AMORC Origin Stories (2015)

An Analysis of Differing Accounts, Contradictions and Inconsistencies in the Literature o f AMORC and Harvey Spencer Lewis’ Books, Documents and Articles in the Light of Cognitive Persuasion, A Subtle Method of Mind Control Uncovered by the Latest Advances in Neuroscience. ww w .picfrefrecm an.com w w w .lhcpf5soruw ofam oofc.com

*****

The Use of Cognitive Persuasion in the Creation, Modification and Amplification of the Stories of the Founding of a lOO-Year-Old Religious Cult

By Pierre S. Freeman

An Analysis of Differing Accounts, Contradictions and Inconsistencies in the Literature of AMORC and Harvey Spencer Lewis’ Books, Documents and Articles in the Light of Cognitive Persuasion, A Subtle Method of Mind Control Utilizing the Non-Reflexive, Instinctual W ay of Thinking Uncovered by the Latest Advances in Neuroscience

Copyright ©2015 by Pierre S. Freeman All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews. Please do not participate in or encourage the piracy of copyrighted materials in violation of the author’s rights. Purchase only authorized editions.

“...there is only one universal Rosicrucian Order existing in the world today, united in its various jurisdictions, and having one Supreme Council in accordance with the original plan of the ancient Rosicrucian’s manifestoes... This international organization retains the ancient traditions, teachings, principles and practical helpfulness of the Order as founded centuries ago. It is known as the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis, which name, for popular use, is abbreviated into AMORC.” Statement of the Grand Lodge of the English Language Jurisdiction, AMORC, Inc., Publishers of

Cosmic Mission Fulfilled by Ralph M. Lewis 1966 Edition

CONTENTS AMORC Origin Stories Endnotes Appendix

It was quite some time ago when I left AMORC, determined to find a way to prevent present and future members from having to endure the psychological trauma and life-destroying consequences of its subtle, but highly effective mind, control system. In my various books,

The Prisoner o f San Jose, AMORC Unmasked, The Emperor-Imperator-Speaks: Tales o f the Puppet Master, Daring to Speak o f Darkness, Mayhem on the Astral Highway—M ind Slaves o f the Rosicrucian Collectorum —Parti, I have spoken of various methods by which AMORC has lured prospective members into

its stronghold of deception—but mostly remotely—through its advertising and its books, and now, through the wonder of the Internet.

How I Came to Look a t the Origin Stories More Closely In Tales o f the Puppet Master, I presented a series of reviews of various books of H. Spencer Lewis and commented on the account of one of his origin stories in my review of the official Rosicrucian Manual. Following my discussion of Tales and its publication that included some commentary of a huge controversy about Lewis' account of its origin as presented there, I found I had left an important piece out, Lewis’ own which was supposedly first published in 1916. autobiographical account, Although I knew about its existence, I could not seem to locate it. Still curious after was published, I spent some time looking for it, realizing that I had run into it but the title of the web pages that carried it had thrown me off. It seemed like it was only part of the book, but a closer inspection found that it was rather short, some 26 pages, and was really the whole thing. Very shortly after it was published, it was taken out of print, according to an official 1957 publication from AMORC’s organization in London and was permitted republication by the Imperator Ralph M. Lewis, the son of H. Spencer Lewis. Why was it taken out? The answer to that is probably the cornerstone of my discussion.

A Pilgrim’s Journey to the East,

Tales

ThePower o f Origin Stories in M ind Control

I have always known that one of the fundamental building blocks of AMORC’s mind control system as in many other cults are its origin stories. Just like in comic books where one is always interested in the origin of superheroes, people are always interested in the origins of religions and religious figures because origin stories provide a platform for how institutions or their leaders gathered their authority. And since AMORC claims to be a super cosmic organization, an ancient occult fraternity that sometimes proclaims that it is the only true connection between God and man, a vital determinant for our species taking the right course for human history, origin stories are important in establishing that monolithic, all powerful contact. In classical hypnosis and in various forms of mind control, the whole basis for creating a trance in a subject is preceded by validating the practitioner’s authority and power. For this reason, AMORC, its Imperator and its leadership, must serve that purpose. In cult mind control in general, the objective is to transfer the sense of their themselves—their essential sense of self (true personality) or what Robert Jay Lifton calls the Protean Self—to a cult personality (false or synthetic personality), which will pay homage to a cult leader and their organization. At that point, the dimensions of control that they can gain over another person are unfathomable. I know. I was one of AMORC’s mind slaves for twenty-six3 years, a reality that I have fully documented in my book, AMORC’s literature about itself and some outside commentary, including this discussion, reveals that For those interested in the true history of AMORC’s creation, this can be a fascinating journey but for those who are hoping that AMORC is what it pretends to be, perhaps a rather disappointing one. It really is hard to entangle to find even a kernel of truth. We are talking here about multiple and contradictory origin stories, or so it appears. If one keeps up with the comic books or perhaps more likely Marvel and DC films about superheroes, you will notice that there are multiple origin stories about Superman, Batman, and Spiderman. They all have similarities, but, if you want to be nitpicking, there are a lot of differences. We can easily forgive that because we all like good superhero adventure stories and the variety is interesting. But having a distinctive difference in an origin story is not necessarily so appreciated when you are dealing with critical narratives of an organization with extraordinary claims that can affect the entire

The Prisoner o f SanJose {link).

AMORC has notJust one origin story, but several.

direction of your whole life. Those kinds of variations in stories, perhaps, are worth picking apart because they cast a shadow on the organization’s claims? Do they reveal the truth, or does their very contradictory nature reveal the possibility that there is another origin story altogether, one held back from the public and from the majority of those truly invested in the story like the current members of AMORC? Very intriguing possibility.

WhyDo Origin Stories Have Such Power? In all my books so far, I have emphasized one mind control element as the decisive factor in total cult indoctrination. That component that I believed was the decisive factor in creating full compliance from a cult member, and which I still believe to be true, is trance induction. This technique is combined with various hypnotic triggers to create a state of suggestion capable of even creating positive hallucinatory experiences on a regular basis. Ultimately, trance induction heightens suggestibility to such an extent it helps to create buffers in the human personality that repress both the normal or Protean personality, allowing a false or cult personality to emerge as the predominant conscious decision maker. The Protean personality is a term used by the famous anti-cult analyst, Robert Jay Lifton, and conveys the idea of an essential, core identity of all human beings, one that can be suppressed but does not go down fighting and can actually war against the cult personality. I have fully described my own battle in the (link). I still have some of the aftereffects of that battle. This type of mind control, featuring the hallucinatory elements, creating a division so great in the cult member that it can cause Post Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms, is common in religious or paranormally-oriented cults, which need "the miraculous’’ or "other worldly” events to support their claims. But there is another factor, another element of persuasion that is not trance-based and has recently come to the fore as a major factor in various kinds of human decision-making like politics, marketing or even family interactions, and that is the power of the narrative through the neurologically-based activity of framing. I call this type of mind control Before we discuss the actual technique of cognitive persuasion, let us take a peek at some of the terms used in cognitive linguistics, a subset of neuroscience that looks at language in the face of scientific

Prisoner ofSan]os&

cognitivepersuasion.

used in cognitive linguistics, a subset of neuroscience that looks at language in the face of scientific discoveries about the way we think and talk. One of those scientists is George Lakoff, who classifies himself as a progressive political thinker concerned about the way neuroscience discoveries reveals the persuasive power of storytelling, which serves to propagandize certain political views that actually have the power to overturn the rational and ethical ways of thinking demanded in human rationality. "Frames,” as explained by George Lakoff, a cognitive scientist, are "structures of ideas we use to understand the world.” Frames, he purports, allow us to internally organize and simplify the things and events around us. Each frame is related to a specific neuronal level which, when activated, can actually be observed and measured. Frames strung together in a certain way create narratives, and narratives used in storytelling can be used to trick the mind into a premature act of belief.1 This power to trick the mind is, in fact, what I have called cognitive persuasion, a non-trance form of mind control used a great deal in political propaganda and commercial advertising for centuries, but only today is the scientific basis for this type of mind control being discovery as it is based on the way people are naturally inclined to think, as demonstrated in laboratory experiments. According to Lakoff, there are two reasons, one allegedly proven and the other still speculative, that give narratives a special power over the human mind. One is that the part of the brain that responds to, say, seeing or moving things responds in identical ways to that we are seeing or moving something. This is called mental "stimulation." This means that there is a certain reality to what happens in our imagination that equates internally to what happens in the real world. Yes, we can generally distinguish between the two, but because of this, in some way, unless disciplined by specific oversight coupled with rational thinking, the two appear to have almost equal weight in the mind of the undisciplined recipient. What happens in the real world and the mind has somewhat of an equal power. This process is affecting the brain in this way is called "mental stimulation.” Lakoff says on page 39 of

imagining

The PoliticalMind.

The same part of the brain we use in seeing is also used in remembering seeing, in dreaming we are seeing, and in understanding language about seeing. The same parts of the brain used in really moving are used in imagining that we are moving, remembering about moving, and in understanding about moving. Mental

"stimulation" is the technical term for using brain areas for moving or perceiving, imagining, remembering, dreaming or understanding language. It is mental stimulation that links imaginative stories to lived narratives.2 But, again according to Lakoff, there is a possibility that there is something called "mirror neuron circuits” which link our own sense of lived narratives to the narratives of another person. So, in a sense, we experience what another person is alleged to do in the same manner as we experience ourselves doing something. The way "your lived narratives are linked to someone else" could be, according to Lakoff, because of "mirror neuron circuits,” a kind of brain activity" proven in macaque monkeys, but only plausibly assumed to take place in human beings. “Mirror neuron circuitry" implies that when you see someone in an action or perform it yourself, there are two-way pathways that connect to the brain in the same way: to the primary motor cortex, connecting to neuronal activity in the muscles, which can directly control muscle movement and to the part of the brain that integrates sensory information in the visual, auditory, and somatosensory regions of the brain— what is called the parietal cortex. Also, the positive and negative emotional pathways are connected through the insula. Also, in this theory of ‘mirror” circuitry, there is a connection to the posteromedial cortex, which actively supports ‘the experience of empathy, say, in compassion and admiration. Finally, there is a connection to the prefrontal cortex that supposedly contains the "super-mirror” neurons, which modulate the activation of the mirror neurons and limit or enhance their capacity for empathy.’By understanding the equation between real experience and imagined experience and one’s own experience and another, powerful influences can intentionally create in words or in media that have an influence on recipients that, without conscious reflection and due diligence, can override one's rational processes and unwantedly influence the human personalities’ predilections, desires, and interpretations about events. This is a way of controlling the mind without trance induction or even some kind of submission of authority to a third party through something like psychological transference. Again, I call this form of mind control “cognitive persuasion.” No drugs, no trances, no enhanced interrogations utilized spontaneously in the past by people with a shrewd understanding of human nature

and how people could be easily manipulated whether they knew the scientific underpinnings or not. We shall see how cognitive persuasion works in AMORC shortly, but first let us take a deeper look at AMORC’s self-described beginnings.

AMORCLAUNCH-TIME! The fact is that there are, indeed, several origin stories about AMORC. In this book, I will present eight of them chronologically—six from AMORC and two from outside skeptics about AMORC’s stories. Three from AMORC were initiated by H. Spencer Lewis himself with one of those a posthumous biography by his son, Ralph Lewis, and another by a so-called Rosicrucian historian, Christian Rebisse, but both heavily derived from Harvey’s own writings. A third AMORC writer is "Grand Master" Julie Scott. The was undoubtedly ultimately developed, in part, without Harvey’s supervision, but depended on it. Two more stories, one created by R. Swinburne Clymer, the founder of the Rosicrucian Fellowship, and the other described and analyzed from the historical record by Robert Vanloo, an author and ex-member of AMORC, who has taken considerable efforts to study and report of these origins.

Rosicrucian Manual,

STORY #1 - THE 1916 VERSION

A Pilgrim’sJourney to the East By Harvey Spencer LewisI

How H. Spencer Lewis, who has studied Rosicrucian literature and engaged in various literary and social activities involved in studying psychical and spiritual matters, makes a personal journey to become an initiate in the Order. This was an autographical account by H. Spencer Lewis, published in 1916 in This is was the first published autobiography, but apparently, according to its 1957 republication by the branch of AMORC in London1, it was not available for many years, probably quite soon after its original publication. When you see how much it was altered, it is not too hard to figure out why? Yet, there was so much evidence that it was altered, it is sometimes difficult to figure out why

Pilgrim’s Journey to the Far East.

A

they were not more careful. STORY #2 - THE 1929 VERSION Rosicrucian Questions and Answers By Harvey Spencer LewisIn this story, H. Spencer Lewis is a self-professed descendent of the founders of a Rosicrucian Order in America who projects that the true Rosicrucian Order operates in 108 year cycles. Having professed he started an organization to explore Rosicrucian traditions and history, he is eager to start a new cycle of the Order in America. Having been encouraged by a “Legate" from India, mentioned in the 1929 book, he goes to France to gain the authority to start the Order. This story omits certain information mentioned in a magazine called Cromaat, published in 1918, which indicates who that "Legate" may have been, a Mrs. May Banks-Stacey, a controversial participant in the written history of the Order.

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers,

STORY #3 - THE 1935 VERSION Rosicrucian Fellowship in America Which Contains a Formerly Published Brochure: “Not Under the Rosy Cross” By R. Swinburne Clymer2 Perhaps Lewis’ most vocal and litigious opponent. Clymer was challenged to a public debate by Lewis in December of 1933. He replied by inviting Lewis to a "complete and impartial tribunal composed of high Masons.” When Lewis refused, he wrote this scathing expose of the connection between AMORC and Aleister Crowley, the Black Magician. His claim was that Lewis’ initiation in France was totally bogus and claimed it took place in England under Crowley’s umbrella. He takes great length to show the connection between the symbolism, teachings, costuming, and rituals of AMORC are not Rosicrucian but from a much darker place.

STORY # 4 - THE 1966 VERSION Cosmic Mission Fulfilled By Ralph M. LewisThis autobiographical account of Ralph Lewis’ father, the former Imperator of AMORC, borrows explicitly from but attempts to integrate certain features in other versions of H. Spender’s Lewis story in and in the obituary of May Banks-Stacey. He speaks of his father in the third person, assuming that he wrote it and includes portions of his father’s Last Will and Testament, which perhaps makes it somewhat more personalized. The book seems like an attempt to integrate and explain some of the contradictions in the other versions, but, on inspection, it fails in its purpose.

A Pilgrim's Journey to the East Rosicrucian Q&A

STORY #5 - THE 1971 VERSION The Rosicrucian Manual Initiated and Overseen by H. Spencer Lewis And, Later, Probably Other Imperators with Help of Staff2

Rosicrucian Manual

This later version is mentioned in the 1971 edition of the but it may have been printed before. This edition develops the idea that Mrs. May Banks-Stacey, a representative of the Order in India, provides Lewis with certain documents and jewels that gives him the right to start the Order. He then travels to France to start the Order. It draws on information mentioned in the 1918 edition of Cromaat about Mrs. May Banks-Stacey but not mentioned in the 1929 In this story, she is the descendent of the English sponsors of early settlers of the original Rosicrucian Order in America and had been made a Legate from the Rosicrucian Order in India.

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers.

STORY #6 - THE 2001 VERSION “Controversy around a Document? -Is the A.M.O.R.C. an Offspring of the O.T.O. or Not?” By Robert Vanloo, BA12

In a sense, Vanloo’s version of the origin of AMORC raises more questions than gives conclusive answers. It certainly throws doubt on the role of Mrs. Banks-Stacey and the Toulouse initiation. On the other hand, although the connection between Crowley and Lewis seems rather clearly demonstrated, Vanloo does not see AMORC as a true branch of the OTO as promulgated through Crowley (or anyone else for that matter), although he sees the possibility of some kind of non-Crowley involvement in the early years. Later on, there was a definitive connection between Reuss’ OTO and Lewis, but not anything substantive in relation to the content of AMORC’s teaching. Crowley, in somewhat of speculative effort by Vanloo (because names are not mentioned), does appear to be a kind of witness to Lewis’ deceptive practices, particularly with Mrs. May Banks-Stacey. STORY # 7 - 2 0 0 9 “H. Spencer Lewis - Restorer of Rosicrucianism” By Christian Rebisse, FRC Featured in a podcast,— movie— and article—. The 2009 date appears as a copyrighted version of the podcast and video. As it is so prominently featured, it appears to have the fullest possible authority by AMORC as it is featured in their new multi-media publicity machine. STORY # 8 - 2 0 1 0 “Clemence Isaure: The Rosicrucian Golden Isis” By Grand Master Julie Scott, S.R.C.— This article focuses on an anecdote taking place and preceding Lewis’ initiation in the Hall of the Illustrious in Toulouse’s city hall The Difference in AMORC Generated Stories #1 , #2 and #5 The first question which we believe should be addressed, why are there differences between these different AMORC-originated stories #1, #2, and #5, however small? We are not particularly focusing on

Ralph Lewis’ biography because it is basically an amalgam of Stories #1 and #2. We will be addressing Christian Rebisse’s version a bit later. In my opinion, when you develop a mind control or hypnotic script, you want it to be power packed with authority as much as possible. And if you don’t particularly care about the truth and you don’t think you can easily be caught, why not change things around and improve on them? Another related possibility is that things may have come up in the stories that made AMORC more vulnerable to its subterfuge about its early history being uncovered and maybe there was a value in hiding these components. Remember, earlier in its history, AMORC was under attack from various opponents, including a legal battle with R. Swinburne Clymer. Remember all this is done in the days before the Internet when investigating something like this would mean going to libraries or, even more possibly, visiting newspaper morgues or traveling to or corresponding with bookstores or even individuals to find books that probably wouldn’t be found in the ordinary library. I would like to state here that although it is clear there are inconsistencies in the stories, there may be other documents existing that provide a more complete account of the early AMORC era than I have so far. Any assistance by readers having access to other relevant documents would be very much appreciated. My guess is that additional documents would probably expand the variations in these stories since their obvious intent is to convey whatever the controlling author wished and not necessarily to relay the historical truth.

TheD evilis in the Details In order to explain the difference in these origin stories, I will go into some of the details. As I will go into later in this discussion, the human mind is easily swayed by certain types of narratives, and the hope is that someone truly concerned with the various influences that control his or thinking and life will take the time to make sure these influences are pure and unfiltered by a secret agenda—be it commercial, political, or personal. For such a person, the devil is in the details.

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers and look how the A Pilgrim'sJourney (please note my

Let me first quote from page 170 in the book, narrative differs slightly from what is in the manual itself and also from emboldening).

It was in 1909, also, that I made my visit to France for a similar purpose. For many years I had held together a large body of men and women devoted to occult and metaphysical re' search along Rosicrucian lines. As editor of several occult magazines I had made contact with various Rosicrucian manuscripts and had discovered that I was related to one of the descendants of the first Rosicrucian body in America-that which had established itself in Philadelphia in 1694. This gave me access to many of their old papers, secret manuscripts, and teachings. These we discussed, analyzed, and attempted to put into practice. Among ourselves, the society, composed of several hundred persons in professional life, was known as It is worth noting that this story from the 1929 told in the 1971 Manual, which says on page 6.

The Rosicrucian Research Society.— Questions and Answers differs somewhat from the story

"Having had passed to him in the proper way certain knowledge preserved by the descendants of the first foundation in America, he prepared himself through various courses of study and association with metaphysical bodies, for the work he was to undertake in 1909. Then in the month of July of that year he went to France where he was introduced to the proper authorities and inducted into the mysteries and methods of carrying out his life mission.— ; One can note here that it does not, in this passage from the manual, mention that he was a descendant, but rather he had the information "passed to him in the proper way....” Standing alone that would not be a problem, but later in the Manual, on page 129, it says that after many years of scientific and psychic research, Lewis... ...made his first contact with the work of the Rosicrucians through obtaining copies of

the secret manuscripts of the first American Rosicrucians, who established their headquarters near Philadelphia in 1694. A member of the English Branch which sponsored the first movement in America, Mrs. May Banks-Stacey, * descendant of Oliver Cromwell and the D’Arcys of France, placed in his hands such papers as had been officially transm itted to her by the last of the first American Rosicrucians, with the Jewel and Key of authority received by her from the Grand Master of the Order in India, while an officer of the work in that country.— For her role in the alleged role in the formation of AMORC, Mrs. May Banks-Stacey is designated in the as the Co-Founder and First Grand Matre in U.S.A. in a caption below her photograph even though it is alleged that the Grand Matre did not sign the first Manifesto in (check). A passage seemingly confirming she was the "Legate” was published on page 27 in Volume D in a Rosicrucian Magazine called back in 1918.

Rosicrucian Manual

Cromaat

“I further state that the said Jewels and incomplete instructions were delivered into my hands by the R.C. Masters of India, representing the Supreme Council of the World, and that I was there made an initiate of the Order and a Legate of the Order for America. I also state that the said Jewels and papers were represented to me as coming direct from Egypt and France, and that they were given to me to be formally handed to that man who should present certain papers, documents, jewels and “key” in America. Such a person having matured and being Brother H. S. Lewis, I did the duty expected of me, fulfilled my commission and with pleasure express the joy at seeing the work so well under way in accordance with the prophecy made in India to me in person. The history of the Jewels and papers are, to my knowledge, exactly as stated herein and as described by Mr. Lewis, our Imperator, in the History of the Order as published in the Official Magazine.”— Interestingly, this quote is published in an article colorfully entitled, “The Supreme Matre Emeritus Raised to the Higher Realms." The article is actually Mrs. Banks-Stacey’s obituary.

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers,

In published in 1929, on page 165, it clearly states that before 1909, when Lewis first visited France, as a descendent himself of the original founders of a Rosicrucian settlement at Ephrata in Pennsylvania, he was going specifically to gain official authority to start a new cycle of Rosicrucianism in America, He says: I have said that as the year 1909 approached, many men and women journeyed to France or other parts of Europe seeking not only initiation into the Order, but some official permission to aid in the establishment of the Order again in the United States, for its new cycle.— So, again, his mission to go to France was clearly to found this Order, not just because of a personal passion as described in A Pilgrim’s Journey (which we shall fully document later). One can only imagine that the "Legate” mentioned in the following passage on page 171 was Mrs. Banks-Stacey, but Lewis does not mention her. This is what he says:

o f Rosicrucian Questions and Answers

Just before 1909 there applied for membership in our society one who presented papers proving appointment as...’’Legate” of the Rosicrucian Order in India. Many weeks of close association with this member revealed the fact that I might be successful in my search for some form of authority to introduce the true Rosicrucian work in America at the right time. Every means of communication with any official of the Order in foreign lands was denied to me until early in the year 1909 when I was informed that the year for the public appearance of the Order in America was at hand and that definite arrangements for the new cycle had been completed.—

Journey Rosicrucian Manual

Yes, in Story #2 in 1929, it does not identify Mrs. Banks-Lacy as the Legate, although it, like the her role was published explicitly before in 1918. Further, in 1971, the says that she was the descendent, not Lewis. Why all these strange little discrepancies concerning Mrs. Banks-Stacey’s role and Lewis’ background and mission? For the moment, let us look at some notes from Soror Rectifier at the beginning of the 1916’s republication in 1957. She states that the republication occurred, after years of its being out of print, by the largesse of Ralph M. Lewis, H. Spencer Lewis’ son, who was the then Imperator. In

to the Far East,

Journey to the Far East

A Pilgrim's

the 1957 notes, she says, The information contained in this booklet is given out as a privilege to members. The present Imperator, Fra. Ralph M. Lewis, wishes it to be understood that no questions can be answered in connection with the contents, and that there will be no correspondence about it. It is a publication of the history as written by Dr. Lewis, and, therefore, since he has passed through transition, no one is further qualified to carry on correspondence with respect to his personal experiences.— I think this is quite interesting because given anyone's sensibilities about what was published already, there surely could be many questions. But I suppose the voice of the current Imperator might be taken as a kind of thoughtfulness on his part out of respect for his deceased father? Or would it have opened a Pandora’s box of questions if one had read the obituary in Remember this is before the Internet and books not printed for a number of years—especially obscure ones—would be very hard to find.

Questions and Answers and.

TheReasonforLewis’ Going to Paris as Related in "APilgrim'sJourney"? In a further statement in the 1957 prologue to A Pilgrim’s Journey,

CromaaP.

the story about Lewis being a descendent from Questions and Answers is repeated which clearly states that a “Legate” from India appeared to him and told him "that I might be successful in the search for some form of authority to introduce the true Rosicrucian work in America at the right time.” None of this is mentioned in the beginning of nor does he mention his desire to open a branch of the Rosicrucian Order in America nor his alliance with a "Legate” from India. Instead, it is said that he actually writes to the editor of a Parisian paper the following question: “How can I learn of the method to pursue which will secure guidance to the Rosae Crucis?” When the editor writes back, he tells him to call on the studio of a Professor of Languages in Paris. Lewis says:

A Pilgrim'sJourney

After many years' study of the exoteric work of Rosaecrucianism and an increasing, obsessional desire to join with the Brotherhood, unselfish in its great undertakings for the betterment and unity of man, I wrote—after a deep inner impression to do so—to the unknown editor of the Parisian paper.— Why, pray tell, if he knows the Legate of the Order in India, is he forced to write to an unknown editor in France? After all, the Legate supposedly came to him before he left for France in 1909, according to Rosicrucians Q&A. Still, when he wrote, published in 1916, it isn’t clear he had much certainty about anything, much less the influence of the Legate. He hadn’t come up with the idea yet. Further, speaking in he says:

A Pilgrim'sJourney,

A Pilgrim'sJourney,

Determination I had, and the visions I dreamed by day and by night kept alive my ambition and my faith. It was early in July that I received my letter from Paris; possibly by the following year I might find it convenient to go to Paris. W hat was a year of waiting? Had I not waited two, three, four, five years in the hope of even learning that the Order still existed? And so I folded the letter carefully and put it among the precious papers that constituted my hopes of the future.— But he knows the Legate from India! He knows the Order exists. To repeat Lewis’ quote from Story #2 in

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers.

Just before 1909 there applied for membership in our society one who presented papers proving appointment as...’’Legate" of the Rosicrucian Order in India.— Flash forward to his meeting with the professor, who asks him, “and why do you seek to know a Brother of the Rose Croix?” At this critical juncture you would expect him to say, if the is true that he is a descendant of the Founders of the Order in America and wants to start the new cycle there. But, instead, Lewis says, stumbling:

Question and Answervexsion

"Because I want to know if the old Order is still in existence and if it is....’’ I was lost for words. I could not say that I wanted to become a member. One could not bluntly ask such a privilege in the presence of a man like Professor "X.”— The Professor replies, "And that is your only excuse for coming to Paris, for coming here? Is it what you call a curiosity”?— Then Lewis gives his reason. "Ah, no, Professor,” I began, feeling that I had wrongly expressed myself and had done an injustice to my real motives. "I am not acting out of idle curiosity at least. I want to know because I want, some day, to be one of them, if I may.”— The professor is not impressed until he finally seems to show the real motivation behind his journey. He says: "But, Professor," I began again, “I only want, desire, to learn how I may proceed if I am ever to have my fond hopes realized. I make no demand now for admission into the Order; I ask for no rare privilege or honour at this time. I come to you only as a seeker for knowledge—for light.”— His speaking of his ardent desire is what opens the door for him—a purely personal reason. Yes, the professor knows his background as an occult journalist and lecturer, his college degree and recognition by a French academy. But it is desire for Light that opens the door—certainly not his yet unmentioned pedigree.

What This ShouldSoundLike if Story #1 was True? First of all, Lewis wouldn’t be writing to an unknown Parisian letter. Having an acquaintance with a "Legate” from India, he would probably be given an address, perhaps to this alleged Professor in France. If he told him a few things in the letter, but not his connection to the mysterious "Legate,” perhaps the conversation would go like this: If the version in were true, wouldn’t the story go more like this?!!!!

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers

Hypothetical Conversation in Paris with Professor if Lewis Had Come for Reasons Cited in the

Rosicrucian M anual

Professor: So-1 have read your letter and consented to see you. We do know of this Legate and so I take it you have a serious inquiry? Lewis: Yes, professor, first I would like to present to you some documents from my family that can document the fact that I am related to some of the earliest members of the American Rosicrucian Order, which was established in Ephrata in Pennsylvania. The Professor looks over the papers. Professor: We have done some research on you after we received your letter. It is my belief that these documents are authentic. So why are you here? Lewis: I represent a group of people who have spent years with me researching and studying what we could find about Rosicrucian traditions. I am convinced that not only would I personally make a permanent connection to the Order, but I believe myself to be associated with enough earnest and serious students of the occult as to warrant my being authorized to revise the American Order. Professor: Well, Mr. Lewis, that indeed is a lofty ambition. You wish to initiate the 108-year cycle in America? Lewis: With all my heart. Professor: I’m in no position to grant you your wish or to speculate on your possibilities, but I think I can say, if you are serious, there are a few people I think you should speak to.

But what about Story #3? How would that go if that were true?

Hypothetical Conversation in Paris with Professor if Lewis Had Come for Reasons Cited in the 1972

Rosicrucian Manual

Professor: So, I have read your letter and am quite excited to see you. Lewis: May I show you these documents, Professor? The Professor takes the documents and looks them over. At one point, he takes out a magnifying glass. Professor: I have spent a good bit of my life studying art, including canvas and paper. These are, indeed, very ancient. And the marks, though faded, seem quite authentic. Congratulations. The Professor, seeming slightly nervous, looks at Lewis intently. Professor: May I see the jewels? Lewis takes a small linen sack out of his jacket and empties the jewels in the Professor’s hand. The Professor sits down at his desk and takes a small microscope out of the bottom drawer, peering at the jewels for almost ten minutes. He then hands them back to Lewis. Professor: Thanks you so much. It is quite amazing to meet you. There must be quite a story behind this. Lewis: Do you know Mrs. May Banks-Stacey? Professor: Yes, I do. I met her once in London. She is from our English Order and quite a world traveler, I believe. Lewis: Yes, she was a member of the very branch that originally sponsored the first Rosicrucians in America. She is a descendent of Cromwell and the French D’Arcys. Anyway, she gave me papers that had been originally transmitted by the last descendent of the first American Rosicrucians. She also received the Jewel and the Key

of authority from the Grand Master in India. She was an officer at that time in India. Professor: You spoke of a key? Lewis: Yes. Would you like to see it? He removes it from his vest pocket. The Professor takes it from him gingerly. He shakes his head slowly as if in awe of the artifact in his hand, then hands it back. Lewis: Is there anything else you need to know, Professor? Professor: Honestly, perhaps I was being selfish in keeping you here so long. But you are bearing considerable historical treasure, and I felt compelled to take a look. Lewis: I quite understand. Professor: Don't worry, Mr. Lewis, our Grand Master and his staff have been preparing for your arrival. All is ready. I will give you your travel instructions later this afternoon. Will you be able to come back to my office? Lewis: Of course. I am quite ready for everything and anything I may have to do. I am at your disposal.

A

As you can see from my hypothetical conversations based on two other versions that differ from there is somewhat of a gap between all three stories. But now let us get back to that original 1916 version, where Lewis is on his way to learn his destiny in regards to joining the highly secretive Rosicrucian organization. So, after much effort, Lewis finally arrives in Toulouse and finds himself at the Old Tower, a painting of which he saw when he was being interviewed by the Professor. Climbing up a long staircase, he finally reaches a room where he is greeted by an old man with a long gray beard and white hair. The old man says

Pilgrim’s Journey,

that he had been expected and, as a matter of fact, Lewis’ horoscope is on his desk. Lewis says: I spent an hour examining some rare hand-illuminated books. I saw one book made in the time of Christ, recording His work for the Order, containing a sketch in water colours of the true Christ and other sketches of incidents of His life. The book was bound with wood and iron, had iron hinges and an iron lock—all greatly rusted. I saw articles from Egypt, from various pyramids and Temples. I saw rare relics from Jerusalem and other countries. And, I saw the last Oath of the Order made by Lafayette before he came to America, the first Rosaecrucian from France to come here. May his name ever remain sacred to the Order in America.— Following his interview with the old man, who turns out to be the Chief Archivist of the Order, he is given directions to a great estate near the Tolosa, the old Roman city where Toulouse was eventually built. He eventually arrived at a mysterious old building known as the Grand Temple. There, he is finally initiated into the Order Rosae Crucis. At the end of all this, the day he left, he was allegedly told the following directly by the “Most Worshipful" Grand Master of France, Monsier L: Brother, these papers appoint you as a Legate of this Order for your country. Your duty and privileges are well defined. The documents you have, and the few jewels I now hand to you, will enable you to proceed at the tim e and in the manner indicated. When you have made some progress you will m eet with a representative from the Order in Egypt who will hand you, under certain conditions, other papers and seals. From time to time there will come to you those whom you will recognize by the signs indicated. They will add to your papers and devices until your working papers and tools are completed. Our Archivist will send you under seal, with the protection of the French Government, other papers as soon as you have made the progress, which will be reported to us by our Agents. Your semi-annual reports will

warrant, or deny, your progress and assistance. The Master of the world will be glad to administer to your wants and your requirements from time to time; and Peace and Power shall come to America if the dictates of our Order are faithfully fulfilled.”— So, in this version, he is made the Legate immediately by the Grand Master. He goes to France and is made a Legate. And he gets certain jewels and documents then. And, yes, he is made a messenger to the United States, but the actual original allegedly Rosicrucian community of Ephrata is not mentioned. And, as I have mentioned before, and will mention again, whether or not the Pietists who formed this community were truly Rosicrucian in the sense of being directly a part of an initiatic order is still a controversy. As you can see, the story goes through various stages—not necessarily a straight path—and tumble around. There was not an Internet back then, and as I said, changes in documents were far harder to track. *****

TheFun Part—Analyzing the N arrativesfrom the Standpoint o f "Persuasive Cognition ”—Another CultM ind Control Technique Only Now Coming to the Forefront o f Public and Scientific A wareness In looking at the way the mind works, one cannot ever underrate the power of narratives, especially when embodied in storytelling. There are various reasons why, which we explore. And, despite whatever stylistic objections one might have to H. Spencer Lewis' original origin story, there is no doubt that it would have a powerful and persuasive interest on individuals looking to understand various fundamental truths of reality, with the hope that by comprehending these truths, they could better their lives. This, of course, was my hope, as I significantly explain in my memoir of cult entrapment, In discussing the effect of I would like to point out there is probably no more powerful kind of narrative than a first person story. In literature, this is meant to create a close bond between the narrator and the reader because of its powerful emotional effect. And when you look at the origin stories of AMORC and couple with them the extensive literature and monographs written or supervised by Lewis, its first Imperator, you can understand why a first person account could be, in people's

A Pilgrim’s Journey to the Far

East,

The Prisoner o f SanJose. A Pilgrim’s Journey,

minds, the very foundations of AMORC’s appeal. Of course, in literary creations, the protagonist who tells the story is fictional. However, if you are more of a propagandist than a creator of literature, you want to use narration as a tool for creating “authenticity" in the mind of the reader or listener. A story told by one person has a rippling effect on their consciousness no simple third person narrative could have. Marry this first-person effect with a sense of the honesty and integrity of the narrator and you have a profound step in the direction of creating belief in the mind of the recipient. When a narrative/story is conveyed by an expert in mind control, it can be a fundamental tool for enslaving the human mind. Hitler did it, spreading his poison with Mein Kampf, a masterpiece of political propaganda, resulting in a great deal of Germany losing their soul in a cauldron of well-conceived mind control. And as we have mentioned elsewhere, it appears, by his writing, that H. Spencer Lewis was a fan and apologist of Hitler’s. And, if someone wishes to debate that, try and debate his infatuation and proximity to Mussolini who he courted in the flesh. Whatever the degree of untruth is in there is no doubt it makes Hitler appear to its readers as a real person. In a marvelous little literary blog by Chris Gerwel called Chris makes some points about the manipulative power of the "voice" in narration that I find directly applicable to the power of “reader manipulation” through this device. He says, speaking of the "invisible voice” in literature in a specific blog, titled "Narrative Voice as Mind-control: Thoughts on Manipulating Reader Perception:”

Mein Kampf,

The King o f Elfland's Second Cousin,

Voice is the ultimate mind control, affecting how the story resonates with us, how we feel about the characters, and what we remember when the last page is turned. At its most impressive, it should be invisible. When we notice the voice, its influence on our responses and perceptions is lessened. He further says in the following excerpts from the same blog.

First person narration—when executed well—earns the reader’s instant engagement precisely through its link to voice. The narrator is a character in the story, with their own perceptions, predilections, and foibles. They have their own way of seeing the world, a tendency to pay attention to certain aspects that others might not notice in the same way. One narrator might comment on people’s appearances. Another might pay closer attention to facial expressions. In first-person narration, we are generally locked into the narrator’s voice throughout the story. That’s the trade-off we make for building that super-close reader/narrator relationship.11

A Pilgrim’s Journey to the Far East,

In discussing I would be remiss in mentioning that it is a wonderful, intriguing little narrative demonstrating the humility and integrity of the narrator, presumably the author, H. Spencer Lewis, very shiny and believable. But, maybe, considering its withdrawal from republication for so many years and the substitute of alternative stories, maybe someone in charge thought it lacked the power it needed. And maybe, given that motive, that someone didn’t mind reverting to what might be his strongest point involved in his recruitment of AMORC membership, some more carefully crafted literary fiction.

Cognitive Persuasion “Cognitive persuasion" is a technique of mind control that rests on a peculiarity of the human mind to favor certain types of narratives. You might cause it the result of a certain protective mechanism, built in the brain, to favor certain outcomes, regardless of their ultimate practicality or truth. As an example of this, let us look at something familiar to my readers, the so-called "fight or flight syndrome.” Neil F. Neimark, M.D., a Board Certified Family Practice Doctor defines it in his essay, "Five Minute Stress Mastery.” When we experience excessive stress—whether from internal worry or external circumstance—a bodily reaction is triggered, called the "fight or flight” response. Originally discovered by the great Harvard physiologist Walter Cannon, this response is hard-wired into our brains and represents a genetic wisdom designed to protect us

from bodily harm. This response actually corresponds to an area of our brain called the hypothalamus, which—when stimulated—initiates a sequence of nerve cell firing and chemical release that prepares our body for running or fighting.— He further goes to point out that during this time, "chemicals like adrenaline, noradrenaline, and cortisol are released" into the bloodstream; blood moves quickly from the digestive track to better fuel muscles and limbs so we can better run or fight. Awareness increases while perception of pain decreases, etc.— This is obviously an instinctive process. But sometimes, given human values and goals, we have to fight against this natural instinctive process, built into our physiology, in order to achieve a more important outcome than fight or flight. An example of this would the utilization of passive resistance techniques used to fight segregation in the United States by Martin Luther King who emulated Mahatma Gandhi who deployed this technique to bring down the British Empire. Passive resistance often meant standing one’s ground against an enemy attack and deliberately not fleeing (often because fleeing was not all that possible in an enclosed space like a restaurant where one was illegally perching at a soda fountain counter during the heyday of segregation. Passive resistance was a technique to show one’s determination, to block normal consumer activity unless an expected event occurred (like serving a cup of coffee to a black person) or to shame the perpetuator of violence, who was trying to bully, hurt or maim a non-violent person whose major crime was to be treated equally as a normal human being. Therefore, the conscious human mind would deliberately overcome the instinctual directions embodied in the "flight or fight syndrome.” As we have mentioned, George Lakoff is a cognitive scientist and linguist, whose metier happens to be, among other things, the neuroscience behind political persuasion. In his book, he points out the powerful draw of certain types of narratives in his book, narratives that appeal to us on such an instinctive level that they can easily be easily accepted, unless we insist that our opinions are governed by reflective thinking. Although this book is concerned with political narratives, its findings are clearly

The Political Mind,

applicable to other areas as well. I think, psychologically, political and cult propaganda are inextricably linked. The building blocks of narratives are the concept of "frames,” which we have indicated that looks at a structure of ideas we use to understand the world. Another, even more scientific-sounding account of frames is given in Paul Thagard’s glossary of Cognitive Science: "Data structure that represents a concept or schema.’— In that glossary, a “concept” is defined as a “mental representation of a class of objects or events that belong together, often corresponding to a word”— and a “schemata” as “a mental representation of a class of objects, events, or practices.’ — If frames are like the atom in physics, you could compare narratives to molecules because they are composed of frames and if they are structured in a certain way can do things that atoms cannot. Although frames can be seen as something thought of or a thought embodied in language, the whole point of cognitive science is that these ‘frames’ are also represented in actual neuronal activity in the brain. There is a physiological correlate to frames that can be measured. Frames can be simple or complex. When H. Spencer Lewis steps onto a trolley in that can be a relatively simple frame compared to that point when he has climbed a long staircase in the Old Castle and is greeted by the Archivist, a little more complex frame. I know many of you following this discussion are not necessarily interested in a complex discussion of the neurophysiology of frames and narratives, but nonetheless, I would like to take the time to make this concept slightly clearer. As hypnosis and other trance states levels were first measured by brain waves through an electroencephalograph, the EEG is sometimes used in cognitive research, but, it can also be used in conjunction with other methodologies like an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) to measure frame activity on a neural level. To see what this might mean to scientists, let us refer to a 2012 experiment with the prodigious title of "Tracking Down Abstract Linguistic Meaning; Neural Correlates of Spatial Frame of Reference Ambiguities in Language,” by Janzen, Haun and Levinson. Their conclusions in their Abstract show that different specific spatial concepts, described in language and images, can be tracked down to specific, correlated neurological activity:

A Pilgrim'sJourney

Using this method, we were able to precisely pinpoint the pattern of neural activation associated with each linguistic interpretation of the ambiguity, while holding the perceptual stimuli constant. Increased brain activity in bilateral parahippocampal gyrus was associated with the intrinsic frame of reference whereas increased activity in the right superior frontal gyrus and in the parietal lobe was observed for the relative frame of reference. The study is among the few to show a distinctive pattern of neural activation for an abstract yet specific semantic parameter in language. It shows with special clarity the nature of the neural substrate supporting each frame of spatial reference.— I mention this to demonstrate that the conclusions of cognitive scientists like Lakoff who wish to draw conclusions about the way people think or how they are influenced are based on experiments such as this, demonstrate neural activity through using scientific instrumentation that shows physiological brain activity, that correlates to the facts and interpretations they are making. This actually is a huge breakthrough in utilizing science to understand the human mind—not only the deliberative, conscious mind but also the instinctual, built-in power of certain narratives, built out of frames in a specific way. Since this is a complex subject and my point here is to consider the type of influence we have called "cognitive persuasion,” we will not dwell on the neural substratum of cognitive science but rather some insights into human thought and behavior that have bearing on a specific type of influence that AMORC has attempted to use for the same reason it has used trance induction—to control what people think. When I say this, I don’t mean that H. Spencer Lewis, during his time, actually knew about cognitive science as we know about it today. But as a trained advertiser, he knew about the power of language and, fully conscious or not, the power of certain types of narratives. This kind of knowledge has existed in a somewhat intuitive level since ancient times. It is the essence of both political and commercial propaganda. This is reflected in modern times as in politics speechmaking, campaign promises and advertising, party platforms and public relations, and in the commercial world primarily in advertising, but also in public relations. We have known for a long time about the power of narratives, but we did not know that much about how and why they worked in respect of brain physiology and cognitive linguistics.

Frames, as we have mentioned, are relatively simple structures, but when they are strung together, they can form a more complex structure out of frames like: H. Spencer Lewis, seeker after Truth; a cruise ship; the office of a Professor Linguistic in Paris, the old Archivist, officious Jewels and Documents. When formed together with a specific direction, this complex of frames is called a narrative. Narratives generally have a Protagonist to whom good and bad things happen. According to Lakoff, there is a structure to a narrative, which goes like this: Preconditions—pre-conditions that exist before the narrative starts Buildup—the route to the main event The Main Event—the subject of the narrative The Purpose—the goal of it all The Wind Down—the immediate aftermath Result—the short-term consequences Later Consequences—what happens later o n This type of narrative is called an "event schema.” It involves a dynamic structure and is powered neurophysiologically caused by "neural binding,” a way in which neural pathways and activities are locked together in a certain structure. In a moment, we will examine a key dynamic event as described in the literature of AMORC. Suffice to say that event schemas like this can have strong emotional effects via the positive route, the dopamine circuit, which creates a sense of well-being and happiness, or the norepinephrine circuit, which triggers negative emotions like fear or anger. *****

WhyA Pilgrim’sJourney to the E ast is a PowerfulNarrative First of all, it is complete—a whole story. It is short enough to be read in one or two sittings. Secondly, it is a Hero type of story, a power-packed type of narrative we will examine later. Let us now look at its structure,

Preconditions—preconditions that exist before the narrative starts H. Spencer Lewis is characterized as a profound Seeker After Truth, who has spent his adult career as an editor and writer of the occult. Where he has various business and educational credentials, his one overwhelming concern is the pursuit of Truth and he wants, with all his heart, to be a part of the Rosicrucian tradition. To this end, he has even written to an editor, who he does not know, in Paris to see if he can make contact with a real Rosicrucian contact. Buildup—the route to the main event When the Parisian editor responds, he takes a boat to India. On the boat, he meets a man he supposes to be East Indian. As per his instructions from the editor, he meets a Professor of Languages at his store, which sells artwork and photographs of French monuments. After an interrogation by the Professor, he inspects a painting of a Tower and is sent to Southern France, where he meets his companion from the boat on a train “by accident,” who proves later to be a member of the Order, who is watching him, and has various adventures that lead him eventually to Toulouse, The Main Event—the subject of the narrative Once in Toulouse, he meets a photographer who sends him off to another venue, which turned out to be the very tower that the Professor had shown him in a picture, called by Rosicrucians, the Dongeon. There he meets an old Archivist, who proves to him that he has been watched and approved enough to meet the Grand Master and Imperator in his holy temple. Eventually, he heads out, as directed, to the old city of Tolosa and to an old estate and told he will meet the Officers of the Grand Lodge at sunset. That night he is initiated into the Order Rosae Crucias, crossing the Threshold in the Old Lodge in that same building of the estate. He meets the Officers, takes the pledges and is made a Brother of the Order "as the witching hour of Midnight” is struck by the old chimes in the tower of the building.” The Purpose—the goal of it all The goal was to become a Brother of the Order.

The Wind Down—the immediate aftermath Lewis remains in Toulouse for a week and gets to go to lectures, demonstrations, and private classes, He also gets to attend the Monthly Convocation of the Illuminati as well as seeing the buildings and courts that are used as a Rosicrucian monastery. Result—the short-term consequences The day he leaves Toulouse, he is appointed as Legate for America. The Grand Master tells him: Brother, these papers appoint you as a Legate of this Order for your country. Your duty and privileges are well defined. The documents you have—and the few jewels I now hand to you—will enable you to proceed at the time and in the manner indicated. When you have made some progress you will meet with a representative from the Order in Egypt who will hand you, under certain conditions, other papers and seals. From time to time there will come to you those whom you will recognize by the signs indicated. They will add to your papers and devices until your working papers and tools are completed. Our Archivist will send you under seal, with the protection of the French Government, other papers as soon as you have made the progress, which will be reported to us by our Agents. Your semi-annual reports will warrant, or deny, your progress and assistance. The Master of the World will be glad to administer to your wants and your requirements from time to time; and Peace and Power shall come to America if the dictates of our Order are faithfully fulfilled.”— Later Consequences—what happens later on He brings the Grand Master’s blessings to his brothers and sisters in America. Of course, it is understood that after he reaches America, then he begins AMORC.

The Pilgrim'sJourney to the Far East, which incidentally is about H. Spencer Lewis’ journey to Toulouse, France, not the Far East, is a narrative about the humble beginnings of a Spiritual Super Hero. For someone who actually knows what AMORC pretends to be, as described in their brochure, and in the monographs, realizes that the position of the Imperator, whose Rosicrucian organization is basically the only authentic and best link with the God on Earth, is more important as a person than the kings and presidents of planet Earth, as well as the Pope and the Dalai Lama and any head of a large corporation in the world. Such a person is a Superhero. But, if so, why do there appear to be changes to the narrative? I think there is one clear progressive change in the narratives. They provide more authoritative support given to Lewis outside of himself, which gives more credence to the so-called weight of the initiations in Toulouse. In the first narrative, Lewis is really just a humble petitioner with a background in the study of the occult who wishes to join the Order. In the second narrative, Lewis is an actual relative of the founders of the American Rosicrucian Order, who is influenced by a Legate of the Order to petition the Order in France for his involvement. This "Legate,” with the unmentioned name, appears to him before he leaves for France. He then says, referring to his first journey to France in 1909,

The

Mastery o f Life,

A Pilgrim'sJourney,

Rosicrucians Q&A,

Before leaving France I had the pleasure of meeting several of the highest officers and met in America on my return the Legate from India, who presented to me the Jewels and Papers that had been preserved from the early American foundation.25 Doesn’t this "Legate” seem like she must have been Mrs. Banks-Stacey? But Mrs. Banks-Stacey doesn’t appear until perhaps the fall of 1914, at least according to Ralph’s account in

Cosmic Mission Fulfilled.

It was in the fall of 1914 that events occurred that accelerated the formation of the Order Rosy Cross for its second cycle. He (H. Spencer Lewis) wrote of this event, "There came to me a grand old lady who had been a deep student of the occult for years. She had traveled much abroad in search for knowledge and had been initiated in many forms of our (Rosicrucian) work.”—

He then goes on to say that the lady was, indeed, Mrs. May Banks-Stacey, a descendant of the D’Arcys of France and Oliver Cromwell and how she had been given a special errand and mission connected to “the Order.” Thus, on another rainy night in the month of November, on my birthday, in fact, she unceremoniously and reverently placed in my hands a few papers, a small packet, and a beautiful red rose! The papers I found to be some of those which the Masters had explained to me in Europe in 1909 and which were promised to come to me by special messenger when I needed them most.”— So is this the same Legate from India who inspired him to go to France before he went to France in 1909? Again, why does not mention her? Why are not jewels mentioned this time as they are sometimes—sometimes before he leaves France, sometimes afterwards? Remember our recent quote from ? It talks about his initiation in 1909 in France, saying he returned to meet the Legate again, who presented him with jewels and papers from the early American Order? Did it not talk about Mrs. Banks-Stacey giving him jewels and documents in both the 1971 Manual and her obituary in of 1929? And why in his son’s book and in the manual does it not mention him as being a direct descendent of the Founders in America as it does say in Rosicrucians The stories and their components weave back and forth, jeopardizing their credibility if anyone were wary enough to look at them carefully. To me, it appears that Lewis alone may not have had the credibility he wanted, and then perhaps the addition of the Legate and his own blood relationship to the Order in Ephrata gave him more power but was not enough. But then, then the bestowal of the jewels and documents by a Legate who received their orders from India was even more authoritative. And so these three narratives evolved, giving more and more support to Lewis’ supposed initiation. But along with this authority being vested in him, why was his descent from the American Order left out? Perhaps it was not such an easy thing to disprove? Who knows? As you can see, the claim has not been forgotten.

A Pilgrim'sJourney

Rosicrucians Questions and Answers

Cromaat

Questions and Answers?

Perhaps one of the most significant narratives today is based on a short biography called "H. Spencer Lewis—Restorer of Rosicrucianism” by Christian Rebisse, FRC, who is touted as a "Rosicrucian historian” in the few paragraphs before the narrative begins. It is significant because it is currently being promoted by AMORC through a podcast and a movie. The movie is offered in many different venues—not just through the official website. As you can imagine from what we have discussed about cognitive persuasion, there is a great power in a narrative because what you see outside yourself is linked to the same processes of perception in your own mind. And certain narratives have more of an effect than others, unless the rational mind intervenes, and investigates what is behind the narrative. Of course, one of the main points of mind control in cults is to utilize the power of a simple narrative to gain the participation of the member. This is done through cognitive persuasion. But after a short time, techniques are deployed to fatigue the mind and body of the member, which enhances suggestibility. Then, methods of trance induction are deployed that can heighten suggestibility to the point of actually replacing the personality of the member with a new cult personality, often partially based on changes in the member’s perception of reality by creating a capacity for positive hallucinations based, in this case, on the teaching of a religious cult. Still, in no way should the effect of cognitive persuasion be diminished. It is a conduit to many lifechanging decisions and emerging lifestyles due to commercial advertising, political propaganda, and religious indoctrination. In my opinion, overall, it has a more dangerous effect on society than trance induction, which is used robustly by religious cults but also sometimes, in a variety of ways, by other types of cults and political organizations. So, let us now take a look at the “Restorer" narrative. As we have laboriously mentioned, there are conflicts and problems with the AMORC-generated accounts we have previously presented. But now we are about to see more conflicts. According to the claim of Rebisse, Lewis had a mystical experience on the Thursday after Easter that would ultimately change his life. It was this experience that convinced him that the ultimate truth lay within himself and that he had to go to France to contact the Rosicrucians.

There are several problems with this narrative. First of all, it seems to indicate that this experience was the ultimate driver of the journey. And, other narratives, like in and his “ seem to speak of years of preparation. Secondly, in it certainly appears that the appearance of a Legate from India joining his organization prompted him. As mentioned, in a quote from Mrs. May Banks-Stacey, whose story is referenced in the 1918 edition and referenced in the manual, it appears she brought him documents and jewels, validating that he would be the one to start an Order in America. The narrative and the Banks-Stacey claim both emphasize that his reason for going to France was to be able to restart the Rosicrucian Order in America.

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers Questions and Answers,

Pilgrim'sJourney to the East"

Cromaat

Questions and Answers

WhoD id Lewis F irst Contact in France WhoPersuadedHim to Come to Paris? You would think that an historian would be more careful in his discussion of Lewis’ background, especially since he directly quotes In Rebisse’s Restorer version it says:

A Pilgrim'sJourney to the East.

In the hope of obtaining some information regarding Rosicrucianism in France, he (Lewis) decided to write to a Parisian bookseller whose catalogue he had obtained.— But in

A Pilgrim'sJourney, Lewis speaks of a: ...letter I received from the editor of a Parisian paper of whom I had asked the simple question: “How can I learn of the method to pursue which will secure guidance to the Rosae Crucis?”—

So here we have an editor in one account and a bookseller in another. Perhaps a small thing, but perhaps not for a biographer whose interest seems to be to identify the actual characters that Lewis connected with. Despite the contradiction between these two claims with the initial contact, both cases, quoting from the version says that Lewis was told he should contact at "the Studio of M., the Professor of languages at No._ Blvd. St. Germaine.”

Pilgrim'sJourney,

Restorer

A

Questions and Answers

Rosicrucian does not mention either contact, but paints the picture that the mysterious Legate from India encouraged him to go to France since he was a descendent of the Founders of the American Order and had studied their original documents.

How Lewis' Trip was “M agically”Funded And How He Went to France with his Father A Pilgrim’s Journal,

In it does mention Lewis having some financial problems with the trip, but within a week of determining his need to visit the connection mentioned in the letter from either the editor or the bookseller (whichever you believe) came another: ...letter through a business proposition, which offered a most unexpected opportunity to visit several cities in France. And I could visit Paris, my mind free and easy, and my desires to be gratified. Surely this was a demonstration of a Rosaecrucian principle.—

Pilgrim %

In it does not say much about the nature of the business proposition, but in explicit. It says:

Restorer, it is quite

Although his financial situation did not permit him to consider such a voyage, an unexpected opportunity presented itself the following week. His father, Aaron Lewis, an expert in authenticating documents as well as a renowned genealogist, needed an assistant while conducting research in France for the Rockefeller family. On July 24, 1909, the two men sailed for Europe on the Amerika, of the Hamburg Amerika Line. On Sunday, August 1, the ship arrived at Cherbourg, and the two travelers set off for Paris by train.—

How Lewis’ Trip was "Magically”Funded And How He Went to France with his Father In A Pilgrim’s Journal, it does mention Lewis having some financial problems with the trip, but within a week of determining his need to visit the connection mentioned in the letter from either the editor or the bookseller (whichever you believe) came another: ...letter through a business proposition, which offered a most unexpected opportunity to visit several cities in France. And I could visit Paris, my mind free and easy, and my desires to be gratified. Surely this was a demonstration of a Rosaecrucian principle.—

Pilgrim's,

In it does not say much about the nature of the business proposition, but in explicit. It says:

Restorer, it is quite

Although his financial situation did not permit him to consider such a voyage, an unexpected opportunity presented itself the following week. His father, Aaron Lewis, an expert in authenticating documents as well as a renowned genealogist, needed an assistant while conducting research in France for the Rockefeller family. On July 24, 1909, the two men sailed for Europe on the Amerika, of the Hamburg Amerika Line. On Sunday, August 1, the ship arrived at Cherbourg, and the two travelers set off for Paris by train.44 How Lewis’ Trip Was Magically Funded And How, Totally Alone, He Befriended A Middle Eastern Stranger

Pilgrim’s,

But in which also states the voyage on the ship began on the 24th of July, 1909, it mentions how on the following morning he meets a “dark complexioned young man” who "seemed to place himself in my company at every opportunity, above and below deck, on Saturday afternoon, and I felt that lonesomeness, the one great equalizer at sea, was gnawing at his heart as it was at mine.”

Although the reference to meeting him on Sunday, but spending time with him on Saturday, does seem incongruent with its own narrative, the discussion of his loneliness and spending all his time with him seems totally incongruent with the fact he was on board ship with his own father. In this stranger and he arrive in Cherbourg and they begin a six-hour journey to Paris, where they part. So, in it is his father and he who are "the two travelers” who set off to Paris by train. In it is Lewis and a darkcomplexioned man.

Pilgrim's,

Restorer,

In

Restorer,

Restorer, it says:

The days that followed were entirely devoted to genealogical research, and it was only in the following week that H. Spencer Lewis was able to visit the bookshop and the professor of languages on Boulevard Saint-Germain. “A Pilgrim’s Journey to the East” reported his meetings with the professor on Saturday, August 7, and on Monday, August 9.— Of course, in

Pilgrim’s, there is no bookstore. In fact, in explicit detail, Lewis says:

a store whose sole merchandise was rare and beautiful etchings and photographs o f the “monuments o f France. I visited the Professor early one morning and found that he was the proprietor of

I will remark on this point, that is, the store being a fine art shop with etchings and photographs; because on his second trip, he shows him one of his pictures, taken from behind one of the glass doors of a cabinet. "Among the many beautiful sights you may see while in this country is this one. You see here only a material representation of a spiritual place. This old tower—a very old building—is one of the truly great French monuments. Some day you may see this tower, then remember that I have called your attention to it. I believe that you will

always cherish a view of it and this is a very excellent piece of work.”—

Lewis on the Loose In Toulouse Various Twists on thatjoum ey Since there is no father in Pilgrim's, on his first trip by train out of Paris, with the destination being ‘Avignon, he meets up with his friend from the steamer on a train. After various adventures, not mentioned in he finally arrives in Toulouse. There, he visits the "Hall of the Illustrious,” and then, later he rides in a carriage to his next destination. He says:

Restorer,

I was, in fact, practically skirting the city. I say old churches, old buildings, some old Roman Bridges across the Garonne, some ruined places - and then - ah, at least, the Old Tower. There, before me, was the actual tower itself, the one I had seen in the picture at the Professor's store in Paris. I notified the driver to stop, I paid and dismissed him. And, in rapture and doubt, I stood before that Old Tower (known to Rosaecrucians as "The Dongeon”—Fr. Donjon,) for many minutes with a feeling in my heart that, somehow this was the goal. My search was ended.—

Pilgrim's

This, indeed, is a momentous moment in because it is there that Lewis receives his next directions, after meeting the old Rosicrucian Archivist and seeing he is clearly on his way. But in it says something quite different. Lewis doesn’t even go to the Old Tower. His father does, and it appears to be a public place, where Lewis' father can consult the city archives, presumably about material related to the Rockefeller genealogy research.

Restorer,

On Tuesday, August 10, the two men left Paris, and following some adventures that H. Spencer Lewis interpreted as his having been put to the test, they arrived in Toulouse on Wednesday. On the following day, his father resumed his work and

probably went to the Donjon (Keep or Old Tower) to consult the city archives. Meanwhile, H. Spencer Lewis went to the Salle des Illustres (Gallery of the Illustrious) of the Capitol, where he met an individual who was instrumental in bringing his quest to a successful conclusion. After a brief discussion, this person gave him a piece of paper on which was written the name of the street where he should go so as to meet some Rosicrucians.—

Restorer

In the version, at about 3 o'clock in the afternoon, Lewis engages a taxi and goes to the address provided, and as we have said, his encounter with the Archivist in the Tower completely left out of the story and the Tower appearing to be a place where there are city archives, which would probably not be in a building belonging to a secretive Roscrucian Order. Why are there these discrepancies? Then again, in another passage, another seeming problem occurs. After passing through the old town of Tolosa, he arrived at a stone edifice encircled by high walls and situated on a hill. It was in this castle that, according to he was initiated into the Rosicrucian Order. Although this text does not give any details regarding this ceremony, his autobiography provides some intriguing information. We are told that the person who greeted Lewis was Count Raynaud E. de Bellcastle-Ligne, a seventy-eight-year-old man, who lived here with his widowed daughter and whose means of living were modest, despite his noble origins. Although it clearly says that this information about the identity of the Count is supplied in it is not there at all. It is rather located in the book called Why would the Order allow such obviously sloppy attributions be made, which further points to the fictionalization of AMORC’s origins narratives but also to a kind of a cavalier attitude towards being exposed? We know that out of print sometime early in AMORC’s history and that it was republished, perhaps as a brochure, in the 1950s, a long time before the Internet. Perhaps it was allowed to slip out of print again.

“A Pilgrim’sJourney to the East"

Journey to the East, Answers.

A Pilgrim'sJourney went

A Pilgrim's Rosicrucian Questions and

Robert VanLoo’s A rticle Revisited I have tremendous respect for the research of Robert VanLoo as revealed in his article, “Is the A.M.O.R.C. an offshoot of the O.T.O. or not?”49 When attacked by a reader for alleged plagiarism of Clymer's writing in a Google Group, one reader with a rather well known pseudonym (Christian Rosencreuz) said: In his online materials Robert Vanloo is also critical of Clymer's arguments. He examines issues of AMORC legitimacy that Clymer did not, particularly the status of the Pronunziamento #1 and Lewis's variousclaims. Certainly if Clymer was aware of the Pronunziamento with the “OTO" written on it, he would have used it in an attempt to link Lewiswith Crowley. Vanloo's research was initially undertaken while he was in the AMORC and I believe he was ousted when the results of his work started to threaten people's beliefs in Harvey Spencer Lewis. So the work was not initially prepared with the intent of hostility to AMORC. In fact, Vanloo's work is copiously referenced from source materials, and the arguments are developed by analyzing those materials. It's noteworthy that in the six years since the publication of his work, “Les Rose-Croix du Nouveau Monde”, AMORC, with all its resources, has not been able to mount a scholarly reply to his arguments at all. Doesn't that say something? R+C—

Tales o f the Puppet Master, Rosicrucian Questions and Answers or A Pilgrim’s Journey to the East.

At the time that I wrote analyzing some of H. Spencer Lewis’ books, I had not come across either Although I obviously have not believed in anything about AMORC’s fairytales about its legitimacy, I did not have the source material to realize their profound lack of consistency. VanLoo’s research brings us to the point, again, of asking—Why? In my work, I always look at the mind control, and now, with the cognitive persuasion component platform that Lewis was creating. But, with this in mind, it is a question whether Lewis was engaged in a kind of cover-up, where he feared he might lose his credibility to the nefariousness of the connections he may have unwittingly initiated in the beginning of his efforts in forming AMORC. According to VanLoo, the problem might have been with the connection between the O.T.O. (Ordo Templie Orientis) and AMORC. Had AMORC been originally trying to derive its authenticity from the O.T.O., but had he found that its connection to “sex magic,” which would severely color AMORC’s commercial success in often very Victorian-minded America? Or even worse, was there a direct connection between Alistair Crowley, a man whose reputation in early twentieth century America could alienate the middle-ofthe-road potential customer base of Lewis? This claim of some type of connection between the O.T.O. and AMORC was not invented by VanLoo but was developed in detail by R. Swinburne Clymer, whose authenticity as the leader of a Rosicrucian Order (the Rosicrucian Foundation) and ‘‘protector’’ of Rosicrucianism was challenged by the then upstart AMORC organization. His book is titled, A section under the title defines the purposes of the book specifically.

NOT UNDER THE ROSY CROSS.

Presenting documentary proof that H. Spencer Lewis—Imperator of AMORC, a spurious R.C. Order—fabricated and copied secret lessons from published books.... Lewis admits that Crowley, Baphomet Anti-Christ, is his Secret Chief, and the Black Cult of O.T.O., as source of his authority, shows his connection with Black Magic and inverted triangle.—

The book, published by Clymer’s Rosicrucian Foundation, which is, incidentally, located in Quakerstown, Pennsylvania, (the state where Ephrata, the alleged but sometimes disputed first colony of Rosicrucians were established in America) claims to contain a facsimile explanation of its documentary proof. The page following the title page, defines its mission: "An Expose of the Imperator of AMORC, His Pilfering Charlatanism and His Connections with ALEISTER CROWLEY, Notorious Black Magician and O.T.O. ORDO TEMPLI ORIENTIS Despised Black Cult.” To show his eagerness to spread the word, a single page following the foregoing says: "Not Copyrighted. Permission to copy granted. The courtesy of credit is requested." In quoting the following passage and in our further explication of what Clymer says, we are not in any way trying to confirm that Clymer represented a true Rosicrucian Order nor that his specific allegations against H. Spencer Lewis are true in the way he formulated them so many years ago. We are presenting them and other claims, such as made by Crowley himself, as evidence of the antiquity of these claims and an explanation of why Robert VanLoo and others, including myself, continue to try and unravel the truth about AMORC’s origins, an organization which continues to recruit and indoctrinate hundreds of innocent members a year. Our main points of view in this book can be summarized as follows: the origins of AMORC are unclear because there are so many versions and contradictions in them. That we postulate the reason for this is Lewis’ instinctive understanding that certain narratives have a more persuasive power than others, an understanding that is buoyed up by the discoveries and interpretations of the results of cognitive science. This power of narratives was understood even back then by commercial promoters and advertisers, as well as confidence men, steeped in fraud and criminality. We call these methods of influence, utilizing narratives instinctively favored by our minds But in addition to the use of certain persuasive narratives, changes in these narratives may have occurred to hide certain realities in Lewis’ actual history. It is well known that he had communication and even alliances with some strange bedfellows, particularly in his adventure with the formation and promotion of FUDOSI, which was formulated, as we have previously discussed, with anti-Semitic and antimasonic prejudice.

—cognitivepersuasion,

Even though the history of the origins is not clear, there is little doubt that H. Spencer Lewis was involved in some way with Reuss and Crowley, both affiliated with an organization originally calling itself the O.T.O. an organization that splintered into different groups. Nonetheless, it is probably not in the bombastic way that Clymer presents, yet Clymer’s claims and his person are a part of the history of the Order. As is Crowley. As is Reuss. Here is what Clymer's preface to his book, (which he calls a brochure, despite the fact it is 130 pages, single-spaced) says about Lewis and his motives.

NOT UNDER THE ROSY CROSS

This brochure presents and makes available to all students of the occult sciences and mysticism; members of secret schools, societies and the churches; serious seekers of the Rosy Cross, and especially to all members of A.M.O.R.C., a picture in miniature of the astounding career of a most successful deceiver; a vile impostor, a clever charlatan and a crafty sorcerer, who, having formed in 1915 an organization under the stolen name of a holy order, under the false pretense that it was an authentic Rose Cross Order—an order of White Magic and of the White Brotherhood—while at the time of such organization, at all times since, and is now a member and affiliated with the a notorious Black Cult of the Black Brotherhood; who, O.T.O. ( since 1921, by and under the direction of Aleister Crowley, its founder and Secret Chief, a notorious and despised Black Magician, and who has, long intended and now, is attempting by a process slow b UT sure to convert its organization, the A.M.O.R.C., into a Cult of Black Magic under the dominion of Crowley the ANTI-CHRIST, whom he acknowledges to be his

Ordo Templi Orientis), has been acting under the authority o f a charter issued by the O. T. O.,

indicated,

evidently,

as it is clearly

Secret Chief—

-Bahomet-

Clymer, perhaps Lewis’ most flagrant opponent, in his brochure/book tells quite a different tale about Lewis’ initiation in 1909 of which we have already two somewhat complete, but different stories in and in By publishing this ancient claim, we are by no means asserting its veracity. Nor do our

Restorer.

Pilgrim

quotes from Clymer diminish the fact that his bone fides as to being a "true Rosicrucian” have been challenged by others. One thing is certain, his prolific attack on Lewis was prodigious. Even Crowley, whose proposed association with Lewis made him the key villain in Clymer’s claims against Lewis, had this to say about Clymer’s ceaseless attempts to defame AMORC and its exalted Imperator. ...filled with nothing but hatred. It is to me an extraordinary circumstance that a man should be so eaten up with passion that he can put hours of time and quite large sums of money into such a monument of abuse. Even in the Middle Ages, I don’t recall any controversy so prodigiously documented. An interesting point is that Clymer seems to have acquired almost magical powers through his fervor. He has obtained possession of documents which even I, who had my nose in the business since 1912, have never heard.— Clymer certainly does make strong accusations against Lewis, challenging his authenticity in a variety of ways. Perhaps some of his strongest statements are as follows: HIS INITIATION IN 1909 In the beginning of his spurious Rosicrucian activities in 1915 and for some time thereafter, Mr. Lewis claimed and frequently published his claim that in 1909 he went abroad and was received into or initiated in some kind of a Rosicrucian Order and that he had received authority to establish his work in America in 1915. His claims concerning the source of his authority, as in the matter of his sponsor, have been vague, contradictory, and confusing. He has made claims of authority from Egypt, France, Germany, Switzerland, and other sources.— He further says:

HIS 1909 INITIATION WAS IN LONDON Not in Toulouse France, as He Claimed It now appears that prior to and during 1909 Mr. Lewis and Mr. Albert H. Postel were employed by a publishing concern or associated in the publication of a mystery magazine in New York City. Mr. Lewis was the artist and Mr. Postel the astrologer. An investigation by the United States postal authorities made it advisable, if not necessary, for them to leave the country in the year 1909. Mr. Postel tells us that he left for Paris, while Harvey S. Lewis, as he was then known, paid a visit to London, where he received his initiation in 1909, about which has written so much and so confusedly.— So, far I have not been able to track down too much about Allen H. Postel except that there was an astrologer named Postel and he made interesting claims. Here is the cover of the March 1907 edition of a magazine called the Nautilus which contains an advertisement highlighting Postel's claims about his astrological gifts.

iM iiilil X030803865

THE STORY OF YOOR LIFE Ntw York Professor Perfects System by Which He Quickly Reads the Secret Characteristics and Lives of People Though Thousands of Miles Away. X c n n m l W o m r n In A ll W a l k * o f L ite I te c e l v e l e t t e r * Iro n i th in G r r a t A n tr n lo g c r In w h ic h H e A ils la m T h « n t o n I m ­ p o r t a n t A flfclr*. O ff e r * F r e e I{r a illn K « l o A ll W h o W r i t * it m l Hr m l D a le o l I t l r t h .

DON’T WRITE TO ME: I f rarn o t p r c s DM I a m t l yo a * h U la « I M t -Kroo R n d l i ( . ‘ w hk-b m #1 D O n l i M to h > M ; . TTmm I r a o lU w d ln c * a r» u t r a r u m «« o p i e foe u > o m b o n i on a c r r t a ln d a j . n * > i n atm Jioo ot i m t l t l K t w * • I U ir f r r o t x w lo few p lK O o f M rtll u d UM* b o w . A * w *ll in ig k t * i p « i I M M I ( • g t * W T m an t o m ea A a t II I A t* M l m n d l f m M f I f jr«a v a s t a c a iw fa l r r a d l i f l i d i i f w illin g lo H>; f o r I t . M o d j o * r f n :i d a ta *, a a i. ^ la ra , t u P r C * * . ooo nr 1* 0 iM U n R r a 4 f o r ■> liw rm taro a n yw a y i h (o r I h a v e N f i In aaano ptap»dSnrfMJ**rtou **i theis ^ffiliaUd ewntrifS' of*U tM J m /u /tt dhjtrs ump*iiagO»FUDOESi.

*Jksm/7 kAteriS trrrefyb•eeaU MaA w/sJrm*cAQndea10 theefmMtdeemfrtn m tm n u n e m y e n + rjrlty - t f s f t k r J 6 r (fix e r s

d*4ef0/*i e fto rfim r h i* O rders te m p e sv f M e ,/IW J /* /i/s b h rm * W ^ n r / W r * B ru ssels. d ~ -~ f (t» fJ k e fv s i /S * h /* •/* * * AQ>v d e tM td iy S e M m e f

V. People tend to think in terms of prototypical frames. These would be conventional, typical frames that come to mind. I would say that both "ardent seeker finds the truth” is one example. The story of Gautama Buddha questioning the reason for death, disease, and old age and then finding enlightenment under the Bodhi tree is this kind of a success story, paralleling the

narrative the Lewis search for a Rosicrucian Order, ultimately taking him to the initiation in Toulouse. The other frame is based on authority being passed on by virtue of the royal blood of a descendant, which would be the story of most Kings and Queens gaining their position or by a spiritual authority delegating authority to a successor as Jesus did to Peter. Lewis stories of his succession are: 1) That he himself is a descendent of the Founding Fathers of the American Order. 2) That he is given authority by a descendent of the English Order that permitted the founding of the Order in America. These are kind of a hybrid of sacred stories about the seeker thirsting for spiritual knowledge and gaining it and a man granted spiritual leadership by authority of his descendants or someone else’s—a variant of authority by the blood of royalty in one way or another, popular, well-known narratives historically or by legend or hearsay. VI. People tend to adapt to a new state and take it as a new reference point. This vulnerability of people accepting new frames and leaving others behind, not even really worth exploring, explains why AMORC can get away with rewriting their historical narratives. This was a lot easier before the Internet. VII. People tend to substitute more “accessible” frames for more accurate but less accessible frames. This is clearly related to the "new state” preference for frames. The new origin stories told by AMORC are much more accessible, particularly for entranced newcomers. You still have to do a lot of searching to find them, presuming you question these stories in the first place. This is why the organization of this material in this way is rather new. Perhaps it has been done before—that is, comparing these various narratives in

this way and analyzing them in terms of cognitive persuasion. But frankly, I could not find this kind of discussion in this way, and it was laborious to put it together. This is maybe the most obvious reason that AMORC has worked so successfully to promote and maintain its exalted image. It is also why politicians and CEOs’ pasts are so often forgotten. They simply don’t investigate much of the frames they have accepted. I don’t think simple laziness is the reason that people don’t check the central stories they believe in—stories about politics, religion, and business and why they seem so forgiving about the misdeeds that are quoted to them from time to time that challenge their beliefs. To some extent, perhaps it is a neurophysio logical nudge not to overload their pure, confused selves with too much investigation. Whatever the reason, most people do very little probing of an investigative nature into their core beliefs. I believe this is why we are saddled with so much corruption in politics, religion, and business and why so much of our thinking, as members of the human race, is so often reflexive. Reflective thinking involves hard, conscious work and certainly the acquisition of facts. That is why it is so much easier to believe, instead of to know. In the case of AMORC, many of the facts that I am presenting here are buried in old documents, thankfully preserved, but in the recent past, difficult to obtain without the Internet and its capacity, a capacity fueled by people who have archival interests in preserving knowledge in manuscripts, books, and audio-video media, to increasingly catalog and restore some our recently lost knowledge. And it is for that reason, along with the help of a few researchers, we have been able to come closer to an appreciation of this most important reflexive function of our brains to challenge what we are told, to investigate and come to our own conclusions. Even in the Internet, most members of AMORC probably rarely use it to fact check or to see if they can challenge the official story. They are more inclined to accept what they believe and what they can easily access.

Ralph Lewis Takes Up the N arrative Gauntlet Restorer,

We have discussed what appears to be the most contemporary story of the seven stories we have discussed but now let’s go back a bit. In 1966, Ralph Lewis first released his book, and it has gone through several editions. Recently, along with Christian Rebisse’s work, components of it are available for podcast. I have taken my comments from Chapter 1 of the podcast. In Ralph Lewis’ version, after much time searching, in great consternation for information regarding the Rosicrucians, Harvey Lewis finds a letter from Paris in the mail. He tears it open and reads an answer to his question that he had written to the editor of a Parisian paper. The question is: “How can I learn of the method to pursue which will secure guidance to the Rosae Crucis?” The answer is as follows: "If you came to Paris and found it convenient to call at the Studio of Mons, the professor of languages a t ____ B'l'v'd St. Germain, he might be able to tell you something of the circle of which you inquire....Certainly a letter to him announcing your coming (by date and name of boat) would be courteous.” The substance of the letter in the broadcast with one sentence left out ("It might be advisable to hand him this note”) is identical to the quote in subtitled, "And I Journeyed to the Eastern Gate,” published in as the Fifth Installment of the ‘Complete and Authentic History of the Order in in May of 1916. The podcast also paraphrases the claim that Lewis had put a special mark in the letter, a symbol he had received in a dream. Ralph Lewis’ book follows nine years after the 1957 republication of a copy of which contained a note to the reader that Lewis would not respond to any questions about the short autobiography. Could it be that this new version had been developed, quoting the original source, because there had been various problems concerning Lewis’ account that had been troublesome for some readers— particularly in the account in In both the podcast and the early version of an economic deficiency haunts the ardent Harvey Lewis in regards to an immediate journey to Paris. In the solution is presented, somewhat vaguely, through “a business proposition, which offered a most unexpected it is directly through Harvey’s opportunity to visit several cities in France.” In the podcast, like in

Cosmic Mission Fulfilled H. Spencer Lewis—Restorer o f Rosicrucianism,

A Pilgrim'sJourney to the East,

American Rosae Crucis Magazine Pilgrim’s,

Rosicrucians Questions and Answers? Cosmic Mission Fulfilled

Pilgrim’s,

Restorer,

Pilgrim's,

father, Aaron R. Lewis who supposedly had become an expert on forged documents was also a genealogist and had been commissioned by the Rockefellers to research their family history in France. In the podcast, he had been doing so for a number of years with his wife, Catherine, but now his wife could not go so he decided to take his son. On the steamer, Harvey Lewis is mystified by the experiences he is about to have on the steamer. In the podcast version of Harvey is with his father, who does not appear to be on the ship as in Ralph mentions that Harvey, like in met a mysterious stranger on board who besides signing a postcard with the names of the passengers, also hands Harvey a separate piece of paper with his contact information. It is, of course, rather strange that this one single incident with a stranger handing an extra piece of paper to Harvey is deemed as an experience worthy of the term, "mystification.” After Harvey goes to Paris, he meets the Professor who owns the art store. Although perhaps slightly embellished, the story is basically the same as in a strange book because although it is written by his son, it is not written in the first person as though by a loving son about his father, who he has replaced as Imperator. It generally seems to be written by an appreciative, but very much third person narrator. It also seems very derivative with long segments taken directly from and from

Pilgrim’s.

Cosmic Mission,

Cosmic Mission Fulfilledvs,

Pilgrim’s,

Pilgrim's.

Pilgrim’s Rosicrcucian ’s Q&A. And YetAnother Variation... In a short but poetic article, titled Clemence Isaure: The Rosicrucian Golden Isis, Grand Master Julie Scott,

S.R.C. relates another variation of AMORC’S origins, providing specific, seemingly inside information, of an event described vaguely in the Hall of the Illustrious in Toulouse's City Hall.— In a it does not describe or name the painting that Lewis studied but it does talk about him approaching a photographer who seemingly makes a Rosicrucian sign. He then goes up to him and says, in the following passage from

Pilgrim'sJourney,

Pilgrim’s.

"Pardon Monsieur," I said, “but I believe I am addressing a gentleman who has some information for one who is seeking Light.” That seemed to be a very proper way of addressing him.

His reply was in French, and I could understand but one word, "Yes.” Seeing my embarrassment he took from his pocket a paper and with a pencil he wrote some words and handed it to me to read. I can read more French than I can speak. In fact that is not the proper comparison. I can read about one hundred French words and can speak only three or four. What he wrote, however, said: “Why did you so study that one painting in the alcove?” I was disappointed at what I read. At first I thought it was a statement. It was only the question mark that enabled me to realize—with my limited knowledge of French—that it was a question. And such a question after all the expectations. "Because, Monsieur,” I said, "it seems so beautiful, so wonderful and expresses what I believe. I see in it a very mysterious meaning, a symbol of....” He was smiling. He could not understand what I was saying, and I was going along rapidly, enthusiastically, as I recalled the deep impression the painting had made. Then he wrote again on the paper: “I understand, I appreciate.’— That is fine, maybe the Grand Master knows something, but then she, like so many others, returns to the story of Lewis coming to the palace and tells yet another variation of the story. In 1908, twenty-four-year-old H. Spencer Lewis had a mystical experience in which he was directed to seek out the Rosicrucians in France. Not knowing exactly where to begin, he wrote to a Parisian bookseller who had recently sent him a catalog of mystical books, to ask if he might be able to help him in his quest. The bookseller suggested that H. Spencer Lewis come to Paris. Following many synchronistic events, H. Spencer Lewis was able to travel to Paris a year and a half later.—

Pilgrim's

As mentioned before, states that it was a professor of languages that had an art store who called for him to visit Paris, not a bookseller. In fact, considering the Professor’s avocation and the big deal he makes in showing Lewis a picture of the Old Tower and Lewis’ apparent interest in art (besides being an

illustrator and calligrapher himself), it is a puzzling omission unless it is because of other AMORC origin stories floating around. Further, it is puzzling that she says, "Following many synchronistic events, H. Spencer Lewis was able to travel to Paris a year and a half later.” Perhaps the key synchronistic event was that, although when he received the letter in early July, he did not have the funds to go but then, after a week of great concern over the then financially unobtainable promise: ...came a letter through a business proposition, which offered a most unexpected opportunity to visit several cities in France. And I could visit Paris, my mind free and easy, and my desires to be gratified. Surely this was a demonstration of a Rosaecrucian principle.... I wrote once again to Paris, this time announcing to the professor, my coming on the steamer “America,” leaving New York on July 24th, fifteen days hence.— Going back to the old problem with who accompanied him on his journey to France, would he really talk about his chance to go to Europe as a "business proposition” in the mail, when his father had asked him allegedly to do genealogical research? THE GREAT DECEPTION I think of all the questions I might be asked by people curious as to why I spent twenty-six years trapped in the Rosicrucian mind control system; this is the one that is the most important: Of all its components, what is the most serious deception in the AMORC mind control system? The answer to this is simple—AMORC’S NARRATIVE THAT IT IS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION WITH A FUNDAMENTAL LINK TO GOD. In the which is my most extensive account of my personal odyssey through AMORC’s system, I discuss how I only gradually accepted AMORC as the key factor in my life, the first being my family’s economic survival. I came to the United States from Haiti after securing a paycheck from the government of Haiti as long as I lived in the United States. At that time, for reasons I will explain, I was not worried because I believed my connection with AMORC gave me the protection I needed "to beat the

Prisoner o f San Jose,

economic survival game." As I said back then when I wrote “As things progressed, AMORC would slowly become the center of my life and, eventually, my only connection to God.” The reason I thought this is profound and complex is because it required that AMORC slowly, primarily through its monographs, weave a complex web around my rational mind.

Prisoner,

AMORC holds that to pray to God, you must enter into contact with the Cosmic. Contact with the Cosmic is actually a state of consciousness which some might say would be equivalent to the mystical Christian state of unity with the divine. According to AMORC, this is best done through rising to the level of the Celestial Sanctum. This is the best platform for seeking Cosmic Attunement...To enter the Celestial Sanctum is only possible to those that are in deep harmony with the Master of the Universe. And this works most effectively if one is a member of a true initiatic or mystical organization on Earth. Notice this one point in the foregoing quote—’’prayer works most effectively if one is a member of a true initiatic or mystical organization on Earth.” At one point in discussing the monographs, I wrote: AMORC speaks of the seven true mystical organizations, which are all from seventeenth and eighteenth century. The only ones of these that are still in existence are AMORC and the Freemasons. But according to AMORC, the modern Freemasons are a “sleepy organization,” meaning that they are not the authentic organization they ought to be. Being sleepy means the Masons no longer are really providing the cosmic connection one needs to effectively communicate with Deity. I then further said: It did not take much thinking to realize that I had to be in harmony with AMORC in

order to reach the Cosmic. Whenever I felt doubt about the AMORC organization, I quickly suppressed it and complied with their teachings at all cost because I did not want to lose what I then believed to be my only connection to God. This discussion demonstrates how certain areas of the brainwashing are in the more or less private literature of AMORC like the monographs, whereas other elements are quite public. This book opens with a quote to be found at the end of It is a statement from the Grand Lodge of the English Language jurisdiction of AMORC, Inc., the publishers.

Cosmic Mission Fulfilled.

“...there is only one universal Rosicrucian Order existing in the world today, united in its various jurisdictions, and having one Supreme Council in accordance with the original plan of the ancient Rosicrucians manifestoes... This international organization retains the ancient traditions, teachings, principles and practical helpfulness of the Order as founded centuries ago. It is known as the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis, which name, for popular use, is abbreviated into AMORC.”— If you have read this book carefully, you might see how puzzling this statement is because it seems to imply that AMORC, the organization that I belonged to, which was created by H. Spencer Lewis is now the central Rosicrucian Order. But this Order was supposedly only permitted to exist by the official largesse of a separate international organization that first gave AMORC the authority to exist in America. Consistent with this view, the manual, after speaking about being granted this permission provisionally, then states that after various organizational meetings were held, two officials of the International Council of the Order came to America and approved of the Order in America, making it an independent Jurisdiction but under guidance of the aforementioned International Council of the Order (no longer under the French Jurisdiction that Lewis was originally connected to). It says:

And this gave the Ancient and Mystical Order Roase Crucis (AMORC) of North America a representation in the International Council, in its National and international Conventions and Congresses, and made the American AMORC a part of the AMORC of the world. Therefore, the A.M.O.R.C. of today is the ONLY Rosicrucian movement in America having such authority and connection.— It is my belief that over the years, a kind of deceptive switch was made from AMORC in America being represented as an independent organization affiliated with an ancient worldwide organization to it becoming the worldwide institution itself. This was my belief when I was a member of AMORC: They were the supreme organization in the world today, the only real connection to God and I better stay in or risk the loss of my divine connection.

END NOTES

The PoliticalMind: Why You Can't Understand 21 st -Century American Politics with an 18th

1. George Lakoff, (New York: Viking Penguin, 2008, 22-24

Century Brain 2. Ibid., 39

3. ibid, 101, 118

“A Pilgrim’s Journey to the East" The American Rosae Crucis, May, 1916, 12 Lewis, “A Pilgrim’s Journey to the East" 1957 Republication by the London

4. H. Spencer Lewis,

5. H. Spencer http://docslide.us/documents/a-pilgrims-journey-to-the-east.html

Order:

Rosicrucian Questions and Answers. With Complete History o f the Rosicrucian Order (San

6. H. Spencer Lewis, Jose, Supreme Grand Lodge of AMORC Printing and Publishing Department, 1929)

Rosicrucian Fraternity in America:Not Under the Rosy Cross, Book V,

7. R. Swinburne Clymer, p. 269, one of several book selections in this compendium of different works, (Rosicrucian Foundation Beverly Hall,, Quakerstown, Pennsylvania 1 9 3 5 )- book was published as a "brochure” probably in 1934

Cosmic Mission Fulfilled, (San Jose, Supreme Grand Lodge of AMORC Printing and

8. Ralph M. Lewis, F.R.C., Publishing Department, 1966)

9. H. Spencer Lewis, Ph.D., F.R.C. (In 1918, prepared under the supervision of probably up to his death then subsequently supervised by succeeding Imperators) (San Jose, Supreme Grand Lodge of AMORC Printing and Publishing Department, 1971)

Rosicrucian Manual

10. Robert Vanloo, BA, “Controversy around a Document? -Is the A.M.O.R.C. an Offspring of the O.T.O. or Not?” (2001), http://www.parareligion.ch/sunrise/vanloo/ameng.htm 11. Christian Rebisse, FRC, “H. Spencer Lewis—Restorer of Rosicrucianism”—podcast version (2009), https://rosicrucian.org/podcast/h-spencer-lewis-restorer-of-rosicrucianism-christian-rebisse/

Restorer,

12. Christian Rebisse, FRC, movie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qxbf361Rh8 13. Christian Rebisse, FRC,

version

(2009)

Begin

video

on

Part

1

at

Restorer, Rosicrucian Digest, No. 2, 2014, 9

14. Julie Scott, S.R.C, Grand Master, “Clemence Isaure: The Rosicrucian Golden Isis/’ 1. 2 0 1 0 ,4 6 .

Rosicrucian. Digest. No.

15. H. Spencer Lewis, Rosicrucian Q&A, 170

Manual, 6 17. H. Spencer Lewis, Manual, 129 16. H. Spencer Lewis,

18. H. Spencer Lewis, "The Supreme Matre Emeritus Raised to the Higher R e a l m s 1918, 27 19. H. Spencer Lewis,

Rosicrucian Q&A, 165

20. Ibid, 171 21. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” 1957 Republication, 1 22. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,”

Rosae Crucis, 12

23. Ibid, 12

Rosicrucian Q&A, 171 25. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” Rosae Crucis, 14 24. H. Spencer Lewis,

26. Ibid, 14 27. Ibid, 14

Cromaat, Volume D,

28. Ibid, 14 29. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,”

RosaeCruris, 26

30. Ibid, 26 31. Chris Gerwal, The King of Elfland’s Second Cousin (blog), "Narrative Voice as Mind-Control: Thoughts on Manipulating Reader Perception”, http://elflands2ndcousin.com /2011/05/17/narrative-voice-asmind-control-thoughts-on-manipulating-reader-perception/ 32. Neil F. Neimark, M.D., "Five Minute Stress Mastery”, http://www.thebodysoulconnection.com/EducationCenter/fight.html 33. Neil F. Neimark, M.D, "Stress” 34. Paul Thagard, "Glossary of Cognitive Science”, http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/courses/Phil256/glossary.html 35. Janzen, Haun and Levinson, 2012 Experiment "Tracking Down Abstract Linguistic Meaning; Neural Correlates of Spatial Frame of Reference Ambiguities in Language”

The PoliticalMind, 17 37. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” Rosae Cruris, 27 38. H. Spencer Lewis, Rosicrucian Q&A, 173 36. George Lakoff,

39. RalphM. Lewis, F.R.C., 122 40. Ibid, 122

Rosicrucian Digest, 10 42. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” Rosae Cruris, 12

41. Christian Rebisse, FRC, “Restorer,”

43. Ibid, 12 44. Christian Rebisse, FRC, “Restorer,”

Rosicrucian Digest, 10

45. Ibid, 10

Rosae Crucis, 12 47. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” Rosae Crucis, 17 48. 41. Christian Rebisse, FRC, "Restorer,” Rosicrucian Digest, 10

46. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,”

49. Robert Vanloo, BA, "Controversy” 50. Google group/topic: AMORC https://groups.google.eom/forum/#itopic/alt.amorc/OqNiVCtlvKO

Not Under the Rosy Cross, Title Page 52. R. Swinburne Clymer, Not Under the Rosy Cross, (Rosicrucian Foundation 51. R. Swinburne Clymer,

Beverly Hall, Quakerstown, Pennsylvania)—this preface is quoted from copy of original brochure, which does not appear to be dated.

The

53. Crowley—Letter to Christ Kraemer, October 27, 1938 as found in the GJC Collection; referenced in Martin P. Starr, (Bolingbrook, Illinois,) The Teitann Press, Bolingbrook, Illinois. 2003). 230

Unknown God- W.T. Smith and the Thelemites,

Not Under the Rosy Cross, 335 5 5. R. Swinburne Clymer, Not Under the Rosy Cross, 336 56, Martin P. Starr, The Unknown God—W.T. Smith and the Thelemites, (Bolingbrook, Illinois,) The Teitan 54. R. Swinburne Clymer,

Press, Bolingbrook, Illinois. 2003). 230 57. Milko Bogaard, F.U.D.O.S.I., VERSION 1.2, November 2000, http://REPUBLICwww.hermetics.org/fudosi.html

58. Ibid. 59. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,” 1957 Republication, Epilogue 60. George Lakoff,

The PoliticalMind, 224

61. H. Spencer Lewis, “The Authentic and Complete History of the Ancient and Mystical Order Rosae Crucis: Sixth Installment,” The 11-12

American Rosae Crucis,

62. Ibid, 12 63. Julie Scott, S.R.C, "Clemence", 46 64. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,”

Rosae Crucis, 22-24

65. Julie Scott, S.R.C, "Clemence", 49 66. H. Spencer Lewis, “Pilgrim’s,”

Rosae Crucis, 12

67. RalphM. Lewis, F.R.C., Cosmic, 365

APPENDIX SOME FASCINATING CONTRADICTIONS IN AMORC’S ORIGIN STORIES

A Pilgrim'sJourney to the East- The American_Rosae_Crucis, May 1916 Q&A—Rosicrucian Questions and A nswers, 1929-1954 MANUAL— The Rosicrucian Manual, 1971 RESTORER—H. Spencer Lewis, Restorer o f Rosicrucianism, by Christian Rebisse, PILGRIM—

FRC—printed in the

Rosicrucian Digest Volume 93, Number 2 2014 ISIS—Clemence Isaure: The Rosicrucian Golden Isis, Grand Master Julie Scott, S.R.C Number 1, 2010

—Cosmic Mission Fulfilled 1966 and 1978 Editions cited

COSMIC

W H A T K I N D C O N T A C T IN P A R I S C O N V I N C E D I.F .W IS T O C O T O P A R I S , W H E R E I I E W A S A L L E G E D L Y I N I T I A T E D IN T O U L O U S E ?

s o d r c i:

P IL G R IM

DATE QUOTE A fte r m an y y e a rs’ stu d y o f th e e x o te ric w o rk 1916 o f R o sa c c ru c ia n ism a n d an in crea sin g , o b se ssio n a l d e sire to jo in w ith the B ro th e rh o o d . u n selfish in its g reat u n d e rta k in g s fo r th e b e tte rm e n t an d u n ity o f m an . I w ro te — a lte r a d e e p in n er im p ressio n to d o so— to th e u n k n o w n e d ito r o f the P a risian p ap er.

PA C .E n 12

B U I I N 1 9 0 9 , A C C O R D I N G T O R O S I C R U C I A N S Q«SfcA. I I E K N O W S T H E L E G A T E F R O M IN D IA - S O H E A L R E A D Y H A S A C O N N E C T IO N . W H Y W R I T E T O A N U N K N O W N E D I T O R IN P I L G R I M 'S A N D W H Y D O E S H E N O T M E N T I O N T H E L E G A T E IN T H E 1916 D O C U M E N T A N D H IS ‘K N O W L E D G E * T H A T H E W A S A D E S C E N D E N T O F T H E F IR S T A M E R I C A N R O S IC R U C IA N O R D E R ? T H E P A R IS IA N E D IT O R IS N O T M E N T I O N E D IN T H I S B O O K .

Q&A

Ju st b e fo re 1909 th ere ap p lie d fo r m e m b e rsh ip in o u r so c ie ty o n e w h o p re sen te d p a p e rs p ro v in g ap p o in tm e n t as “ L eg ate" o f the R o sic ru c ia n O rd e r in India.

1929

Ju st b e fo re 1909 th ere ap p lie d fo r m e m b e rsh ip in o u r so c ie ty o n e w h o p re sen te d p ap e rs p ro v in g ap p o in tm e n t as " L e g a te ” o f the R o sic ru c ia n O rd e r in India.

1966

129

B U T I N R A L P H L E W I S B I O G R A P H Y O F H I S F A T H E R , C O S M IC M IS S IO N F U L F IL L E D , I T M E N T I O N S T H E L E T T E R T O T H E P A R I S I A N E D I T O R A N D N O “ L E G A T E " IS M E N T I O N E D ? A R E W E M O R E O R L E S S B A C K T O T H E P I L G R I M 'S V E R S IO N ?

C O S M IC

IN A N A R T I C L E B Y G R A N D M A S T E R J U L I E S C O T T , S. R . C ., S H E C L A I M S T H A T L E W IS C O N T A C T E D A P A R IS IA N B O O K S E L L E R , N O T T H E E D I T O R M E N T I O N E D IN P I L G R I M 'S . N O L E G A T E A S W E L L .

ISIS

1908. tw e n ty -fo u r y e a r-o ld H . S p e n c e r I^cw is 2 0 1 0 h ad a m y stic al e x p e rie n c e in w h ich he w as d ire c te d to seek o u t the R o sic ru c ia n s in F ran c e. N ot k n o w in g e x a c tly w h ere to b e g in , h e w ro te to a P a risia n b o o k se lle r w h o h ad rec e n tly sen t h im a c a ta lo g o f m y stic al b o o k s, to ask if he m ig h t b e ab le to h e lp h im in his q u e st. T h e b o o k se lle r su g g e ste d th at II. S p e n c e r L ew is c o m e to P aris. F o llo w in g m an y sy n c h ro n istic e v e n ts. II. S p e n c e r L ew is w as ab le to trav el to P a ris a y e a r an d a h a lf later.

P. 49 R .D . NO. 2 20 1 4

IN A N A R T I C L E B Y C H R I S T I A N R E B I S S E , W H I C H C I T E S A P I L G R I M JO U R N E Y T O T H E EA ST, W H Y D O ES IT N O W SAY H E C O N T A C T E D P A R IS IA N B O O K S E L L E R ? D ID IIE N O T R E A D IT A N D J U S T D E C ID E D Q U O T E J U L I E S C O T T 'S A F O R E M E N T IO N E D A R T I C L E ? N O L E G A T E M E N T IO N E D H E R E .

RESTO RER

In the hope o f obtaining some information regarding Rosiemeinnism in I'raitcc, he decided lo write to a Parisian bookseller whose catalogue he had obtained.

2014

’S A TO IS

P. 9 R .D . NO. 2 20 1 4

IN ROSICRUCIANS Q &A IT SAYS THAT LEWIS IS DESCENDENT OF FIRST ROSICRUCIAN BODY IN AMERICA AND THAT GAVE HIM ACCESS TO THEIR PAPERS QUOTE DATE PA G E# SOURCE Q&A As editor o f several occult magazines I had 1929 170 made contact with various Rosicrucian manuscripts and had discovered that I was related to one o f the descendants o f the first Rosicrucian body in America-that which had established itself in Philadelphia in 1694. This gave me access to many o f their old papers, secret manuscripts, and teachings. IN THE 1971 MANUAL IT SAYS HE MADE FIRST CONTACT WITH THE WORK OF THE ROSICRUCIANS THROUGH THE WORK OF MRS. MAY BANKS-STACEY WHO HAD BEEN GIVEN THEM BY THE LAST OF THE FIRST AMERICAN ROSICRUCIANS 129 MANUAL After many years o f continuous scientific and 1971 psychic research...he made his first contact with the work o f the Rosicrucians through obtaining copies o f the secret manuscripts of the first American Rosicrucians, who established their headquarters near Philadelphia in 1694. A member o f the English Branch which sponsored the first movement in America, Mrs. May BanksStacey, desccndent o f Oliver Cromwell and the D 'Arcys o f France, placed in his hands such papers as had been officially transmitted to her by the last o f the first American Rosicrucians.

IN I W , W H E N H . S P E N C E R L E W I S C R O S S E D T H E A T L A N T I C IN A S T E A M S H I P IN O R D E R T O G E T I N I T I A T E D , W H O W A S H I S C O M P A N I O N IN H IS J O U R N E Y ? W A S H E A L O N E W H E N H E M E T T H E S T R A N G E R H E S P E A K S A B O U T IN A P I L G R I M 'S J O U R N E Y ? H E S U R E S E E M S T O B E .

P IL G R IM

T h e tw e n ty -fo u rth w as o n a S a tu rd a y . E a rly on 1916 S u n d a y m o rn in g 1 m ad e th e a c q u a in ta n c e o f a d a rk -c o m p le x io n e d y o u n g m a n . w h o m 1 b eliev ed to b e an E ast In d ia n . H e se e m e d to p lac e h im se lf in m y co m p a n y at ev ery o p p o rtu n ity -a b o v e an d b e lo w d ec k -o n S a tu rd a y a fte rn o o n , a n d / felt that

I*. 12

/anestmteness. the one great equalizer at sea. was gnawing at his heart as it was at mine. I N 1 9 * 6 . I N C O S •M I C M I S S I O N F U L F I L L E D , A L L E G E D L Y W R I T T E N B Y H A R V E Y L E W I S * S O N , R A L P H . I T E X P L I C I T L Y S A Y S T I L . R O C K E F E L L E R O F S I ’A N D \ R D O I L . S O H O W C O U L D III'. B E C O N S U M E D B Y L O N E L I N E S S . A S E X P R E J i S E D IN P I L O R I M ' S I F H E W A S W I T H T H I S F A T H E I t? P. 1X4 - 8 5 A aro n a p p ro a c h e d his o ld e r so n . H arv e y . I '»>