A F.U.D.O.S.I. foi formada em 1934 “para proteger as liturgias sagradas, ritos e doutrinas das Ordens iniciáticas tradicionais de serem apropriadas e profanadas por organizações clandestinas”. A F.U.D.O.S.I. não era uma Ordem, mas uma Federação Universal de Ordens e Sociedades esotéricas e autônomas, portanto, um órgão administrativo antes de tudo.

“Algumas pessoas, cujas mentes ainda não receberam luz suficiente, desejam saber por que era necessária uma Federação Universal. As Ordens e Sociedades Iniciáticas que, no seu próprio campo de trabalho, desfrutam da mais absoluta e completa liberdade e perfeita autonomia e independência. A esta questão nós podemos responder que, mais que qualquer outra coisa, está no trabalho iniciático que a maior vigilância é indispensável e que uma disciplina internacional estrita e ativa deve ser exercida.

Nós devemos reconhecer e lamentamos a existência de muitos falsos profetas e vários auto-proclamados iniciados que usam, para propósitos egoístas e tirânicos de dominação, o pretexto da iniciação para explorar as pessoas crédulas e sinceras. Era tempo de advertir o público contra estes falsos líderes e contra doutrinas nocivas que eles ensinaram às almas confiantes.

Em cada país, cada Ordem autêntica e regular conhece seus imitadores e tais falsos profetas. Era necessário vigiar estes movimentos clandestinos, expor estes impostores ou instrumentos ocultos e evitar sua força, em todos os países, onde quer que eles estejam operando, e assim evitar qualquer confusão entre as Ordens regulares e autênticas e as Organizações falsas que são prejudiciais ou que ofereçam ensinamentos que nada têm a ver com a Tradição Universal e o Esoterismo.

E também era necessário que as Ordens autênticas tivessem cuidado ao selecionar os seus membros e oficiais e manter os seus adeptos e estudantes no caminho correto das verdadeiras doutrinas, obrigando-os a seguir uma linha estrita de disciplina, trabalho racional, sincero e consciencioso, para evitar ensinamentos radicais e heterodoxia. Este imenso trabalho que era pretendido e que protegia as Ordens contra os seus inimigos internos e exteriores foi efetuado com sucesso pela F.U.D.O.S.I. e continua ocorrendo.” (Jornal da F.U.D.O.S.I., novembro de 1946)

 

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

BMO, lineages and other non-spiritual matters by Fr. M

Greetings,

Thorsten, since you were asking about Martinism in London I can tell you that there are several active groups. However, many of these are controversial in that they are not following the Tradition of the Martinist Order as set up by Papus, Chaboseu & co. For instance, you have the infamous TMO only being open to AMORC members, and similarly there are Martinist Orders only open to Masons (no, I'm not refering to the Elus Cohen).

However, I know for certain that both the British Martinist Order (BMO) as well as the Synarchy Martinist Order (OM&S) has lodges in London, and they are both following the Martinist customs in the strictest observance.

Although the OM&S is almost extinct today, partly because Sar Gulion has long gone retired from active Martinist work, they are still around, and are the oldest surviving Martinist Order in the world today - at least of those deriving from Papus & Chaboseus Order. There are other Orders in the world using the name OM&S, but many of them are not recognized (for what it's woth) by the 'mother' in Britain. The ICES was originally an OM&S offspring in Barbados, but is no longer such a representative. The rituals and doctrines of the OM&S is very similar to that of OMT (Ordre Martinist Traditionel, the European original of todays TMO) and also to BMO. I have personally verified this, but there are also some slight differences, probably not too important (albeit it depends on the beholder). OM&S also have some other stuff attached to it, which is perhaps less known (again I am not refering to Elus Cohen and neither to EGC/EGA/EGU), but sufficient to say that Dr. Eduard Bertholet had a significant role to play in this.

ICES/OM&S Barbados

As for the BMO, I must say I am puzzled how many myths are revolving around them. It is true that they 'origin' from TMO/AMORC insofar as many of their original members was defectors from said groups. However, there was also members from other orders among its founders, such as SOL, BOTA, HOGD, Co-Masonry, OM&S, etc, and I have not seen any of these groups getting blamed for being behind it. Some may raise the objection that the lineage is from TMO and therefore the comparsion holds, but if lineage is the important matter then perhaps one should consider that BMO also holds a seperate lineage which is not associated with the TMO/AMORC Tradition whatsoever.

The fact that some find Gary Stewart controversial and given that he is associated with the BMO (their TMO lineage flows through him), it is still not a reason to discard them as worthless, since one really can not judge a whole organisation based on one person. And if one insist on doing this, perhaps it would be more appropriate to look to the recently deceased Grand Master John A.B. Fox, who may be regarded as the heart of the BMO in Europe. He was also a high representative of SOL, so if one wants to tie BMO with AMORC one might as well tie them to SOL.

At any rate, if we examine the ritual-doctrinal heritage of BMO, it is true that they used material similar to TMO. I say similar, because it was not identic. However, most Martinist groups have some version of this material, so there is nothing outstanding about this. In fact, BMO made a point of distancing itself from the TMO, not so much because of politics (Fox supported Stewart versus Bernard), but rather because of Traditional concerns (as have been pointed out already in this discussion there is a lot of controversy regarding TMO - not only because of their lineage; a lot of the TMO material has been altered by somewhat incompetent egos). BMO sought back to the roots, and if you define them by their attitude they are certainly more in resonance with the original order (of Papus & co) than many of the modern Martinist Orders. Let me slightly elaborate on this:

AMORC/TMO has been accused for being commercial and violating the Traditon in a million ways. BMO, on the other hand, does not try to advertise for new members. In fact, it is far easier to join the new invention AMO in the USA than it is to get admission into the BMO. I personally know one of the Grand Masters and Free Initiators of BMO, and he is outraged by what he considers to be a fluffy and unserious attitude of modern Martinists by exposing themselves as they do on the web, and he is furthermore shocked by the way information, rituals, signs, and what have you is revealed online in such places as this forum. Now, you may of course respectfully disagree with this view of his, but that's not the point, the point is that this goes to show what a conservative attitude significant BMO representatives holds. It is anything but commercial, in fact it is perhaps a bit extreme in the direction of the old ways of the old days.

Online application forms is perhaps the worst example of violating the original Tradition. The Tradition have it that for different spiritual reasons you need to be reccomended by existing member(s) and that you have to go through a personal interview before admission can be granted you. There is still a lot of Esoteric groups practicing this faithfully, and one may be surprised to learn that this also includes BMO. Most orders today, including many Martinists, is somewhere between these polarities, and displays information, contact, address and emails in various magazines and on the web. Perhaps these groups should be attacked as well, if one insist on branding BMO with the mark of AMORC or the 'McDonaldization of occulture'?

Apart from the BMO, you will also find that the Martinist Order of Holland (which incidentally - like the BMO - is not restricted to one country) and the OM&S all holds a very low profile, and I doubt you will ever find them participating in any forum or online discussion group. Right or wrong, they insist on maintaining the Work in cover from the public noise. If you look at the 'esoteric market' of today, that's a decreasing attitidue.

The question of TMO's lineage is another interesting matter. I have written a piece about that where I try to balance the picture somewhat, since it seems that no one is coming forward to their defence. Perhaps there is none left in the TMO with the competence of its real history. I know that Raymond Bernard has some knowledge of this, but he is also retired from the Work. One of the facts I am pointing out in my piece, is that the French OMT was recognized by both Ambelain and Amadou, and I hold a copy of such a charter given to Raymond Bernard. In fact, there was Martinist meetings held in amity between these groups back in the 70ies until Ralph Lewis put a stop to that.

The key to understanding TMO's missing links, as well as their altered material is Ralph Lewis. Not only didn't he care about having TMO appear respectable and genuine in the eyes of the Martinist World, he directly caused it to become alienated from it's relatives (ordering a revision of both it's doctrinal & ritualistic material, removing theurgic rendencies, abandoning the I.L., organising TMO under the chains of AMORC, etc). Of course, this was Lewis priviledge as the chief, I.L. and sole dicator of TMO.

Now, people talk about charters as if they were scientific irrefutable evidence in comformity with occams razor, when in fact they are mere pieces of paper. Well, there is little doubt that Lewis initially transferred the lineage to several of his staff, but the problem is that after he stopped this he also refused them to pass it on further. I will refrain from going in much further details about this, because it will all be displayed in my article, however I can add that there are 2 other complicating factors to this very complex context. One is that Lewis received his I.L. from FUDOSI Martinists (albeit both he and his father had received their first initiations from OM&S), and I may add that he desperately begged them for this because it would in the aftermath of H. S. Lewis demise give his son a final joker in the internal battle for TMO's control. Second that other TMO members also received this from genuine I.L. Martinists of FUDOSI. The big question remains, does any living Martinist have this I.L. lineage today?

Well, I will leave this question open for now. However, I may add that Christian Bernard does hold a lineage from his father, which he does not admit publicly (or should I say semi-publicly in that he only addresses these matters within the TMO), one from Gary Stewart (ibid for obvious reasons) and one from Orval Graves. Stewart on his part, holds one from Cecile Poole and one from Fox. The so-called genuinity of most of these lineages are moot for several reasons, but the missing charter point is as far as my opinion goes an obsolete and insignificant part of this dispute.

I hope this was to some help for those who are unfamiliar with these matters.

Sincerely,

Fr. M

posted by FRATER AL SAHER at 12:31