Discussion:
Gary Stewart's financial shenanigans
(too old to reply)
Melanaigis
2008-03-15 15:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In Washington it's common to use the truth to tell a lie. This is how
opinions and impressions are manipulated. Heroes become villains,
persecutors become victims. What is hidden is more important than what is
revealed. Learning to see through the deception is a part of everyday life.
It is even important in the occult world. Alchemists used to put copper
sulphate into water then dip steel into the solution. When they removed the
steel it looked like it had turned to copper. But it was a trick; the copper
in the solution plates out on the surface of the steel, and can be rubbed
off.

Over the years Gary Stewart has been working to build an impression that he
is the innocent victim of malefactors at Rosicrucian Park. Is he an adept or
a fraudulent alchemist? Gary Stewart has alleged a variety of reasons for
his removal from the position of Imperator of AMORC. Once it was a
conspiracy between the Bernards. Recently he's stated AMORC perverts banded
together against him because he wouldn't tolerate their behavior. He implied
it was a personal vendetta because he fired Supreme Grand Lodge members
girlfriend. He's claimed his "reforms would cause them to do a lot of work."
So they didn't like him.

But he will not accept any blame for the financial fiasco that took place on
his watch. Instead he's said "it was decided I should get more involved in
banking matters" and "I didn't handle the financial aspect of AMORC". This
is a blame shifting technique to go along with the pretense that the board
used $250,000 to set him up, in order to throw him out.

We should begin with some of the people Gary Stewart brought in.

First was his new Spanish Grand Lodge Grand Master, Antonio De Nicolas, who
was listed as publisher under the masthead of the official magazine of Sun
Myung Moon's Unification Church. He was only a neophyte in the AMORC
studies. He was not even qualified to take the first degree initiation. Gary
Stewart had to know this would create resistance to his appointment. So he
was a very curious choice, even more curious when you discover the Spanish
Grand Lodge had a membership of over 30,000, (many with over twenty years of
study behind them). Why select a neophyte with less than one year in the
AMORC studies as Grand Master? What was the agenda that required a neophyte
as Grand Master?

Gary Stewart likes to compare his appointment to HSL's appointment of
Raymond Andrea, but Lewis did not have a pool of thirty thousand candidates
to pick from. Nevertheless English Grand Master Raymond Andrea served for
over thirty five years.

By comparison Gary Stewart had three different English Grand Masters within
two years. If Gary Stewart didn't fire them why did they quit? Gary Stewart's
final choice for English Grand Master played a hand in getting him thrown
out of office. Does this show the kind of judgement HSL had?

I have trouble reconciling ideas expressed by Gary Stewart about the people
in Rosicrucian Park.

Gary Stewart wrote contemptuously: "What was Rosicrucian Park if not a sign
of prestige and power?"

He also wrote: "Antonio taking on the task of Grand Master was no perk or
prestige for him" as if he were doing AMORC a favor by accepting the job of
Grand Master. How come there was no prestige associated with the job of
Grand Master? Why the contempt for AMORC?

Gary Stewart also brought in some financial consultants. Nelson Harrison was
one of them.

Nelson Harrison's qualifications to be a financial consultant:

Gary Stewart wrote:

Dr. Nelson Harrison (a 25+ year member of AMORC as well) to serve as our
financial consultant and to set up the trust on our behalf. He had plenty of
references and proven experience

Gary Stewart wrote:

"As I said, you would have to ask him as he could tell you better than I,
but I do know he was quite good at what he did. And there are a number of
Rosicrucians in Pennsylvania who swear by Nelson's financial and business
advice."


Gary Stewart wrote:

"He was a part-time jazz musician at the time as you said (and still
works in that profession), but your assertion that he was an unemployed
Psychologist is misleading and an attempt to color the facts in favor of the
intent of your "analysis". He resigned from that profession some years prior
to my association with him in 1989 to take up financial and general business
consulting -- a profession which he maintained for a number of years prior
to AMORC retaining his services. Yes, he was qualified and those
qualifications were made known to the board."

What references did he have?

What experience did he have?

What licenses did he have?

In what states was he licenced?

What degrees in finance did he have? From where?

What background and education in finance did he have?

What certifications did he have?

What professional designations did he have?

What professional associations did he belong to?

Who were his clients other than AMORC?

Did he set up similar programs for any of them?

These are pertinent questions to ask before hiring a financial consultant.

This brings us to the events that caused Gary Stewart's ouster.
The reason why the upheaval happened is because your financial shenanigans
put all of the officers of the Supreme Grand Lodge at financial risk.
Fianancial shenanigans as in having a corporate resolution to borrow
and transfering money from one AMORC account to another? No matter how
you spin it, the fact remains that no funds at any time ever left
AMORC accounts except those that were used to pay fees approved by
corporate resolution and all financial dealings had total corporate
approval by the directors.
This should not be taken at face value and should be examined in light of
previous postings by Gary Stewart.

This is Gary Stewart's explanation of what happened. It is basically true,
but not straightforward and it includes the deception played on the AMORC
board of directors and the membership. See if you can find it.

Gary Stewart wrote:

at the Grand Master's meeting that was held in
Morocco. In that meeting it was decided I should get more involved in
banking matters regarding the corporation in San Jose. Whether I was
being set up, I don't think so, but it eventually turned out that way
in my opinion. Anyway, I put together a financial advisory team and
began looking into the feasibility of greater member benefits --
including group health insurance for US members, Rosicrucian University
accreditation, international cultural interchanges, and a few other things.
One of the specific member programs was moving the SpanishGrand Lodge from
the US and establishing it in Spain. To do this, we decided to seed its
formation in a Supreme Grand Lodge account established in Andorra. Instead
of using funds from our other accounts,we decided to establish a line of
credit in a San Jose, California bank. We did this to the tune of 8.5
million dollars but decided to only transfer 3.0million to the Andorran
account and 500 thousand to a Pittsburgh account which was intended to pay
fees involving some other projects we were developing. The transfer of the
funds were to go into our accounts, but would only be used as needed and
signed off by the board. I initiated the transfer and then went off to
Edinburgh for the annual Grand Master's meeting. As I left for the airport,
two directors went to the bank and claimed they had no knowledge of the loan
or the transfer of funds. The bank officials looked at them and effectively
told then they were crazy as all directors had signed the corporate
resolution to borrow, one director had co-signed the authorization to
transfer, and both directors that claimed they knew nothing had sat in about
two weeks of meetings with myself, the financial advisory team, and the bank
officials involved in our loan. So, the bank said they wouldn't stop the
transfer of the loan unless I also agreed. By the time I got to Scotland,
the funds were in the Andorran bank. I refused to return the transfer until
I knew what was going on -- which, by this time, all the Grand Masters knew
more than I did. They even had the account numbers which I didn't have.
Anyway, to cut to the chase, we all returned to San Jose, we put the grand
masters on the board (which was necessary for other reasons); they voted
that the funds should be returned and demanded that I do it; I agreed as I
was outvoted but the bank was closed for Easter and I wouldn't have been
able to do anything until the following Monday; they decided I was stalling
and filed suit on Good Friday (which also happened to be Friday the 13th
which I thought was quite ironic). The other unfortunate incident was that
AMORC also sued the Andorran bank which meant that they had to go through
their legal matters before the funds could be released. That took about 30
days. But all funds were returned (minus the interest the funds collected
sitting for 30 days in the bank). Also, the 500 thousand sent to pittsburgh
was a board approved payment to the team we had put together to develop
member services mentioned above. Those funds were not returned even though
AMORC tried to get them back. One last item regarding funds and something I
didn't even know about until I was sued, was that about 6 weeks prior to the
lawsuit, myself,two other directors, and two members of the financial team
were at Dean Whitter's where AMORC had an account. We were reorganizing the
account and during that meeting, one of the financial team members asked
that I authorize a $250,000 payment to them. I refused saying that I needed
a written proposal, etc. and board approval before any funds would be
released. Apparently, that same day when we returned to our HQ, Burnam
Schaa, one of the directors and the patsy that filed the complaint
against me, released that payment.

There were enough irregularities for IRS to get involved.

Gary Stewart wrote:

Jean-Noel recently uncovered an IRS letter involving what seems to be a
requested audit of the Order during my tenure as Imperator. Apparently the
letter states that there were irregularities with the way I handled finances
but since AMORC took steps to remove me, AMORC's non-profit status was not
in jeopardy. Anyway, I didn't know anything about this until a couple of
weeks ago and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me since I didn't handle the
financial aspect of AMORC, but the document is there to look at if you can
get Jean-Noel to furnish the link.

If Gary Stewart did not handle the financial aspect of AMORC what was he
doing hiring financial consultants, borrowing money and transferring money
into trust funds? Or is this simply another blame shifting excuse?

Why did the board have to sue the bank in Andorra to get the money back? Why
didn't Gary Stewart return the money immediately? It was AMORC money, not
Gary Stewart's. Was it in a trust fund which only Gary Stewart and his
consultants had access to? Is that why the bank would not return it to
AMORC? Did the neophyte Spanish Grand Master have access to the money in
that account? Was the money going to disappear like the money sent to
Pennsylvania?



Gary Stewart wrote:

Regarding "giving" Pandorra $750,000. At the time, I didn't know about
the 250,000 already being set up in the trust. But yes, the board approved
the transfer of $500,000 to the trust and I signed the
transfer docs. As to how that trust was managed, I suggest you contact
AMORC and have them give you the contract if they haven't destroyed it.


Why doesn't Stewart know how the trust was managed? It was set up by Stewart
and financial consultants Stewart brought in. Stewart claims there were
meetings about the business plan for two weeks before the money was
transferred. Wasn't that enough time to write an accurate business plan to
present to the board? Why did Stewart send three million seven hundred and
fifty thousand dollars into trust funds if he did not know how the trusts
were managed? Even if we deduct the $250,000 Burnam sent as not Stewart's
responsibility, he still sent $3,500,000.00 to trust funds which he claims
to know nothing about the management of.
All plans, when set into motion, start with a vague idea. But ideas had
to become reasonably concrete before funding would continue.
And:

Gary Stewart wrote:

(remember, it's a trust account of which monies are paid out of when
services are performed) prior to a proposal and contract.

So the contract was vague; why did Stewart give the financial consultants
$500,000 for vague contracts?

Monies were NOT supposed to be paid out until services were performed. How
did the financial consultants get the money since Stewart wrote, "I think I
gave you a rundown of the plan. It wasn't spent on anything as the lawsuit
interfered with all plans." So he recognizes nothing was done to earn the
money.

The money was not supposed to leave the trust until services were performed;
and no services were performed.

The board thought they were transferring money from one AMORC account to
another; as stated by Stewart above, " No matter how you spin it, the fact
remains that no funds at any time ever left AMORC accounts except those that
were used to pay fees approved by corporate resolution and all financial
dealings had total corporate approval by the directors."

Events make it clear, the money was deposited into accounts controlled by
Gary Stewart and/or his financial team, not by AMORC.

Gary Stewart wrote:

I would disagree that it would be unwise for non-profits to go into
debt as you say, but that wasn't the case with AMORC. We established a line
of credit with Silicon Valley bank to the tune of 5 million dollars of which
we borrowed 3.5. Nothing was mortgaged and we had investments exceeding the
amount borrowed so if something happened and we defaulted on the loan, we
did have the capital to pay it back.
The loan was backed by securities. Non Profit corporations are not allowed
to accumulate unlimited reserves of money that is not allocated; were they
using the employee pension fund as collateral for the loan? How was Stewart
going to make an additional $3,500,000 plus interest off of the membership
simply by moving to Andorra? Were there other money making plans involved?

Gary Stewart wrote:

What we were in the process of doing was moving the Spanish Grand Lodge to
Spain and setting up a trust in Andorra to fund the Spanish Grand Lodge.

The Spanish Grand Lodge was already established and funded; they had a very
successful operation. Why change Spanish Grand Masters and borrow three and
a half million dollars to set it up again in another place?




Gary Stewart wrote:

There was borrowed money so that investments wouldn't be dipped into, but in
the overall plan, we would have made a profit after interest was paid.
Having a 30,000 + membership in Spain over the course of a few years would
have been worth it; but a more immediate advantage would have been the
profit made in central and south america because of the business and tax
breaks that would have been afforded us because of the treaties between
Spain and south american countries. There would have been no taxation on
intellectual material (monographs, books) sent to central and south america
from Spain. There was a tremendous burden on taxation sending that material
from the US.


Stewart was predicting a profit of over $130.00 each on a membership of
30,000 over and above what AMORC was already charging in dues. How was that
possible? It is more than the annual dues paid by the membership. How could
saving tax dollars, which are a small percentage of gross, have returned
more money to AMORC than they were already making in dues?

Gary Stewart wrote:
I think they spent it because they agreed with the plan we put together even
though Burnam jumped the gun by authorizing the amount to be sent to the
Pandora Trust.

Did they agree to a "vague" plan? Or did they agree to put money in the
trust, which they thought was owned and controlled by AMORC, waiting
disbursement if and when a feasible concrete plan was developed?

Didn't the vague plan call for $750,000 to be placed in a trust fund for
AMORC? Was the $500,000 for the "vague plan" and the $250,000 was for the
same plan when it became concrete? When you refused to give the extra
$250,000 did you inform the board that you "unauthorized" the transfer? Did
Stewart's financial consultants ask Burnam for the money after Stewart
refused to place the $250,000 in the trust? Or is Burnam clairaudient and
heard the request from Henry Chiesa (Pandora) telepathically? Did Burnam
know Stewart had refused to place the $250,000 in the trust account? Did he
know once the money was in the trust fund it was gone? Did Stewart and his
financial advisors keep that part of the business plan a secret from the
board of directors? Or was the board conned into believing the money was
safely parked in an AMORC trust account to be paid out after the board
agreed to it. As Stewart pointed out "(remember, it's a trust account of
which monies are paid out of when services are performed) prior to a
proposal and contract." Weren't the consultants hired "to set up the trust
on our behalf." meaning AMORC's behalf? or was it set up for the benefit of
Stewart and the consultants?

Gary Stewart wrote:
"It wasn't spent on anything as the lawsuit interfered with all plans"

So the financial consultants received all of the money and did not spend it
on anything for AMORC?

Why did Stewart pay them then? How did they get the money before they were
entitled to it?

Why did they get the money before they were entitled to it?

Is it probable that when Stewart refused to release the $250,000, Henry
Chiesa (Pandora) went behind Stewart's back to get Burnam to deposit the
money in the trust? Or perhaps Burnam Schaa was feeling generous and said,
"I think I'll give $250,000 to Gary Stewart's financial advisors today"
without any prompting?

If Burnam's understanding was the money was to be paid out of the trust only
when approved by the board he was only going along with already agreed on
plans.

Gary Stewart wrote:
"The transfer of the funds were to go into our accounts, but would only be
used as needed and signed off by the board."

In other words it was one thing to put the money in the trust fund; it was
another to disburse the funds when they were earned.

Gary Stewart wrote:

As to the $500,000. Yes, it was upon my signature that the funds were
sent. The authorization to send it was with the full agreement of all
board members at the time.

They agreed to send the money; did they agree to release it to Gary Stewart's
financial consultants?

Did the board know that the transfer of $500,000 would result in the loss of
all of that money? Did they think they had received $500,000 worth of
services from Stewart's financial consultants?

Gary Stewart wrote:
"Yes, there was a contract. That money would have been returned as was the
funds sent to the SGL account in Andorra had AMORC not blown it when filing
their 1990 taxes."

Isn't Gary Stewart acknowledging that he knew the money was not supposed to
be disbursed from the trust account and there was no agreement by the board
to disburse the money? Wasn't the board led to believe the money was being
deposited in an AMORC trust fund to be released only on their approval when
it was earned or needed? The tax return was irrelevant. It was not filed
until a year after the money disappeared.

Gary Stewart wrote:
I had caused to be sent $500,000 to the Pandora Trust to begin funding a
*number* of projects on the behalf of AMORC of which one of them would be an
insurance benefit program for AMORC members. I did not cause any money to be
transferred to them until the board received a written business proposal by
Pandora Trust. As to the other $250,000 of which I was accused of sending to
Pandora in February, 1990, that was not sent by me and I knew nothing about
it until my attorneys told me, on the day of my first deposition in april
(or may) 1990 that I would be queried about that transfer. I said that Henry
Chiesa (Pandora) asked that we transfer that amount at a meeting held at
Dean Whitter and I refused to do so until we got a written business plan. It
wasn't until 1993 after AMORC begin seeking settlement in their case that
the document of that $250,000 transfer was brought to the surface as the
result of an INS insurance fraud claim made against AMORC by the insurance
company. AMORC had tried to collect their loss and apparently committed
insurance fraud submitting their claim. As it turned out, Burnam Schaa was
the one who transferred the $250,000 to Pandorra back in February (he signed
the wire transfer document) -- against my wishes. If I was being conned,
which I think it
obvious I was, I would say it was definitely more on the side of AMORC than
Pandora.

So now it's clear; there was a "vague" written business proposal but no
written business plan. What is the difference? The amount of $750,000 had
been discussed in board meetings. Did Gary Stewart inform Burnam Schaa he
had unauthorized the $250,000.00 payment to the trust fund in Pittsburgh?

Gary Stewart wrote:
All plans, when set into motion, start with a vague idea. But ideas had
to become reasonably concrete before funding would continue.

So there was a vague proposal. Why did you authorize half a million dollars
on a "vague idea"? Why not wait for the written business plan to see if it
was worth anything before transferring any money into the trust fund?

The way AMORC filed their tax return, after a year of trying to get the
money back, is not germaine. The contract Gary Stewart entered into was so
ambiguous, or, as he says "vague", they could not get the money back. As for
his statement, "That money would have been returned" why wasn't it returned?
It doesn't appear to have been earned by anything I can see. All the
consultants did for the money was to talk about things. Is that the kind of
integrity people expect from financial consultants?

Gary Stewart wrote:
"The transfer of the funds were to go into our accounts, but would only be
used as needed and signed off by the board."

In other words, the board was to agree to put money in the trust funds but
no money was to leave those trust funds until the board agreed to release
the money. There was board approval to place the funds in the trust i.e.
$750,000; where was the board approval to disburse the funds? The funds
placed into the Pittsburgh trust were simply taken by the financial
consultants. Why were the consultants signatories on AMORC trust accounts?
Whose idea was that?

What the financial consultants did for AMORC:

Set up two trust funds; they paid themselves ALL of the money deposited in
one of those trust funds. AMORC sued to get the money back from the second
trust fund set up in a foreign country before it disappeared too.

Talked about setting up a health insurance program for the membership.

(This can be done for free by a licensed insurance broker.)

Talked about setting up credit card program for the membership

(This can be done for free by any credit card issuing bank)

Talked about accreditation for RCUI

(Accreditation for RCUI was already being handled by another consultant and
was NOT being paid for from the trust funds)

Talked about fair employment practices at the hq

(Information can be had for free from government agencies)

Talked about the establishment of local AMORC offices around various parts
of the world where members would be employed

(AMORC already had offices and lodges around the world; why did we need
more?)

Talked about "some other projects we were developing"

What projects?

Talked about the "establishment of R+C retreats, public retreats, cultural
centers, museums, etc. In other words, we were planning to use our money to
establish Rosicrucianism firmly in a public way."

(AMORC already had a museum. As for the rest, there were no leases signed,
no properties under contract, no employees hired etc. Nothing had gone
beyond the stage of talking. What was the $500,000 spent on? Why was the
$3,500,000 borrowed before there was any solid plan to spend it on? Why not
pay for these things out of the bank accounts AMORC already had all around
the world? Why put the money in trust funds at all? Why were the trust funds
controlled by financial consultants who don't appear to have had any
licenses or professional associations?)

They also did, "a few other things" according to Gary Stewart. But in
eighteen years he's never been specific.

In short:

Most of the projects being worked on by the financial consultants could have
been handled for FREE by AMORC employees making a few phone calls.

The Board had agreed to borrow money.

The board had agreed to set up the trust funds owned and controlled by
AMORC.

The board had agreed to deposit $750,000 into the Pittsburgh trust fund,
which they thought AMORC owned and controlled.

Gary Stewart "unauthorized" the second payment of $250,000 to the Pittsburgh
trust fund. It doesn't appear he informed the board of this decision.

The Board did not agree to disburse the funds to anyone, since there was no
specific plan to spend it. The contract provided by his consultants was
"vague".

It is obvious that the trust funds were not, as implied, owned by AMORC. It
was not "transfering money from one AMORC account to another?" They had to
sue to get the money returned by one trust and lost all of the money placed
in the other trust.

______________________________

How do you like walking question marks now?

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Sid
2008-03-15 17:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
In Washington it's common to use the truth to tell a lie. This is how
opinions and impressions are manipulated. Heroes become villains,
persecutors become victims. What is hidden is more important than what is
revealed. Learning to see through the deception is a part of everyday life.
It is even important in the occult world. Alchemists used to put copper
sulphate into water then dip steel into the solution. When they removed the
steel it looked like it had turned to copper. But it was a trick; the copper
in the solution plates out on the surface of the steel, and can be rubbed
off.
Over the years Gary Stewart has been working to build an impression that he
is the innocent victim of malefactors at Rosicrucian Park. Is he an adept or
a fraudulent alchemist? Gary Stewart has alleged a variety of reasons for
his removal from the position of Imperator of AMORC.
______________________________
How do you like walking question marks now?
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
Well Keranos, I was a walking question mark, and was quickly expelled
from my Lodge for asking/answering questions about how this should be
handled according to the C&S of the Order. I was placed on a 'black
list' and my membership was withdrawn after nearly 20 years. What were
'they', the cabal afraid of? Why did they take it to Court (against
the C&S of the Order)? If everything is/was as clear cut as you have
presented above why were the instructions in the C&S of the Order not
followed? Why were the rights of the members AND Gary not respected
accordind to the C&S? Your presentation above is just a smoke screen
to avoid the real truth of the matter regarding problems within the
Order that go back to about 1972, long before GLS entered the picture.
He came in to sort out those problems and you and others chose
otherwise, against the C&S of the Order, and against your oaths taken
as a member/officer. I also resent the fact that much is presented as
if Gary had just turned up out of nowhere when he was OK as Imperator
for nearly 5 years.

Best regards,
Sid
Melanaigis
2008-03-16 10:39:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What is hidden is more important than what is
Post by Sid
Post by Melanaigis
revealed. Learning to see through the deception is a part of everyday life.
+++++++++
Post by Sid
Well Keranos, I was a walking question mark, and was quickly expelled
from my Lodge for asking/answering questions about how this should be
handled according to the C&S of the Order. I was placed on a 'black
list' and my membership was withdrawn after nearly 20 years. What were
'they', the cabal afraid of? Why did they take it to Court (against
the C&S of the Order)? If everything is/was as clear cut as you have
presented above why were the instructions in the C&S of the Order not
followed? Why were the rights of the members AND Gary not respected
accordind to the C&S? Your presentation above is just a smoke screen
to avoid the real truth of the matter regarding problems within the
Order that go back to about 1972, long before GLS entered the picture.
He came in to sort out those problems and you and others chose
otherwise, against the C&S of the Order, and against your oaths taken
as a member/officer. I also resent the fact that much is presented as
if Gary had just turned up out of nowhere when he was OK as Imperator
for nearly 5 years.
Best regards,
Sid
----------------------

Hi Sid

The whole situation was poorly handled. As for your own problems with those
in authority, I had a similar situation. Two regional monitors took down
everything I said at ab meetings and reported back to the GC. They were
building a case to throw me out. I quit first. Degenerate people will become
bootlickers to get themselves promoted. It's one of the lower forms of human
nature.

The ouster was not handled according to the Constitution and Statutes; it
should have been. The lawyers were brought in because a lot of money was at
risk in a foreign country with poorly regulated financial markets. There was
a risk the money would disappear. There was no other way to stop the money
from disappearing. If Gary Stewart is being honest when he says he doesn't
know how the trusts he set up were run, then he doesn't know who had signing
authority on those accounts, or who had access to the money. The fact that
the Andorran bank refused to return the money to the Board of Directors
makes it clear that the AMORC board no longer had control over the money in
that account.

I think part of the problem was Christian Bernard's ignorance of American
jurisprudence. The American legal system is controlled by lawyers and is
designed to enrich them. They do not make money by solving problems; they
make money by making problems bigger and making problems last longer. The
result is the richer opponent often wins. This is why there was no clearcut
resolution to the problem.

Gary Stewart was entitled to a tribunal held by heirarchey members. I don't
know if he asked for one. I don't think the conclusion of a tribunal would
have been any different from what did happen. An Imperator could be removed
for illegal activity. What I've written, goes beyond gross negligence and
enters the hinterland of illegal activity. Non profit corporations have to
follow their own articles and the IRS rules. They are not allowed to engage
in many money making activities, nor can they accumulate large profits. They
are not allowed to place money in trust funds or other corporations in order
to engage in activities that are illegal for the non profit corporation to
directly engage in either.
What I've used above was taken almost exclusively from Gary Stewart's
postings; I did not include the other side of the story, which would make
things much worse. Those things are still hidden from view. But it would be
better if those things were told by someone who sat in in the meetings and
not told second hand.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-16 15:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranso;

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 06:39:21 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
The fact that
the Andorran bank refused to return the money to the Board of Directors
makes it clear that the AMORC board no longer had control over the money in
that account.
What are you talking about? They did return the funds about 30 days
after they were sent over. AMORC sued them the day after the funds
were initially sent; having been sued, the bank froze the account
until the matter could be resolved through their legal system; and
when that was cleared, the funds were returned to AMORC simply because
they were amorc funds controlled by amorc and amorc requested they be
returned. If the funds were not in amorc's name, they wouldn't have
been returned to amorc. This is how the banking system works.

<snipped the remaining ignorant postulations>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-16 16:42:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Hi Keranso;
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 06:39:21 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
The fact that
the Andorran bank refused to return the money to the Board of Directors
makes it clear that the AMORC board no longer had control over the money in
that account.
What are you talking about? They did return the funds about 30 days
after they were sent over. AMORC sued them the day after the funds
were initially sent; having been sued, the bank froze the account
until the matter could be resolved through their legal system; and
when that was cleared, the funds were returned to AMORC simply because
they were amorc funds controlled by amorc and amorc requested they be
returned. If the funds were not in amorc's name, they wouldn't have
been returned to amorc. This is how the banking system works.
<snipped the remaining ignorant postulations>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
---------------------------
Gary Stewart wrote:
I initiated the transfer and then went off to Edinburgh for the annual Grand
Master's meeting. As I left for the airport, two directors went to the bank
and claimed they had no knowledge of the loan or the transfer of funds. The
bank officials looked at them and effectively told then they were crazy as
all directors had signed the corporate resolution to borrow, one director
had co-signed the authorization to transfer, and both directors that claimed
they knew nothing had sat in about two weeks of meetings with myself, the
financial advisory team, and the bank officials involved in our loan. So,
the bank said they wouldn't stop the transfer of the loan unless I also
agreed.
================
If it was a straight up transfer from one AMORC acount to another, how could
the bank have refused to return the money, as stated by Gary Stewart above?
How was the trust set up so that the AMORC board no longer controlled the
money? Why wasn't the money returned immediately?
If two directors had sat through two weeks of meetings with the financial
team and didn't know the money was being borrowed and transfered, then there
was a lot of confusion and doubletalk in those meetings intentionally making
things as "vague" as the contract Gary Stewart signed. There is a reason for
vagueness; it hides what people's real intentions are. Gary Stewart and his
financial team had two weeks of meetings to clear up the vagueness; they
kept it "vague". Why?
Did the all directors know the money was being borrowed? Only one signed the
resolution to transfer the money, not all. The others ageeed to borrow if
and when there was a concrete plan for the money, if the board approved.
There wasn't. Why was the money transfered before there were specific plans
for the money?
Why borrow money and pay interest on that loan before you know what you are
going to do with the money? Or did Gary Stewart and the financial team know
what the plans were for the money?
================
Gary Stewart wrote:
By the time I got to Scotland, the funds were in the Andorran bank. I
refused to return the transfer until I knew what was going on -
==============
How could Gary Stewart have refused to return the money to AMORC if it was a
straight up transfer from one AMORC bank to another? Why would Gary Stewart
refuse to return the money to AMORC when he was first asked for it? There
was no immediate need for the money to be in a foreign country, that we know
about.
===============
Gary Stewart wrote:
they decided I was stalling and filed suit on Good Friday
============
The bank refused to return the money; Gary Stewart refused to return the
money. The board had no choice but to sue before the money disappeared as
the money in Pittsburgh disappeared.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-16 18:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:42:46 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

First, answer the question: "What are you talking about?" The funds in
question were returned.

Second, you seriously need to improve your reading comprehension
skills. Your arguments are an epistle to either your own inability to
comprehend what you read or a very serious obsession with a hatred of
those who point out the weaknesses in your arrived (or better yet,
"contrived") contentions.

third, if the latter, get some help. If the former, get a tutor who
actually knows more than you.

and fourth, answer the questions put to you in a previous thread
regarding a far more interesting topic that isn't dated.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
What are you talking about? They did return the funds about 30 days
after they were sent over. AMORC sued them the day after the funds
were initially [sent]; having been sued, the bank froze the account
until the matter could be resolved through their legal system; and
when that was cleared, the funds were returned to AMORC simply because
they were amorc funds controlled by amorc and amorc requested they be
returned. If the funds were not in amorc's name, they wouldn't have
been returned to amorc. This is how the banking system works.
Sorry, the word "sent" I placed in brackets above should have been
"received" as in being received by the Andorran bank. The completion
of the transfer was blocked by two amorc directors and held in limbo
for several days mid-transfer.

<snipped feeble attempts to build a comprehensible argument>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-19 11:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid
Well Keranos, I was a walking question mark, and was quickly expelled
from my Lodge for asking/answering questions about how this should be
handled according to the C&S of the Order. I was placed on a 'black
list' and my membership was withdrawn after nearly 20 years. What were
'they', the cabal afraid of? Why did they take it to Court (against
the C&S of the Order)? If everything is/was as clear cut as you have
presented above why were the instructions in the C&S of the Order not
followed? Why were the rights of the members AND Gary not respected
accordind to the C&S? Your presentation above is just a smoke screen
to avoid the real truth of the matter regarding problems within the
Order that go back to about 1972, long before GLS entered the picture.
He came in to sort out those problems and you and others chose
otherwise, against the C&S of the Order, and against your oaths taken
as a member/officer. I also resent the fact that much is presented as
if Gary had just turned up out of nowhere when he was OK as Imperator
for nearly 5 years.
Best regards,
Sid
======================
Sid the problems you had with AMORC were not due to the leadership of the
Lewis's but were simply the result of human nature. Gary Stewart cannot
solve those problems; they are endemic in the human race.
Stewart caused more problems. Consider three English Grand Masters in three
years.
I have nothing personal against him. But the officers of AMORC and the
heirarchy worked for over seventy years to raise occultism and mysticism
into a respectable art, worthy of research and serious consideration by
intelligent people. Gary Stewart has an agenda to reduce it to the ludicrous
state it held among the ignorant and superstitious people of the dark ages.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-19 19:09:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:29:02 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
Post by Sid
Well Keranos, I was a walking question mark, and was quickly expelled
from my Lodge for asking/answering questions about how this should be
handled according to the C&S of the Order.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
======================
Sid the problems you had with AMORC were not due to the leadership of the
Lewis's but were simply the result of human nature.
If by "human nature" you mean it is of our nature to disregard the
laws which govern us, then yes, it *is* a problem of leadership to
allow such to happen. So, too, is it a problem of the leadership of
amorc to cause and allow its constitution and statutes to be trashed
or interpreted to become a document of convenience.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Stewart caused more problems. Consider three English Grand Masters in three
years.
I became Imperator in January, 1987 seven months after I stepped down
from my position as Grand Master so as to become an officer of the
Supreme Grand Lodge. Dennis Kwiatowski was appointed by Ralph Lewis to
take my place as Grand Master. That was in June, 1986. Dennis resigned
as Grand Master in 1989 (it could've been late 1988, I don't remember)
and I replaced him with Donna O'Neil who was Grand Master until at
least a year after I left AMORC. Where do you get three English Grand
Masters in three years?
Post by Melanaigis
I have nothing personal against him.
Really?
Post by Melanaigis
But the officers of AMORC and the
heirarchy worked for over seventy years to raise occultism and mysticism
into a respectable art, worthy of research and serious consideration by
intelligent people.
Some officers worked in that direction while others used their
positions to glorify their own inflated image of themselves at the
expense of AMORC, it's objectives, and its reputation.
Post by Melanaigis
Gary Stewart has an agenda to reduce it to the ludicrous
state it held among the ignorant and superstitious people of the dark ages.
People in the "Dark Ages" (I prefer "Early Middle Ages" -- circa
476-1000 CE -- as it gives a more accurate description of that era,
the era that produced (among many others) such personnages as
Boethius, Alcuin of York, Eric of Auxerre, Remy of Auxerre, Alfarabi,
Avicenna, Saadia, Honein ibn Ishaq, and, of course, John Scotus
Eriugena who was a prescholastic who fused Christian and Neoplatonic
teachings into a metaphysical system; or the era that saw the
Carolingian Renaissance and Charlemagne's advancement of learning
through the establishment of schools (prior learning was private) such
as the Palatine (royal court and precursor to universities, the
Episcopal (designed for those intending to enter the priesthood), and
the Monastic (schools open to those living both within and without the
monastic community) all of which had the curriculum of the Bible,
Trivium (grammar, dialetic, rhetoric), and Quadrivium (arithmetic,
geometry, astronomy, and music) ... sorry, I diverged. Let me start
again: ignorant and superstitious people in the dark ages held
occultism and mysticism as being in a ludicrous state? The so-called
dark ages wasn't as dark as you think; most of the so-called ignorant
and superstitios people to which you refer would be the non-christians
such as pagans, who, being more natural in the way they lived, kept
many of the mystical and so-called occult practices as they were
related to local custom and tradition alive; the Muslims, who were
primarily responsible of perpetuating the memories and works of the
Classic writers, scientists, philosophers, and keeping their arts
alive as well as the art of alchemy and the belief of spirits (djin)
which has become important in many of today's mystical and occult
belief systems ... and you think I have an agenda to reduce either
amorc, mysticism, or occultism (you aren't clear) to that state? Well,
no. I don't have an agenda to reduce anything to anything. My agenda
is to perpetuate the ideals of the R+C by keeping it open and honest.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Sid
2008-03-15 21:49:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
In Washington it's common to use the truth to tell a lie. This is how
opinions and impressions are manipulated. Heroes become villains,
persecutors become victims. What is hidden is more important than what is
revealed. Learning to see through the deception is a part of everyday life.
It is even important in the occult world. Alchemists used to put copper
sulphate into water then dip steel into the solution. When they removed the
steel it looked like it had turned to copper. But it was a trick; the copper
in the solution plates out on the surface of the steel, and can be rubbed
off.
Over the years Gary Stewart has been working to build an impression that he
is the innocent victim of malefactors at Rosicrucian Park.
I disagree. Just listen to some of the 'open forum' tapes where he
answered all questions that were put to him.
Post by Melanaigis
Is he an adept or a fraudulent alchemist?
Neither. I would say he is an Imperator with a job to do.
Post by Melanaigis
There were enough irregularities for IRS to get involved.
If the IRS were involved then I am sure we would have heard about.
Post by Melanaigis
Jean-Noel recently uncovered an IRS letter involving what seems to be a
requested audit of the Order during my tenure as Imperator. Apparently the
letter states that there were irregularities with the way I handled finances
but since AMORC took steps to remove me, AMORC's non-profit status was not
in jeopardy. Anyway, I didn't know anything about this until a couple of
weeks ago and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me since I didn't handle the
financial aspect of AMORC, but the document is there to look at if you can
get Jean-Noel to furnish the link.
______________________________
How do you like walking question marks now?
Keranos
My understanding is that there was a new IRS ruling that was already
known in 1989(?) that would have required ALL Grand Lodges to open
their books to the IRS as long as their Headquarters were in the US so
as there were a few Grand Masters who did not want this to happen,
then AMORC's non-profit status would have been in jeopardy. Solution?
Move the Headquarters out of the US to Canada. Simple really.

After such a long time I find it rather strange that this subject is
still doing the rounds, or is it just that you have a personal axe to
grind with Gary? Are you a member of AMORC or have you chosen another
Rosicrucian group or Order?

J.V. Andreae wrote about the Chaos of the Rosicrucian Brotherhood, so
I guess with so many opinions expressed here; the CHAOS continues.

Regards,
Sid
Melanaigis
2008-03-19 11:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sid" <***@t-online.de>
=================
Post by Sid
Post by Melanaigis
Over the years Gary Stewart has been working to build an impression that
he is the innocent victim of malefactors at Rosicrucian Park.
I disagree. Just listen to some of the 'open forum' tapes where he
answered all questions that were put to him.
=====================
I don't care what answers he gave to people who did not know what questions
to ask. That is a smokescreen.
A few days ago Stewart wrote he was thrown out because he would not tolerate
perverted behaviorin Rosicrucian Park; he introduced the topic of his ouster
and the reasons for it, not me.
-------------------------------
Post by Sid
Post by Melanaigis
There were enough irregularities for IRS to get involved.
=================
Post by Sid
If the IRS were involved then I am sure we would have heard about.
-------------------
Gary Stewart brought up the IRS investigation; I did not invent it. It was
also discussed on another newsgroup.
==============
Post by Sid
Post by Melanaigis
Jean-Noel recently uncovered an IRS letter involving what seems to be a
requested audit of the Order during my tenure as Imperator. Apparently
the letter states that there were irregularities with the way I handled
finances
but since AMORC took steps to remove me, AMORC's non-profit status was
not in jeopardy.
-----------------------
Post by Sid
My understanding is that there was a new IRS ruling that was already
known in 1989(?) that would have required ALL Grand Lodges to open
their books to the IRS as long as their Headquarters were in the US so
as there were a few Grand Masters who did not want this to happen,
then AMORC's non-profit status would have been in jeopardy. Solution?
Move the Headquarters out of the US to Canada. Simple really.
====================
You've posted this nonsense about an IRS ruling before. Even Gary Stewart
attacked it when he thought I was the original poster. It is nothing but an
attempt by one of Stewart's MCE members to distract attention.
--------------------
Post by Sid
After such a long time I find it rather strange that this subject is
still doing the rounds, or is it just that you have a personal axe to
grind with Gary?
Regards,
Sid
=====================
As long as Stewart keeps posting that he was a completly innocent victim of
the cabal, the real reasons he was ousted will continue to make the rounds.

If you analyze Gary Stewart's description of what happened and his defense
of his actions, you will discover there was no way to pay back the three and
a half million dollar loan using his plan. Either there was something he is
unwilling to admit or he was duped himself.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-19 19:45:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:47:43 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
----- Original Message -----
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
A few days ago Stewart wrote he was thrown out because he would not tolerate
perverted behaviorin Rosicrucian Park; he introduced the topic of his ouster
and the reasons for it, not me.
Once again, you seriously need to enhance your reading comprehenson
skills and get some real experience in developing proper research
skills. At this point I would like to think you're just being
careless, inexperienced, and ignorant of the topics being discussed
because if you are intentionally trying to disseminate dis and
misinformation, you're proving yourself to be a bumbling idiot and I
don't want to think that about you. Ah well ... the discussion, when
taken in context, was me responding to your assertion that there were
no problems or uphevals with amorc officers until I came along. I
pointed out a few examples and yes, the topic discussed was introduced
by you.

<snipped more bumblings>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Blue_Beard
2008-03-15 22:49:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos,

"Melanaigis" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

...snip
Post by Melanaigis
He also wrote: "Antonio taking on the task of Grand Master was no perk or
prestige for him" as if he were doing AMORC a favor by accepting the job
of Grand Master. How come there was no prestige associated with the job of
Grand Master? ... snip
Because, Keranos, there is no 'prestige'. Its an act of Service. The
higher the position, the more Service.

Thats all,
+r
Sid
2008-03-16 00:59:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings +r
Post by Blue_Beard
Hi Keranos,
...snip
Post by Melanaigis
He also wrote: "Antonio taking on the task of Grand Master was no perk or
prestige for him" as if he were doing AMORC a favor by accepting the job
of Grand Master. How come there was no prestige associated with the job of
Grand Master? ... snip
Because, Keranos, there is no 'prestige'.  Its an act of Service.  The
higher the position, the more Service.
Thats all,
+r
Though not a Mason I thought the following URL may be of some value
and interest to you:

http://staffs.proboards37.com/

Regards,
Sid
Blue_Beard
2008-03-16 06:01:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid
Though not a Mason I thought the following URL may be of some value
http://staffs.proboards37.com/
Thanks Sid,
a very valuable link... as usual :-)
Post by Sid
Regards,
Sid
In Light,
+ramon
Melanaigis
2008-03-19 11:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Save your pablum for children bluebeard; if Antonio were a fraction of the
man Raymond Andrea was, CRC sould have a thriving Spanish Grand Lodge; they
don't have ANY Spanish Grand Lodge. That speaks to the attitude of those
involved in the appointment.

Keranos
Post by Blue_Beard
Hi Keranos,
...snip
Post by Melanaigis
He also wrote: "Antonio taking on the task of Grand Master was no perk or
prestige for him" as if he were doing AMORC a favor by accepting the job
of Grand Master. How come there was no prestige associated with the job
of Grand Master? ... snip
Because, Keranos, there is no 'prestige'. Its an act of Service. The
higher the position, the more Service.
Thats all,
+r
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-19 19:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:32:26 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
Save your pablum for children bluebeard; if Antonio were a fraction of the
man Raymond Andrea was, CRC sould have a thriving Spanish Grand Lodge; they
don't have ANY Spanish Grand Lodge. That speaks to the attitude of those
involved in the appointment.
The CR+C doesn't have any grand lodges, period. Nor do we have any
grand masters as we are not structured like amorc. You do not know if
Antonio has made any contributions to the CR+C or not. Nor do you have
any idea of the types of contributions made to the CR+C by anyone.
It's as Bluebeard says, there is no prestige, it's an act of service.
To understand that you need to understand the Fama and the laws
governing the R+C.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
<snip>

gls
gls
2008-03-16 14:39:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:35:16 -0400, "Melanaigis"
In Washington it's ...
<snip>

Do you feel better now?

If so, maybe you can turn your attention back to the discussion at
hand. There are a number of unqualified statements you made; and a
number of questions I asked -- all of which you left hanging. You
might want to address them for the sake of the seekers who you feel
have come to alt.amorc for enlightenment and to whom you have
professed concern.

gls
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-03 01:16:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings all .'.

I was made aware of this usenet group and discussion by a friend, and
have not read all posts relevant to the matter.

Nevetheless I'd like to jump in with a few remarks which probably are
arbitrary and relatively irrelevant. Fortunately, this is the
Internet ;)

Unlike Mr. Stewart, I am no first hand witness to the matter at hand.
Just like Mr. Melanaigis, I had an above average interest in the
subject many years ago.

I must confess I investigated it in depth, to the best of my ability,
and collected piles and piles of documentation and interviewed and/or
discussed with a lot of key people (including Mr. Stewart, Mr. Raymond
Bernard, Mr. Ken O'Neil and many others) - all with the intention of
not only understanding the different layers of the subject but also
publish some sort of "neutral" account of it.

Alas, I was naiv.

Albeit I did get deeper into it, the more I learned the less I *knew*.
To be sure, it was both a Pandoras box as well as a Matryoshka doll.
Fortunately, my priorities got wiser and I abandoned the task of
getting to the "bottom" of it. I've still got my reasearch stashed
away in boxes, where it lies like a beurochrats wet dream. I did share
a few pointers with others, for instance Roggemans, Koenig, etc, but
mainly I withdrew from the whole task.

See, I have come to the conclusion that it is not possible for anyone
to really understand everything that happened, unless they were
directly involved, and even then they'd only understand their own
aspect of it. Im not saying all the different issues doesnt have
reasonable or documented conclusions, only that altogether there is
simply no way of being as sure about everything in a black or white
dual reality (i.e. one side was good, the other bad). Besides, I grew
beyond the point that my interest in the matter could compete with
more spiritual subjects and tasks at hand. My hunger for truth of the
matter was more than satisfied, although chiefly with its junk food.

For what I soon became sure of was that there was a lot of people with
their own realities, perceptions, intentions, agendas, experiences,
assumptions, projections, actions and what have you. Even though they
may have seemed to be on a "side", or thought they did, at the end of
the day there was too many sides to be able to keep a clear survey.

So, I'll not pretend to be a judge on the matter.

However, apart from being able to verify or disprove some detailed
facts, I have inevitably reached a few personal opinions as well as
expert guesses. They are not as strong as some of those made by other
spectators in here, but at least they are not tainted by my personal
bias or emotions (in that I have non and remain completely uninvolved
and do not even have membership in either of the groups).

Since much of the controversy back then seems to surface now in the
version of being about Mr. Stewarts charachter, I'll address that. But
first let me rush to point out that the problems are in no way as
simple that they can be reduced to his person. If they were, he would
indeed be a powerfull manifestation of our specy. But no, he did not
operate in a vacuum. He was a key player yes, but it can't be reduced
to being about him - nor Mr. Christian Bernard for that matter. Anyone
having access to the minutes of the Supreme Grand Lodge 1915 - 1993
knows this. AMORC had a lot of serious internal issues, like any giant
organization is bound to have, both prior to and afterwards. And a lot
of personal conflicts. And ideological differences. etc.

My experience with Stewart was that he was extraordinat
straightforward. It took me by surprise, because it is not common
among heads and figurheads of spritiual and esoteric groups. Most
chooce silence, either because of ignorance, wisdom, fear or elitism.

Not only was he very sharing, he was not being pretensious or pompous
(as I know many have accused him to be). I dont know if he used to be
this and changed (in which case he shows the extraordinary ability to
evolve, which is easier said than done), perhaps it just boils down to
the fact that people tend to disagree, project, have bad chemistry,
misunderstand, lie, etc. But in my experience, he was honest, direct
and sharing.

Another thing that striked me was his complete lack of seeming bitter.
Most of the noise came from self-chosen followers. He didnt even seem
interested in collecting followers (emphasis on *followers*, Im not
refering to cooperating with brethren - obviously he would, otherwise
theres no point in heading AMORC then CRC). He seemed to have made
peace with his past, albeit he was still voicing his own opinions,
experiences and perspectives on the matter. He had amble opportunity
to attack AMORC, Beranrd et al, but seemed to prioritize his focus on
his esoteric work in CRC.

On the other hand a lot of people have over the years asked him about
these matters, like I did, and he does not lack eagerness to share.
His mere presence in this public forum reflects this. But there is a
difference to campaign actively on the matter, and answer people and
discuss with them. The drive - and even obsession - about the matter
seems to come from outsiders like myself, who wanted to know. God
knows the AMORC shcisms (thats right, theres several not involving Mr.
Stewart) have meant a lot for many people for several psychological,
spiritual, social and practical reasons. And few has seemed willing to
share on this, and of those involved, only Mr. stewart seems to be
willing to do this in public.

I know this may be interpetated as I am "defending" Stewart. I am not,
I am sharing my personal experience because thats the closest I can
get to truth, and so it is my truth I am defending. I can voice a lot
of ciritical issues regarding Stewarts role in AMORC and the shcism,
but to do so without also doing it with a lot of other players would
be unbalanced and reflecting an agenda. Either we take a critical look
and make a due evaluation on them all - as long as there are many
others worthy of this who was involved (yes, even beyond Mr. Bernard),
or we let it be. To do it here, would mean to actually publish my
book, which I've decided I won't. So I let it be.

But I can air my personal conclusions from my experience with them,
and I remain firmly impressed with Mr.Stewarts qualities to be
straightforward, sharing, corteous and paced. Im not sure I could have
kept such a calm and overviewing perspective as what he showed during
our communications (im not refering to some of the threads in here, I
wouldnt have the patience to involve myself with the bickering even if
it was about my own personality).

Now, to be fair, Christian Bernard (Rebisse) have come out of the
history closet the last years with a more grounded and sober AMORC
history (fronting real names and persons as opposed to the myths), and
even if its due to pressure from the slander, rumours, info and
research floating around on the Internet (like that of Mr. Vanloo,
Cailett, Stewart, etc) nevertheless they have taken that step. Of
course that doesn't mean we have to agree with AMORCs accounts. And
they remain closed to open questions, especially about the controversy
of 1990. At this point, it is history, and given their position I
understand them. They have nothing to gain by doing so, save for
contributing to truth - if that is at all possible. However, there is
a tendency in AMORC to revise their past. Bernard doesnt have monopoly
on this, they have done that for years and years. Former enthusiasts
and distinguished members fall from grace and gets deleted from their
history. Even Grand Masters. Even an Imperator. It happened already
with the first Grand Master of America (who was from Finland) and it
even happened with their last one. So Mr. Stewart is in good company
here.

Revisions are bad imho. I'd rather have someone give their take on it,
even if we perceive it as rubbish. I welcome Mr. Stewarts contribution
in this regard, and I have not been able to prove him wrong on any of
the facts he presented me - and I tried. I have, however, received
many contrary opinions and perspectives to his own, and in some cases
I agree with them, but that has to do with the intangable area of the
psyche and its realities. That's bound to be diverse and subjective
and beyond evidence. And let me add that I also agree with many of Mr.
Stewarts opinions and takes.

I'm afraid noone is any wiser as for any black-white verdict from my
own statements. But thats precisely the point Im making: Unless you
have a personal agenda or emotional stake, I cant see how such strong
conclusions can be made at all! Certainly it is far beyond any sanity
to lay it all upon mr. Stewart, as some here seems to do. I've even
heard post-Stewart AMORC leaders express themselves excusingly and
moderately about Mr.Stewarts person. So its not about the charachter
of one man, as it is about a complex multitude of actions,
assumptions, lies, intentions, comprehensions, agendas,
misunderstandings and all the rest of the can worms.

As for Mr. Stewarts character, im well aware that it is controverisal
in that many people have strong opinions about him (apart from this
board), but ask yourself: Who in an exposed position doesnt get this?
If you were the president, you'd get it too, it's not exclusive to
being Bush - and your competence doesnt even matter in this regard).
In my mere personal experience, I see no splinters in his eye worthy
of mentioning - although many others do in their experience (which I
respect) - but unfortunately even more so from their bias/assumptions/
third-hand sources or whatever constitutes their reality. And we
havn't even started to compare this with our judgement about other
people.

No, this gets us nowhere. And kudos to Mr. Stewart for putting up with
it.

In fact, observing Mr. Stewarts mostly entertaining but occasional
interesting inputs in this forum only confirms my personal experience.
With one exception: An unhealthy patience about nitpicking discussions
leading nowhere. But who am I to criticise human diversity? Enjoy and
have fun if thats whats going on ;)

Sincerely,
Al

(We can forgive a child for being afraid of the dark. The real tragedy
of life is when adults fear the Light. - Plato).
Ben Scaro
2008-04-03 13:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Now, to be fair, Christian Bernard (Rebisse) have come out of the
history closet the last years with a more grounded and sober AMORC
history (fronting real names and persons as opposed to the myths),
and
even if its due to pressure from the slander, rumours, info and
research floating around on the Internet (like that of Mr. Vanloo,
Cailett, Stewart, etc) nevertheless they have taken that step. Of
course that doesn't mean we have to agree with AMORCs accounts. And
they remain closed to open questions, especially about the
controversy
of 1990. At this point, it is history, and given their position I
understand them. They have nothing to gain by doing so, save for
contributing to truth - if that is at all possible. However, there is
a tendency in AMORC to revise their past. Bernard doesnt have
monopoly
on this, they have done that for years and years. Former enthusiasts
and distinguished members fall from grace and gets deleted from their
history. Even Grand Masters. Even an Imperator. It happened already
with the first Grand Master of America (who was from Finland) and it
even happened with their last one. So Mr. Stewart is in good company
here.



Hi Al

I think the Rebisse history was definitely a step forward. I'm very
grateful for it.

I don't agree with all of it by any stretch, and there are things like
the 'May Banks Stacey' story that I'm still suspicious of - for
example her capacity to act -in any capacity- as a 'Rosicrucian
ambassador' and what her connections or authority were.

Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
lawsuit against AMORC in 1948 on the Rosicrucian Garden forum
recently. Unfortunately apart from a brief news report at the time,
little emerged about her motivations and why the two sides fell out.
I hope more is revealed because this sounds an interesting story.

Regards

Ben
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-03 13:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings Ben!

The tendency not to mention substantial historic elements seems to
have been introduced during RMLs time. Many dramatic reforms were
implemented during his time, much more than GLS ever had time to even
dream of. And RML got his due heat, but managed to ride the storm off
(he was even charged as Imperator). HSL did indeed namedrop in his
history account (though one may argue that his facts wasn't always
accurate) and provided charters, documents and associations with all
kinds of contemporary persons. So GLS and CBs more sober approach is a
return to the old ways. I guess RML decided to put it all under the
rug due to finding it embaressing or contrary to his style, since he
was more accurate and sober by nature (my personal interpretation).

The story about KIimaletho and the lawsuit is covered in the SGL
minutes, if I recall right. I think it was a bad treatment and that
someone should be ashamed. But I dont find it very interesting, only a
personal tragedy. The ego part of history is getting increasingly
boring in my personal view.

Sincerely,
Al :)
Hi Al
I think the Rebisse history was definitely a step forward.  I'm very
grateful for it.
I don't agree with all of it by any stretch, and there are things like
the 'May Banks Stacey' story that I'm still suspicious of - for
example her capacity to act -in any capacity- as a 'Rosicrucian
ambassador' and what her connections or authority were.
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
lawsuit against AMORC in 1948 on the Rosicrucian Garden forum
recently.  Unfortunately apart from a brief news report at the time,
little emerged about her motivations and why the two sides fell out.
I hope more is revealed because this sounds an interesting story.
Regards
Ben
gls
2008-04-05 04:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Al;
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Greetings Ben!
The tendency not to mention substantial historic elements seems to
have been introduced during RMLs time.
He didn't want them mentioned because he didn't know what they were.
That is, he was just as much in the dark about many of hsl's
historical accounts as the rest of us. As rml once told me, his father
didn't document his research and he never discussed it with anyone,
including his himself. Ralph did want a documented history produced,
however, and did try to get people to research and document. In the
late 70's, he commissioned Stephen Stubbs for the task and he did a
fairly decent historical account but he, mistakenly, in my opinion,
sold the copyright to amorc for $200. The manuscript sat unused and
unread until it was given to me. Christian now has it along with a
number of other things ... I think it should be published. It would be
fairly light compared to what else is published on the subject today,
but it was an interesting read and was the first attempt to publish a
history based upon what was found in the amorc archives.

The next attempt was in 1982 when he commissioned myself and Andrew
Tomas for the job. After several years of research we withdrew from
the project for reasons personal to myself and Andrew (with the full
agreement of rml). But we did collect a few thousand pages of research
which, like yours, are sitting in boxes collecting dust.
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Many dramatic reforms were
implemented during his time, much more than GLS ever had time to even
dream of.
oh I dreamed of them ... just got my time to implement them a bit
disrupted by a few years of silliness. However, I'm quite happy with
the way the doctrinal/ritualistic dreams are manifesting in the CR+C
as well as with things yet to come.
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
And RML got his due heat, but managed to ride the storm off
(he was even charged as Imperator). HSL did indeed namedrop in his
history account (though one may argue that his facts wasn't always
accurate) and provided charters, documents and associations with all
kinds of contemporary persons. So GLS and CBs more sober approach is a
return to the old ways. I guess RML decided to put it all under the
rug due to finding it embaressing or contrary to his style, since he
was more accurate and sober by nature (my personal interpretation).
Yes, he was more accurate and sober by nature, but I wouldn't exactly
say he swept it under the rug. Just that he didn't quite know what to
do with it.

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Al :)
gls

<snip>
Sid
2008-04-04 10:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Now, to be fair, Christian Bernard (Rebisse) have come out of the
history closet the last years with a more grounded and sober AMORC
history (fronting real names and persons as opposed to the myths), and
even if its due to pressure from the slander, rumours, info and
research floating around on the Internet (like that of Mr. Vanloo,
Cailett, Stewart, etc) nevertheless they have taken that step. > Regards
Ben
http://www.rosecroixjournal.org/resources/index.html
Sid
2008-04-04 10:37:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Now, to be fair, Christian Bernard (Rebisse) have come out of the
history closet the last years with a more grounded and sober AMORC
history (fronting real names and persons as opposed to the myths), and
even if its due to pressure from the slander, rumours, info and
research floating around on the Internet (like that of Mr. Vanloo,
Cailett, Stewart, etc) nevertheless they have taken that step. > Regards
Ben
http://www.rosecroixjournal.org/resources/index.html
http://www.rosicrucian.org/publications/digest/digest1_2007/table_of_contents.html
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-05 03:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nice!
Post by Sid
http://www.rosecroixjournal.org/resources/index.html
http://www.rosicrucian.org/publications/digest/digest1_2007/table_of_...
gls
2008-04-05 04:06:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 06:11:38 -0700 (PDT), Ben Scaro
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Ben Scaro
Hi Al
I think the Rebisse history was definitely a step forward. I'm very
grateful for it.
In my opinion, I'm not so sure it was a step forward. It is in the
sense there is an attempt at documentation, but in some instances the
same old game is being played -- make the round peg fit the square
hole. One of the reasons why I say this is I know that present day
amorc has documentation about 1909, the journey, and contacts which
they feel they want to ignore and replace it with speculation masked
as documented research to try to force a history that is more in
agreement with what others in the esoteric community find acceptable.
I see amorc being more apologetic about its existence, especially
regarding its history, than assertive, and as such, the tail ends up
wagging the dog. And when there are attempts at assertion, it's
presented as aggression. I feel amorc should present their case openly
and honestly and not mickey mouse their way through their own history.
Post by Ben Scaro
I don't agree with all of it by any stretch, and there are things like
the 'May Banks Stacey' story that I'm still suspicious
You probably know this, but her name was Mary Banks. Her husbands name
was May Stacey.
Post by Ben Scaro
of - for
example her capacity to act -in any capacity- as a 'Rosicrucian
ambassador' and what her connections or authority were.
RML rememberd her pretty clearly and what he rememberd about her was
her military connections as she once told him that she could help get
him into West Point if he wanted. She was definitely a person who had
a positive influence in the early days of AMORC, and she did profess
to have rosicrucian connections and did give hsl some jewellery. I've
seen it, but nothing that can be said to be Rosicrucian. Her husband
was a Mason and that is how hsl got the masonic rosicrucian emblem
that amorc touted around for awhile. My feeling is that her R+C
connection was through her husband having been a Scottich Rite Mason.
Also, it's a good possibility that she was a theosophist associated
with their inner circle. I once tried to trace her back to India to
the Theosophical Society's hq thinking maybe she came out of their
alleged R+C circle, but couldn't actually place her there. Couldn't
get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed. To be
honest, I didn't really try all that hard. I had arranged to go there
when in India back in 1985 for that reason, but the meet never
happened.
Post by Ben Scaro
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
lawsuit against AMORC in 1948 on the Rosicrucian Garden forum
recently. Unfortunately apart from a brief news report at the time,
little emerged about her motivations and why the two sides fell out.
I hope more is revealed because this sounds an interesting story.
As al said elsewhere, there was mention of it in the early board
minutes but, like in most board meetings, a three hour discussion can
be presented as a one line motion ... but, I once ran across the legal
files back in the early 80's and I asked ralph about them. According
to him, TK was one of the initial investors in the starting of amorc
in 1915 (everyone put up $100). After he died, his wife felt that she
was entitled to her share of the stock and sued amorc for what she
felt was the percentage due her. The problem was, by then AMORC was
incorporated in california as a non-profit and didn't have shares or
shareholders.
Post by Ben Scaro
Regards
Ben
best

gls
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-05 04:29:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings,
Post by gls
hole. One of the reasons why I say this is I know that present day
amorc has documentation about 1909, the journey, and contacts which
they feel they want to ignore and replace it with speculation masked
as documented research to try to force a history that is more in
agreement with what others in the esoteric community find acceptable.
I see amorc being more apologetic about its existence, especially
regarding its history, than assertive, and as such, the tail ends up
wagging the dog.
If this is so, then it reflects uncertainty - a lack of themselves
believing in HSL. Alternatively, a lack of relating to that level of
experience.

My own view is that he exaggerated his mandate, perpetually and big
time. But that doesn't make him a unauthentic or a swindler. His
encounters and connections were real, but Im sure he wasn't exactly
asked to put up the worlds largest and most public Rosicrucian group.
He was young, rather inexperienced (in fact, formally a neophyte like
R. Andrea) and unaffiliated. But I guess an initiation in a way is a
kind of spiritual charter, and besides the Almighty is the greatest
Imperator of them all. And I think HSL listened more to that authority
than any mortal.
Post by gls
And when there are attempts at assertion, it's
presented as aggression.
I've noticed this.
Post by gls
Also, it's a good possibility that she was a theosophist associated
with their inner circle. I once tried to trace her back to India to
the Theosophical Society's hq thinking maybe she came out of their
alleged R+C circle, but couldn't actually place her there. Couldn't
get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed. To be
honest, I didn't really try all that hard. I had arranged to go there
when in India back in 1985 for that reason, but the meet never
happened.
What do you think of Mr. Vanloos speculation that she is the one
mentioned by Crowley in his diary.
Post by gls
Post by Ben Scaro
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
Btw, he was originally affiliated with a finnish RC group (It's
actually more of a RC church) which still exists (independent of
amorc). Hum... Finnish and R+C is a strange mix to my ears.

Sincerely,
Al :)
Sid
2008-04-05 15:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings Al,
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Greetings,
Post by Ben Scaro
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
Btw, he was originally affiliated with a finnish RC group (It's
actually more of a RC church) which still exists (independent of
amorc). Hum... Finnish and R+C is a strange mix to my ears.
Sincerely,
Al :)
Have you heard of the book by Susanna Akerman? Bit too expensive for
my pocket, but I have heard that it is a good piece of research. It's
called "Rose Cross over the Baltic": The Spread of Rosicrucianism in
Northern Europe (Brill's Studies in Intellectual History) (Hardcover)
by Susanna Akerman (Author)

Susanna Åkerman: Rose Cross Over The Baltic, 1998, Brill Academic
Publishers, 264 pages, ISBN 90-04-11030-5

Regards,
Sid
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-05 18:09:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sid,

Yes, I know her research, but thanks for the tip. She has contributed
to shedding light on the RC impulses in the north, particularly in
Sweden. I first read an article she wrote about the Golden
Rosicrucians in the sweedish royal house. I believe she has several
books out, and the soft covers would obviously be cheaper. As I see
it, she sheds light on particular aspects of the history, but does not
provide a grand scope - which is quite alright.

Sincerely,
Al :)
Sid
2008-04-05 22:59:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Sid,
Yes, I know her research, but thanks for the tip. She has contributed
to shedding light on the RC impulses in the north, particularly in
Sweden. I first read an article she wrote about the Golden
Rosicrucians in the sweedish royal house. I believe she has several
books out, and the soft covers would obviously be cheaper. As I see
it, she sheds light on particular aspects of the history, but does not
provide a grand scope - which  is quite alright.
Sincerely,
Al :)
I'm sure that each country has it own sources :)
gls
2008-04-06 04:35:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Al;

On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 21:29:03 -0700 (PDT), ***@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by gls
Also, it's a good possibility that she was a theosophist associated
with their inner circle. I once tried to trace her back to India to
the Theosophical Society's hq thinking maybe she came out of their
alleged R+C circle, but couldn't actually place her there. Couldn't
get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed. To be
honest, I didn't really try all that hard. I had arranged to go there
when in India back in 1985 for that reason, but the meet never
happened.
What do you think of Mr. Vanloos speculation that she is the one
mentioned by Crowley in his diary.
I'm relying on memory here as mr. vanloo's book can't be found in my
library at the moment. Plus, I might be confusing this with a
different conversation I had a long time ago, but what I recall is
that vanloo was suggesting that mary banks was, in effect, the
contact between hsl and crowley in that they both appeared in New York
at about the same time circa 1914. If you could be so kind as to give
me an idea where in crowley's diary he mentions her, I'll let you know
what I think.

However, for what it's worth, from a military perspective, I doubt any
connection between the two would have been possible. Her husband being
a full bird colonel in the US army, and both sons being west point
graduates and commissioned officers, there is a certain protocol
required of military families, especially with those of rank. Having
been raised in a military family myself, I can attest to that. Anyway,
the wife was expected to live up to a fairly high level of standard..
If she didn't, it usually meant a forced early retirement for the
husband. With crowley's reputation, I don't think the military would
have tolerated a connection. But, stranger things have happened.
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by gls
Post by Ben Scaro
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
Btw, he was originally affiliated with a finnish RC group (It's
actually more of a RC church) which still exists (independent of
amorc). Hum... Finnish and R+C is a strange mix to my ears.
What's the history of that group?
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Sincerely,
Al :)
best

gls
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-06 05:40:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings,

You pretty much got the jist of it. Good memory. Vanloo seems to
believe she didn't know much about Crowley and his reputation,
especially since back then he was fresh in America. Crowley describes
the NY upper class teosophic ladies as sheepish. But I imagine it was
a good arena for him to pose and impress people. He seems to think he
master the social bit and even brags about "saving" HSL from making a
fool of himself.

You'll find the info of Vanloo here:

http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/sunrise/vanloo/vanloo.htm

It's on Koenigs site dedicated to the OTO and all it's relations, but
its a subsite dedicated to the AMORC connection by Vanloo.

Here are some of Peters take on it:
http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/white.htm
http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/sunrise/vanloo/mylewis.htm
He also gets into it in other articles on his website.

I'll get back to you on the Finnish group.

Sincerely,
Al :)
Post by gls
Hi Al;
<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by gls
Also, it's a good possibility that she was a theosophist associated
with their inner circle. I once tried to trace her back to India to
the Theosophical Society's hq thinking maybe she came out of their
alleged R+C circle, but couldn't actually place her there. Couldn't
get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed. To be
honest, I didn't really try all that hard. I had arranged to go there
when in India back in 1985 for that reason, but the meet never
happened.
What do you think of Mr. Vanloos speculation that she is the one
mentioned by Crowley in his diary.
I'm relying on memory here as mr. vanloo's book can't be found in my
library at the moment. Plus, I might be confusing this with a
different conversation I had a long time ago, but what I recall is
that vanloo was suggesting that mary banks was, in effect, the
contact between hsl and crowley in that they both appeared in New York
at about the same time circa 1914. If you could be so kind as to give
me an idea where in crowley's diary he mentions her, I'll let you know
what I think.
However, for what it's worth, from a military perspective, I doubt any
connection between the two would have been possible. Her husband being
a full bird colonel in the US army, and both sons being west point
graduates and commissioned officers, there is a certain protocol
required of military families, especially with those of rank. Having
been raised in a military family myself, I can attest to that. Anyway,
the wife was expected to live up to a fairly high level of standard..
If she didn't, it usually meant a forced early retirement for the
husband. With crowley's reputation, I don't think the military would
have tolerated a connection. But, stranger things have happened.
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by gls
Post by Ben Scaro
Regarding Thor Kiimalehto, we discussed the issue of Mrs Kiimalehto's
Btw, he was originally affiliated with a finnish RC group (It's
actually more of a RC church) which still exists (independent of
amorc). Hum... Finnish and R+C is a strange mix to my ears.
What's the history of that group?
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Sincerely,
Al :)
best
gls
Ben Scaro
2008-04-06 11:07:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
In my opinion, I'm not so sure it was a step forward. It is in the
sense there is an attempt at documentation, but in some instances the
same old game is being played -- make the round peg fit the square
hole. One of the reasons why I say this is I know that present day
amorc has documentation about 1909, the journey, and contacts which
they feel they want to ignore and replace it with speculation masked
as documented research to try to force a history that is more in
agreement with what others in the esoteric community find acceptable.
Ben:

Dear Gary, I'm glad for the documentation in it . . . but I'm
interested in your comment about contacts they want to ignore and
forcing a history that suits others in the esoteric community. Can
you please elaborate a bit?

I take it you mean AMORC today is then not the AMORC of old that
dismissed everything else as 'inauthentic' ? Or are they worried
about potential smears were some of HSL's 1909 associations to become
better known?

However, re the tail wagging the dog, I do think to an extent that
their hand has been forced by the work of Roggemanns, Vanloo, Koenig,
Milko and probably in all honesty by what is said on here.

Most of their members know zip about the real history and it must
worry them slightly to have conceded the field to non-members.

I commented some time back that there are instances where the Rebisse
history seems to have made an attempt to address some of the most
strident criticisms of Vanloo etc, but without actually being adult
enough to name the guy and recognise his argument in the first place,
which is a bit odd.
Post by gls
I see amorc being more apologetic about its existence, especially
regarding its history, than assertive, and as such, the tail ends up
wagging the dog.  And when there are attempts at assertion, it's
presented as aggression. I feel amorc should present their case openly
and honestly and not mickey mouse their way through their own history.
Ben:
I suppose that having 'mickey moused' their way for so long, it's hard
to change tack. A pity because the method is clearly inadequate to
present what is in essence a very rich and full story.
Post by gls
Post by Ben Scaro
I don't agree with all of it by any stretch, and there are things like
the 'May Banks Stacey' story that I'm still suspicious
You probably know this, but her name was Mary Banks. Her husbands name
was May Stacey.
Ben:
The thing with her is that when I read things like the Denise
Clairembault letter (admittedly in translation), it seems to confuse
things by referring to 'May Banks Stacey' and I'm not that sure
they're not confusing the mother with the son. Taking your mother to
a place like the Philippines in the 1890s would seem unusual, it had
two wars in succession and was pretty lawless at the time.





(snip) and she did profess
Post by gls
to have rosicrucian connections and did give hsl some jewellery. I've
seen it, but nothing that can be said to be Rosicrucian. Her husband
was a Mason and that is how hsl got the masonic rosicrucian emblem
that amorc touted around for awhile.
Ben:
I think that jewel is pictured in the Wikipedia article on AMORC and
there's no way in the world it's as old as it is said to be. I think
the Masonic Rose-Croix is a likely source for this connection. Quite
possibly that was the basis of Julius Sachse's claimed R+C connection
too.

Despite various Masonic attempts to 'whitewash' the Rose-Croix, it's
obviously Rosicrucian and perhaps in terms of content its a heck of a
lot more esoteric than the Masonic Rosicrucians themselves (SRIA and
associated orders).

The jewel pictured though, so far as I know is not an SRIA bauble.
Theirs are somewhat different and wouldn't obviously strike one as
Rosicrucian (they look more Templar than anything).


My feeling is that her R+C
Post by gls
connection was through her husband having been a Scottich Rite Mason.
Also, it's a good possibility that she was a theosophist associated
with their inner circle. I once tried to trace her back to India to
the Theosophical Society's hq thinking maybe she came out of their
alleged R+C circle, but couldn't actually place her there.
Ben:
Well, that was what Clairembault seemed to hint at - maybe Besant's
Order of the Star in the East ? But he (?) also references the
Masonic OES. I'm not quite sure what he's getting at there.

Couldn't
Post by gls
get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed.
Ben: Wasn't it her son,Cromwell, who was based there? The husband died
in 1886, at which time the Philippines was a Spanish colony. David T
Rocks article doesn't list the husband being stationed there, though
it's only a brief sketch.

Regards

Ben
Sid
2008-04-06 16:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ben Scaro
Couldn't get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed.
Ben: Wasn't it her son,Cromwell, who was based there? The husband died
in 1886, at which time the Philippines was a Spanish colony. David T
Rocks article doesn't list the husband being stationed there, though
it's only a brief sketch.
Regards
Ben
Interesting that you mention the Philippines. The latest internet
Rosicrucian group/Order to start up there calls itself the KMCE. It
looks as if they also have a base in the US as well.

So many failed Masonic experiments desperate for recognition. Even the
S'tologists are in the business of starting Occult Orders.

The confusion continues
Sid
2008-04-06 18:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid
Post by Ben Scaro
Couldn't get her past the Philippines where her husband was stationed.
Ben: Wasn't it her son,Cromwell, who was based there? The husband died
in 1886, at which time the Philippines was a Spanish colony. David T
Rocks article doesn't list the husband being stationed there, though
it's only a brief sketch.
Regards
Ben
Interesting that you mention the Philippines. The latest internet
Rosicrucian group/Order to start up there calls itself the KMCE. It
looks as if they also have a base in the US as well.
So many failed Masonic experiments desperate for recognition. Even the
S'tologists are in the business of starting Occult Orders.
The confusion continues
http://knightsofthemce.blogspot.com/search/label/History
w***@gmail.com
2008-04-06 22:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
KMCE is not affiliated with Gary Stewart or AMORC...just to clear this
out. Thanks
Post by Sid
Post by Sid
Ben
Interesting that you mention the Philippines. The latest internet
Rosicrucian group/Order to start up there calls itself the KMCE. It
looks as if they also have a base in the US as well.
So many failed Masonic experiments desperate for recognition. Even the
S'tologists are in the business of starting Occult Orders.
The confusion continues
http://knightsofthemce.blogspot.com/search/label/History
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-07 03:00:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings,

Anyone know if this is a perpetuation/splinter from "Clymers" MCE,
AMORCs MCE or Stewarts OMCE?

Their Imperator (sic) seem to think that the brightest souls on earth
have been incarnated in the bodies of the Philippine people.

Gary, I tried sending you a mail about the finnish group, but
apparently you do not take incoming fire.

Sincerely,
Al :)
gls
2008-04-07 05:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Al;
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Greetings,
Anyone know if this is a perpetuation/splinter from "Clymers" MCE,
AMORCs MCE or Stewarts OMCE?
He's not from the OMCE. He's been trying to get in touch with me --
sending emails to our website, but I haven't responded. It looks to me
that he is borrowing a lot from our site, but he has no connection
with us.
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Their Imperator (sic) seem to think that the brightest souls on earth
have been incarnated in the bodies of the Philippine people.
Gary, I tried sending you a mail about the finnish group, but
apparently you do not take incoming fire.
I'm emailing you at the yahoo address ,,,
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Sincerely,
Al :)
gls
Ben Scaro
2008-04-07 11:53:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sid

I've travelled widely in the Philippines and it always seemed to me a
fertile ground for some of the more eccentric realms of Western
mysticism.

The interests of Imelda Marcos who at one point claimed to be a
reincarnated Egyptian princess, and the foibles of their 'hangers-on
at court' at Malacanang Palace - it attracted all sorts of
soothsayers and paranormal 'experts'- set my antenna whirring a bit.

I even wondered a couple of years ago whether Ferdie or Imelda were
AMORC members. As the M Roggemanns found, as far as right-wing
dictators went, they would have been in good company (!) But I don't
believe this was the case.

Esoterically, Arnoldo Krum-Heller issued charters for his FRA for all
the Spanish-speaking world and that included the Philippines, but I'm
not sure FRA ever took root there and Parzival K-H could not recall
who was issued the charter for the PI in any event. It may have just
been mailed to some Masonic lodge and forgotten about.

I have queried Pinoy occult connections a few times about any traces
of Mrs Banks-Stacey in the PI, but have never had any bites.

Someone surfaced a year or so back trying to allege they were starting
an R+C group in the PI with a claimed lineage involving SAR Hieronymus
of all people. The 'chain of initiation' seemed to have been
specifically designed to detour round the uncomfortably obvious source
(AMORC). After a few well-aimed queries, the guy talking it up turned
out not to have a leg to stand on, and packed up his wares and moved
on.

Rather like this site, which seems to skirt around any details of
recent linkages while pointing optimistically at 1586 and hoping for
the best. Ergo, I wonder if this KMCE isn't just the latest iteration
of that.

It seems more or less inevitable that they derive in some way from
AMORC in the Philippines.

Ben
Post by Sid
Interesting that you mention the Philippines. The latest internet
Rosicrucian group/Order to start up there calls itself the KMCE. It
looks as if they also have a base in the US as well.
So many failed Masonic experiments desperate for recognition. Even the
S'tologists are in the business of starting Occult Orders.
The confusion continues
gls
2008-04-05 04:56:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Al;

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:16:04 -0700 (PDT), ***@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
I must confess I investigated it in depth, to the best of my ability,
and collected piles and piles of documentation and interviewed and/or
discussed with a lot of key people (including Mr. Stewart, Mr. Raymond
Bernard, Mr. Ken O'Neil and many others)
Incidentally, I don't know if you know as I can't remember how long it
has been since we last communicated, but ken and I buried the hatchet
a few years ago. He only lives a couple of hundred miles from me now.

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
- all with the intention of
not only understanding the different layers of the subject but also
publish some sort of "neutral" account of it.
Alas, I was naiv.
Albeit I did get deeper into it, the more I learned the less I *knew*.
To be sure, it was both a Pandoras box as well as a Matryoshka doll.
Fortunately, my priorities got wiser and I abandoned the task of
getting to the "bottom" of it. I've still got my reasearch stashed
away in boxes, where it lies like a beurochrats wet dream. I did share
a few pointers with others, for instance Roggemans, Koenig, etc, but
mainly I withdrew from the whole task.
That's too bad as I think you would have been the best person to
document and write the history -- not just about the events of 1990,
but about the history of Rosicrucianism. In my opinion, 1990 could be
relegated to a footnote saying something like it was a pissing match
between two yahoos where both ended up acquiring what they really
needed, and where Rosicrucianism benefited through its release from
20th century institutional bondage.

Interestingly. The Stubbs manuscript had a chapter devoted to what he
called the War of the Roses which was about the schisms of the late
19th c.

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
In fact, observing Mr. Stewarts mostly entertaining but occasional
interesting inputs in this forum only confirms my personal experience.
With one exception: An unhealthy patience about nitpicking discussions
leading nowhere.
Sometimes nitpicking will get someone somewhere ... but sometimes,
not.

<snip>
Post by f***@yahoo.co.uk
Sincerely,
Al
(We can forgive a child for being afraid of the dark. The real tragedy
of life is when adults fear the Light. - Plato).
gls
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-05 05:31:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Gary,
Post by gls
Incidentally, I don't know if you know as I can't remember how long it
has been since we last communicated, but ken and I buried the hatchet
a few years ago. He only lives a couple of hundred miles from me now.
I didn't know, but that sounds great. I was in a restricted online
council on amorc history (you would probably recognize some of the
involved) where Ken entered right before it collapsed into the great
abyss. I believe the digital scans of the cromaat series, now
available everywhere, was leaked from there. Incidentally, one of the
participants made a nice website on amorc nostalgia, called the salon
RC.
Post by gls
That's too bad as I think you would have been the best person to
document and write the history -- not just about the events of 1990,
but about the history of Rosicrucianism.
You're too kind, but even if you're right the market changed
dramatical making the task more or less superfluous. Between the bunch
of internet researchers, the amorc christians, the remy boyer people,
and all kinds of info floating around lately, the world changed too
fast from when I first touched it. Back then, all you could find about
RC on the internet was a few amorc members crying out for contact with
others. There wasnt even any homepages by amorc or others. I believe
most of the action took place in forums like Gnosis Journal etc, but
enter the net and they all went under. So my old survey on rosicrucian
groups (i also made one on martinist groups which i never published)
was actually a revolution - now its an anachronism 8-) Besides, I did
share some of my research with others who made use of it (mostly
uncredited which was just as well considering many of them had agendas
or where just being too gossipy). But overall, the market was not as
starving anymore, and i concluded that information-wise most was
available already (at least for the persistent seeker). Add to this Im
swamped in other writing tasks, esoterically and exoterically. My
field of interest and priorities have transmuted.

As for the schism - there's additional reasons for staying out of
that. One of them you point out below.

However, I see your point about someone not being downright
antagonistic, promotional or completely exoteric in their approach.
There's too little of that in this area, imho.
Post by gls
In my opinion, 1990 could be
relegated to a footnote saying something like it was a pissing match
between two yahoos where both ended up acquiring what they really
needed, and where Rosicrucianism benefited through its release from
20th century institutional bondage.
Interestingly. The Stubbs manuscript had a chapter devoted to what he
called the War of the Roses which was about the schisms of the late
19th c.
Which was also my working title on the conflict, until I discovered
McIntosh named his chapter on the Peladan-Guaita feud precisely that.

Nice knowing the CRC Work is progressing. I entered the website
recently, but it didn't seem to been updated in a while. Which in my
view is a good sign that energy and priorities are where they should
be: Internally, esoterically and off-line.

Regards,
Al :)
Loading...