A reply by Michel Potay to comments touching on the media, journalism in particular, and the absence therein of The Revelation of Arès, translated by djd.
Oh, yes, so as not “to fall into the throes of censure and propaganda” journalists censure themselves and make their own propaganda. It is a snake biting its own tail, thus they go around in circles, locking themselves in a cycle from which they cannot escape. As they cannot get out of it, they keep seeing the same things and cannot find us!
You are right: there have only been two journalists among us, both were Breton, working for Ouest France at the end of the 70’s, beginning of the 80’s. One fell ill and died, the other disappeared. But that is all. Journalism is a profession some members of which have approached us on a strictly private basis and not more than as sympathisers but never on a professional basis. Another profession is in the same case, lawyers, notary publics, judges. Our sister Lucette P., now defunct, was the only professional lawyer to be a member of our assembly in Marseille, although she never participated in the mission.
A journalist near the end of his career, member of the director’s board for the group Express wrote to me in the 80’s more or less the following: “There are some personalities of which one can never speak ill, the Pope, the Dalaï Lama, etc., and there are some personalities of which one can never speak good, Michel Potay, for example. The best thing a journalist who holds you in esteem can do is to remain silent.” Therefore I consider the press’s silence on my subject to be a sign of sympathy. My police record is blank, I have never even been investigated, I pay my taxes and no one has ever been able to redress me in that domain, no one has ever lodged a complaint against me, therefore journalists, who know that I am now 88 years old and that the movement issuing from The Revelation of Arès will be 44 years old in January, don’t know what to say about me. The same is true of our big family of Arès Pilgrims, there are only honest people. I nipped in the bud the rare attempts of corruption or abuse that could have happened in our assembly. Prevented from saying good about us and not having anything bad to say, journalists are vowed to silence. This is the auto censure I mentioned at the beginning of this reply.
I have often formed an idea of what a journalist could say about us if he were to keep to information pure and simple. For example, this short article, strictly informative:
“Michel Potay, ex-engineer and ex-ecclesiast, affirms that he was visited by Jesus as the Creator’s Messenger in 1974 and by the Creator Himself in 1977. He consigned the message that they gave him in a work called The Revelation of Arès (Arès is the town in the Gironde department of France where the supernatural events took place) now with 350 000 copies in circulation.
The Revelation of Arès does not found a religion but revives a spiritually liberating movement similar in spirit to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. The members of this movement are called Arès Pilgrims.
They have been street missionaries for 44 years. Their message is quite simple: Man, know that it is not your religion or your prayer that will save you, but rather the Good that you do. This Good is called penitence: love, forgiveness, peace, spiritual intelligence and freedom, in The Revelation of Arès. In other words, evil will not be conquered by religion, morality, law, courts, etc., but simply in your heart!”
Why has not one journalist been capable of having printed such a simple article? It is a legitimate question, intriguing. Well! I think it is because journalists never stick to just giving the facts. They think, they interpret and want their thoughts and interpretations to be known. Thought in their eyes is to establish one or more projects, to say what crosses their mind. The journalists thought makes him something more than one who informs. He wants to participate in the laws of the universe, politics, the world of thought, to give meaning to the moment, to technique, to History, to our presence in the world.
The journalist does not see this work of thought as being purely informative. For him it is also interpretive. He wants to show that he is capable of deducing. For him, to change the world (Rev of Arès 28/7) is first to understand it and he considers that a simple statement of facts does not permit comprehension. He wants to understand the meaning of what is. So he gives an opinion and this opinion about the supernatural at Arès is first and always, doubt. He will say that he doubts because it’s in the air of our time, but he considers that if he says he is in doubt, many readers will also doubt, and that would possibly be a shame, etc. From there, a contradiction which generates a certain impotence for journalism to treat this kind of subject.
What conditions must be met so that a journalist would limit himself to the facts in an adequate manner? I do not know, but I know that this goes further then the idea that I have of pure journalism, which in reality doesn’t exist, because The Revelation of Arès questions the reader about being, the fact of being, the reason for being, in short, man in all his depths, and that the journalist wants to add his grain of salt.
The Revelation of Arès raises the question of life or death, existence or nonexistence of the soul and in this realm, it is probably no longer the role of the press to reflect but rather a theologian, a metaphysician, a philosopher. The journalist then asks himself what is his role, he perceives its limits but that irritates him, he tries to push its limits. Not everyone has the extraordinary talent of a Jack London or a Joseph Kessel for presenting things as they should be, that is to say, while remaining a journalist, to invite the reader to ask himself metaphysical questions. The journalist thus fears remaining, if I can say “unthought”. The result is that for us, Arès Pilgrims, the best spokesperson is perhaps not a journalist but for example, a philosopher, an essayist, maybe a historian… a philosopher, an essayist, or a historian with a large audience of course.
For example, the role of a historian of ideas would be to examine the ideas contained in The Revelation of Arès and in the thought of the witness, the prophet, to understand their signification, to evaluate their coherence and reach, to show their genealogy, to note the filiations.
But the journalists with whom I met in the 80’s quickly saw that I am a man without the least concern for my own self and that caused them such a problem, that so disconcerted them, that they finally said, “This guy, let’s just crush him, since he has such a lack of care about his own person.” In effect, and I know this is a handicap in this day and age, I do not have the slightest desire to enter History, nor to be famous in any way. I only wish, as this is the role given to me by the Father, to find a sufficient number of penitents, ripe ears of grain, and it is the journalist that appears to me to be most apt to contact the world via the press. But for me personally I couldn’t care less if I am buried anonymously in a common grave at the rear of a cemetery. After my maternal grandmother died in Arès, as she had become an Arès Pilgrim, we went to Toulouse for the cremation (there was not at that time a crematorium in Bordeaux, 1982 or 1983), while she was burning in the oven, I went walking around the cemetery and found myself in the area of the unknown dead, a small mound of earth and a little stick with a number: “867” or “B148”. I said to myself, “That’s what I would like,” to be buried anonymously – I dare not say like Calvin or Mozart, because one would think I am comparing myself to these geniuses, I who am a zero, but I dare say like…let’s say…a Trappist, because I believe that Trappists do not have their name on their sepulchre. That’s fine, because the soul, if one has a soul, does not bear a name, and if one is nothing more than a spectre, it does not bear a name either; they are nothing but unnamed entities in the light or in the shadows according to the case. As for myself, I do not know if I have earned a soul, I hope so, but no more than that.
After all, how many journalists have brought a contribution to the history of thought and ideas? Very few. Some editorialists undoubtedly, such as Charles Péguy, Albert Camus, Raymond Aron and a few others. Yes, very few journalists have drawn fruitful charts of the interpretation of events, ways of seeing the world that might help it progress. Then why do they not act as humble informers? Can there not be found simply a journalist who would keep to the facts as I proposed above? One does not expect a journalist to think about the nature of mankind, society’s origin, a new theory of value, the essence of capitalism, communism, Christianity, Islam, life after death, etc. A journalist is not expected to found the basics of a philosophy of the depths. Péguy, I believe, did a bit of journalism and how interesting it would be to know what Charles Péguy would think about The Revelation of Arès, but that was another time. A time when, as you say, there was a Zola to write “J’accuse”. Poor Péguy was blown to smithereens by a German shell or riddled with bullets, I don’t know which anymore, during the 1914-1918 war. Derision of brute soldiers who believe that destroying a grand thought is defending justice. Poor world!
The world is led by love or hate, generosity or selfishness, truth or lying. The old question of whether or not ideas lead the world has not been answered and above all, not in the realm of journalism. Journalists have never constituted a force capable of underlying the foundations of History, to change the will of mankind, to define moral determinations, social interactions, innovations leading to happiness. Look, after seventy-five years of soviet journalistic propaganda and the hammering of Marxist ideas on the radio and television in the URSS, what is left today? Nothing. That should incite journalists to be strictly informers, but no! They wish to be considered thinkers. That is the problem.
Journalists should know, and know it better than anyone else, that intellectuals (those who think) have a bad reputation in many circles, are perceived as idea jugglers, to whom reality is foreign, for the facts are no longer reality when one gives an interpretation of them, holds forth on them. There has been ancient thought, scholastic thought, the Cartesian revolution, the Kantian revolution, modern historicism and there will be one day or another Arèsian thought, of which I will be the minuscule mediocre initiator hoping that others better than me will express in a more sublime way, more spiritual, more celestial, more decisive, in order to make this world a world of men of love, forgiveness, peace, with the heart’s intelligence and freedom. We Arès Pilgrims are very far from noisy revolutions, grand human explosions that journalists love so much because that gives them scoops, promotions, raises, but these big explosions have no tomorrow. We will have a tomorrow and who in fact can speak about tomorrow? Journalists?
The Revelation of Arès provides the human being a way of thinking which can understand the historic moment humanity is living at the present time and change its course which is leading to the sin of sins (Rev of Arès 38/2). Perhaps the journalist could add this to the small article found above?
20jul17 187C3 Réponse
For The Revelation of Arès and for us, Arès Pilgrims, penitence is not contrition, nor deep regret nor remorse of having offended God and committed sins, with the intention to correct one’s faults and never fall into them again. Penitence in the Word of Arès and for us Arès Pilgrims is just the active intention to stop sinning (RA30/16) with the accomplished action of being men and women of Good cultivating within themselves absolute Love, including loving the enemy, forgiveness of all offenses, total peace, reviving within the almost snuffed out lantern of the heart’s intelligence or spiritual intelligence (RA32/5), becoming free beings (RA10/10), free from all prejudice, laws, powers, fears. In other words, penitence for us is the conscious and wilful application to our lives of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) in which we see the dynamic heart of the Gospel. In other words, The Revelation of Arès retains only the positive and constructive meaning of penitence. Therefore I do not have, and my brothers and sisters in faith do not have, a feeling of guilt. I am not, and none of my companions in faith are, a morbid person who feels like some kind of monster and forces himself to destroy the monster within, but rather is someone who changes his life (RA30/11). The word repent does appear in The Revelation of Arès, but with the same sense as the word penitence as a dynamic for changing life from evil to good. It is a repentance which constructs, not a repentance that laments its past faults. The Father says in The Revelation of Arès, “If they stop sinning, I stop recollecting their past” (RA30/13) and “I will forget their hatred” (RA28/16). For a penitent, one’s neighbour, any other human being, is what was, for example, La Boétie for Montaigne and Montaigne for La Boétie, another self. “Because it was him and because it was me,” said Montaigne. It’s this feeling which I call the co-penetration of beings, the sharing of joys and sufferings, which dominates the spirit of penitence for us.
As long as the world is not dominated by the will –that we may do Your Will (12/4)—to become a world of beings of Good, not a world crying over their evil, and as long as the world will see in a fault something to be punished and expiated rather than something which must disappear, and as long as the world does not see God’s Judgment Seat as a building site, the continuation of the Creation of the world rather than the courtroom of a sanctioning judge, this world will remain as it is, a world of Evil.
This radical change in the meaning of penitence is, what’s more, problematic in our mission.
03mar17 182C41 Réponse
Translated by djd
This gallery contains 2 photos.
Hellebore blooming I was shocked by what I heard on the news this morning via one of our local radio stations (I thought they were more or less independent but now I realize they go right along with the system). They informed us that measures of heightened security will be taken at the Breton […]
Here are some excerpts from replies to comments on the blog entry 177 by Michel Potay.
“…Politics and its mother religion want to be done with problems of conscience, but we on the contrary force ourselves to awaken this conscience. I even heard a person I encountered while seeking penitents say that intelligence was going extinct and should be replaced with instinct. ‘What instinct’, I asked. ‘The animal instinct of course’, they replied. ‘No’, I said, ‘we are not animals, but men with a conscience. No animal has a conscience. They live in a universe of signals. We live as Children of God, that is to say intelligent, and we can reawaken this conscience as one stirs up a fire.’”
23aou16 177C11 Réponse
“I believe that nothing is possible on the level of society as long as we have not succeeded in spreading the idea that first man must personally change his life (RA 30/10-11).”
25aou16 177C18 Réponse
“…Our penitence is anarkhia, since it rejects the power of evil in all of its forms. We shall soon engage in the hardest striving for Good within us, around us, on Earth. Politics seeks a cohesion of the masses under the law, police, courts of justice, but we work towards renewing the value of individuality and liberty—two of the five gifts God gave Adam, creating his spiritual nature: love, speech, creativity, liberty and individuality—and thus we must literally re-create the world and re-create ourselves…”
25aou16 177C21 Réponse
…Yes, « the world will change in the assembly or will not change ». In our assembly, the loop will be joined, that is to say that the process of penitence will have caused Evil to disappear and will have installed Good. We have created and begun our assembly with The Revelation of Arès as a starting point which encourages us to refuse the hypocrisy, conscious or very often unconscious, of the religious Jews, Christians, Muslims or others, who while believing they are combating Evil, often without realising it, exercise a form of Evil which is paralysis, a mummification of faith. Faith is Life. To immobilize it by wrapping it in the bandages of dogma is Evil, that is to say, something which inhibits the march towards Life.
In the assembly we localized the first cause of Evil which is fear of one another which must be replaced by love of one another. Was not barbarism born from the fear of one another? One destroys the other, be it physically or intellectually, one destroys all that he does out of fear of him and what he does, one wants to remain as one is, without evolving, because one is fine, just like those with a toothache fear the dentist and prefer to stay home, feeling better with their pain than they would feel under the dentist’s drill. We have installed the dentist’s drill, penitence. In that way we are really combating Evil, beginning with the Evil within; we are not satisfied with believing, we act, we do. Thus we strive, as does The Revelation of Arès, “to lead men to discover that love, reason, conscience and action in liberty, tools given to men from God’s very own Hand, will re-create the planet.” Since most men do not understand because their minds are lacking the door through which action upon themselves might pass, the action of change, we strive for the moment to find those whose minds are not hermetically closed, those where that door exists, even if it is only a small louver window, those we call the ripe ears of grain.
30aou16 177C32 Réponse
“…our political era seeks to eliminate the private individual in order to install what I call a standard man, who has no personality, who lives according to social standards decided by those in power, no longer plays any role, is nothing more than a human machine with interchangeable functions. Those in power can dominate that man. Those in power cannot exercise their domination on men like us, men who rediscover their liberty, each one his own, each one the creator of himself, each one the image and likeness of the Creator…”
01sep16 177C37 Réponse
Translated by djd
Link to the original blog entry 177 in English:
“Nothing is easy, all goes slowly, we carry time as a very heavy burden, but little by little we see clearly and advance… Living spiritual life—as opposed to religious life—is very difficult because spiritual life happens within whereas religion comes from outside oneself. Spiritual life, although it has a unique goal throughout the world which is the Union of All that is the Creator and all creatures, takes place in a wide variation of form and thought, because there is a constant rapport between spiritual life which is unique with the variable environment of the moment. Thus for example original Buddhism, of Buddha, one of the greatest prophets of the Highest, aligns with the principle of reincarnation which was current in the Vth century BC environment in India, whereas in the XXIst century CE, we align with the unicarnation (I invent the word here) of our time, and yet both are true, for we are what has followed from the spiritual life that preceded us and at the same time responsible for our instantaneous destiny. We have neither the words nor the way of thinking to express this truth apparently contradictory, but that will come. Just as you become conscious of something calling you…”
excerpt from 14aou16 176C111 Réponse
Translated by djd
“In as much as I speak to those around me, I find an important number of persons who consider the accumulation of laws and powers by bureaucrats in the police force, the tax offices, justice system, etc., to be excessive, even unacceptable, and yet they submit to them. It is therefore that they prefer after all the unacceptable to the effort, certainly an enormous one, required to change their lives themselves. The same is true of religion. Most believers do not seek the real sense of the Creator’s Calls; they submit bone-idly to religious and superstitious dictates. One finds the same lazy reflex, the search for ease or convenience, with the Hebrews in the desert when they complain, “If only we had died by the Lord’s hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you (Moses and Aaron) have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death.” (Exodus 16:3 NIV)”
excerpt from 14aou16 176C111 Réponse
Translated by djd
“ …I do not believe that those who listen to us are as many as that who perceive our discourse as ‘abstract and impracticable’, but rather that they feel—because millenniums of power and laws above them have rendered them passive, therefore instinctively lazy—that following politics and the law is a lot less tiring than the penitence of which we speak. In other words, people see comfort in politics and the law!…”
excerpt from 14aou16 176C111 Réponse
Translated by djd