FAIR TRIAL, FAIR HANGING
This is Chapter Two of the silent classic "Les Vampires" in which the black hooded gang brings the reporter trying to expose them before the Grand Inquisitor, for an inquisition to be followed by an execution at dawn.
INQUISITION INDEED!
"You need no funds as far as the conferring of powers is concerned. I am the scribe and prophet of The Book of the Law; the sole condition of complete adherence is merely the acceptance of that Book. Every group is completely autonomous." Aleister Crowley, personal communication,June 21, 1944
"There is a section of Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov where one character tells a story about a church official (The Grand Inquisitor) whose interest in religion only goes to the extent that he can use it to control people. "More Notes from Underground"
"A kangaroo court or kangaroo trial, also known as drumhead court-martial or Drumhead trial, is a sham legal proceeding or court. Kangaroo courts are judicial proceedings that deny proper procedure in the name of expediency. The outcome of such a trial is essentially made in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all." Wiki Definition
Word has it that the Grand Inquisitor Commanders will meet shortly, without having ever notified me of the charges against me, or where their Inquisition is to be held, or when, to go through the form or pretense of a "trial" and expel me from OTO. They have taken their sweet time, and, as detailed in this Live Journal, never informed me of their 'preliminary hearing' or 'charges and specifications' - recommended my expulsion without having so much as spoken to me, and, showing they do have my address, sent me a bogus letter asserting that I had been previously contacted but given no response, though this was sent to the same address they professed to have sent two precious notifications to. One might (unlikely-based on my experience) have gone astray in the mail, but two sounds like a "show lie" for the record. Not knowing the 'charges' I sent a letter (published in this journal) saying that I had broken no rules, let alone rules meriting expulsion from the order. By this time, I was fighting on principle; clearly this was an organization without justice or chivalry.
The next thing I knew was that a friend of mine had been expelled without being given a chance to speak on his behalf, based solely on preliminary comments. There are a few ranking members who don't like all this. One *very ranking* member wrote me that - regardless of his personal opinion - even the appearance of 'kangaroo justice' was totally unacceptable. He set up an in-person meeting with me - his request, vigorously, and - totally out of character, did not show up for the meeting and has not been in touch with me since.
Before cutting off contact, this ranking member, and another, sent me what can only be fairly described as an unofficial, unsigned copy of a bill of particulars that purported to be the "charges and specifications" against me. I had tropuble thinking this authentic - it was a series of rather silly assertions all boiling down to my expressing doubts about the competency of the present upper management, and (respectfully) *asking* them to step down. I cited good and sound reasons, in my now famous (they made it famous) "Statement Regarding the O.T.O." It contained no personal defamation, and followed years of efforts to address internal problems internally, until they reached emergency level. I drew up a *draft* memo in response to this alleged bill of specifications, but - as none of this was official - it was an informal response, easily refuting each and every point, so I'd have some basis to develop a case. It was intended to be fleshed out and accompanied by exhibits, but it was held pending official notice. Such notice has yet to come, and will likely never come.
When my friend was thrown out in such a cowardly and unjust manner, I attempted to show said notes to management, stating that they were not definitive and I wished to appear in person--I have myself been a sitting GIC on such a 'court' and the member under inquisition (himself a lawyer) was present, notified well in advance, and had both an advisor on procedures and right of questioning witnesses and the inquisitors.
No such right was afforded my friend, nor has such been afforded me. This is a smoke filled back room deal, and I am not going to sit idly by and get stepped on by medieval practices that are - indeed - an Inquisition.
There is a lot more to this, but for now, some observations on this type of process in historical perspective should suffice.
[see also http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist/dostgi.html]
Wikiversion:
The Grand Inquisitor is a parable told by Ivan to Alyosha in Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel, The Brothers Karamazov (1879-1880). Ivan and Alyosha are brothers; Ivan is a committed atheist, but Alyosha is a novice monk.
The Grand Inquisitor is an important part of the novel and one of the best-known passages in modern literature because of its ideas about human nature and freedom, and because of its fundamental ambiguity. It was recently published as an independent text by Continuum Books.
The tale is told by Ivan with brief interruptive questions by Alyosha. In the tale, Christ comes back to earth in Seville at the time of the Inquisition. Jesus performs a number of miracles (echoing miracles from the Gospels). The people recognize him and adore him, but he is arrested by Inquisition leaders and sentenced to be burned to death the next day. The Grand Inquisitor visits him in his cell to tell him that the Church no longer needs him. The main portion of the text is the Inquisitor explaining to Jesus why his return would interfere with the mission of the church.
The Inquisitor frames his denunciation of Jesus around the three questions Satan asked Jesus during the temptation of Christ in the desert. These three are the temptation to turn stones into bread, the temptation to cast Himself from the Temple and be saved by the angels, and the temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the world. The Inquisitor states that Jesus rejected these three temptations in favor of freedom. The Inquisitor thinks that Jesus has misjudged human nature, though. He does not believe that the vast majority of humanity can handle the freedom which Jesus has given them. Thus, he implies that Jesus, in giving humans freedom to choose, has excluded the majority of humanity from redemption and doomed humanity to suffer.
Ivan indicates that the Inquisitor is an atheist. After a lifetime of pursuing God, he has given up in frustration. He is nevertheless left with his love of humanity and desire to see humanity not suffer. Despite declaring the Inquisitor to be an atheist, Ivan also implies that the Inquisitor and the Church follow "the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction," i.e. the Devil, Satan, for he, through compulsion, provided the tools to end all human suffering and unite under the banner of the Church. The mulitude then is guided through the Church by the few who are strong enough to take on the burden of freedom. The Inquisitor says that under him, all mankind will live and die happily in ignorance. Though he leads them only to "death and destruction," they will be happy along the way. The Inquisitor will be a self-martyr, spending his life to keep choice from humanity. He states that "Anyone who can appease a man's conscience can take his freedom away from him."
The segment ends when Christ, who has been silent throughout, kisses the Inquisitor on his "bloodless, aged lips" (22) instead of answering him. On this, the Inquisitor releases Christ but tells him never to return. Christ, still silent, leaves into "the dark alleys of the city." Not only is the kiss ambiguous, but its effect on the Inquisitor is as well. Ivan concludes, "The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his ideas." The kiss that Christ plants on the lips of the Grand Inquisitor is the equal of Christ's whispered words to Judas (John 13.27) "that thou doest, do quickly." Just as Jesus in no way condones Judas' betrayal, so Christ's kiss does not excuse the Grand Inquisitor.
Not only does the parable function as a philosophical and religious work in its own right, but it also furthers the character development of the larger novel. Clearly, Ivan identifies himself with the Inquisitor. After relating the tale, Ivan asks Alyosha if he "renounces" Ivan for his views. Alyosha responds by giving Ivan a soft kiss on the lips, to which the delighted Ivan replies, "that's plagiarism!" The brothers part soon afterwards.
According to Dostoevsky's own letters, even the author struggled with the questions posed in the Grand Inquisitor and wondered and worried how they might affect even the faith of the reader. Dostoevsky himself could not come up with a straight answer, but rather put forth the life of the Elder Zossima, which follows almost immediately this chapter, as his "answer" to Ivan's questions. Therefore the Grand Inquisitor cannot be fully understood without reading it with the chapters on the life of the Elder Zossima and subsequent chapters.
NOTE - John Crow was just expelled from OTO. I urge all of you to carefully read the details he presents at Treasure House. This is, in no reasonable sense, the result of fair deliberations, but an effort to silence criticisms very different from my own. Whether I agree with John's views or not, he is a brother, friend, and a free citizen of a free country entitled to express his opinions without fear. The OTO exudes fear...it is a fear-based culture, very much in danger of becoming a cult. There were no reasons to expel him, save that he expressed opinions different from the rather unimaginative and very unchivalrous Upper Management currently in power.
Click to view INQUISITION INDEED!
"You need no funds as far as the conferring of powers is concerned. I am the scribe and prophet of The Book of the Law; the sole condition of complete adherence is merely the acceptance of that Book. Every group is completely autonomous." Aleister Crowley, personal communication,June 21, 1944
"There is a section of Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov where one character tells a story about a church official (The Grand Inquisitor) whose interest in religion only goes to the extent that he can use it to control people. "More Notes from Underground"
"A kangaroo court or kangaroo trial, also known as drumhead court-martial or Drumhead trial, is a sham legal proceeding or court. Kangaroo courts are judicial proceedings that deny proper procedure in the name of expediency. The outcome of such a trial is essentially made in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all." Wiki Definition
Word has it that the Grand Inquisitor Commanders will meet shortly, without having ever notified me of the charges against me, or where their Inquisition is to be held, or when, to go through the form or pretense of a "trial" and expel me from OTO. They have taken their sweet time, and, as detailed in this Live Journal, never informed me of their 'preliminary hearing' or 'charges and specifications' - recommended my expulsion without having so much as spoken to me, and, showing they do have my address, sent me a bogus letter asserting that I had been previously contacted but given no response, though this was sent to the same address they professed to have sent two precious notifications to. One might (unlikely-based on my experience) have gone astray in the mail, but two sounds like a "show lie" for the record. Not knowing the 'charges' I sent a letter (published in this journal) saying that I had broken no rules, let alone rules meriting expulsion from the order. By this time, I was fighting on principle; clearly this was an organization without justice or chivalry.
The next thing I knew was that a friend of mine had been expelled without being given a chance to speak on his behalf, based solely on preliminary comments. There are a few ranking members who don't like all this. One *very ranking* member wrote me that - regardless of his personal opinion - even the appearance of 'kangaroo justice' was totally unacceptable. He set up an in-person meeting with me - his request, vigorously, and - totally out of character, did not show up for the meeting and has not been in touch with me since.
Before cutting off contact, this ranking member, and another, sent me what can only be fairly described as an unofficial, unsigned copy of a bill of particulars that purported to be the "charges and specifications" against me. I had tropuble thinking this authentic - it was a series of rather silly assertions all boiling down to my expressing doubts about the competency of the present upper management, and (respectfully) *asking* them to step down. I cited good and sound reasons, in my now famous (they made it famous) "Statement Regarding the O.T.O." It contained no personal defamation, and followed years of efforts to address internal problems internally, until they reached emergency level. I drew up a *draft* memo in response to this alleged bill of specifications, but - as none of this was official - it was an informal response, easily refuting each and every point, so I'd have some basis to develop a case. It was intended to be fleshed out and accompanied by exhibits, but it was held pending official notice. Such notice has yet to come, and will likely never come.
When my friend was thrown out in such a cowardly and unjust manner, I attempted to show said notes to management, stating that they were not definitive and I wished to appear in person--I have myself been a sitting GIC on such a 'court' and the member under inquisition (himself a lawyer) was present, notified well in advance, and had both an advisor on procedures and right of questioning witnesses and the inquisitors.
No such right was afforded my friend, nor has such been afforded me. This is a smoke filled back room deal, and I am not going to sit idly by and get stepped on by medieval practices that are - indeed - an Inquisition.
There is a lot more to this, but for now, some observations on this type of process in historical perspective should suffice.
[see also http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist/dostgi.html]
Wikiversion:
The Grand Inquisitor is a parable told by Ivan to Alyosha in Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel, The Brothers Karamazov (1879-1880). Ivan and Alyosha are brothers; Ivan is a committed atheist, but Alyosha is a novice monk.
The Grand Inquisitor is an important part of the novel and one of the best-known passages in modern literature because of its ideas about human nature and freedom, and because of its fundamental ambiguity. It was recently published as an independent text by Continuum Books.
The tale is told by Ivan with brief interruptive questions by Alyosha. In the tale, Christ comes back to earth in Seville at the time of the Inquisition. Jesus performs a number of miracles (echoing miracles from the Gospels). The people recognize him and adore him, but he is arrested by Inquisition leaders and sentenced to be burned to death the next day. The Grand Inquisitor visits him in his cell to tell him that the Church no longer needs him. The main portion of the text is the Inquisitor explaining to Jesus why his return would interfere with the mission of the church.
The Inquisitor frames his denunciation of Jesus around the three questions Satan asked Jesus during the temptation of Christ in the desert. These three are the temptation to turn stones into bread, the temptation to cast Himself from the Temple and be saved by the angels, and the temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the world. The Inquisitor states that Jesus rejected these three temptations in favor of freedom. The Inquisitor thinks that Jesus has misjudged human nature, though. He does not believe that the vast majority of humanity can handle the freedom which Jesus has given them. Thus, he implies that Jesus, in giving humans freedom to choose, has excluded the majority of humanity from redemption and doomed humanity to suffer.
Ivan indicates that the Inquisitor is an atheist. After a lifetime of pursuing God, he has given up in frustration. He is nevertheless left with his love of humanity and desire to see humanity not suffer. Despite declaring the Inquisitor to be an atheist, Ivan also implies that the Inquisitor and the Church follow "the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction," i.e. the Devil, Satan, for he, through compulsion, provided the tools to end all human suffering and unite under the banner of the Church. The mulitude then is guided through the Church by the few who are strong enough to take on the burden of freedom. The Inquisitor says that under him, all mankind will live and die happily in ignorance. Though he leads them only to "death and destruction," they will be happy along the way. The Inquisitor will be a self-martyr, spending his life to keep choice from humanity. He states that "Anyone who can appease a man's conscience can take his freedom away from him."
The segment ends when Christ, who has been silent throughout, kisses the Inquisitor on his "bloodless, aged lips" (22) instead of answering him. On this, the Inquisitor releases Christ but tells him never to return. Christ, still silent, leaves into "the dark alleys of the city." Not only is the kiss ambiguous, but its effect on the Inquisitor is as well. Ivan concludes, "The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his ideas." The kiss that Christ plants on the lips of the Grand Inquisitor is the equal of Christ's whispered words to Judas (John 13.27) "that thou doest, do quickly." Just as Jesus in no way condones Judas' betrayal, so Christ's kiss does not excuse the Grand Inquisitor.
Not only does the parable function as a philosophical and religious work in its own right, but it also furthers the character development of the larger novel. Clearly, Ivan identifies himself with the Inquisitor. After relating the tale, Ivan asks Alyosha if he "renounces" Ivan for his views. Alyosha responds by giving Ivan a soft kiss on the lips, to which the delighted Ivan replies, "that's plagiarism!" The brothers part soon afterwards.
According to Dostoevsky's own letters, even the author struggled with the questions posed in the Grand Inquisitor and wondered and worried how they might affect even the faith of the reader. Dostoevsky himself could not come up with a straight answer, but rather put forth the life of the Elder Zossima, which follows almost immediately this chapter, as his "answer" to Ivan's questions. Therefore the Grand Inquisitor cannot be fully understood without reading it with the chapters on the life of the Elder Zossima and subsequent chapters.
NOTE - John Crow was just expelled from OTO. I urge all of you to carefully read the details he presents at Treasure House. This is, in no reasonable sense, the result of fair deliberations, but an effort to silence criticisms very different from my own. Whether I agree with John's views or not, he is a brother, friend, and a free citizen of a free country entitled to express his opinions without fear. The OTO exudes fear...it is a fear-based culture, very much in danger of becoming a cult. There were no reasons to expel him, save that he expressed opinions different from the rather unimaginative and very unchivalrous Upper Management currently in power.