Discussion:
Gary Stewart's lies and deception
(too old to reply)
Melanaigis
2008-03-19 10:50:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Gary Stewart wrote:
I don't avoid any questions. In that I am infrequently participating
in this ng, there may be times where I don't see posts with questions
directed at myself, but as I recall that time, I answered everything
you directed at me. If you feel I didn't, ask me now.
--------------------------

The questions I asked are still hanging unanswered.

A few more:

An office can be opened for a few thousand dollars. This could have been
done with ready cash.

Why did you need BORROW three and a half million dollars to open an office?

Why pay the enormous interest on such a large loan when it was not
necessary?

Why borrow the money before the Board had agreed on a plan to spend it?

What was the plan for the three and a half million dollar loan?

How did you plan on paying the money back?

Andorra was known as a place where drug lords and smugglers laundered money
and unethical banking practices were common. Why set up the trust in
Andorra? Why not Spain? Portugal, Gibralter? Why not use the bank accounts
AMORC already had?



What was the urgency to get money out of country before board doubled in
size with a lot of new faces?


Why did you refuse to return the money when two directors asked for it?

This time there is no one to bait into a fight to distract people away from
the
questions. .




Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-19 21:03:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:50:38 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
I don't avoid any questions. In that I am infrequently participating
in this ng, there may be times where I don't see posts with questions
directed at myself, but as I recall that time, I answered everything
you directed at me. If you feel I didn't, ask me now.
--------------------------
The questions I asked are still hanging unanswered.
No, to the best of my knowledge, they are not. The problem with you is
that you think you already know the answer and if you don't get the
answer you want, you make accusations that they remain hanging.

But I tell you what, you start answering the questions and/or
responding to our previous discussions on alchemy, the parabola, etc.
I put to you and I'll start giving you a little more consideration.
It's obvious your intent is not to ask questions so as to find out my
thinking or why I took an action that I did. It's your attempt to
prove whatever it is you want to prove about me as defined by your
heading to this thread. You have a serious obsession you need to
temper.
Post by Melanaigis
An office can be opened for a few thousand dollars. This could have been
done with ready cash.
Why did you need BORROW three and a half million dollars to open an office?
You already know the facts. The SGL took out a five million dollar
line of credit of which three was to be used to seed the establishment
of a Spanish grand Lodge in Spain. We weren't opening an office. We
already had an office in Spain headed by Jeannine Morgan.
Post by Melanaigis
Why pay the enormous interest on such a large loan when it was not
necessary?
Why liquidate our assets and pay penalties?
Post by Melanaigis
Why borrow the money before the Board had agreed on a plan to spend it?
We established a revolving line of credit and only borrowed funds that
we agreed to use for the purposes stated. This has been answered time
and time again.
Post by Melanaigis
What was the plan for the three and a half million dollar loan?
This has been answered time and time again over the course of the past
18 years. I know you have seen some if not all my responses because
from time to time you come up with snippets of what I wrote with the
intent to prove I had some nefarious plan to send amorc back to the
"dark ages".
Post by Melanaigis
How did you plan on paying the money back?
dues, investments, and other income. Just like amorc has always paid
back its loans.
Post by Melanaigis
Andorra was known as a place where drug lords and smugglers laundered money
and unethical banking practices were common.
Google Andorra banking and find out for yourself. You're jsut spouting
stupidity here.
Post by Melanaigis
Why set up the trust in
Andorra? Why not Spain? Portugal, Gibralter? Why not use the bank accounts
AMORC already had?
Once again, you know the answer to this. If you have a real question
about why Andorra, ask it after researching Andorra and its banking
policies comparing them to the advantages of the other locations you
mention.
Post by Melanaigis
What was the urgency to get money out of country before board doubled in
size with a lot of new faces?
No urgency.
Post by Melanaigis
Why did you refuse to return the money when two directors asked for it?
Once again, you're playing games with what I wrote the other day and
what you already know from previous discussions on the subject. The
two directors didn't ask me to return the money, they tried to block
its transfer after I left the country to attend a meeting with the
grand masters. Why they agreed to it and then tried to stop it after I
left raised red flags with the bank so the bank refused to return it
until the matter was resolved therefore it remained in limbo. A few
days later, the bank completed the transfer as initially instructed.

The only time *I* was asked to return the funds was during the newly
convened board meeting in San Jose when all gm's were added to the
board. I voted no on the proposal to return the funds but was out
voted. I made it clear I disagreed, but would do as the majority
determined. I called the bank that night to get it when it opened
(there is a 10 hour time difference) only to find the bank was closed
for a banking holiday (Maundy Thursday) and would not open until the
following Tuesday. When I told the board, Raab pipes in that there is
no such banking holiday in Europe and Schaa chimes in for a call for a
"vote of confidence" (he meant a vote of *no* confidence, but I didn't
say anything).

Now that I answered your questions, why don't we continue with the
previous discussion and you respond to my contentions and questions?
Post by Melanaigis
This time there is no one to bait into a fight to distract people away from
the
questions. .
You have me all wrong Keranos. If I wanted to bait you I would go
about it all differently. First of all, I wouldn't be calling you
Keranos. I would call you Mayonaise as a play on your addy, or, I
wouldn't give you any respect by referring to you by name, any name,
at all. Then I would start responding to other folks on the ng and
maybe start referring to you in the third person by saying something
like "Mayonaise has developed his own type of logic I call Keranesian
logic where demonstrability is not necessary to prove validity and all
that is needed is simple say-so." Next, I would start new threads with
old topics and use titles such as 'Mayonaise's lies and deceptions' or
'intellectual shenanigans' etc. Then I would start ignoring what you
write in context and respond out of context so as to make you appear
to be saying something other than what you said; and then I would
start making up things and attributing them to you as well as taking
what you write and making seemingly minor edits here and there to make
them appear different from what was initially written ... but I'm not
doing that.

No, I'm not trying to bait you at all. I'm trying to have a
conversation with you even though it is a conversation of disagreement
for the most part, but a conversation nonetheless. But it appears you
are awfully obsessive with me and what I say and that isn't healthy
for you. Pouring hours and hours through my writings looking for
something you can use to prove yourself right is becoming a problem
for you. You should believe in yourself a little more.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Ben Scaro
2008-03-20 15:14:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
No, I'm not trying to bait you at all. I'm trying to have a
conversation with you even though it is a conversation of disagreement
for the most part, but a conversation nonetheless. But it appears you
are awfully obsessive with me and what I say and that isn't healthy
for you. Pouring hours and hours through my writings looking for
something you can use to prove yourself right is becoming a problem
for you. You should believe in yourself a little more.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
This is a good response.

I'm still waiting for Mr William Gleason to quote where I called AMORC
'fraudulent' in this debate.

Exact words, if you will, and not some half-arsed misinterpretation of
other things I said.

Ben
Melanaigis
2008-03-20 16:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ben Scaro
gls
This is a good response.
I'm still waiting for Mr William Gleason to quote where I called AMORC
'fraudulent' in this debate.
Exact words, if you will, and not some half-arsed misinterpretation of
other things I said.
Ben
======================
There is no misinterpretation. You do not have the moral integrity to write
straightforward English. This is common among those who indulge in occult
study in the fraudulent schools. So you malign and smear by innuendo; but
you made it clear in several postings you think AMORC is a bogus order.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Ben Scaro
2008-03-21 10:13:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
======================
There is no misinterpretation. You do not have the moral integrity to write
straightforward English. This is common among those who indulge in occult
study in the fraudulent schools. So you malign and smear by innuendo; but
you made it clear in several postings you think AMORC is a bogus order.
Keranos
So, what you mean to say, in your bitter, venomous way, William, is
that I didn't call AMORC fraudulent ?

That's what you mean to say, isn't it ?

Give yourself a Vietnam service medal, mate. How about: Distinguished
service, Long Tan, 1979.

That should do it.

Ben
Melanaigis
2008-03-21 13:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ben Scaro
Post by Melanaigis
======================
There is no misinterpretation. You do not have the moral integrity to write
straightforward English. This is common among those who indulge in occult
study in the fraudulent schools. So you malign and smear by innuendo; but
you made it clear in several postings you think AMORC is a bogus order.
Keranos
So, what you mean to say, in your bitter, venomous way, William, is
that I didn't call AMORC fraudulent ?
Ben
================
You can't take it when someone uses the same tactics on you, that you and
the Lewis haters use on everyone else who posts here can you Ben Scaro?
You are nothing but a sly puerile adolescent minded fool. Your own fantasies
are your punishment. Revel in your malice and hate.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-20 09:51:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Hi Keranos;
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:50:38 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
I don't avoid any questions. In that I am infrequently participating
in this ng, there may be times where I don't see posts with questions
directed at myself, but as I recall that time, I answered everything
you directed at me. If you feel I didn't, ask me now.
--------------------------
The questions I asked are still hanging unanswered.
No, to the best of my knowledge, they are not. The problem with you is
that you think you already know the answer and if you don't get the
answer you want, you make accusations that they remain hanging.
======================
You have NOT answered the questions I asked. You claim you answered them
hoping people will believe it.
You've thrown out some insults to entertain the harpies that follow you.
You've evaded and distracted attention, self-justified, and quibbled over
irrelevant details. But you haven't answered the questions I asked.
One thing you have accomplished-you've made it clear why you were unfit for
the job of imperator.
You want to irrevocably join AMORC with the insane accretions that have
always sprung up around the mystery schools. (The same accretions the
Lewis's worked so hard to differentiate AMORC from, the same accretions the
Lewis's looked on with such contempt) Your intent is to obscure the light
with cynicism and foolishness and sophistry.
So you promote frauds and mountebanks as real Rosicrucians. (You've now
added alchemy to your bag of tricks.) You malign genuine Rosicrucians or
call their initiation bogus. Or emphasize their eccentricities. All this
under the pretense of being "honest" and historically accurate.

I wish you success in attracting your own kind to your CRC group. You
deserve them.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-21 16:32:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 05:51:36 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
You have NOT answered the questions I asked. You claim you answered them
hoping people will believe it.
You know, you could easily resolve this dilemma by simply posting the
questions you think I haven't answered. I suggested this, what, two or
three times already? And all you respond with is a perpetual whine
about how you're being abused, questions being avoided, etc. etc. I
must really get your goat (no pun intended) somehow.

But, I'm getting kind of tired of all your whining and accusations
without you even attempting to qualify your position let alone
qualifying them in a rational and reasonable manner. It has become
blatantly obvious that your positions are consistently bested by
anyone chosing to respond to your posts and your only ability to
respond is to embark on an accusatory and whining campaign.
Post by Melanaigis
You've thrown out some insults to entertain the harpies that follow you.
I don't think anyone here is following me and I'm flattered that you
think I'm entertaining folks, but when it comes down to the nitty
gritty, you're the one offering up most of the entertainment.

*I'm* throwing insults says the one who commits himself to posting
libel in a public forum? No, not exactly. You accuse me of baiting (or
trying to bait you as you pretend) and I responded with how I would go
about baiting you if that was what I wanted to do. Remember? I started
out by saying I would mess with your addy and call you "mayonaise"?

What I didn't say, but now that you bring it up, if I wanted to insult
you, I would start out by calling you "goat boy". But when it comes
down to it, I don't think I really could insult you because I would
simply just be pointing out your own choice of imagery you have made
for yourself. Ok, but let's try ...

You've made it clear that you're some sort of hot shot amorcian
historian and are able to trace the history of amorc way beyond what I
claim. And I think you kinda pride yourself in that fact (remember my
warning regarding Ampeercha's children several days ago?). So much so
that you take on a rather obscure name as your addy (obscure only to
those not versed in Greek mythology). That being, "Melanaigis". You
figure it would be a sign that you know all about the Dionysian
mysteries and being a rosicrucian, such would be a mark of your
historical acumen. But I ask, why "Melanaigis"? Why not one of the
other animal incarnations of Dionysis such as the bull, deer, fox,
wolf, bear, etc? Why a black skinned goat? Here's my dilemma with you.
On the one hand you're always harping on others as being of the black
magic persuasion, but at the same time you choose the imagery to
identify yourself that such folks as Crowley and Lovecraft use. You
must know what you're doing because one of your heros, Levi,
illustrates that imagery as the Sabbatic Goat -- naturally a bit more
toned down than the way Crowley and others view it.

I'm sure you know that "Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin".
The title Melanaigis is explained in the Souda by the story of how
that manifestation of Dionysis came to be. Anyway, the daughters of
Eleuther saw an apparition of Dionysis wearing a black goat skin and,
because they mocked him, they went mad (got converted to become a
maenad). As the story goes, to cure their insanity, theit father
followed the advice of an oracle to institute the Cult of Dionysis
Melanaigis. Its most significant instance is how it is introduced into
the foundation myth of the City of Dionysia: Pegason of Eleutherai
brought the statue of Dionysis to Attica but the Athenians did not
receive it with honor. The angry god then sent an incurable affliction
on the genitals of all the men, which could only be cured by paying
every honor to the god by fashioning phalluses for use in his worship
as a memorial to their suffering. Therefore, every year, the festival
of Dionysis was inagurated by bringing in the cult statue with temple
girls carrying wood and bronze phalloi following a cart carrying a
larger phallus in procession from the academy which was just outside
the city to its temple and theater precinct.

Now, here's the insult: The imagery you have created for yourself
(probably intentionally) is that of a black goat skinned god with a
hard on being carted around with a bunch of phalluses. I find you to
be very hypocritical, Melanaigis, here you are imaging yourself after
the Shub Niggurath while you put yourself high and mighty above others
who do the same ... and this is what you want to be a part of your
history of amorc?

There's some interesting things going on within the Dionysian
mysteries especially when it comes to the afterlife, but you've got to
look at things the way they were, or are!

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
One thing you have accomplished-you've made it clear why you were unfit for
the job of imperator.
I guess that's a problem for you, isn't it? How to reconcile that your
judgement is better than the judgement of Ralph Lewis without making
him look bad. But, live with it. Regardless of what you think of my
abilities, I am the Imperator.
Post by Melanaigis
You want to irrevocably join AMORC with the insane accretions that have
always sprung up around the mystery schools. (The same accretions the
Lewis's worked so hard to differentiate AMORC from, the same accretions the
Lewis's looked on with such contempt)
That's laughable. Read the above Melanaigis. You've done a good job of
actually doing what you accuse me of trying to do.

<snip more whining>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-22 13:38:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
You've made it perfectly clear why you don't believe the Rosicrucians have
roots in the mystery schools of Greece and Egypt. You are totaly ignorant of
the meaning of the symbols they used or their associations. Your judgement
is as shallow as that of Crowley et al. You obviously have no experience
with Rosicrucian initiation. How did you fool Ralph Lewis?

Melanaigis
======================
"gls" <***@blackland.com> wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-23 21:11:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Melanaigis;

I see you've abandoned the use of 'keranos'. Would that be an act of
defiance on your part? Or denial?

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:38:23 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
You've made it perfectly clear why you don't believe the Rosicrucians have
roots in the mystery schools of Greece and Egypt.
I don't think anything written is perfectly clear to you let alone
anything I've written -- which is obvious considering I was writing
about *your* choice of identifying with the cult of dionysis
melanaigis.
Post by Melanaigis
You are totaly ignorant of
the meaning of the symbols they used or their associations.
I've heard about revisionist history, but not about revisionist
mythology which is obvious as to where you're going with this. But ok,
I'll bite ... please enlighten us about your choice of identifying
with the symbolism of the black skinned goat and the phallus, what
they mean, and how they are used in you alleged rosicrucian
associations.
Post by Melanaigis
Your judgement
is as shallow as that of Crowley et al. You obviously have no experience
with Rosicrucian initiation.
You're getting to be very repetitive saying things like this, so much
so, that it's beginning to appear you're more concerned about
convincing yourself that what you say about me is true rather than
trying to convince others.
Post by Melanaigis
How did you fool Ralph Lewis?
I've always found it interesting that some of my detractors try to
present me as being incompetent and unknowledgeable about
rosicrucianism on the one hand, while at the same time being a
manipulative genius capable of fooling Rosicrucian Imperators and
adepts on the other. So, if what you say is true that I am shallow and
obviously have no experience with rosicrucian initiation, then you
must believe the same about Ralph Lewis since he selected me to
replace him. If you think I fooled him, then you still must think rml
was incompetent and shallow in that he was easily duped. Or, which is
more likely, Ralph knew what he was doing and I'm neither shallow, a
manipulative genius, nor fooled him. But I know, you can't accept that
because it would make you wrong and you can't be wrong. You've got
quite a quandary to sort out don't you? Best that you ignore it
otherwise your house of cards will come tumbling down.
Post by Melanaigis
Melanaigis
as you wish

gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-24 16:54:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
GLS

You were entitled to a tribunal where you would be questioned by the
heirarchy. You would be allowed to freely explain your actions and answer
any charges. You've been given ample opportunity here; moreover I only used
your description of events to pose questions.
You responded with evasion, arrogant posturing, insults, equivocation, and
distraction.
Moreover you depict the Eleusinian symbols, (where HSL, RML and even Michael
Maier trace the origins of the Rosicrucians) in the most vulgar terms you
can imagine.
You've ridiculed Rosicrucian origins.
You've rejected the course steered by past Imperators so you can embrace the
pseudo rosicrucian groups that have always plagued the innocent seeker.
You've betrayed the trust placed in your hands.
You were given the largest, most successful, and prestigious mystic
organization in history. All you had to do was hold the reigns. You couldn't
even do that. You created turmoil, instead.
You exhibit most of the symptoms Eliphas Levi describes as "astral
intoxication". They are the sad results of injudicious occult practice, and
mixing occult studies from various groups in the hope of cherry picking the
best and most effective methods of reaching whatever goal people seek.
You are deluded in believing you are "Imperator".
You are Imperator of nothing.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-24 22:21:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

I see you're back to signing as "keranos". A little red faced are you?
No matter, "melanaigis" suits you better so I think I'll stay with
that.

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:54:50 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
GLS
<snipped huffing and puffing>

remember the house of cards you're in melanaigis? Not a good idea to
do a lot of that huffing and puffing in there. But yes, the tribunal
subject was discussed for years. Pay attention.
Post by Melanaigis
Moreover you depict the Eleusinian symbols, (where HSL, RML and even Michael
Maier trace the origins of the Rosicrucians) in the most vulgar terms you
can imagine.
Need a little more wiggle room to try and move those goal posts
Melanaigis? I kind of figured you'd be rather embarassed by the
imagery with which you associated yourself. Again, pay attention,
neither you nor I were discussing anything Eleusinian. The subject was
dionysian, and more specifically, the *Cult of Dionysias Melanaigis*
from which you adopted your internet identity. You're the one who
introduced the imagery, through your choice of name. I explained it
to you in case you didn't know about it; or exposed (no pun intended)
what the imagery meant if you did know about it but chose to keep the
matter to yourself for whatever reason.

I take it you accept Sir Francis Bacon as being a Rosicrucian
Imperator? You wouldn't be a good amorcian if you didn't and you
certainly would be at odds with both lewis' as well. But anyway, this
is what Bacon wrote in "The Wisdome of the Ancients" London, 1619:
"He [Dionysis] was held the inventor and institutor of Sacrifices, and
Ceremonies, and full of corruption and cruelty. Hee had power to
strike men with fury or madness [which I explained in my previous post
regarding the affliction he set upon the genitals of the Athenian
men]; for it is reported, that at the celebration of his Orgies, two
famous worthies, Pentheus and Orpheus were torne in pieces by certain
franticke women, [maenads] ..." I kept the original spelling as much
as possible. Because Bacon mentions it, are we to assume he means that
it is a part of Rosicrucian history?

Again, the name you freely use on the internet is associated with
these aspects of the Dionysian mysteries. The image is of a black
skinned goat and the phallus. These are images *you* chose to
represent by choosing your name. Whether or not they are vulgar
doesn't matter. If *you* consider them to be vulgar, they are terms
*you* introduced by virtue of the imagery your chosen name represents.

Now, absolutely nothing was said or referenced in my post about the
Eleusinian symbols, mysteries, or whatever ... but now that you
brought it up: No, Michael Maier does not trace the *origins* of the
Rosicrucians back to the Eleusinian mysteries or symbols. He did
believe that alchemical symbols were hidden in ancient myths; he does
mention the "wisdom of Hermes, King of Egypt" in his "Symbola Aurea";
and he most certainly did believe that the Rosicrucians had the secret
of making material gold (I assume Maier is one of the *authentic*
rosicrucians who sought the making of material alchemical gold and not
one of the frauds you mentioned earlier?)

But of the Eleusinian aspect, in his Silentium Post Clamores" he
writes of the Eleusinians as follows: "[they] were very familiar with
the art of making gold which they preserved and practised so secretly
that no one learned the name of the process." You have to take a giant
leap to conclude that Maier was saying that the origins of the R+C
could be traced back to Eleusinian symbols by virtue of what he wrote.
Would you be so kind to bridge that gap for us? It's not enough to say
that simply because he mentioned them in his writings that he
therefore concluded they were the origins of Rosicrucianism. He
mentions a lot of other myths as well which I doubt you would consider
to be a source for Rosicrucianism.
Post by Melanaigis
You've ridiculed Rosicrucian origins.
No, I disagreed with your take on the subject. To disagree does not
mean to ridicule.
Post by Melanaigis
You've rejected the course steered by past Imperators so you can embrace the
pseudo rosicrucian groups that have always plagued the innocent seeker.
No, in *some* areas I have disagreed with *some* of the historical,
literary, and doctrinal positions held by the past two Imperators. As
to the "course steered" by hsl and rml, if you mean I have rejected
those courses specifically dealing with their intolerance, then yes, I
would agree with you there. It is not the Rosicrucian position to pass
judgments on others as you are doing. It is our position to do the
Work.

<snipped more huffing and puffing>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-25 00:35:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
You show all the wit and ignorance of Voltaire, when he quipped Christianity
was a religion about a convicted criminal and a pigeon. Your understanding
of Eleusis, Dionysus and Rosicrucian initiation is no deeper than Voltaire's
understanding of Christianity.
It takes more than wit and cynicism to make an imperator; it's surprising
that the Supreme Grand Lodge board of directors put up with you for almost
three years.

KERANOS
AKA
MELANAIGIS
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-25 04:26:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:35:53 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
You show all the wit and ignorance of Voltaire, when he quipped Christianity
was a religion about a convicted criminal and a pigeon.
I'm not familiar with that quote. Could you please cite your source?
The reason I ask is because if you actually read Voltaire and keep his
words in context to what he was writing about, you would find that his
criticisms of Christianity (and all religion) was moreso with its
corporate, if you will, structure and not its beliefs. Have you ever
heard of the phrase "Voltairean Pantheism"? Probably not, but you
might want to look into it.

But here's something Voltaire wrote regarding one of the subjects at
hand: "Cicero himself was initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries. The
knowledge of only one God was the principal tenet inculcated in these
mysteries and magnificent festivals. It is undeniable that the prayers
and hymns handed down to us as belonging to these mysteries are the
most pious and most admirable of the relics of paganism."

But, just as a reminder, my issue with you is not about the Eleusinian
mysteries, but the Dionysian. Whatever were you thinking about when
you id'd yourself as "melanaigis"? This is what ... the third or
fourth time I asked?

Anyway, I could give you an almost endless number of his quotes
regarding the virtues of Christian belief, but I won't because you
don't really need any more diversions to keep you up at night as you
have enough on your plate already. The point being, though, that your
dismissive one liners do not serve your position, but only illustrate
your ignorance and lack of comprehension which, dare I say it,
envelopes you in an aura of stupidity.
Post by Melanaigis
Your understanding
of Eleusis, Dionysus and Rosicrucian initiation is no deeper than Voltaire's
understanding of Christianity.
Ummm... you might want to actually read Voltaire before saying this
because you are actually giving me a compliment when you fully
appreciate the intent and depth of Voltaire's philosophy. And you
might want to listen to what I'm saying as well because it's getting
painfully obvious that just about any discussion I and others have
with you goes well over your head. It seems your depth to just about
any topic discussed, from Martinism, to Vril, to Rosicrucian
initiation, and to dionysian and eleusinian mysteries is based upon
you grasping at one liner catch phrases taken out of context and
without a basic understanding of what is being discussed. I'm sorry to
be saying this to you, but you really do need to try and jumpstart
some of that grey matter of yours. You're causing it to atrophy with
your close mindedness and intolerance which is demonstrable by your
inability to carry on a conversation after having introduced your one
liner philosophy.
Post by Melanaigis
It takes more than wit and cynicism to make an imperator; it's surprising
that the Supreme Grand Lodge board of directors put up with you for almost
three years.
Maybe that was because they were witless? See, that was an example of
the use of "wit" as you were presenting it. In my humor (at my
expense), I was demonstrating to you what the absense of wit will
produce. Everyone needs wit, but, sigh, this will go over your head
as well I fear ...
Post by Melanaigis
KERANOS
AKA
MELANAIGIS
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-26 14:53:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
An essay on Voltaire; I'll file it alongside of the essay on the dark ages
and other irrelevant posts which you use to impress people with your
education. You are obsessed with proving your education entitled you to the
position of imperator. But it doesn't hide the fact that you do not have the
talent, insight or integrity needed for imperator.

You are so bitter at having been thrown out it colors your whole life. So
you must resort to malice and vulgarity where none is called for. But it
does distract the harpies.

I did not bring up the cult of Melanaigis; it is long gone. Cult followers,
even yours, do not act rationally. But the myth remains along with the
initiatic meanings it veils.. Since you have an adolescent fascination with
vulgarity in the ancient mysteries, you might like to research the Isiacs;
they castrated themselves in honor of Isis. The Romans paraded with four
foot long facsimile phalli in honor of Dionysus/Bacchus. Mithras contended
with the bull while a scorpion attacked its genitals. The Druids gave out
that when they cut the mistletoe from the oak tree on the winter solstice,
they were cutting off the genitals of the oak. Paracelsus was said to have
been castrated by a boar; although he was bald headed (which would prove
everything was in its proper place). The rabble could not understand the
symbolism. You obviously can't understand it either. Degenerates see only
vulgar erotica. The Rosicrucians do understand these symbols. They veil many
secrets of high initiation. To attempt to explain them, is to initiate the
unworthy. You display a remarkable ignorance of initiation. These things are
beyond you and your cult of personality. Go back to your gutter and revel in
your bitterness and vulgarity. You have no one to blame but yourself for
your ouster as imperator. Your non answers prove that.




By the way you owe Ben, Jadam and Bluebeard membership in the MCE. They suck
up magnificently.

And continue posting to this group; you prove you are ignorant of
Rosicrucians and unworthy of the imperator's title with each post.




Keranos aka Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-27 20:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:53:57 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
An essay on Voltaire; I'll file it alongside of the essay on the dark ages
and other irrelevant posts which you use to impress people with your
education.
Just curious ... if you think its irrelevant why do you bother filing
it?
Post by Melanaigis
You are obsessed with proving your education entitled you to the
position of imperator.
It's not in the having of an education, but in the ability to be
educated which is important. One needs both social skills and
communication skills which, when combined, culminate with a
reasonable ability to maintain an ongoing conversation without
changing the subject every few words, or throwing a tantrum when one's
opinion is challenged.

But no, it wasn't my education which entitled me to become Imperator,
but rather, my talent in understanding both Rosicrucian and mystical
tradition, initiation, and purpose; my integrity which forbids me from
compromising what I know to be right while at the same time being able
to admit when wrong and adjust accordingly; and to maintain working a
path to achieve the goal to which I have the talent to understand; and
my insight into understanding both particulars and nuances when it
comes to interpreting Rosicrucian and mystical experiences and
philosophy. That is what guided rml to choose me as his successor.
And he spent several years running me through the ringer to boot so as
to satisfy himself of my abilities.

What are your skills?
Post by Melanaigis
But it doesn't hide the fact that you do not have the
talent, insight or integrity needed for imperator.
You are so bitter at having been thrown out it colors your whole life.
Your buddy was a bit preoccupied with that notion, too ... But why are
you still obsessed over this whole amorc thing 18 years after the
fact? If you're happy with the way things are with amorc now, why all
the fuss?

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
I did not bring up the cult of Melanaigis;
No one did. But it was I who brought up the Cult of Dionysus
Melanaigis (you left the important part out). As I said before,
"Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin" and it was a cult
developed around Dionysus' appearance as a black skinned goat. I
brought it up when I asked you why you chose to identify yourself with
that name. I thought you knew that. Anyway, considering your rants and
accusations against just about everyone who dares disagree with you,
god forbid to disagree with you with viable arguments, as being
involved with or influenced by the dark path, or Crowley, or being
"astrally intoxicated", etc. I was curious as to why you chose to
identify yourself with a name that gives a source to that very path
you claim to be adamantly opposed to. I still am curious, but it's
blatantly obvious you have no intention of informing us.
Post by Melanaigis
it is long gone. Cult followers,
even yours, do not act rationally. But the myth remains along with the
initiatic meanings it veils..
You're trying to wiggle out of this one here ... but that's nothing
new. There's a big difference between symbolism and practice. The cult
of Dionysus (not *just* the cult of Dionysus Melanaigis) was involved
in the *actual practice* of drunken orgies, brutality, and in some
instances, the killing, tearing apart and cannibalism of humans -- and
not just depicting a mythological story that has a moral in its
telling. The problem with the type of thinking you demonstrate is that
you hear words like "Mystery School" and automatically think that such
a school must be good and therefore must be a source for
Rosicrucianism. But by laying claim to such roots, you are identifying
your perception of Rosicrucianism to those same roots. Trying to move
the goal posts, you argue that those cult practioners who engaged in
such activity had to have been the rabble who couldn't see beyond the
veil and therefore do not represent the ideals you want to believe in.
To believe such is a cop out, Melanaigis, and hypocritical. You're
guilty of selective thinking and belief . Your real purpose is to
embellish the organization you worship with the glamour of antiquity
so you can feel elite and feel better about yourself. Your belief has
nothing to do with following the Rosicrucian tradition of seeking
truth. Rather, you're about revising truth to conform to what you
*want* to believe. And at what cost? In your zeal, and in the zeal of
other amorcian Rosicrucians (as well as many others in other
traditions) who take a fanatical approach to their affiliation, when
it comes down to the bottom line of this discussion, you're
effectively arguing that it is ok to have drunken orgies in a
Rosicrucian Convocation because they mean something deeper and
spiritual. You need to start looking at the consequences of what you
write and what you say instead of being more concerned with what image
you project to others.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Go back to your gutter
sorry, can't. I live in a rural area and we have a septic system.
There are no gutters where I live.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
By the way you owe Ben, Jadam and Bluebeard membership in the MCE. They suck
up magnificently.
Membership in the MCE is controlled by Christian as it is an amorcian
thing.
Post by Melanaigis
And continue posting to this group; you prove you are ignorant of
Rosicrucians and unworthy of the imperator's title with each post.
I will continue to post to this group from time to time, yes. I have
no problem being assessed or even judged by those who read what I
write. And if they conclude I am unworthy of my title, that's ok with
me. I'm here to share ideas.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos aka Melanaigis
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-28 00:27:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
It's not in the having of an education, but in the ability to be
educated which is important. One needs both social skills and
communication skills which, when combined, culminate with a
reasonable ability to maintain an ongoing conversation without
changing the subject every few words, or throwing a tantrum when one's
opinion is challenged.
-------------
You demonstrated your abilities quite well by managing to alienate the AMORC
board of directors and getting yourself thrown out by unanimous vote.
I'll ignore the self serving nonsense you posted about your abilities.
================
Gary Stewart wrote:

..... my integrity which forbids me from
Post by gls
compromising what I know to be right
and
Post by gls
Your buddy was a bit preoccupied with that notion, too ... But why are
you still obsessed over this whole amorc thing 18 years after the
fact?
---------------------
My buddy??? If you are referring to Cathari's husband, I don't know him,
never met him. He was your friend and you obviously knew him quite well. I
have no idea what your personal differences are, but to engage in a vicious
fight which had nothing to do with AMORC or this newsgroup was uncalled for.
As for your integrity, you are simply hoping to smear me by associating me
with your freind, who you viciously attacked. You had the personal
relationship with him not me.
Is that your idea of integrity?
==============

Gary Stewart wrote:

But it was I who brought up the Cult of Dionysus
Post by gls
Melanaigis (you left the important part out). As I said before,
"Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin" and it was a cult
developed around Dionysus' appearance as a black skinned goat. I
brought it up when I asked you why you chose to identify yourself with
that name.
-------------------
Again you are proving your ignorance of the goat symbolism. You relate
everything to something sordid and can't see beyond it. Even the hoi polloi
had deeper insight into these matters.

=======================
Gary Stewart wrote:

I thought you knew that. Anyway, considering your rants and
Post by gls
accusations against just about everyone who dares disagree with you,
god forbid to disagree with you with viable arguments, as being
involved with or influenced by the dark path, or Crowley, or being
"astrally intoxicated", etc. I was curious as to why you chose to
identify yourself with a name that gives a source to that very path
you claim to be adamantly opposed to. I still am curious, but it's
blatantly obvious you have no intention of informing us.
--------------------
More smear tactics; is this your idea of integrity? You associate the goat
with black magic; it has other more important associations.
============
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
it is long gone. Cult followers,
even yours, do not act rationally. But the myth remains along with the
initiatic meanings it veils..
You're trying to wiggle out of this one here ... but that's nothing
new. There's a big difference between symbolism and practice. The cult
of Dionysus (not *just* the cult of Dionysus Melanaigis) was involved
in the *actual practice* of drunken orgies, brutality, and in some
instances, the killing, tearing apart and cannibalism of humans -- and
not just depicting a mythological story that has a moral in its
telling.
----------------------
Sun Myung Moon was engaged in the actual practice of mind control and
domination. So what should we judge about an imperator who brings in one of
Sun Myung Moon's right hand men? By your thinking shouldn't we conclude that
the imperator who does this is also engaging in mind control and domination?
imitating the same sordid practices?
The rest of your post is self-serving sophistry, not worth the time.

Keranos Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-28 20:04:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:27:24 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
You demonstrated your abilities quite well by managing to alienate the AMORC
board of directors and getting yourself thrown out by unanimous vote.
It was unanimous with those attending. One director didn't attend and
two others who technically should've been there weren't permitted to
attend by the newly elected board as they would have voted in
opposition to the majority ... but can't you come up with something
better and quite a bit more interesting to try and get my goat?

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
Your buddy was a bit preoccupied with that notion, too ... But why are
you still obsessed over this whole amorc thing 18 years after the
fact?
---------------------
My buddy??? If you are referring to Cathari's husband, I don't know him,
never met him. He was your friend and you obviously knew him quite well. I
have no idea what your personal differences are, but to engage in a vicious
fight which had nothing to do with AMORC or this newsgroup was uncalled for.
As for your integrity, you are simply hoping to smear me by associating me
with your freind, who you viciously attacked. You had the personal
relationship with him not me.
Actually, I was referring to Cathari and not her husband. She once
wrote me a long time ago to let me know she was in communication with
you and the both of you were sharing and collaborating on research.
The reason why I called you buddies is because the two of you share
almost identical research methodologies in that you first decide what
you *want* to believe and then set about trying to prove it by only
accepting those notions which you can twist into your peculiar
interpretation. Then the both of you go about rejecting the other
notions with quite a bit of vehemence and hatred so as to convince
yourself their denial is justified. What gets interesting is when some
poor, unsuspecting person who maybe posts for the first time steps on
a sore spot in the both of your ideologies, there is a sudden tantrum
of "foul", "fraud", Crowley", etc. etc. Which is precisely what you
just did when you assumed I was talking about armand; with what you're
doing with the discussion (a rather one-sided discussion I might add)
of the word "melanaigis"; and with how you treat anyone who dares to
disagree with you on any subject. Even when you responded to Vern way
back when, you started off with a brief welcome and then proceeded to
tell him about all the gloom and doom to expect from those who you
know will disagree with you. Methinks you protest too much ...

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
But it was I who brought up the Cult of Dionysus
Post by gls
Melanaigis (you left the important part out). As I said before,
"Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin" and it was a cult
developed around Dionysus' appearance as a black skinned goat. I
brought it up when I asked you why you chose to identify yourself with
that name.
-------------------
Again you are proving your ignorance of the goat symbolism. You relate
everything to something sordid and can't see beyond it. Even the hoi polloi
had deeper insight into these matters.
Sigh ... You need to get off your astral barstool and clear the fog
out of your mind and start focusing on the conversation back here on
Earth. We're not talking about the universal quantifier "goat" (i.e.,
as in the class of goat), but rather with the existential quantifier
of a *specific* manifestation of a goat. Yes, we can have an
interesting discussion on the history of goat symbolism and all the
variances it entails, but that would be a distinct and separate
discussion. What *we're* talking about is the manifestation of
Dionysus in a black goat skin and what that *particular* symbolism
means and what the followers of Dionysus actually did. The name you
choose to be identified with relates to that and not the general
symbolism of the goat.

So, based upon your meanderings around the subject, can I safely
assume you chose the name because you ignorantly thought it meant
something other than it does?
Post by Melanaigis
=======================
I thought you knew that. Anyway, considering your rants and
Post by gls
accusations against just about everyone who dares disagree with you,
god forbid to disagree with you with viable arguments, as being
involved with or influenced by the dark path, or Crowley, or being
"astrally intoxicated", etc. I was curious as to why you chose to
identify yourself with a name that gives a source to that very path
you claim to be adamantly opposed to. I still am curious, but it's
blatantly obvious you have no intention of informing us.
--------------------
More smear tactics; is this your idea of integrity? You associate the goat
with black magic; it has other more important associations.
What's that I hear reverberating throughout the forest above the sound
of the gallop of cloven hooves? Protestations of foul and evil doing?
If you didn't get it from the paragraph above, I'll say it again ...
we're talking about "melanaigis", the manifestation of Dionysus in a
black goat skin; his maenads, drunken orgies, the tearing asunder of
animals and humans and the eating of both by the followers of the god
and how all that applies to Rosicrucian initiation as you are
presenting that it does. I'm not talking about poor Vinnie van Goat
who grazes peacefully in the pasture dreaming of the day his kind
climbed the mountainsides reaching great heights ...

Sorry, Melanaigis, here's one of those instances where you will go
down screaming and kicking in denial because reality doesn't support
your fantasy.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
You're trying to wiggle out of this one here ... but that's nothing
new. There's a big difference between symbolism and practice. The cult
of Dionysus (not *just* the cult of Dionysus Melanaigis) was involved
in the *actual practice* of drunken orgies, brutality, and in some
instances, the killing, tearing apart and cannibalism of humans -- and
not just depicting a mythological story that has a moral in its
telling.
Sun Myung Moon was engaged in the actual practice of mind control and
domination. So what should we judge about an imperator who brings in one of
Sun Myung Moon's right hand men? By your thinking shouldn't we conclude that
the imperator who does this is also engaging in mind control and domination?
imitating the same sordid practices?
That's my question to you, Melanaigis. Because of your choice of name,
are you identifying yourself with the activities of the cult; or, did
you choose the name in ignorance thinking it meant something other
than it did? Or was it for some other reason? These are the questions
I've been asking for several days that you're been avoiding.

But specifically to your hypothetical question, if a person employs a
known manipulator for the reason of manipulating, then yes, it is
reasonable to believe that the person has the intent to manipulate. If
that person employs a manipulator unknowingly, then it would be
unreasonable to believe there was any intent to manipulate.

So, are you a knowing Melanaigis? Or an unknowing Melanaigis?

But it seems to me you got yourself suckered in with this Moonie mind
control thing you believe in. Antonio was neither a moonie nor one of
Moon's right hand men. If you believe that, someone got one over on
you big time.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
First and last name now, huh?

gls
Sid
2008-03-28 20:56:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Hi Melanaigis;
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:27:24 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Sun Myung Moon was engaged in the actual practice of mind control and
domination. So what should we judge about an imperator who brings in one of
Sun Myung Moon's right hand men? By your thinking shouldn't we conclude that
the imperator who does this is also engaging in mind control and domination?
imitating the same sordid practices?
That's my question to you, Melanaigis. Because of your choice of name,
are you identifying yourself with the activities of the cult; or, did
you choose the name in ignorance thinking it meant something other
than it did? Or was it for some other reason? These are the questions
I've been asking for several days that you're been avoiding.
But specifically to your hypothetical question, if a person employs a
known manipulator for the reason of manipulating, then yes, it is
reasonable to believe that the person has the intent to manipulate. If
that person employs a manipulator unknowingly, then it would be
unreasonable to believe there was any intent to manipulate.
So, are you a knowing Melanaigis? Or an unknowing Melanaigis?
But it seems to me you got yourself suckered in with this Moonie mind
control thing you believe in. Antonio was neither a moonie nor one of
Moon's right hand men. If you believe that, someone got one over on
you big time.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
First and last name now, huh?
gls
Although I have not been able to get copies of the so called Hierarchy
letters that were being circulated before the great chism within
AMORC, my understanding is that some of the contents of the 'H'
letters were later used and posted to the members/Officers as fact, as
with the example with the German Grand Lodge.

Regards,
Sid
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-03 02:31:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sid,

My personal observation:

Those letters was prior to the Internet age, and was made very early
on when noone really knew anything and a lot of rumours floated around
in an atmosphere of fear and confusion. Hence their contents are
relatively uninteresting and moot, as rumours tend to be. Even the
somewhat better attempt of The Rosicrucian Chronicles, are now
obsolete and primitive, except for historical and sociological
interest (plus they had some interesting articles).

There is much more info online, in court papers and other publications
that has surfaced during the years.

Regards,
Al :)
Post by Sid
Although I have not been able to get copies of the so called Hierarchy
letters that were being circulated before the great chism within
AMORC, my understanding is that some of the contents of the 'H'
letters were later used and posted to the members/Officers as fact, as
with the example with the German Grand Lodge.
Regards,
Sid- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Melanaigis
2008-04-02 17:47:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
You demonstrated your abilities quite well by managing to alienate the AMORC
board of directors and getting yourself thrown out by unanimous vote.
It was unanimous with those attending. One director didn't attend and
two others who technically should've been there weren't permitted to
attend by the newly elected board as they would have voted in
opposition to the majority ... but can't you come up with something
better and quite a bit more interesting to try and get my goat?
=================

One of those who was not allowed to vote was the neophyte Spanish Grand
Master you appointed, who had no right to the position. You were trying to
stack the board of directors with your toadies, and didn't get away with it.
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
Your buddy was a bit preoccupied with that notion, too ... But why are
you still obsessed over this whole amorc thing 18 years after the
fact?
---------------------
My buddy??? If you are referring to Cathari's husband, I don't know him,
never met him. He was your friend and you obviously knew him quite well. I
have no idea what your personal differences are, but to engage in a vicious
fight which had nothing to do with AMORC or this newsgroup was uncalled for.
As for your integrity, you are simply hoping to smear me by associating me
with your freind, who you viciously attacked. You had the personal
relationship with him not me.
Actually, I was referring to Cathari and not her husband. She once
wrote me a long time ago to let me know she was in communication with
you and the both of you were sharing and collaborating on research.
The reason why I called you buddies is because the two of you share
almost identical research methodologies in that you first decide what
you *want* to believe and then set about trying to prove it by only
accepting those notions which you can twist into your peculiar
interpretation. Then the both of you go about rejecting the other
notions with quite a bit of vehemence and hatred so as to convince
yourself their denial is justified. What gets interesting is when some
poor, unsuspecting person who maybe posts for the first time steps on
a sore spot in the both of your ideologies, there is a sudden tantrum
of "foul", "fraud", Crowley", etc. etc. Which is precisely what you
just did when you assumed I was talking about armand; with what you're
doing with the discussion (a rather one-sided discussion I might add)
of the word "melanaigis"; and with how you treat anyone who dares to
disagree with you on any subject.
Most of the people posting here are have an anti Lewis stance and are trying
to provoke a fight over some trivia they picked up from someone like you.
You are upset because someone counters your cynicism. As for Cathari, she is
capable of doing her own research; I gave her some information about BOTA
and Levi; that's all. I'm surprised at your viciousness towards her; she was
a devoted supporter of yours and did a lot of work for you and your group.
This reflects more on your lack of character than her research abilities.
You've proven your research is shallow and faulty by your misunderstanding
of Melanaigis.

Even when you responded to Vern way
Post by gls
back when, you started off with a brief welcome and then proceeded to
tell him about all the gloom and doom to expect from those who you
know will disagree with you. Methinks you protest too much ...
There was no doom and gloom; again your projections. I was simply informing
him that most of the posts here are petty arguments about the legitimacy of
AMORC and the Lewis's. No mysticism, no occultism, just bickering.
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
But it was I who brought up the Cult of Dionysus
Post by gls
Melanaigis (you left the important part out). As I said before,
"Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin" and it was a cult
developed around Dionysus' appearance as a black skinned goat. I
brought it up when I asked you why you chose to identify yourself with
that name.
-------------------
Again you are proving your ignorance of the goat symbolism. You relate
everything to something sordid and can't see beyond it. Even the hoi polloi
had deeper insight into these matters.
Sigh ... You need to get off your astral barstool and clear the fog
out of your mind and start focusing on the conversation back here on
Earth. We're not talking about the universal quantifier "goat" (i.e.,
as in the class of goat), but rather with the existential quantifier
of a *specific* manifestation of a goat. Yes, we can have an
interesting discussion on the history of goat symbolism and all the
variances it entails, but that would be a distinct and separate
discussion. What *we're* talking about is the manifestation of
Dionysus in a black goat skin and what that *particular* symbolism
means and what the followers of Dionysus actually did. The name you
choose to be identified with relates to that and not the general
symbolism of the goat.
So, based upon your meanderings around the subject, can I safely
assume you chose the name because you ignorantly thought it meant
something other than it does?
I am well aware of the symbolism of the black goat; you are again showing
your ignorance of the symbols used by the ancient writers and insistent on
relating it to something sordid.
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
You're trying to wiggle out of this one here ... but that's nothing
new. There's a big difference between symbolism and practice. The cult
of Dionysus (not *just* the cult of Dionysus Melanaigis) was involved
in the *actual practice* of drunken orgies, brutality, and in some
instances, the killing, tearing apart and cannibalism of humans -- and
not just depicting a mythological story that has a moral in its
telling.
==================
There is more to it than a simple moral in the story. You show your
ignorance and inability to penetrate the mysteries again.
Post by gls
An essay on Voltaire; I'll file it alongside of the essay on the dark ages
and other irrelevant posts which you use to impress people with your
education.
Just curious ... if you think its irrelevant why do you bother filing
it?

I guess you don't understand sarcasm.


It's not in the having of an education, but in the ability to be
educated which is important. One needs both social skills and
communication skills which, when combined, culminate with a
reasonable ability to maintain an ongoing conversation without
changing the subject every few words, or throwing a tantrum when one's
opinion is challenged.

Everything you've posted is a tantrum because people disagree with your
opinions about the Lewis's and AMORC.



But no, it wasn't my education which entitled me to become Imperator,
but rather, my talent in understanding both Rosicrucian and mystical
tradition, initiation, and purpose; my integrity which forbids me from
compromising what I know to be right while at the same time being able
to admit when wrong and adjust accordingly; and to maintain working a
path to achieve the goal to which I have the talent to understand; and
my insight into understanding both particulars and nuances when it
comes to interpreting Rosicrucian and mystical experiences and
philosophy.

The above is all self serving bs and sophistry.

But it was I who brought up the Cult of Dionysus
Melanaigis (you left the important part out). As I said before,
"Melanaigis" means "he of the black goat skin" and it was a cult
developed around Dionysus' appearance as a black skinned goat. I
brought it up when I asked you why you chose to identify yourself with
that name. I thought you knew that. Anyway, considering your rants and
accusations against just about everyone who dares disagree with you,
god forbid to disagree with you with viable arguments, as being
involved with or influenced by the dark path, or Crowley, or being
"astrally intoxicated", etc. I was curious as to why you chose to
identify yourself with a name that gives a source to that very path
you claim to be adamantly opposed to. I still am curious, but it's
blatantly obvious you have no intention of informing us.


Dionysus Melanaigis had NOTHING to do with with "the dark path" or black
magic or any of the other nonsense you attribute to the name. You should not
criticize Cathari's research when your own research is so shallow. Those are
your ignorant projections.

Black magic is the domain of Hecate and Kirke.

My posts on black magic were few and only to show the ignorance when someone
was promoting one of the fake Rosicrucian schools as a legitimate source of
Rosicrucian knowledge. (You are the one obsessed by it and its practice.)

Mental poison was a major preoccupation of members of the Golden Dawn, and
many of the other fake Rosicrucian schools. It was a major factor in their
disintegration.

---------------------..
=================
The cult
of Dionysus (not *just* the cult of Dionysus Melanaigis) was involved
in the *actual practice* of drunken orgies, brutality, and in some
instances, the killing, tearing apart and cannibalism of humans -- and
not just depicting a mythological story that has a moral in its
telling.

==========


The myths of Dionysus are part of the Eleusinian mysteries; Rosicrucian
initiation is based on the same.

============
Post by gls
And continue posting to this group; you prove you are ignorant of
Rosicrucians and unworthy of the imperator's title with each post.
I will continue to post to this group from time to time, yes. I have
no problem being assessed or even judged by those who read what I
write. And if they conclude I am unworthy of my title, that's ok with
me. I'm here to share ideas.
==============

You are not here to share ideas; you never post anything but attacks and
sophistries on the Lewis's. You couldn't write a coherent article on
occultism or mysticism if your life relied on it.

I've gained some insight into your admiration (and misunderstanding) for
Voltaire. Voltaire intentionally associated with Jesuits Rosicrucians and
Templars, not to find knowledge or enlightenment but in order to confound
and poison their thinking, and so to gratify his ego. His cynicism extended
to disparaging remarks about Le Comte de St. Germaine, who many believe was
the leader of the Rosicrucians. This cynicism and malice is why Voltaire was
banished from court.

Like Voltaire, the goal of your research is to create cynicism, lack of
faith. This was the sin of the Fisher King of Arthurian legends, and the
direct cause of the wasteland. It is an initiatic problem as the initiand
will not sacrifice the ego to the initiation. Instead he feeds it with the
illusion that his objective reason is superior and he rejects spiritual
insights which are demanding recognition. This also explains the differences
between our research methods. Like the original Stoics (cynics), I seek
answers and solutions. You seek contradictions and sophistries which will
feed your ego, and reinforce your malice and cynicism.

You make an excellent catch basin for those who leave AMORC disenchanted,
because they can't perform miracles in a few short months.




Keranos Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-04-03 22:48:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:47:13 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

Were you sober when you wrote your reply? Because if you weren't, you
sure are rattled about something. Your organization of your thoughts
are even less than par for you; but your organization of your post,
well, let's say it leaves a lot to be desired ...

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
It was unanimous with those attending. One director didn't attend and
two others who technically should've been there weren't permitted to
attend by the newly elected board as they would have voted in
opposition to the majority ... but can't you come up with something
better and quite a bit more interesting to try and get my goat?
=================
One of those who was not allowed to vote was the neophyte Spanish Grand
Master you appointed, who had no right to the position. You were trying to
stack the board of directors with your toadies, and didn't get away with it.
How have your math skills been lately? Having any problems balancing
your checkbook? I mean, really ... there were what, 15 members of the
board and you accuse me of trying to stack the deck by ushering in
one? You call him a neophyte but yet you acknowledge his vast
superiority over the majority of board directors if you think his
vote, in combination with mine, would have stacked the deck in my
favor.

But, seriously, first, what's wrong with being a neophyte? Do you
think them incapable of understanding Rosicrucianism or mysticism? Or
incapable of managing a rosicrucian organization? And secondly,
Antonio may have been a "neophyte" in amorc, but he was definitely
highly skilled in mysticism, rosicrucianism, philosophy, religion,
languages, diplomacy, and writing. Why not "stack your board" with
people of talent and reputation?

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
You are upset
No, I'm not upset in the least.
Post by Melanaigis
because someone counters your cynicism.
I thought you were the cynic. I mean, you wrote later in your reply: "
Like the original Stoics (cynics), I seek ..."
Post by Melanaigis
As for Cathari, she is
capable of doing her own research; I gave her some information about BOTA
and Levi; that's all. I'm surprised at your viciousness towards her; she was
a devoted supporter of yours and did a lot of work for you and your group.
This reflects more on your lack of character than her research abilities.
How does your ignorance reflect upon my alleged lack of character or
her research abilities for that matter? You haven't a clue one way or
the other if she did any work for me or "my" group.
Post by Melanaigis
You've proven your research is shallow and faulty by your misunderstanding
of Melanaigis.
I've been very meticulous about explaining my research and my sources.
All you have come up with in countering my position is, well ... you
haven't come up with anything except your keranosian logical
conclusion of: "I'm right because I say so". Sorry melanaigis, you're
clueless about what you are writing about and that statement is
reinforced by your refusal to substantiate your position. No point in
beating a dead horse any longer ...

<snip>

Well, maybe one more thrashing of the horse for you here.
Post by Melanaigis
I am well aware of the symbolism of the black goat; you are again showing
your ignorance of the symbols used by the ancient writers and insistent on
relating it to something sordid.
What symbols? What ancient writers (and don't namedrop like you did
with Hecate and Kirke that I snipped out of my response). Give us
something solid so we all can assess your position fairly. Remember,
I'm pretty well versed with the writings a lot of these guys so don't
try to bluff your way through like you have in the past because I will
call you on it. Rather, give us something real so we can have a *real*
discussion.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
An essay on Voltaire; I'll file it alongside of the essay on the dark ages
and other irrelevant posts which you use to impress people with your
education.
Just curious ... if you think its irrelevant why do you bother filing
it?
I guess you don't understand sarcasm.
oh, I understand the *attempt* at sarcasm. your response would only be
sarcastic if it were't true. The sad truth is, you *are* filing
everything I write away. You are a collector and you collect.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
The myths of Dionysus are part of the Eleusinian mysteries; Rosicrucian
initiation is based on the same.
No it's not.

You have a rough road to travel if you want to prove that, but you
would be better advised to start. You would generate more respect if
you at least *try* to substantiate your position. Who knows, you may
even present an interesting argument but it looks like no one is ever
going to know as you are seemingly happy to relegate yourself to the
position of the news group winer (pun intended).

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
I've gained some insight into your admiration (and misunderstanding) for
Voltaire.
I doubt it, but I'll humor you ...
Post by Melanaigis
Voltaire intentionally associated with Jesuits Rosicrucians
them critters never existed. You need to check your sources and find
out who started that story and why.
Post by Melanaigis
and
Templars,
About a 400 year difference in time here don't you think? That is,
unless you're a firm believer in the larminus charter. If you are, I
have a "Donation of Constantine" document I'll sell you real cheap.
Post by Melanaigis
not to find knowledge or enlightenment
Obviously, if he associated with the above two fantasies, he wouldn't
be finding any knowledge or enlightenment. Looks like we might be
having ourselves an agreement ... at least on the conclusion ... so
best to stop here on a high note.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
...This also explains the differences
between our research methods. Like the original Stoics (cynics),
In the reply of yours you have identified yourself with the cynic
"school" twice (one reference of yours I snipped out). But I'm
curious, are you of the Antisthenes persuasion? Or the Diogenes? I
hope the former, because if the latter, it looks like we're going to
have to introduce the dog into the mix ... which might make your goat
jealous ...

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
have a nice day

gls
Melanaigis
2008-04-04 17:24:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
It was unanimous with those attending. One director didn't attend and
two others who technically should've been there weren't permitted to
attend by the newly elected board as they would have voted in
opposition to the majority ...
=================
One of those who was not allowed to vote was the neophyte Spanish Grand
Master you appointed, who had no right to the position. You were trying to
stack the board of directors with your toadies, and didn't get away with it.
----
... there were what, 15 members of the
board and you accuse me of trying to stack the deck by ushering in
one? You call him a neophyte but yet you acknowledge his vast
superiority over the majority of board directors if you think his
vote, in combination with mine, would have stacked the deck in my
favor.
==================
The other directors who did not vote were Bindon, your appointee and
yourself. You try to fool people by not filling in the details. You did the
same a while back when you wrote two directors approved sending three
million dollars to a trust in Andorra. One was you, the other was Anotonio,
who was to be situated in Andorra, where the money was.
====================
Post by gls
But, seriously, first, what's wrong with being a neophyte? Do you
think them incapable of understanding Rosicrucianism or mysticism? Or
incapable of managing a rosicrucian organization? And secondly,
Antonio may have been a "neophyte" in amorc, but he was definitely
highly skilled in mysticism, rosicrucianism, philosophy, religion,
languages, diplomacy, and writing. Why not "stack your board" with
people of talent and reputation?
=======================
I do not acknowledge Antonio's " vast superiority over the majority of board
members". That is your illusion and part of your disease. His association
with Moon leaves a lot of unanswered questions.
============
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
Voltaire intentionally associated with Jesuits Rosicrucians
them critters never existed. You need to check your sources and find
out who started that story and why.
Post by Melanaigis
and
Templars,
About a 400 year difference in time here don't you think? That is,
unless you're a firm believer in the larminus charter. If you are, I
have a "Donation of Constantine" document I'll sell you real cheap.
=============
My source is the introduction to a an old copy of Candide, written in the
original French.
==========
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
not to find knowledge or enlightenment
Obviously, if he associated with the above two fantasies, he wouldn't
be finding any knowledge or enlightenment. Looks like we might be
having ourselves an agreement ... at least on the conclusion ... so
best to stop here on a high note.
=============
FINALLY, THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG!!
You don't believe the Rosicrucians ever existed!
It begs the question, why did you accept the position of Grand Master?
Why Imperator? Why start CRC, which pretends to continue the work of the
Lewis's if they were fools and mountebanks?
Did you take the oath at the end of the Eleventh degree? How can you
reconcile it with your position that the Rosicrucians are a fantasy?
What sort of malice inhabits your body to want to promote a fantasy?
Or are you moved by a bitterness over your failure to accomplish anything?



Keranos Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Sid
2008-04-04 20:40:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
It was unanimous with those attending. One director didn't attend and
two others who technically should've been there weren't permitted to
attend by the newly elected board as they would have voted in
opposition to the majority ...
=================
One of those who was not allowed to vote was the neophyte Spanish Grand
Master you appointed, who had no right to the position. You were trying to
stack the board of directors with your toadies, and didn't get away with it.
----
 ... there were what, 15 members of the
board and you accuse me of trying to stack the deck by ushering in
one? You call him a neophyte but yet you acknowledge his vast
superiority over the majority of board directors if you think his
vote, in combination with mine, would have stacked the deck in my
favor.
==================
The other directors who did not vote were Bindon, your appointee and
yourself. You try to fool people by not filling in the details. You did the
same a while back when you wrote two directors approved sending three
million dollars to a trust in Andorra. One was you, the other was Anotonio,
who was to be situated in Andorra, where the money was.
====================
But, seriously, first, what's wrong with being a neophyte? Do you
think them incapable of understanding Rosicrucianism or mysticism? Or
incapable of managing a rosicrucian organization? And secondly,
Antonio may have been a "neophyte" in amorc, but he was definitely
highly skilled in mysticism, rosicrucianism, philosophy, religion,
languages, diplomacy, and writing. Why not "stack your board" with
people of talent and reputation?
=======================
I do not acknowledge Antonio's " vast superiority over the majority of board
members". That is your illusion and part of your disease. His association
with Moon leaves a lot of unanswered questions.
============>> Voltaire intentionally associated with Jesuits Rosicrucians
them critters never existed. You need to check your sources and find
out who started that story and why.
Post by Melanaigis
 and
Templars,
About a 400 year difference in time here don't you think? That is,
unless you're a firm believer in the larminus charter. If you are, I
have a "Donation of Constantine" document I'll sell you real cheap.
=============
My source is the introduction to a an old copy of Candide, written in the
original French.
==========>> not to find knowledge or enlightenment
Obviously, if he associated with the above two fantasies, he wouldn't
be finding any knowledge or enlightenment. Looks like we might be
having ourselves an agreement ... at least on the conclusion ... so
best to stop here on a high note.
=============
FINALLY, THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG!!
You don't believe the Rosicrucians ever existed!
It begs the question, why did you accept the position of  Grand Master?
Why Imperator? Why start CRC, which pretends to continue the work of the
Lewis's if they were fools and mountebanks?
Did you take the oath at the end of the Eleventh degree? How can you
reconcile it with your position that the Rosicrucians are a fantasy?
What sort of malice inhabits your body to want to promote a fantasy?
Or are you moved by a bitterness over your failure to accomplish anything?
Keranos Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Zitierten Text ausblenden -
- Zitierten Text anzeigen -
Greetings, "Melanaigis"

Have you read the following texts?

http://www.crcsite.org/intromono.htm

http://www.crcsite.org/intromono.htm#History

http://www.crcsite.org/printinterview.htm

http://www.crcsite.org/Mission.htm

Sid
f***@yahoo.co.uk
2008-04-05 03:57:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Greetings .'.

Now that the discussion is about issues and not Mr. Stewarts
character, I'd like to contribute a few personal opinions.

I'll avoid details and documentation here, and only speak my general
impression and conviction after careful studying some facts. It's just
my opinion, albeit well founded.

From all I've seen and heard, the removal of Stewart as Imperator had
ideological, political and egotistical motivations (not necessarily
all three in each adversary). The reasons given, however, were a cover
in order to do what they felt was right. Obviously one cannot just
remove the king without having the process in order, unless one wants
to be perceived as revolutionaries or coup-makers. If the system is
going to be continued, one would like to appear as saviours.

I'm convinced that most of the key participants in the drama believed
they did the right thing. This is important. Unfortunately, most
people really believe that the means justify the end - even spiritual
people. I've seen angelic people apply demonic means, just to get the
heavenly agenda through - it happens all the time. Spiritually it's
dubious, cause like Ghandi said: The means and the goal is one. So a
wrong can never become a right. This is my personal conviction.

Nonetheless, most of the Grand Masters and other organizational key
persons did not share this sentiment, and perhaps that's what happens
when you are weaved into bureaucracy. Power corrupts our souls. Having
said that, it seems clear to me that only a handful of them were
conscious of the agenda. Some of the Grand Masters had not access to
Stewarts version, or didn't care to oppose what seemed to be a
majority, and they have in common the fact that their own jurisdiction
are geographically, linguistic or culturally separated from most of
the others (it wasnt as mainstreamed back then) - and they were more
or less autonomic. Perhaps they didnt even care too much what
happened in San Jose. Im referring especially to Japan, Greece and
Holland, and maybe some others. So even if Australia and Spaon backed
Stewart, it wasn't as if the rest of the jurisdictional
representatives were hostile to him.

Another interesting fact is that most of the non-GMs administrators
and leaders who supported the removal of Stewart and were instrumental
in this process, sooner or later were removed themselves, either
directly by Bernard or indirectly by one of his appointees. I guess
Bernard is wise enough to know that you cannot trust "traitors" (these
were mainly American). Besides, one of the causes for dissatisfaction
with Stewart was what they perceived to be too many reforms too
quickly (aka his vision) - which made him seem like a loose cannon to
them - then enter Bernard who even tops this (im not saying his
reforms are bad, I'm actually impressed with a few of them) and these
old timers were bond to frown upon that as well. There were many
similar rumours and states of emergency and fear after Bernard took
over (remember the panic about the french closing down the Park and
selling the place?), just like when Stewart did, but this time the
powers were more centralized and allied (and Bernard knowing an
imperator can fall were probably more vigilant) so there wasnt much
anyone could do about it.

So such as rumours (e.g. Mr. DeNicholas being a Moonie) and issues
(e.g. GLS fund being an attempt to steal from AMORC) are beside the
point. Noone at the top really believed in these things. What they did
believe, however, was that Stewart was a poor choice of RML and that
they knew better. I don't think anyone in Stewarts position could
really have avoided what happened. If it was Bernard who was chosen
and Stewart who allied himself with the SGL, I think Bernard would be
heading CRC today.

Don't ask me to document any of this, because I don't even want to
think of re-opening the case on a scientific basis. Like I said, this
is just my impression. And I don't claim to know everything about it
and the definitive, omnipotent truth. But it's a very sober and
probable analysis with few holes. And it's the same old story of human
psychology.

Ok, so much for nostalgia. Back to lurking mode :)
Sincerely,
Al
gls
2008-04-05 05:43:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:24:36 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
The other directors who did not vote were Bindon, your appointee
Peter was elected, not appointed. The only appointments are
ritual/doctrinal officers such as Grand Masters. Directors of the
board are elected.
Post by Melanaigis
and
yourself. You try to fool people by not filling in the details. You did the
same a while back when you wrote two directors approved sending three
million dollars to a trust in Andorra. One was you, the other was Anotonio,
who was to be situated in Andorra, where the money was.
You are incorrect. Antonio was never a director of the board and he
never had signatory power for amorc for anything.

My reference to representation at the board meeting was to Peter
Bindon who left San Jose prior to the meeting; Reuben Dalby who was
the grand master of the Spainish GL prior to my appointment of Antonio
(as the new board made it clear they wouldn't recognize antonio, they
should have reverted back to Reuben as a representative of the
Spainish GL as the wording of the motion to expand the board was to
include all grand lodges); and keneth Idiodi.
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
But, seriously, first, what's wrong with being a neophyte? Do you
think them incapable of understanding Rosicrucianism or mysticism? Or
incapable of managing a rosicrucian organization? And secondly,
Antonio may have been a "neophyte" in amorc, but he was definitely
highly skilled in mysticism, rosicrucianism, philosophy, religion,
languages, diplomacy, and writing. Why not "stack your board" with
people of talent and reputation?
=======================
I do not acknowledge Antonio's " vast superiority over the majority of board
members".
My words were made based upon your innane comment about me attempting
to stack the board with one person ... but, you are a fool to disavow
Antonio's abilities as a mystic and a Rosicrucian and it's your type
of thinking that is responsible for keeping amorc on the remote outer
fringes of rosicrucianism. But don't worry, you have absolutely no
influence one way or the other whatsoever.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
============
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
Voltaire intentionally associated with Jesuits Rosicrucians
them critters never existed. You need to check your sources and find
out who started that story and why.
Post by Melanaigis
and
Templars,
About a 400 year difference in time here don't you think? That is,
unless you're a firm believer in the larminus charter. If you are, I
have a "Donation of Constantine" document I'll sell you real cheap.
=============
My source is the introduction to a an old copy of Candide, written in the
original French.
==========
I'm humbled. I never realized their existed such an impeccable source
of Rosicrucian knowledge -- and in the original french, to boot. But,
with that said, do you know how to cite a source? Anyway, perhaps you
should familiarize yourself (although I'm sure you already have) with
another impeccable source of Rosicrucianism. That would be the
Rosicrucian writings of Hank Ketchum of the early 1980's.
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
not to find knowledge or enlightenment
Obviously, if he associated with the above two fantasies, he wouldn't
be finding any knowledge or enlightenment. Looks like we might be
having ourselves an agreement ... at least on the conclusion ... so
best to stop here on a high note.
=============
FINALLY, THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG!!
You don't believe the Rosicrucians ever existed!
I don't? I just thought I didn't believe in *your* Rosicrucian
fantasy. That is, I believe there is so such thing as an infiltration
of rosicrucianism by the jesuits, therefore Voltaire couldn't have
infiltrated the Jesuit infiltrators; and that he didn't infiltrate the
Templar Order considering the Templars ceased to exist about 400 years
prior to Voltaire's existence.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
I guess you didn't have a nice day.I hope your next one is better.

Say, how about engaging in a discussion and presenting your views
rationally and with the intent of being informative, of being able to
offer something constructive to others, and being open to ideas
different from your own?

gls
Melanaigis
2008-04-05 16:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Peter was elected, not appointed.
==========
You brought in Peter; he did not appear magically in front of the board.
-----------------


You try to fool people by not filling in the details. You did the
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
same a while back when you wrote two directors approved sending three
million dollars to a trust in Andorra. One was you, the other was Anotonio,
who was to be situated in Andorra, where the money was.
You are incorrect. Antonio was never a director of the board and he
never had signatory power for amorc for anything.
==============
Earlier you claimed you had no knowledge of how the trusts were set up; now
you are saying you do know how they were set up, and who had signing
authority; You change your tune depending on what deception you want to get
away with.

--------------------
it's your type
Post by gls
of thinking that is responsible for keeping amorc on the remote outer
fringes of rosicrucianism.
=============
It's your type of thinking that makes it laughable to the rational world.
============
Post by gls
I just thought I didn't believe in *your* Rosicrucian
fantasy. That is, I believe there is so such thing as an infiltration
of rosicrucianism by the jesuits, therefore Voltaire couldn't have
infiltrated the Jesuit infiltrators; and that he didn't infiltrate the
Templar Order considering the Templars ceased to exist about 400 years
prior to Voltaire's existence.
=============
The above was another of your attempts at deception and evasion.
You simply misstate someone's position to make it ludicrous and distract
attention from the point made. These are high school debate team tricks, not
an attempt at truthfulness. I said nothing about Jesuits infiltrating
anything.
But since you question the existence of the Templars beyond the dark ages,
have you rewritten the monographs you are selling to change the statements
that the Templars continued to exist even up to the twentieth century?

With every post, you exhibit your malice and deception, and prove you were
not entitled to the position of Imperator. Continue to post.

Keranos Melanaigis
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-04-06 00:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Melanaigis;

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 12:09:22 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

You don't have anything coherent to say this time? That's too bad.
Maybe next time you'll feel better.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
gls
NORTHMAN
2008-05-04 05:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Hi Melanaigis;
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 12:09:22 -0400, "Melanaigis"
<snip>
You don't have anything coherent to say this time? That's too bad.
Maybe next time you'll feel better.
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos Melanaigis
gls
Mr. Stewart, all these years I had doubts as to whether you had been
treated
wrongly or properly when you were removed from the position of
Imperator of
AMORC. I shall not judge, of course. But I am somewhat puzzled.

No one who held the title of Imperator of AMORC with a true heart and
mystical humbleness would ever participate in this kind of profane
argument as is being shown here. It is beneath your dignity and
intelligence.

The past is the past and it can never be rewritten. I met you and you
are a very
nice and intelligent person. As you know, even before your present
reincarnation you had chosen cosmically to attain a very high position
and deal with a great controversy if need be.

How you deal with it reveals the degree of mastership you have
attained so
far. As an Imperator (then and now, as you claim) you have a greater
mystical duty to strive towards reconciliation and harmony than any
neophyte. How is it that you have chosen NOT to demonstrate that
capacity by making officially peace with AMORC and thereby once and
for all put an end to any further animosity and disharmony?

I have completed all my AMORC studies over the last 33 years and I am
now
just a supporting member of our Beloved Order.

May you read my comments (as poorly as they are written they are still
written
from the heart) in a spirit of the mystical brotherhood that binds all
Rosicrucians
together and that once connected us together in the mystical spirit of
LLL in AMORC's embrace and with the same goals.

May Peace Profound be with you Now and Forever. Fr. Northman.
MalcolmO
2008-05-07 19:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by NORTHMAN
No one who held the title of Imperator of AMORC with a true heart and
mystical humbleness would ever participate in this kind of profane
argument as is being shown here.
I don't think that's fair. Or correct. Better to say that such a one
would not be baited to behave badly. Also, there's a difference between
the office and the person. The attack on gls has only peripherally been
about the office, IMO; it's been more of a personal attack. And in spite
of persistent attacks, he been more than charitable to the attacker, IMO.

If he'd ignored the attacks, I might've thought them warranted. If he'd
gone tit for tat in a slagging match, I might've thought he had issues.
As it is, he having engaged in such exemplary fashion, not only have I
come to think that they had the right person for the position, but also
have had my organizational interest migrate. I'd been interested/curious
about AMORC for 40-odd years, I guess. Now I'm more i/c about the org
doing what they used to do. So there you go.
Post by NORTHMAN
How is it that you have chosen NOT to demonstrate that
capacity by making officially peace with AMORC
Maybe because the he was always at peace with them? IOW, the onus is
elsewhere.

Now I should perhaps say that I say this as a fellow old-timer of 37
years in my own (different) organization. And I'm kind of feeling that
my org has dropped the ball now too.

But mostly I'm just glad to see posts here again! Yours on the 4th was
the first since Apr. 12! What the heck happened?
gls
2008-05-13 21:43:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hello NM;

On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:33:44 -0700 (PDT), NORTHMAN <***@hotmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>
Post by NORTHMAN
No one who held the title of Imperator of AMORC with a true heart and
mystical humbleness would ever participate in this kind of profane
argument as is being shown here. It is beneath your dignity and
intelligence.
What's beneath my dignity and intelligence is to permit assults
against Rosicrucianism to go unanswered.
Post by NORTHMAN
The past is the past and it can never be rewritten.
But there are those who would wish to reinterpret it. Very few people
appreciate what has been written. Most would like to believe in what
they *wish* was written. Rosicrucianism is about the truth, be it
comfortable or not.
Post by NORTHMAN
I met you and you
are a very
nice and intelligent person. As you know, even before your present
reincarnation you had chosen cosmically to attain a very high position
and deal with a great controversy if need be.
No, I have *not* chosen cosmically in a previous incarnation. That's
not how it works. The choice was first made by rml here on this plane
and I accepted. To imply I made the choice in another incarnation in
another plane is to negate the free will of rml.
Post by NORTHMAN
How you deal with it reveals the degree of mastership you have
attained so
far. As an Imperator (then and now, as you claim) you have a greater
mystical duty to strive towards reconciliation and harmony than any
neophyte.
No, I have a duty (both mystical and otherwise) to strive toward the
manifestation of truth because only in truth can there be true
harmony. It seems to me to focus on reconcillation is a cop out and a
choice of comfort at the expense of need.
Post by NORTHMAN
How is it that you have chosen NOT to demonstrate that
capacity by making officially peace with AMORC and thereby once and
for all put an end to any further animosity and disharmony?
First, I have absolutely no interest in amorc one way or the other.
The organization of amorc has chosen the path it wants to take and
they and only they are responsible for their choices. Second, I
understand my oathes and obligations as Imperator. The premises of
your argument do not reflect them and only reflect what you would like
them to be. There's a big difference there.

I respect the fact that you are with amorc and I have absolutely no
interest in persuading you otherwise. But you need to look within your
own organization for the reconcillation and comfort that you seek and
not to me. If you don't like what I do or the attitude I take, that's
ok. But to look to me to solve your problems with amorc isn't going to
work. You're going to have to do that on your own.
Post by NORTHMAN
I have completed all my AMORC studies over the last 33 years and I am
now
just a supporting member of our Beloved Order.
I would suggest you take a greater interest in your Order and do more
to support it. Your post sounds like you're pretty disillusioned with
it and are looking to me to make you feel better.
Post by NORTHMAN
May you read my comments (as poorly as they are written they are still
written
from the heart) in a spirit of the mystical brotherhood that binds all
Rosicrucians
together and that once connected us together in the mystical spirit of
LLL in AMORC's embrace and with the same goals.
amorc never embraced all rosicrucians. They only embraced those who
affiliated with them and chose to alienate all others.
Post by NORTHMAN
May Peace Profound be with you Now and Forever. Fr. Northman.
best,

gls
NORTHMAN
2008-05-14 03:19:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
Hello NM;
What's beneath my dignity and intelligence is to permit assults
against Rosicrucianism to go unanswered.
But there are those who would wish to reinterpret it. Very few people
appreciate what has been written. Most would like to believe in what
they *wish* was written. Rosicrucianism is about the truth, be it
comfortable or not.
No, I have *not* chosen cosmically in a previous incarnation. That's
not how it works. The choice was first made by rml here on this plane
and I accepted. To imply I made the choice in another incarnation in
another plane is to negate the free will of rml.
No, I have a duty (both mystical and otherwise) to strive toward the
manifestation of truth because only in truth can there be true
harmony. It seems to me to focus on reconcillation is a cop out and a
choice of comfort at the expense of need.
First, I have absolutely no interest in amorc one way or the other.
The organization of amorc has chosen the path it wants to take and
they and only they are responsible for their choices. Second, I
understand my oathes and obligations as Imperator. The premises of
your argument do not reflect them and only reflect what you would like
them to be. There's a big difference there.
I respect the fact that you are with amorc and I have absolutely no
interest in persuading you otherwise. But you need to look within your
own organization for the reconcillation and comfort that you seek and
not to me. If you don't like what I do or the attitude I take, that's
ok. But to look to me to solve your problems with amorc isn't going to
work. You're going to have to do that on your own.
I would suggest you take a greater interest in your Order and do more
to support it. Your post sounds like you're pretty disillusioned with
it and are looking to me to make you feel better.
best,
gls
I never had and do not now have any problems with AMORC. Therefore
no problems need to be solved. I am not looking to you for any comfort
or
reconciliation for myself. Whatever gave you that idea? And I am
neither
disillusioned with AMORC nor am I looking to you to make myself feel
better. I feel just fine and I support it and its ideals fully. I
also respect
all other Rosicrucian Orders anywhere, including yours.

Titles can be given and they can be taken away. It is not the title
that
elevates a man but how he lives up to the expectations that come with
it. I take the liberty to say this only because your comments in
regards
to what I had to say were very haughty and needlessly abrasive.

May you find peace and purpose. Fr. N.
Ben Scaro
2008-05-14 10:35:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by NORTHMAN
I never had and do not now have any problems with AMORC. Therefore
no problems need to be solved. I am not looking to you for any comfort
or
reconciliation for myself. Whatever gave you that idea?
A question. Why in your initial post do you regard it as the
responsibility of the other side to 'make peace with AMORC' ?

Wouldn't a 50-50 division of responsibility be fairer ?

If you're totally satisfied in your org yet feel an official
reconciliation with another org is important, I think it's fair to ask
why you feel that ? What are you missing ?

As we are 18 years down the track, do you accept there might be many
people in either org who have no knowledge or interest in 1990 and
don't want to move closer to another org?

You say the past is the past and can never be rewritten. You may be
right, but your org doesn't think that way. I'll tell you a story.
When I rejoined a few years ago they did a history session in their
library and told us their imperators were HSL, RML and CB. After it
was over, I went to the shelf, got a 1989 copy of their magazine,
opened it at the first page, pointed to the listing of officers and
said 'Can you tell me who that bloke is, please ?' The officer shot
me a look that would have skewered a wild boar.

A real mysticism, to my mind, isn't just a veneer that can turn to
icicles in a second when an inconvenient fact is presented.

So, although you desire the past be acknowledged and that the other
side officially make peace, I am not sure your org wants it. That's
surely a problem.

Ben
gls
2008-05-14 17:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hello N;

On Tue, 13 May 2008 20:19:43 -0700 (PDT), NORTHMAN
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

I took the liberty to snip out your cut and paste job of the post to
which you are responding and replace it with the original so that the
proper context of my response to yours can be shown. I also included
my statement: "amorc never embraced all rosicrucians. They only
embraced those who affiliated with them and chose to alienate all
others." which you removed from your rendition for reasons unknown to
me. For anyone interested, I've included the original at the bottom of
this one.
Post by NORTHMAN
I never had and do not now have any problems with AMORC. Therefore
no problems need to be solved. I am not looking to you for any comfort
or
reconciliation for myself. Whatever gave you that idea?
Your two initial posts.

I was somewhat surprised that as a proclaimed rosicrucian of 33 years,
you reduced that affiliation to having completed your studies and are
now *just* a supporting member, coupled with your second post where
you agree with your alleged friend that he made the right decision not
to affiliate with amorc. Most rosicrucians I know, including many in
amorc, would make it a point to defend their teachings and philosophy
especially to someone they invited into their own home to view their
sanctum no less -- which you said you did. In that you did not make
any effort to alleviate your friend's concerns, I construe your
actions as being of one who is disillusioned with amorc at best, or
ashamed at worst. If that's not the case, you may want to consider
wording your discussions a little more carefully.
Post by NORTHMAN
And I am
neither
disillusioned with AMORC nor am I looking to you to make myself feel
better. I feel just fine and I support it and its ideals fully.
You're telling me that as an Imperator I must behave a certain way
that meets with your perceived standards; that you know I have made
"cosmic choices" in a previous incarnation; that you are making
judgments based upon my perceived behaviour; and suggesting I make
peace with your Order so that what you perceive to be animosity,
ostensibly on my part, could stop. All of this suggests very strongly
that you are uncomfortable with how you feel about amorc and its
leadership and are looking to me to do something about it. If that's
not the case, why am I of concern to you?
Post by NORTHMAN
I
also respect
all other Rosicrucian Orders anywhere, including yours.
What many who accept that there are many respected R+C orders and
lineages in existence would have done if someone showed disinterest in
one order, would have suggested another. You did not. What you did do
was to proclaim all Rosicrucians were at one time embraced under the
banner of amorc. In so saying, you have alienated many Rosicrucians
which is not a sign of respect.
Post by NORTHMAN
Titles can be given and they can be taken away. It is not the title
that
elevates a man but how he lives up to the expectations that come with
it. I take the liberty to say this only because your comments in
regards
to what I had to say were very haughty and needlessly abrasive.
You made it clear from the onset that I am not living up to your
expectations. Would not that be haughty and abrasive in and of itself?
But no matter. My suggestion to you is not to concern yourself with
what I do. but with what amorc does if indeed you are still interested
in it.
Post by NORTHMAN
May you find peace and purpose. Fr. N.
best

gls

****************************************

original post being discussed
Post by NORTHMAN
Hello NM;
<snip>
Post by NORTHMAN
No one who held the title of Imperator of AMORC with a true heart and
mystical humbleness would ever participate in this kind of profane
argument as is being shown here. It is beneath your dignity and
intelligence.
What's beneath my dignity and intelligence is to permit assults
against Rosicrucianism to go unanswered.
Post by NORTHMAN
The past is the past and it can never be rewritten.
But there are those who would wish to reinterpret it. Very few people
appreciate what has been written. Most would like to believe in what
they *wish* was written. Rosicrucianism is about the truth, be it
comfortable or not.
Post by NORTHMAN
I met you and you
are a very
nice and intelligent person. As you know, even before your present
reincarnation you had chosen cosmically to attain a very high position
and deal with a great controversy if need be.
No, I have *not* chosen cosmically in a previous incarnation. That's
not how it works. The choice was first made by rml here on this plane
and I accepted. To imply I made the choice in another incarnation in
another plane is to negate the free will of rml.
Post by NORTHMAN
How you deal with it reveals the degree of mastership you have
attained so
far. As an Imperator (then and now, as you claim) you have a greater
mystical duty to strive towards reconciliation and harmony than any
neophyte.
No, I have a duty (both mystical and otherwise) to strive toward the
manifestation of truth because only in truth can there be true
harmony. It seems to me to focus on reconcillation is a cop out and a
choice of comfort at the expense of need.
Post by NORTHMAN
How is it that you have chosen NOT to demonstrate that
capacity by making officially peace with AMORC and thereby once and
for all put an end to any further animosity and disharmony?
First, I have absolutely no interest in amorc one way or the other.
The organization of amorc has chosen the path it wants to take and
they and only they are responsible for their choices. Second, I
understand my oathes and obligations as Imperator. The premises of
your argument do not reflect them and only reflect what you would like
them to be. There's a big difference there.
I respect the fact that you are with amorc and I have absolutely no
interest in persuading you otherwise. But you need to look within your
own organization for the reconcillation and comfort that you seek and
not to me. If you don't like what I do or the attitude I take, that's
ok. But to look to me to solve your problems with amorc isn't going to
work. You're going to have to do that on your own.
Post by NORTHMAN
I have completed all my AMORC studies over the last 33 years and I am
now
just a supporting member of our Beloved Order.
I would suggest you take a greater interest in your Order and do more
to support it. Your post sounds like you're pretty disillusioned with
it and are looking to me to make you feel better.
Post by NORTHMAN
May you read my comments (as poorly as they are written they are still
written
from the heart) in a spirit of the mystical brotherhood that binds all
Rosicrucians
together and that once connected us together in the mystical spirit of
LLL in AMORC's embrace and with the same goals.
amorc never embraced all rosicrucians. They only embraced those who
affiliated with them and chose to alienate all others.
Post by NORTHMAN
May Peace Profound be with you Now and Forever. Fr. Northman.
best,
gls
Malgwyn
2008-03-24 09:15:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
You've made it perfectly clear why you don't believe the Rosicrucians have
roots in the mystery schools of Greece and Egypt. You are totaly ignorant of
the meaning of the symbols they used or their associations. Your judgement
is as shallow as that of Crowley et al. You obviously have no experience
with Rosicrucian initiation. How did you fool Ralph Lewis?
I haven't seen anything from Mr. Stewart that compares to Crowley,
symbolically or otherwise. You AMORGers got your "Cosmic Wisdom" from
an advertisement in the back of Popular Mechanics or Ladies Home
Journal, it doesn't get any shallower. AMORG derived so much of it's
spooky mystical authority from groups closely involved with Crowley,
be it Memphis Misraim, or the Reuss OTO, and could have only
benefitted from further interactions. Once the (sane) people in any
of these groups mature, they are almost interchangable.

The marketing component of these groups will always be base; with
petty squabbles over territory, alliances, and betrayals. The mystics
can probably move effortlessly from one group to another, and find
whatever they need.
Julie Altswitch
2008-03-20 01:12:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Andorra was known as a place where drug lords and smugglers laundered money
and unethical banking practices were common. <snip>
No that is way off. The place know for drug lords, smugglers, and money
laundering is Washington D.C.
And as to unethical banking practices being common - may I suggest a
look at Freedie Mac, Enron,
and the Congressional Bank of the House - which I think is closed now
due to a lot of bad checks
from all those Congressmen. - LoL


Sorry - I just couldn't resist.
-Julie (not Bob)
gls
2008-03-20 03:08:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Julie;

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:12:12 -0400, Julie Altswitch
<***@swbell.net> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Julie Altswitch
Sorry - I just couldn't resist.
-Julie (not Bob)
I didn't look at your headers so I don't know if you post through
google groups or not, but what you should do is go to google groups,
alt.amorc, and look at one of your posts. Click on "view profile" and
it shows all the postings you have made. In your case you've posted 38
messages in 12 groups. Your first posting was on June 29, 1999 with
the name of Robert Ekstrom. Thus, bob. But come on altswitch?

gls
Mystery Mystic
2013-12-13 20:36:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
For the love of the God of your heart!

Could someone please rename this thread to:

"Gary Stewart's truth and transparency"

It would certainly be more fitting, IMHO.

Lies and personal attacks make baby Jesus cry.

Loading...