reply to post by JoshNorton
Hi again, Josh--
Aleister Crowley used to claim that the OTO originated in Germany as a later offshoot of 'Rosicrucian' Masonry (18th Degree) from the late 18th
century - but he freely admitted that (at least after 1918) the OTO had begun to move on beyond the confines of its Mother Lodge.
So I guess the answer is both YES and NO...in other words, it is more of a Semantic discussion.
Weirdly, perhaps, it seems clear that if the OTO is NOT actually in fact a ‘Masonic Order’ i.e. ipso facto, its Members have first to be Initiated
Masons, and apparently highly initiated Masons are the only ones who can ever be allowed membership into the OTO organisation.
The actual (i.e. literal) ‘Masonic Constitution’ of the OTO is hard to define exactly – it’s a little like saying Massachusetts is NOT
technically a State of the United States (which it literally is not) since, like Pennsyvlania, Virginia & Kentucky, it is a ‘Commonweatlh’ and
does NOT style itself a ‘State’ although it partakes in all things that States partake in - that is as part of the United States of America
Confusingly there are also other ‘states’ in the US also refer to themselves as ‘Commonwealths’ interchangeably with the term ‘State’
e.g. Vermont which uses the term "Commonwealth" 3 times in its own 'State Constitution', Delaware also called itself a "Commonwealth" in its 1776
Constitution, but also calls itself a 'State' interchangeably with 'Commonwealth'.
So I guess the answer to the question: 'Is Massachusetts Really a State' would be both YES and NO.
Again, a Semantic Disscussion more than anything else.
It is nearly as messy when dealing with the actual literal 'Masonic status' of the O.T.O., since by 1912, the system of O.T.O., despite its various
occult influences, remained ‘Principally Masonic’ according to their own writings, but as Reuss (one of the OTO founders) also admitted, in the
Jubilee Edition of the Oriflamme, the O.T.O. "is not technically a Masonic order, pure and simple, but every member of our Order, man or woman must
proceed through the Masonic Craft Degrees of Free-Masonry and also those of high-grade Freemasonry, before they themselves can be Illuminated and
initiated members of our Order."
Aleister Crowley included the following statement in his Manifesto of the M∴M∴M∴:
“The O.T.O., although an ‘Academia Masonica’, is not actually a Masonic Body so far as the Craft degrees are concerned, that is to say, in the
sense in which that Expression is usually understood in England.
Therefore the OTO in no way conflicts with, or infringes the just privileges of, the United Grand Lodge of England. “
So what does one make of … ‘the OTO is not actually a Masonic Body…in the sense in which that Expression is usually understood in England..’
Sounds like Double Speak. Or more Semantics.
Not to go too far off the point here, but perhaps the situation with the ‘authority of Ken Grant’ within his place in the OTO and within the
schema of larger World Masonry can be seen to be largely semantic – perhaps akin to the thorny situation of ‘authority’ that haunted all the
various different ‘Christianities’ that existed in the 1st five centuries AD - including some of the the Gnostic (‘Marcionite’) Christian
Churches who regarded the clan god of the Jews as an evil Demi-Urge who created the ‘evil material world’ out of lust and was NOT the ‘same
loving god as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…’ or the Torah Abiding Ebionite Nazoreans Messianic Christians who operated out of Jerusalem
(prior to 70 CE) whose Bishops (Aram. ‘Mebaqqqerim’ / Gk. Epi-scopoi, lit. ‘overseers’) were chosen out of the blood relatives of
And then there was the uncomfortable gentile loving splinter-groups headed up by Saul of Tarsus (aka ‘Paul’), who was in the habit of calling
himself an ‘Apostle (apostolos) of Christos Iesous’ -- a man whom he never ever met in person, and who fought bitterly with the blood relatives of
‘Iesous’ (e.g. James, the ‘Lord’s Brother’ in Jerusalem over doctrinal issues (mainly over circumcision and keeping the Kashrut diet) –
see Galatians chapter 2, where this ‘Paul’ the self-appointed apostle, called James and Simon Peter (‘Kephah’) ‘those so-called
Even the author of the Apocalypse of Yohanon the Levite (aka ‘Book of Revelation’) mentiones ‘those who run around calling themselves Apostles,
but are not, but are of the Synagogue of Satan…’ see Rev 2:2)
And yet, even though ‘Saul/Paul’ did not receive an official Charter from the original Christian churches, 97% of all Christian Churches to-day
are in fact ‘Pauline Christian churches’ i.e. followers of his own peculiar theology…
Clearly, this Paul person had splintered off on his own from the original Jerusalem ‘Church of the 12’ in order to preach to the god-fearing goyim
a kind of heretical ‘Salvation by Faith in Christ Alone’ doctrine (i.e. open to Diaspora goyim without Torah obedience), in opposition to the
‘Salvation by Works of the Torah’ doctrines of the Nazorean 'Followers of the Way' in Jerusalem headed up by the Daviddic blood relatives of
‘Iesous’ (most were wiped out by 70CE following the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome) leaving the ‘Paulinists’ alive and well and able to
promulgate his own ‘heresy’…
So technically, one could say that what we to-day call ‘Pauline Christianity’ is technically not ‘Nazorean-Jesian,’ but there would be a lot
of persons who would vehemently argue the point (especially those who believe ‘the authority to preach’ comes from ‘dreams and visions’…and
not by official charters from ‘founding members of the family of Iesous’ etc.
So to answer the Question, is Pauline Christianity to be considered 'Jesian' (i.e. derived from 'Iesous') the answer would be again, YES and NO.
But back to the OTO and the Masons. I suppose it depends on what you consider a Mason to be (is there a stricter/narrower Definition AND a wider more
general One? Some Masons would undoubtedly say, OH YES there IS...!)
We noted that on 17 July 1920, Reuss (one of the OTO founders) attended the Congress of the "World Federation of Universal Freemasonry," held at the
Libertas et Fraternitas Lodge in Zürich ostensibly intended to investigate the work of Papus's "International Masonic and Spiritualist Conference"
held in Paris in 1908.
Reuss, with Bricaud's authorization, advocated the adoption of the religion of Crowley's Gnostic Mass as the "official religion for all members of the
World Federation of Universal Freemasonry in possession of the 18° of the Scottish Rite."
But apparently, Reuss's efforts failed to get the other Masonic heads to agree and he fought with Matthew McBlain Thomson (who was elected Honorary
President of the International Masonic Federation) over the OTO’s actual jurisdictional issues….
So..does it follow that immediately after the fight between Reuss and McBlain in 1920, the OTO ‘automatically ceased’ to be part of World Masonry
As you know Reuss died in 1921 – shortly after the argumeent with McBlain…and Aleister Crowley took over until his own death on 5 Dec 1947.
Aleister Crowley (who called himself 'BAPHOMET' and 'THE BEAST 666' among other charming epithets) joined the OTO in 1910 – here is a Transcript of
a Masonic Document signed by certain chief London Masons (dated 29 Nov 1910) which shows that by that time Crowley had been granted the Degree of 33
in the Masonic Orders…and was by then already an OTO member…so he was part of BOTH worlds, it seems...
T. T. G. O. T. S. A. O. T. U. DEUS MEUMQUE IUS SPES MEA IN DEO EST
( Great Seal )
SUPREME GRAND COUNCIL OF THE ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCE OF THE ROYAL SECRET POST PUISSANT SOVEREIGN GRAND INSPECTORS GENERAL of the 33rd AND LAST DEGREE of
the ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED RITE OF MASONRY H.R.D.M.
R.M.S.H. SITTING IN THE VALLEY OF MANCHESTER
PEACE - TOLERANCE - TRUTH
From the East of the SUPREME GRAND COUNCIL of the SOVEREIGN GRAND INSPECTORS GENERAL of the 33rd and last degree of the Ancient and Accepted Rite of
Freemasonry in and for Great Britan and Ireland under G.L. near the D.B. coresponding to 53', 25" N. Latitude 2', 3" West Meridian of Greenwich.
To all Illustrious, Ineffable and Sublime FREEMASONS of every degree Around and [spread] over the surface of the Globe, Greetings:
HEALTH - PROSPERITY - FRATERNITY
KNOW YE - That the undersigned Sovereign Grand Inspectors General do hereby certify & proclaim, viz.
Our Illustrious Brother ALEISTER CROWLEY of *London* to be an Excellent Master Mason, Secret Master, Royal Master, Intimate Secretary,Provost and
Judge,Intendant of the Building,Elect of Nine, Elect of Fifteen, Sublime Knight Elected, Grand Master Archetect, Ancient Master of the Royal Arch,
Grand Elect Perfect and Sublime Mason, Knight of the Temple, Prince of Jerusalem, Knight of the East and West, Knight Rose Croix of Heredom, Grand
Pontiff, Master ad Vitam, Patriarch Noachite, Prince of Libanus, Chief of the Tabernacle, Prince of the Tabernacle, Knight of the Brazen Serpant,
Prince of Mercy, Commander of the Temple, Knight of the Sun, Knight of Saint Andrew, Grand Elect Knight Kadosh, Grand Inspector Inquisitor Commander,
Prince of the Royal Secret, Most Puissant Sovereign Grand Inspector General of the 33rd and Last Degree.
WE ALSO COMMAND: All the Knights, Princes and Sublime Masons under our Jurisdiction and we pray all other MASONS over the Surface Of The Globe, to
Welcome and Honor Him as a SOVEREIGN GRAND INSPECTOR GENERAL, and to give credit to these LETTERS PATENT, we have caused to be signed in the margin
by our said Illustrious Bro. ALEISTER CROWLEY, that they admit no other than himself. Signed and Delivered by us SOVEREIGN GRAND INSPECTORS GENERAL
of The 33rd and Last Degree with the Seal of our said SUPREME COUNCIL affixed in the Valley of Manchester this 29th day of the 11th month
A.M. 5071 coresponding to the 29th November, A.D. 1910.
+--------------+ +------------+ |
/S/_________________________ Ancient & (SEAL) [*]
John Yarker 33~ Accepted| M.P.S. Gr. Comm. of England | Scottish
(Foil Embossed) (Rubber Stamp) |
[*] Rich Higham 33~ [*] Edward Yarker 33~
M.W. Chancellor of England W.^.Gr.^. Secretary of England
RATIFIED AND CONFIRMED &tc.
So there does seem to be quite a connexion between the OTO and Masonry the more one digs into it...just how to weigh up this connexion however is a
matter of opinion...
NB: the sources for the Above were extracted from writings of Calvin C. Burt, W.B. Crow, Isaac Blair Evans, Antoine Faivre, S.E. Flowers, René Le
Forestier, Joscelyn Godwin, Dr. J.A. Gottlieb, Ellic Howe, Francis King, Peter-Robert König, Helmut Möller, William G. Peacher, M.D., Martin P.
Starr, John Symonds, M. McBlain Thomson, A.E. Waite, James Webb, and John Yarker, William Breeze, Martin P. Starr, Parsival Krumm-Heller, Soror Meral,
Soror Grimaud, Lon Milo DuQuette, James T. Graeb, Bjarne Salling Pedersen & P.-R. König.
edit on 11-7-2011 by Sigismundus because: stuttering keyboardddddddddddd