Elizabeth Clare Prophet Publishes Memoirs

On the heels of the release of Prophet’s Daughter, two of Elizabeth Clare Prophet’s children have published the memoirs of their Alzheimer’s-stricken mother. Erin Prophet announced the publication today in a press release. The official title of the book is Preparation for My Mission: Childhood Recollections. It was co-edited by Erin and Tatiana Prophet. Here’s the press release. The book is available in hardcopy or download on I’m hoping to read this and get a review up soon.

Bozeman, MT (PRWEB) December 24, 2008 — Diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease ten years ago, Elizabeth Clare Prophet was in the process of completing a childhood memoir. That memoir was published today, according to her legal guardian and conservator, Erin Prophet. Now age 69, Mrs. Prophet is in the late stages of the illness.

The book, “Preparation for My Mission: Childhood Recollections,” was edited by Erin Prophet, 42, and her sister Tatiana, 36, who are the eldest and youngest of Mrs. Prophet’s three daughters. Both hold degrees in journalism, and worked with their mother for years on the more than 50 books that she published during her life.

The book was initially slated to be part of a larger memoir, but that was never finished. Mrs. Prophet initially began working on it with Tatiana Prophet while on vacation in 1991. “I was 19 during that trip, and I’m so grateful for that time I had with her,” said Tatiana. “I didn’t realize then how important the work would be later on. Although she didn’t complete it, this story of her childhood is a gift to anyone interested in spirituality and psychology.”

“Our mother wrote this book at a stage in her life where she was reassessing. She was doing inner child work and trying to make peace with her parents. She also was committed to honesty and not sweeping anything under the rug,” said Erin Prophet. “In our editing work, my sister and I stayed true to her original intentions. We did not add anything that she hadn’t put in, unless it was something she had told us verbally that we thought would add to the picture. We checked out her facts, and arranged the material into chapters.”

In the book, Mrs. Prophet candidly describes the onset of her childhood epilepsy, her father’s alcoholism, and her spiritual quest, which led her through Christian Science to the teachings of New Age groups such as the Theosophical Society and the “I AM” Religious Activity.

Comments (18 comments)

AmenASHand F / January 8th, 2009, 7:55 am / #1

I received it as a gift via email. Look forward to reading it! Erin and Tatiana working on this was a great showing of their love for her, their mom. Thks for doing it ! She deserves it and the world needs to know it.

Andreas Mannal / July 10th, 2009, 3:38 am / #2

I recently found this web journal, and reconnected with four very important years of my life (1986 -1990), that were part of 16 years of interfacing with "The Great White Brotherhood", "The Masters of Wisdom", or the "Ascended Masters". I never claimed to interact personally with one of those "fellows" (forgive me General El Morya and Kuthumi, Phd), and I sure hope they leave me alone till my life finally transpires.

On the other hand, I felt always connected to them, and I had a fair amount of "experiences". "visions", hyper- realistic "dreams", and personal interactions in time and space with TWO people who claimed to do their WORK. One of them was Elizabeth Claire Prophet. The experience of three personal encounters and exchanges was more than remarkable in this context. She was always around me mentally, as a living "idea", but the personal encounters, that were all three about my engagement with the WORK of the Great White Brotherhood were each very remarkable and archetypal on a universal, and even atheistic horizon of experience and cognition.

Let me say this: Part of the "idea", "person", "presence", "mission", "vision", or "work" called "Elizabeth Clare Prophet" has unmistakably become part of myself. It is a distinct flavor, taste, energy, power, personality, and I Iove her for this. I realize it now, while I am catching up with all these developments since I left in 1990, after the so called "debacle". I never saw it this way, myself, but I Ieft for technical (my status as a foreigner) and then for personal reasons (having to catch up with illusion the world of existence after 14 years of immersion into the light).

"Mother", I thank you, not for your "demise" in time and space, but for your and my presence, that we shared. "Live is measured not in time, bur in events…."

Andre Betuel / October 19th, 2009, 12:03 pm / #3

I think Eliizabeth Prophet at least gave us another view of life and confronted many people to think about why we exist on Earth. Indeed, why we even exist at all! I think she was a unique individual and at least tried to answer some of life's questions in her own style. Good on her for being different and having the courage of her convictions. I have gained some useful insights into life on Earth through her writings, even though I am a buddhist and practise yoga. At least she tried to make a difference!

AmenASHandFree / October 19th, 2009, 5:12 pm / #4

I am writing here today to everyone & the Prophet Family,
I send my condolences & love to everyone who feels the loss of Elizabeth Clare Prophet in every way we have lost her & remember her, in her beauty & good intensions. She was as human as a human can be, not perfect. She has passed on & her loss is felt by us all especially over the years in what we have learned & had to face about her that we all were refusing to face. She will be forgiven & loved at the end bcauase for any of you who has not sinned cast the first stone.
Peace & Love to The Prophet Family

AmenASHandFree / October 22nd, 2009, 11:07 am / #5

1.To the last 4 comments I recieved in my email though I do not see them here yet. ECP was no different than u or u wouldn't have followed her & each human being IS AS NATURE MADE THEM. Free will is a lie & an illusion. U, ur brain-ur whole body, is a natural computer that functions as it was designed to & as nature demands it to. So ECP's failures were not as she wanted them to be from childhood but as nature in her developed to adulthood chose for her to be. We r not as we r from childhood. Children reflect from birth such a sweetness that disapates as early as 2 yrs old. Science is yet to reveal this about human development. Adults humans r the problem of the world not the human race. Their ego's r developed in such a way that admitting wrong is so painful thay can't do it so it never happens. ECP's ego was enormouse so is every politians…no thk u to Governemnt, Religion, Adult control over children, a God or Godess, but most of all Lies.

AmenASHandFree / October 22nd, 2009, 11:29 am / #6

2.Following like herds of sheep is what adults do to children to do from birth. Yet that is nature aswell doing it's nasty to create the reality we find ourselves in. U r as nature made u. IT in us descides when it will be so whatever that may be. Our body, brain, body chemistry makes those descisions for the I in us. Finaly one day, for some of us, like a blanket over our heads lifted we see clearly again. That's nature controling not a demon or is that what our ancestors were trying to say? R demons the negative body & mental chemistry they were refering to that ruin our lives. Evil – Eve ill – Eve's ill – Feminen – Darkness – Negative Polarity. Negative polarity is ill, caotic, out of control, disorginesed, imbalanced, mean, not nice…Life's a Riddle – unfold it. ECP tried to, so has countless #'s on this massive spherical round rock known to English speaking individuals as Earth. Pointing fingures is old & out of date & it can't be childish when adults do it to. ECP was an adult with the same ego's u all have. What u acuse her u did WITH HER…….get for real !!!!!!!!!!!!!! We all did it to ourselves……………! Move on !

AmenASHandFree / October 22nd, 2009, 4:58 am / #7

P.S. Everyone should be angry at ur parents for teaching u to believe that God is good…it's their fault too, society, country, Nation, The Constitution – it mentions a creater, our educational system, our grandparents, aunts, uncles, the whole freaking family, books, T.V., college, Forget anyone? Can't blame the animal kingdom for making me following ECP….. ha ! that's for sure ! The natural world apart from the adult world never decieved me with religion, lies, government, guns, drugs – legal & illigal, misinformation, money etc etc etc….walking up right comes with a supiority complex. That complex leaves when Nature descides it will. Nature is in control & IT makes sure u remember that everyday. Nature is Diety – Diety is Nature – God/Godess – Masculine/Feminin – Light/Dark – Space/Stars – Earth/Sun – Man/Wo(b)man……who r u really pissed off at?

AmenASHandFree / January 3rd, 2010, 8:54 am / #8

Sean Hello, I just finished watching your Mom's memorial done in Nov. I didn't know she did a Autobiography. How was she able to accomplish this?

Keeper of the Flame / June 29th, 2010, 11:59 pm / #9

Hello Sean

I too, am a former Summit University member and Keeper of the Flame who was baptised by your mother. The books that she penned always resonated with me as having a foundation in truth. A large part of my spiritual beliefs were built on these premises so it is devastating to hear you say tin your five part You Tube videos that she "made them up". For my own peace of mind and clarification and healing can you please elaborate on this?

It seems inconceivable to me that anyone could have enough imagination or source materials to make these up based on the sheer volume of material and the complexity of the subject matter. It would be a great gift to understand first hand how these truly originated.

I look forward to your reply.

AmenASHandF / July 2nd, 2010, 10:52 pm / #10

Awe everything in Life is made up & life gave us the power to make up & so on & so forth. All made up- all true- all not true etc. Then there r those who will be in self rightous self proclaimed power & the people humans follow etc Science Governments Religions etc it's all structure, all very silly, it's all fear- power- dominance to guarentee security but thats at the end false all very rediculous. This planet (called something else in an other language) should come with a WARNING: Do Not Come We are Very Srtange & Stupid. We Are addicted to Arguing & Fighting Which Leads to Killing, Cheating, Stealing & Wars.

Life is a big made up reality of who can make up what next & it come off as EVOLUTION, SPIRITUALITY,COSMIC,SCIENCE agh hog wash dirty dirt dirt I just want to leave, die, pass on in PEACE DAMN IT..
Elizabeth's stuff is OLD MAN get for real u have the answer to ur question u just can't let go becasue like any attachment it's hard to let goooo…..GODS NOT THE ANSWER U R…..

mtron / October 31st, 2010, 1:43 pm / #11

Gee, when I first went to the Ranch looking into CUT I was approached by a Church President and asked if I owned any property or owned a business when I answered "no" this person did not speak to me again and would not even acknowledge my existence in passing.

Later I found out that potential new members were screened and those with wealth/money would be paraded to E.C.P. and be given a special reading, and told how special they were and that the "Masters" needed their help (funny enlightened beings do not need anything, their lack of need and attachment is what took them to enlightenment)

Then we have the Mull incident, When one takes some ones business stationary and removes the owners name and plants their name in it, claim to be whom you are not, then go out and purchase over $20,000.00 in office furniture is an act of a criminal. It is also very convenient during the course of the trial to tell your followers not to go "stay at the Ranch and decree" What a great way to hide what really transpired in the court room. Those that did attend and heard the truth left the "Church" and never looked back. I had Mull's daughter as an Attorney and heard about her "going to get the mail" and finding her cats throat cut stuffed in her mail box with a not from the "Masters"

mtron60 / October 31st, 2010, 1:50 pm / #12

Part 2

This, in essence, is the fabulous tale of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table as most people now know it. In one form or another it has been told the world over, translations being found in almost every language.

During the Gothic Revival of the nineteenth century, the haunting lines of Tennyson and the romantic paintings of the Pre-Raphaelites celebrated the Arthurian saga. Today we have the enchanting novels of Rosemary Sutcliffe, the plays of John Arden and the poems of John Heath-Stubbs. On stage we have seen the lavish musical Camelot, later filmed; on screen there has also been John Boorman's colourful epic Excalibur, the marvellous animation of Walt Disney and even the zany humour of the Monty Python team. The world over, King Arthur is a bestseller.

But Arthur is more than simply an inspiration for book, stage and cinema. Travelling the length and breadth of the British Isles, we discover a wealth of Arthurian legend; in every part of the land the great king lives on in folklore. Tales tell how he was born here or died there; that he fought a dragon in this valley, or killed a giant on that mountain. There are Arthur's Hills, Arthur's Stones and Arthur's Caves. King Arthur features in more legends attached to ancient sites in England and Wales than any other character.

King Arthur has even come to personify the resolve of the nation; like Britannia or John Bull, he is the warrior spirit of Britain, ready to be awakened in time of need. The story contains every archetypal image: the innocent succeeding where the strong have failed, knights in shining armour and damsels in distress. But most compelling is the sense that something magical still awaits discovery; perhaps the Grail, the celestial answer to all our dreams.

King Arthur has always been many things to many people, but in recent years Arthurian myth-making has gone mad. Some of the more extreme notions are mind-boggling, from Arthur being an extraterrestrial to his being the king of Atlantis. One recent theory, which actually gained a degree of acceptance, claimed that he was the first European to discover America. Obsessives have spent fortunes trying to track him down; indeed whole societies have been formed for this express purpose. Some even claim to have discovered his remains, while others have resorted to staging elaborate hoaxes as 'proof'. Since the 1960s, hippies have embarked on what the media dubbed 'The Grail Trail', descending in droves on the Somerset town of Glastonbury, much to the annoyance of the locals. And in the 1980s, King Arthur was again sensationalised in the wake of the 'Dungeons and Dragons' craze.

There are guide books, lecture tours, coach trips, magazines and video tapes available for the enthusiast, even travel companies offering Arthurian Holidays. King Arthur is arguably the most popular character in British history and it is hardly surprising that the vast majority of the British population, and its many thousands of foreign tourists, are familiar with the stories about him. They may not believe all the fables, they may not accept all the legends, but many assume the tales to be based on truth. But is this a valid assumption? Are the stories founded on real historical events?

The story of King Arthur we know today was the work of Sir Thomas Malory, printed in 1485 under the title Le Morte Darthur ('The Death of Arthur'). Malory did not invent the story, he simply collected together a wide variety of existing tales which were popular at the time and retold them. As one of the first books to be printed, Malory's established itself as the standard version. Yet from the Middle Ages, the era of jousting, chivalry and knights in armour in which the tales seem to be set, there are no records of such a king actually ruling, either in England or elsewhere in Christendom. Even if we go back to the Norman Conquest of 1066 we find no King Arthur. If we go back still further to the ninth century, when Athelstan became the first Saxon king of all England, again no such monarch exists. So who was Arthur? How did such an elusive and obscure character become so famous?

In addressing this question we must trace the development of the narrative itself, examining how the story evolved in the romantic literature of the Middle Ages. The earliest detailed account of Arthur's life was written around 1135 by the Welsh cleric Geoffrey of Monmouth, who later became Bishop of St Asaph. Geoffrey's work, the Historia Regum Britanniae ('History of the Kings of Britain') became the foundation upon which all the later stories of King Arthur were constructed. As its title suggests, his book was not intended to be read as fiction. On the contrary, it was presented as an accurate historical record of the British monarchy. But at a time when accurate historical records were almost non-existent, and history was not seen, as it is today, as a discipline dependent solely on the interpretation of proven facts, writers often felt free to embellish history as they saw fit. It is thus difficult to distinguish between fact and invention in the works of Geoffrey of Monmouth.

mtron60 / October 31st, 2010, 1:52 pm / #13

Part 3

Written in Latin, Geoffrey's Historia traces the development of the isle of Britain, culminating with the golden age of King Arthur. According to Geoffrey, Arthur is born at Tintagel Castle in Cornwall, the son of the British king Uther Pendragon. Having become king while still in his teens, Arthur quickly asserts authority by defeating his barbarian enemies at the battle of Bath. Wielding a magical sword, Caliburn, said to have been forged on the mystical isle of Avalon, Arthur subsequently defeats the Scots in the North and unifies the nation. Having gone on to conquer Ireland and Iceland, Arthur reigns peacefully for twelve years, his queen Ganhumara at his side. He establishes an order of knights, accepting notorious warriors of all nations, before conceiving the ambitious notion of conquering Europe. When Norway, Denmark and Gaul (an area which once covered Northern Italy, France and Belgium, together with parts of Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland) have fallen easily to his armies, Arthur returns home to a period of peace, holding court at the city of Caerleon in South-East Wales.

Eventually, Arthur is again drawn into war, setting off to fight in Burgundy. But all does not go well. He is soon forced to return to Britain to quell a revolt led by his nephew Modred, unwisely left to rule as regent in his absence. Although he succeeds in crushing the rebellion at the battle of Camlann, somewhere in Cornwall, Arthur is mortally wounded and taken to the isle of Avalon for his wounds to be tended. Geoffrey fails to tell us what then became of King Arthur.

Second only to Arthur in importance in Geoffrey's Historia is the magician Merlin, about whom he also wrote two poetic works. In the Prophetiae Merlini ('Prophecies of Merlin') and the Vita Merlini ('Life of Merlin') Geoffrey portrays Merlin as the guiding influence behind the throne.

Geoffrey's work quickly captured the popular imagination, and before long the adventures of King Arthur inspired writers from all over Europe. The first was the Jersey poet Wace, who in 1155 composed Roman de Brut (the 'Romance of Brutus'). Written in French, this poetic rendering of Geoffrey's account was the first of the Arthurian Romances and contains an important addition to th Arthurian story, namely the Round Table. Said to seat fifty of Arthur's knights, its purpose according Wace was to promote a sense of equality amongst Arthur's noblemen.

Although Geoffrey of Monmouth popularised the Arthurian saga, and Wace then elaborated it in his peotry, it was the French writer Chretien de Troyes who was chiefly responsible for establishing it as a fashionable subject of romantic literature. In his five Arthurian stories, written between 1160 and 1180, Chretien imaginatively develops the events by introducing medieval notions of chivalry and courtly romance. Not only did Chretien create many of the knights (including Sir Lancelot), he also used the more lyrical sounding Guinevere as the name for Arthur's queen, and introduced the Camelot as the name for King Arthur's court.

In the coming decades King Arthur was all the rage, and in the late 1190s Robert de Boron, a Burgundian poet, composed a trilogy of Arthurian verses. Robert was responsible for interpolating perhaps the most popular theme into the story, the Holy Grail. The chalice used by Christ at the Last Supper, the Grail was said to possess miraculous healing properties, and is sought by Arthur's knights, who gain both worldly experience and spiritual insight during their epic quest.

mtron60 / October 31st, 2010, 2:23 pm / #14

Part 5

If we are to identify the real Arthurian period we must start by returning to Geoffrey of Monmouth's account from the twelfth century. Unlike the later Romances, Geoffrey's version of events was not intended to be read as fiction. His work, during the early twelfth century, was presented as an accurate historical document, stating in its preface that it is translated from 'a certain very ancient book written in the British language', given to him by Archdeacon Walter of Oxford. Is Geoffrey reliable? Since no trace of this 'very ancient book' exists today, we are left with the content of Geoffrey's work to make its own case.

Although Geoffrey tells us that Arthur fought at the battle of Camlann in 542 AD, he also presents a number of historical inconsistencies. We are told that Arthur fought a Gallic campaign during the reign of Leo I, who we know from other sources was emperor at Constantinople from 457 to 474. (In 364 the Roman Empire had split into two: the Western Empire, governed from Rome, and the Eastern Empire, ruled from Constantinople.) This suggests that Arthur was around a hundred years old at the time of the battle of Camlann. Such an inconsistency may have arisen as a result of confusion between two alternative systems of dating used at the time. The Vitorious calendar, prepared fro Pope Milarius by Vitorius of Aquitaine around 465, began the first year at Christ's crucifixion, whereas the Anno Domini calendar, which Geoffrey used and which was devised by the Italian monk Dionysius Exiguus around 525,began its first year with Christ's birth. The latter system did not become popular until the late sixth century. If Geoffrey confused these two calendars, then Arthur may have died around 510, not 542, which would be only thirty-six years after the Gallic war.

mtron60 / October 31st, 2010, 2:23 pm / #15

Part 6

Greater inconsistencies arise when we examine Arthur's contemporaries. Although history provides no record of Arthur's father, Uther Pendragon, Arthur's two uncles do seem to have been based on historical characters; the problem is that they lived in different countries and at different times. Geoffrey tells us that Uther was the brother of Aurelius Ambrosius. This was most likely to have been Ambrosius Aurelianus, a genuine historical warlord who fought the Anglo-Saxons during the late fifth century, so Geoffrey's placing of Arthur during this period would seem consistent. However, this does not tally with what Geoffrey tells us of Uther's second brother, Constans. Geoffrey of Monmouth tells us that Constans was a monk and was the son of Constantine. Constans was persuaded to leave his monastery and become king when Constantine died. Constans can be identified as the son of Emperor Constantine III, who was also a monk, and who was also persuaded to leave his monastery to become joint emperor with his father. Unfortunately, this historical Constans lived over half a century before Ambrosius.

Even during Geoffrey's lifetime there was considerable speculation as to when King Arthur supposedly lived. Wace, for example, locates Arthur's death in the mid-seventh century, a hundred years later than Geoffrey. To find clues about the real Arthur, we are therefore left to search an historical epoch spanning a quarter of a millennium, possibly starting as early as 400 AD, and perhaps ending as late as 650 AD. By Malory's time Arthur was portrayed as a feudal king, if he had lived in the fifth or sixth centuries he would have been a British warrior, more closely resembling a Viking chieftain than a sovereign monarch in a golden crown.

In battle, the British warrior would have been very different from the knights in shining armour that we now associate with the Knights of the Round Table. He would not have worn a steel helmet with a plume and visor, but a skull-cap made from iron plates, bronze strapping and panels to protect the nose and sides of the face. Body armour would have been little more than a short-sleeved mail shirt, while shields were made of thick wood covered with leather and reinforced with a metal rim. Swords would not have been long, heavy broad-swords, but the Roman spatha type, about two and a half feet long with a stunted cross guard. Living conditions would have been far removed from the splendour of the huge Gothic castles of the High Middle Ages. Even a chieftain would have lived in little more than a single roomed hall with wattle and daub walls and a thatched roof. And defences would not have been stone walls, battlements and draw-bridged moats, but timber stockades, earthen banks and water-filled ditches.

If Arthur really did live in the fifth or sixth century, the logical thing to do is to consult any reliable records from that period. But immediately, we hit a problem. The principal contemporary historical sources covering England and Wales at this time are the work of the sixth-century monk Gildas, the writings of a few visiting foreigners and early monastic records. These are not primarily concerned with military affairs, but even so, with all the fame that Arthur was later to achieve, it is surprising that none of these sources, which would have been contemporary with his exploits, makes any reference to him. Was the story of Arthur, after all, nothing but a myth originating in the fertile imagination of Geoffrey of Monmouth despite his claim that his source was a 'very ancient book'?

mtron60 / October 31st, 2010, 4:01 pm / #16


During my very short CUT experience (10/99 to 06/01). I met your mother and talked to her several times in that period on and off Ranch property. (more interactions with her than many 20 year members)

You have my condolences for your loss.

sistermaryignatius / December 28th, 2010, 12:51 pm / #17


Your mother was, ironically, an authentical "channeler" or "medium" for the spirit-plane dictations — which WERE genuine. It's just that she personally was inept, incompetent and ruthless as a "business executive" and was nothing more than a Machiavellian grifter, and tyrant, concerned more for stripping anyone's assets from them under guise, pretext of "serving the Ascended Masters" which SHE and her "minions" devised to insure she was extravagantly wealthy. I've had authentic spiritual experiences with or without her "guidance" and I know she's getting her just desserts now. High time, too.

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this post.