Discussion:
authenticity
(too old to reply)
jadam
2008-03-06 20:13:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hello all,
There is no one unimpeachable source in Rosicrucianism past or
present.The closest is GLS. If a "Rosicrucian" from the Ephrata
community was to do a Rip Van Winkle and awaken today and encounter a
modern "Rosicrucian" he certainly would not recognize one who shared
his beliefs.

As one who has been a constant member of AMORC since I953,I have seen
it change its' colors several times over the years. I certainly don't
like what I have seen since the 1990's. RML and HSL certainly didn't
agree on all points of the Teaching. AMORC is,and has never been the
only kid on the block. Rosicrucian is a generic term as is Freemason
and Martinist. Anyone can set up shop and lay claim to any or all of
the names just mentioned.

Rosicrucianism,Martinism,and Freemasonry have had any number of
seperate and distinct versions over the years that all three have been
in existence. If the TMO has any order to look at for its liniage it
is Freemasonry. As a initiate of all three,I can speak from my own
experience.

There are several very small Masonic bodies that call themselves
Rosicrucian. Several of the European mystical orders require one to be
a Freemason before a application for membership will be considered.

One cannot sling mud at others without getting some on himself. If one
calls himself a Rosicrucian,he should attempt to act like one.
Jadam
Melanaigis
2008-03-07 05:01:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
If one calls himself a Rosicrucian,he should attempt to act like one.
Jadam

------------------

Do you mean he should not tell lies to smear others?
For example the lie that Martinism did not exist until Papus; that smears
both of the Lewises and the Bernards too. It is a clear statement that their
initiation is fraudulent.
BUT THE MARTINISTS DID EXIST. Levi wrote about them befor Papus was born.


Do you mean a Rosicrucian should not tell lies to give the wrong impression
of other people, such as the lie Ralph Lewis did not believe in
reincarnation, when HE CLEARLY DID BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION.

A Rosicrucian must learn to recognize the forces he is dealing with, and
their source. When dealing with shallow posers, liars and fools it is best
to treat them for what they are. This is a service to the peole who follow.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-07 07:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 00:01:50 -0500, "Melanaigis"
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
For example the lie that Martinism did not exist until Papus;
ok, that was handled in my previous post to you earlier. I won't
repeat it here.
Post by Melanaigis
that smears
both of the Lewises and the Bernards too. It is a clear statement that their
initiation is fraudulent.
What I will address now is the Bernard's Martinist initiation, now
that you brought it up.

First, Raymond Bernard was initiated into AMORC's TMO by Duane
Freeman. However, Duane Freeman was never initiated into Martinism --
AMORC TMO or otherwise. Knowing that such is not recognized nor is it
proper, Raymond sought initiation elsewhere when Ralph Lewis refused
to initiated him directly. Raymond finds Robert Ambelaine who
initiates him into his system. Years later, Raymond in turn (according
to what he personally told me) initiates someone named Angel Martin
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-07 08:35:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
++++++++++++++

More smear tactics; I've never called a Martinist organization fraudulent.
This is the technique the Nazis used, repeat a lie often enough and it
becomes true.
So noble an Imperator!

Kreanos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-08 19:59:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Kreanos;

Your response is an example of the editing you're so fond of doing I
wrote about earlier in another thread. Only this time you're making
yourself look silly and not the person you're responding to. If
someone was just looking at this post where you responded to what I
wrote, folks would be scratching their heads wondering what you were
talking about.

Admittedly, if they saw the previous post, they would probably still
be scratching their heads because I never wrote that you called a
Martinist Order fraudulant ... sigh.

On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 03:35:43 -0500, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
++++++++++++++
More smear tactics; I've never called a Martinist organization fraudulent.
I don't know if you have ever called a Martinist organization
fraudulant or not. If you have, I haven't seen or remember it. Anyway,
as you can see what I wrote above, you did call a Rosicrucian
organization fraudulant. Maybe I'm wrong, but I assumed the one you
were referring to was the Rose Cross Order based in the Canary Islands
and started by Angel Martin Velyaos. If indeed you consider them
legitimate, I apologize and stand corrected.

My only point was that based upon what Raymond Bernard told me, he
initiated Angel on the authority of his *Martinist* Initiation he
claimed to have received from Robert Ambelain and it was from that
initiation, according to Raymond, that Angel claimed the authority to
found the *Rosicrucian* Order and became its Imperator.

Whether or not Raymond received initiation from Robert Ambelain, I
don't know; whether or not he initiated Angel, I don't know; and
whether or not Angel bases his authority from initiation received from
Raymond, I don't know either. I only know what Raymond told me. And my
point in bringing this matter up was in response to your complaint
that I was smearing the Bernards as well. It is an example of the
convuletd way in which Raymond treated initiation. Since the early
70's Raymond has gone off and done these types of things and it has
created serious problems for AMORC from time to time, pissed Ralph
Lewis off on several occasions, as well as creating problems for
himself (raymond) in a number of areas.
Post by Melanaigis
This is the technique the Nazis used, repeat a lie often enough and it
becomes true.
Which lie would that be?
Post by Melanaigis
So noble an Imperator!
Why, thank you. That was unexpected.
Post by Melanaigis
Kreanos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-07 09:06:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Gary
I did some reserch for you; as I said I have never called any Martinist
Post by gls
Post by Melanaigis
There was nothing Martinist prior to Papus. Augustine Chaboseau and
Papus both claim an incomplete lineage to LC de St. Martin that, in my
opinion, kind of reads like this: "I had a second cousin who had a
friend of a friend's wife who once knew a housekeeper of a friend who
was a cousin of a friend that once met de St,. Martin at a party."
Don't get me wrong, I think that the work that Papus, Chaboseau. and
V.E. Michelet who were inspired by the likes of Pitois, Levi, and
Nodier was extrodinary and their contributions to modern esotericism
and occultism are considerable. But to say their Martinist Order was a
perpetuation of the work of St. Martin is not correct. Rather, it's
safer to say that St. Martin inspired those individuals and their
Order was a tribute to him.
gls
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Malgwyn
2008-03-07 10:58:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Can any person or group openly (here or elsewhere) call themselves
"Rosicrucian" and be anything other than inauthentic?

You could evade the trap by calling yourself a student of
Rosicrucianism, but even that would be a judgement of just who you
believe to be such based on whatever deductions can be made about what
an FR+C is.

I for one have a hard time believing that the most progressive natural
philosophers of their time would still be mired in medievalism, and
prancing around in the regalia of knights, guildsman, and Aegyptians.
Nor would they be endlessly replicating simplistic experiments based
on the four elements, or any other early speculative attempts later
abandoned for better models. If you are STILL trying to replicate
Michael Maier, you clearly haven't taken advantage of the intervening
half millenium of wisdom, nor can you claim to be the inheritors of
those who did. Of course some of them have taken advantage of modern
knowledge, but dupe those who know less.

My guess is that it is the pretenders that hide in anachronisms, The
true anonymous FR+C would likely have stunning articles in the
Journals of Academia, and be treating sick people in the poorest parts
of the world with the latest retrovirus, and that gratis.
gls
2008-03-08 20:08:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 04:06:22 -0500, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
Gary
I did some reserch for you;
Thank you. You must have labored well into the night. I don't mean to
put you off, but I rely upon my own research. That way if I make an
error, it's my responsibility and my responsibility alone.
Post by Melanaigis
as I said I have never called any Martinist
organization fraudulent;
As I said in a previous post, I have no reason to believe that you
had.
Post by Melanaigis
There was nothing Martinist prior to Papus. Augustine Chaboseau and
Papus both claim an incomplete lineage to LC de St. Martin that, in my
opinion, kind of reads like this: "I had a second cousin who had a
friend of a friend's wife who once knew a housekeeper of a friend who
was a cousin of a friend that once met de St,. Martin at a party."
Don't get me wrong, I think that the work that Papus, Chaboseau. and
V.E. Michelet who were inspired by the likes of Pitois, Levi, and
Nodier was extrodinary and their contributions to modern esotericism
and occultism are considerable. But to say their Martinist Order was a
perpetuation of the work of St. Martin is not correct. Rather, it's
safer to say that St. Martin inspired those individuals and their
Order was a tribute to him.
gls
No, that's not an example of calling a Martinist Order fraudulant. I
tell you what, why don't you list those Martinist Orders that existed
prior to Papus and I'll tell you whether or not I think they're
fraudulant.

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-11 17:12:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"gls" <***@blackland.com> wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...

I tell you what, why don't you list those Martinist Orders that existed
Post by gls
prior to Papus and I'll tell you whether or not I think they're
fraudulant.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
***************

Now who is setting up the Procrustean bed to decide who is legitimate and
who is a fraud?
This is what you accuse me, the Lewis's and FUDOSI of doing. You are doing
the same thing you criticize others for doing.
Some of us call that hypocrisy.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Ben Scaro
2008-03-07 10:49:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I have looked at this matter in a fair bit of detail.

Levi's reference in Ch 22 of Dogme et Rituel to 'Martinists' refers to
followers of St Martin.

Gary is talking of the Martinist Order when he says there was nothing
Martinist prior to Papus and he is correct to say that.

It has been well known since 1948 when Ambelain wrote 'Contemporary
Martinism and Its True Origins' that no actual Martinist Order existed
prior to Papus.

http://www.moup.org/Files/Contemporary_Martinism-Ambelain.pdf

Certainly there were followers of St Martin's books and passers on af
an individual initiation ascribed to him , yes. A Martinist Order ?
No.

1948 . . . you don't get out much, do you William ? Set the
neighbourhood dogs a-barking, do you ?

Ben
Post by gls
For example the lie that Martinism did not exist untilPapus;
ok, that was handled in my previous post to you earlier. I won't
repeat it here.
gls
2008-03-08 20:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Ben;

On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 02:49:52 -0800 (PST), Ben Scaro
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by Ben Scaro
Certainly there were followers of St Martin's books and passers on af
an individual initiation ascribed to him , yes. A Martinist Order ?
No.
I've run across a number of names said to have received initiation
from Saint-Martin, but interestingly, none of them are included on the
Chaboseau/Papus list. Not to say none of those weren't, just that
their names aren't included in what I found.

<snip>
Post by Ben Scaro
Ben
<snip>

gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-11 16:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gls
What I will address now is the Bernard's Martinist initiation, now
that you brought it up.
First, Raymond Bernard was initiated into AMORC's TMO by Duane
Freeman. However, Duane Freeman was never initiated into Martinism --
AMORC TMO or otherwise. Knowing that such is not recognized nor is it
proper, Raymond sought initiation elsewhere when Ralph Lewis refused
to initiated him directly. Raymond finds Robert Ambelaine who
initiates him into his system. Years later, Raymond in turn (according
to what he personally told me) initiates someone named Angel Martin
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
*****************
To begin with, I did NOT call that group fraudulent; I never mentioned
them.

Since you want to question initiations and authority; I heard from a well
placed AMORC source that in his final days, Ralph Lewis changed his mind
about who was to follow him as Imperator. He did not select Gary Stewart.
(The officers of BOTA also tell this story.)
Judging by the results of your short tenure in office and what you've been
promoting since, it makes the rumor believable.

It's apparent that Ralph Lewis's strength of character was so strong that it
extended to the people around him; he held them upright. When he died the
strength was gone; and it turned into chaos at Rosicrucian Park.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-07 07:03:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Jadam;
Post by jadam
Hello all,
There is no one unimpeachable source in Rosicrucianism past or
present.
Precisely ... Thank you!

<snip>
Post by jadam
Jadam
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by jadam
Hello all,
There is no one unimpeachable source in Rosicrucianism past or
present.The closest is GLS.
Jadam
Jadam
Your first statement is correct. There are no unimpeachable sources or
experts with the the exception of the Rosicrucians themselves. They would
know their own kind, and reject the frauds and posers.
This would explain what GLS calls their "arrogance" towards other groups.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-11 16:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by jadam
Hello all,
There is no one unimpeachable source in Rosicrucianism past or
present.The closest is GLS.
Jadam
Jadam

Your first statement is correct. There are no unimpeachable sources or
experts with the the exception of the Rosicrucians themselves. They would
know their own kind, and reject the frauds and posers.
This would explain what GLS calls their "arrogance" towards other groups.

Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:34:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I tell you what, why don't you list those Martinist Orders that existed
Post by gls
prior to Papus and I'll tell you whether or not I think they're
fraudulant.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
***************
Now who is setting up the Procrustean bed to decide who is legitimate and
who is a fraud?
This is what you accuse me, the Lewis's and FUDOSI of doing. You are doing
the same thing you criticize others for doing.
Some of us call that hypocrisy.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-14 06:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:34:20 -0400, "Melanaigis"
I tell you what, why don't you list those Martinist Orders that existed
Post by gls
prior to Papus and I'll tell you whether or not I think they're
fraudulant.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
***************
Now who is setting up the Procrustean bed to decide who is legitimate and
who is a fraud?
I'm impressed. Who taught you that word? I had to look it up in the
dictionary. Unfortunately, it's not applicable here
This is what you accuse me, the Lewis's and FUDOSI of doing. You are doing
the same thing you criticize others for doing.
Some of us call that hypocrisy.
others of us call it you not understanding sarcasm.
Keranos
gls
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:34:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by jadam
Hello all,
There is no one unimpeachable source in Rosicrucianism past or
present.The closest is GLS.
Jadam
Jadam
Your first statement is correct. There are no unimpeachable sources or
experts with the the exception of the Rosicrucians themselves. They would
know their own kind, and reject the frauds and posers.
This would explain what GLS calls their "arrogance" towards other groups.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:47:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I tell you what, why don't you list those Martinist Orders that existed
Post by gls
prior to Papus and I'll tell you whether or not I think they're
fraudulant.
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
***************
Now who is setting up the Procrustean bed to decide who is legitimate and
who is a fraud?
This is what you accuse me, the Lewis's and FUDOSI of doing. You are
doing
the same thing you criticize others for doing.
Some of us call that hypocrisy.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
What I will address now is the Bernard's Martinist initiation, now
that you brought it up.
First, Raymond Bernard was initiated into AMORC's TMO by Duane
Freeman. However, Duane Freeman was never initiated into Martinism --
AMORC TMO or otherwise. Knowing that such is not recognized nor is it
proper, Raymond sought initiation elsewhere when Ralph Lewis refused
to initiated him directly. Raymond finds Robert Ambelaine who
initiates him into his system. Years later, Raymond in turn (according
to what he personally told me) initiates someone named Angel Martin
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
*****************
To begin with, I did NOT call that group fraudulent; I never mentioned
them.
Since you want to question initiations and authority; I heard from a well
placed AMORC source that in his final days, Ralph Lewis changed his mind
about who was to follow him as Imperator. He did not select Gary Stewart.
(The officers of BOTA also tell this story.)
Judging by the results of your short tenure in office and what you've
been
promoting since, it makes the rumor believable.
It's apparent that Ralph Lewis's strength of character was so strong that
it
extended to the people around him; he held them upright. When he died the
strength was gone; and it turned into chaos at Rosicrucian Park.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Melanaigis
2008-03-13 01:34:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
What I will address now is the Bernard's Martinist initiation, now
that you brought it up.
First, Raymond Bernard was initiated into AMORC's TMO by Duane
Freeman. However, Duane Freeman was never initiated into Martinism --
AMORC TMO or otherwise. Knowing that such is not recognized nor is it
proper, Raymond sought initiation elsewhere when Ralph Lewis refused
to initiated him directly. Raymond finds Robert Ambelaine who
initiates him into his system. Years later, Raymond in turn (according
to what he personally told me) initiates someone named Angel Martin
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
*****************
To begin with, I did NOT call that group fraudulent; I never mentioned
them.
Since you want to question initiations and authority; I heard from a well
placed AMORC source that in his final days, Ralph Lewis changed his mind
about who was to follow him as Imperator. He did not select Gary Stewart.
(The officers of BOTA also tell this story.)
Judging by the results of your short tenure in office and what you've been
promoting since, it makes the rumor believable.
It's apparent that Ralph Lewis's strength of character was so strong that
it
extended to the people around him; he held them upright. When he died the
strength was gone; and it turned into chaos at Rosicrucian Park.
Keranos
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
gls
2008-03-14 06:45:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Keranos;

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:34:40 -0400, "Melanaigis"
Post by Melanaigis
Post by Melanaigis
Post by gls
What I will address now is the Bernard's Martinist initiation, now
that you brought it up.
First, Raymond Bernard was initiated into AMORC's TMO by Duane
Freeman. However, Duane Freeman was never initiated into Martinism --
AMORC TMO or otherwise. Knowing that such is not recognized nor is it
proper, Raymond sought initiation elsewhere when Ralph Lewis refused
to initiated him directly. Raymond finds Robert Ambelaine who
initiates him into his system. Years later, Raymond in turn (according
to what he personally told me) initiates someone named Angel Martin
who in turn, based upon that authority, established a Rosicrucian
organization in the Canary Islands that you, Keranos, call fraudulant.
(They're the ones who posted here recently saying that amorc was
phoney). So, whose smearing who here?
<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls
*****************
To begin with, I did NOT call that group fraudulent; I never mentioned
them.
But they were the ones who were being discussed when you chimed in
with references to fraudulant rosicrucian groups. But as I said the
other day, you were being unclear and if you consider them to be
legit, then I stand corrected. Why don't you get your preconceived
agenda out of your head and start trying to understand what you read?
Post by Melanaigis
Since you want to question initiations and authority; I heard from a well
placed AMORC source that in his final days, Ralph Lewis changed his mind
about who was to follow him as Imperator. He did not select Gary Stewart.
You said this in another thread to which I responded.
Post by Melanaigis
(The officers of BOTA also tell this story.)
and we're supposed to care because?

<snip>
Post by Melanaigis
Keranos
gls

Loading...