility from the simile of the olive tree in 16; 17-18. He evidently has reason to think that the Gentile Christians may feel inclined to insist on the fact that whatever their origin may have been, at present they are the living branches of the Church while almost all of the old branches have been cut off and thrown away on the heap of dry wood. This fact is undoubtedly true. But what the Gentile Christians should learn from it is: (1) fear of God's severity, since He did not spare even His own chosen people, 21, 22a; (2) gratitude for the grace of their own faith, 22 (3) respect for God's omnipotence, 23. The wonderful way in which God, contrary to all that could be expected, has engrafted the Gentiles into the ancient stem of Israel should be a constant reminder to them that He can do the same at any time with those branches that are at present rejected. To belong to the Church is a grace of God; the one condition on men's part is faith. Gentiles have been accepted into the Church because they have believed, and Israelites have been excluded because they refused to believe. (A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1953, p.1072)

That, I believe, is the correct interpretation of Romans 11;18. But again, I must ask, what does this have to do with anything I've written? I have not boasted of my faith, nor have I bragged of being a member of the Church--true Israel--nor have I scorned any "Jew," real or counterfeit, for their lack of faith or rejection by God. I have been very critical of the anti-Biblical Judaic "religion" and Judaic attempts to co-opt my Church and State. If you believe that St. Paul's words forbid this, I must say you're very confused.

Furthermore, it hasn't escaped my attention that you've studiously ignored the entire content of my original posting and my response to the random unrelated points and innuendos made in your rejoinder.

I have no more time for your random insinuations. You apparently either concede my points or don't have an adequate response to them.

John Zebedee said...

Ms.Cumbey is a 'whited sepulcher' of her favorite
'whipping girls' is Alice Bailey...
Bailey was raised by 'extremely devout' no-nonsense Anglicans, who
apparently taught her that to enjoy
anything at all on this earth was a
sin...after being driven to the brink of suicide by her 'loving
Christian' parents, she ran off to
America with a drunk preacher who
also beat her...when all you have
heard about Jesus Christ is accompanied by this insanity, is it
a wonder that one turns to 'something else'...Bailey's writings reflect this particular psycopathology...As I wrote you once before, Ms.Cumbey is a very
austere woman, and I think represents a 'Christian Pharisee'

Anonymous said...

The verse in romans is saying not to boast against the branches in the same manner that God had commanded in proverbs, if evil happens to an enemy, don't rejoice, or if your brother is poor and asks for help, not to deny them the help.

Please Ms. Cumbey, as you claim to be a Christian, do not confuse something that God did not command, namely to put the Jews on a higher level of humanity above non-Jews, and then say that God commanded it. The zionists who all propagate this favoritism are surely going to be judged for their words on Judgement day. Ezekiel chapter 13 is very expressive about how God consider's those who claim God says something when He has not.

Anonymous said...

Does Constance Cumbey realize that Orthodox Jews consider the Talmud to be UNCREATED?! From a Christian POV this is IDOLATRY!!!

Sulla said...


My concern: the word "Jew" keeps getting bandied about. Do all Jews subscribe to these teachings?

I think not.

There is the "synagogue of Satan," which Jesus clearly warned about. The Noahide laws and the rhetoric used on the pages you cited create an uncomfortable juncture between Bible prophecy and what these folks proclaim is their goal.

But again, this is not all Jews--just as the other worker bees of the mystery of iniquity are not all Christians or whatever else they pretend to be. Just as William F. Buckley was not a follower of Jesus as he pretended to be.

IMO, the danger of the broad brush seems to be the main caveat needed here.

Very good research.