Apostolic Succession of Aleister Crowley

Metzareph

Hello all,

I would like to know what is the official theory for the Apostolic Succession of Aleister Crowley. I'm not familiar with this particular subject in reference to AC, but I'm curious.
Thanks!
93s

Jim Eshelman

@Metzareph said

"I would like to know what is the official theory for the Apostolic Succession of Aleister Crowley. I'm not familiar with this particular subject in reference to AC, but I'm curious."

I'm unaware of any claim that Aleister Crowley was the recipient of apostalic succession.

There are those, however, who make a claim that, as the Magus of the Aeon, he was an origin point for a transmissible succession of the same type. Is that possibly what you've encountered?

RobertAllen

Being an ex-Catholic I had always assumed that the EGC made some sort of claim similar to the church in an Apostolic Succession. I guess I had even assumed that Crowley meant to imply a magical link had been formed with the succession of the Catholic church itself.

I don't know why I think that. I guess I must have read something at some point; but also, the Gnostic Mass is obviously based on the christian Catholic and Eastern Orthodox versions. It always seemed patently obvious to me, by writing Liber XV, he was updating the ritual along thelemic lines. As such, it would be a natural gesture to claim a continuity with other elements of the Catholic catechism—namely, the Apostolic Succession.

Love and Will

Metzareph

Yes, I mean through the Gnostic Tradition. This is what I'm talking about:

1893 - Jules Stanslas Doinel consecrates Gerard Encausse
1909 - Dr. Gerard Encausse consecrates Dr. Theodor Reuss
1912 - Dr. Theodor Reuss consecrates Sir Aleister Crowley

I have to admit that I'm not that familiar with Gnostic lineages.

93s
~Juan

Avshalom Binyamin

Well, I would think that questions about the "official theory for the Apostolic Succession of" the EGC would be best answered by the EGC...

hermetic.com/sabazius/clergy_egc.htm
hermetic.com/sabazius/history_egc.htm

Robert, this article states that Crowley did claim in private correspondence that he received "legimate episcopal consecration".
hermetic.com/egc/catholic.html

Jim Eshelman

@Metzareph said

"Yes, I mean through the Gnostic Tradition. This is what I'm talking about:

1893 - Jules Stanslas Doinel consecrates Gerard Encausse
1909 - Dr. Gerard Encausse consecrates Dr. Theodor Reuss
1912 - Dr. Theodor Reuss consecrates Sir Aleister Crowley

I have to admit that I'm not that familiar with Gnostic lineages."

I've heard/read rumors over the years of Crowley and Reuss allegedly receiving consecration from Encausse or another. It also seems to have been a subject Crowley didn't take seriously (given the construction of his ego, we'd have heard about it in some open writing a time or two, eh?). I think the odds are that such a thing never happened. (And, if it did, then his "not taking it all that seriously" probably matters, since the link must be received with sincere intention.)

EDIT: I keep forgetting something I just found in my own diary. I quote it as listed there: "Bishops Encausse, Sedir, and Chamuel consecrated Aleister Crowley in early 1914, during his stay in Paris (and approximately concurrent with his performance of The Paris Working)." FWIW.

Other lines of apparent apostolic succession began to converge in the late 20th Century O.T.O. Within traditional (historic) terns, I've been led to believe that my own line of succession (several steps downstream from Vilatte) is as valid as any celebrating mass in a Catholic church today; but it's been a long time since I've concerned myself much with it.

Though this goes beyond your question, I'll add a few more remarks:

In the 1990s, I noticed that there was a lot of energy being spent in various people claiming and attempting to document their apostolic authenticity, and by various other people in disputing it. I proposed (and the other two founders of Temple of Thelema concurred) that we step out of that contentious mess. A paper, originally written for the 7°, documenting formal apostolic lineage was withdrawn, and we decided not to pass that information on to the next generation. That is, we decided that if we had anything of value, it would be evident from our work; or, if it wasn't, then the alleged 'succession' really didn't mean anything worth much.

Therefore, we never mention the apostolic succession except as an idle piece of incidental information, roughly as important as, say, "My middle name came from our only rich relative, who owned the biggest trucking company in the midwest," or, "Did you know I was a Cub Scout?" or, "My grandparents always bought Oldsmobiles."

So, in that spirit: At the time Temple of Thelema was founded, each of its three founders had received Episcopal consecration from one or more sources. In the Gnostic Episcopal tradition, we cross-conferred our linkages, consolidating them. Furthermore, I was a Cub Scout, finished my Lion, but never went into Webelos.

FWIW.

Corvinae

@Jim Eshelman said

" I was a Cub Scout, finished my Lion, but never went into Webelos.

FWIW."

You have a great sence of humor Mr. Eshelman......

Incidental...humph....when my son gets done with cub scouting this year, and I get to hang up my CubMistress hat, I am going to celebrate myself with a nice bottle of something, a big fat pipe, and dance naked under the moon howling....

Knowing that I am a public figure, and that little boys look to me for direction, and inspiration.....and discipline.....it's been like a huge joke. I swear to God, I want to start the meetings. With. Do What Thou wilt....instead of ....I promise to do my duty to god and my country...
At least I learned one secret handshake....

Metzareph

Very interesting!
Thanks!

On that same line, I'm assuming that Aleister Crowley, being the beginning of a new (thelemic) apostolic line would be consider as valid as any "old aeon" one... fwiw, right?