Classical vs. Chartres

There is an ongoing controversy as to which type of labyrinth is most effective (read: is best). While I wouldn't deign to say which one I like more, I recently discovered a rather seminal difference between the two which might make one more effective than the other - depending upon your spiritual point of view. Lets take a look at how one walks the Classical versus the Chartres:

Chartres Labyrinth - In to Out	Classical Seven Circuit Labyrinth Out to In
Notice how the Chartres works by filling (mostly) the inner left-hand half first, then the inner right-hand half, the outer left-hand path, and finally, the outer right-hand half, before plunging to the goal.	Notice how the Classical works from out to in. The three outer paths are filled first, followed by movement into the center for the final four.

I wonder if which labyrinth you are drawn to depends on how you see your relationship with your Maker?

But first, the Firmament…

The Catholic Encyclopedia tells us that the notion that the sky was a vast solid dome seems to have been common among the ancient peoples whose ideas of cosmology have come down to us. Thus the Egyptians conceived the heavens to be an arched iron ceiling from which the stars were suspended by means of cables (Chabas, L' Antiquite historique, Paris, 1873, pp. 64-67).The Hebrews entertained similar ideas in numerous biblical passages. In the first account of the creation (Gen., i) we read that God created a firmament to divide the upper or celestial from the lower or terrestrial waters. The notion of the solidity of the firmament is expressed in such passages as Job, xxxvii, 18, where reference is made incidentally to the heavens, "which are most strong, as if they were of molten brass." The same is implied in the purpose attributed to God in creating the firmament, viz. to serve as a wall of separation between the upper and lower of water.