Message from discussion Aleister Crowley: Freemason!
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Newsreader: Virtual Access by Atlantic Coast PLC, http://www.atlantic-coast.com/va
Subject: Re: Aleister Crowley: Freemason!
Reply-To: Ed King <edk...@masonicinfo.com>
From: Ed King <edk...@masonicinfo.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:34:59 GMT
X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 1041348899 18.104.22.168 (Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:34:59 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:34:59 PST
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
In article <b97518ae.0212302238.7c3d2...@posting.google.com>, Sar
> The initiation of Aleister Crowley into Blue Lodge is discussed in an
> interesting paper appearing in the "Ars Quatuor Coronatorum",
> Transactions of Quatuor Coronati, Vol 108, for the year 1995.
Will you PLEASE quit your subterfuge on this stupidity. You may be
a big and mighty "Bishop" able to threaten others with your little
oooggaaa-boogggaaa group but on this, you're behaving like a ten year
old stubborn, doltish child.
The article you cite has, as its SECOND sentence:
"...all his affiliations were with unrecognized and irregular
How much plainer does this need to be?
Now are you going to poke little pins in some voodoo doll and make my
leg twitch too?
> Aleister Crowley was the self-proclaimed "Beast 666" of "Do what thou
> wilt shall be the whole of the law" fame, and whose sacred book, "The
> Book of the Law", is now used in California for the obligation of his
> religious followers.
You seem to be on a 'mission' here - but you would do MUCH better if
you would stick to FACTS rather than playing loose and free with
> On page 153 of the publication, in a paper entitled: "Aleister
> Crowley: Freemason!", Martin Starr documents the Blue Lodge initiation
> of Aleister Crowley:
> "Crowley "... tried another gambit while he was a resident in Paris in
> 1904 ... He petitioned Anglo-Saxon Lodge No. 343, a Lodge chartered
> in 1899 by the Grand Loge de France, ... on 29 June 1904.
> The petition gives his name as 'Aleister St. Edward Crowley', and his
> occupation as 'poet'. ...
> Crowley was initiated on 8 October 1904, presumably passed the
> following month, and raised on 17 December 1904; he is listed in the
> 'Tableau annuel' dated 31 December 1904 with the Grand Lodge number
> 41210, Lodge number 54. Crowley was 'warmly welcomed by numerous
> English and American visitors to our Lodge . . .
The Grand Lodge de France then, as now, makes no demands on its visitors
beyond a basic proof that they are 'apparent' Masons. For them,
recognition is not an issue.
If I were to attend a meeting of theirs as a Mason, I could be
reprimanded, suspended or expelled by my Grand Lodge. If they visited a
lodge of mine, through ignorance and lack of diligence by the Tyler and
Master, there would be NO consequences for them. That's the way they do
it - both then and now. It is, I suspect, one of the reasons for the
continued objections to their recognition.
> .. . .From the records made availabe . . .Crowley appears as a member
> of Anglo-Saxon Lodge No. 343 in 1908."
> At the time of Crowley's initiation, the GLNF was not yet formed, and
> the GLdF was the only regular Lodge in France, (the GODF having been
> declared irregular upon the removal of the S.A.O.T.U. from the
Golly gee, you seem to have missed SO much in that AQC article like, for
"He petitioned Anglo-Saxon Lodge, No. 343, a lodge chartered in 1899 by
the Grande Loge de France, a body unrecognized by the Grand Lodge of
England, on 29 June 1904."
> Previously we have seen that in 1916, when Crowley was living in New
> York, the Grand Lodge of New York recognized the GLdF, and that
> Crowley had occasion to visit a number of Blue Lodges, as well as
> other high grade bodies in the U.S.
No, we have not "seen" any such thing. You note that the Grand Lodge of
New York "recognized". In fact, they _allowed intervisitation_ which is
quite a different things. And you have failed (miserably) to provide any
evidence of your claims of his attendance at ANY such meetings.
I found this interesting paragraph in a new biography of Crowley by
Lawrence Sutin: speaking of his supposed 33rd degree, Sutin writes "It
is noteworthy that Crowley's claim was to the teachings of the loosely
defined Scottish Rite and not those of the accepted body of "regular"
<his quotes> Freemasonry in England - the United Grand Lodge, with its
dominant presence in the aristocratic circles of London. Given his sorry
reputation, it is doubtful that Crowley could have persuaded any
"regular" lodge in his native land to initiate him into even the first
> His membership in an Ark Lodge then active in NYC in this era has
> been reported by another masonic researcher.
And that would be who, please?
http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 2002. All rights reserved.