Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00201)

To Frank: Thanks for the article below by Iverson L. Harris.

To John: The scholar Emmett A. Greenwalt in his work CALIFORNIA 
UTOPIA: Point Loma: 1897-1942 (Revised 1978 ed) states (p. 182) that 
two ULT replies were published to answer Mr. Harris' article.

Theosophy Magazine published a reply in their March 1977 issue, pp. 
159-160. John, can you post to this forum that article?

Also Hermes in their Dec. 4, 1976 issue, pp. 569-570 published 
a "rebuttal" to the I.H article. Has anyone access to this?

To Frank: Apparently The Eclectic Theosophist in their Sep. 15, 
1977, p. 7 issue replied to the comments made in those ULT magazines.
Frank, do you have a copy of that article?

Daniel
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/

---------------------------------------------------------

A CHAPTER OF THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY CLARIFIED

IVERSON L. HARRIS

Following are the "additional notes" by Iverson L. Harris to "Some
Reminiscences of William Q. Judge" by E.A. Neresheimer, referred to 
in our last
issue under 'Historical Material'. Though Mr. 
Neresheimer's "Reminiscences" are
not known to many today, yet they have been in type for some decades, 
and to
readers of them during those years they will have presented an 
incomplete and
in certain instances not fully accurate picture. To some, inter-ested 
not so
much in the history of the Theosophical Society as in the teachings 
and
doc-trines themselves, the whole matter will appear of minor or 
subsidiary
importance; but to those historically minded, and especially to those 
who feel
an inborn duty to defend those on whom misunderstanding has fallen, 
there is
always urgency to place on record actual facts so that these speak for
themselves and become part of a faithful record available to all.
These facts are now covered in the commentary which follows and are 
here
printed as a practical means for their more public noting and their
preservation. - EDS.

Serious students of Theosophical history usually have strong 
convictions -
strong loyalties and sometimes even stronger prejudices, alas! This is
understandable, but does not justify distortion of facts when these 
facts prove
to be unpalatable and irreconcilable with attitudes taken and 
sometimes
stubbornly maintained in the face of the established facts.

The World Centenary Congress of the Theosophical Society in New York 
in
November 1975 took an historic step forward in its public - and 
apparently
unanimous - recognition of the T.S. in New York in 1875, along with 
H. P.
Blavatsky and Col. H. S. Olcott; and not only as such but as the
master-architect and builder of the modern Theosophical Movement and 
best
expounder of the Esoteric Philosophy in the U.S.A. in the Nineteenth 
Century.
The timely publication of the first volume of Judge's Collected 
Writings is
irrefutable evidence of his outstanding stature.
The time is now ripe to brush away some of the distortions, 
misrepresentations
and false-hoods frequently promulgated by earnest but prejudiced or 
misinformed
ex parte writers concerning what happened to the Theosophical Society 
in
America immediately following the death of Mr. Judge on March 21, 
1896.
There has long been a wide cleavage between those who vigorously and 
ardently
main-tained that William Q. Judge 'appointed' Katherine Tingley as 
his esoteric
'Successor' and those who, on the other hand, have chosen to apply to 
the
Buddhist guruparamparâ of the Judge-Tingley 'succession' H.P.B.'s 
dictum that
the 'Apostolic Succession' in the Roman Catholic Church was 'a gross 
and
palpable fraud.'
The final coup de grace to the bona fides of Katherine Tingley's
'successorship' to William Q. Judge was loudly and publicly 
proclaimed by the
anonymous writers of the United Lodge of Theosophists publications to 
have been
in E. A. Neresheimer's Some Reminiscences of William Q. Judge 
privately
circulated and publicly quoted in the early 1930's. On Page 17 of the
typescript of this in many ways well-written, informative and 
generally
authoritative ac-count, Mr. Neresheimer writes:

"Mr. Judge's 'diary' is in my possession and can be seen at any time 
by any
responsible Theosophist. I desire to state that 'the further messages 
and
quotations from Mr. Judge's diary' of which Mr. Hargrove writes in 
the above
pamphlet of April 3rd, 1896, are not in the book and never were, as 
any
inspection will verify. Those alleged 'messages and quota-tions' 
attributed to
Mr. Judge could only have been concocted by Mrs. Tingley, assisted by 
Mr.
Hargrove and Mr. J. H. Fussell, who alone were closely associated with
Katherine Tingley at Headquarters at that time, and who, with her, 
drafted all
communications that then went out from Headquarters."

The historical facts completely contradict the charge that the people 
named
'Concocted' the notes, or memoranda, (sometimes miscalled 
the 'diary') in Mr.
Judge's own handwriting. These Mr. Neresheimer naturally did not find 
in the
Judge Diary in his possession; they were written by Mr. Judge on 
fragments of
paper, of which Mr. Neresheimer was fully cog-nizant at the time of 
Mr. Judge's
death, as borne out by statements made by him at the time. Later, on 
a visit to
Point Loma, Mr. Neresheimer admitted in the presence of his wife and 
other
witnesses that the fragments of 'messages and quotations' published 
by Mr.
Fus-sell and Mr. Hargrove were actually in Mr. Judge's handwriting.
The details of the Judge 'diary' and the above-mentioned libelous 
charge and
its refutation are set forth in The Theosophical Forum, Point Loma, 
Calif.,
Vol. IV, No. 5, January, 1933, and No. 7, march, 1933. Dr. H. N. 
Stokes' O. E.
LIBRARY CRITIC of Washington, D. C., issue of September, 1932 
reproduces the
actual language of seven of these 'messages and quotations' under the 
heading
'The Judge 'Occult Diary'. Vindication of Tingley, Fussell, Hargrove."
Dr. Stokes published further facts in this case in his issue of 
October, 1932
and March, 1933.
I have seen the originals of these 'messages and quotations' in Mr. 
Judge's
handwriting, and I showed photographic copies of them to Miss 
Margaret Thomas
(an active U.L.T: member) at Oakley House, Bromley Common, Kent, 
England, while
I was attached to Dr. de Purucker's staff during the temporary 
transference
thither of the International Headquar-ters of The Theosophical 
Society (Point
Loma) in 1932-1933.
The anonymous author or authors of the U.L.T. History of the 
Theosophical
Movement have persistently maintained that the statement that 
Katherine Tingley
was 'appointed' by Mr. Judge as his esoteric 'Successor' is untenable 
and even
fraudulent. But the Founder of the United Lodge, Robert Crosbie, 
fully aware of
the documents on which the Esoteric Council at the Headquarters in 
New York
accepted Katherine Tingley as having been pointed to (if not literally
appointed) by W. Q. Judge to succeed him as Head of the Esoteric 
Section, for
years thereafter was among the most outspoken in proclaiming the fact 
and the
strength of Katherine Tingley's successorship. Witness, for example, 
the long
article titled "The Sifting Process" published in The Search Light 
Light Vol.
I, April, 1898. over the signature of Robert Crosbie. (Reprinted in 
The
Theosophical Forum, Point Lam, Calif., Vol. III, Page 253, August 15, 
1932, and
in THE O. E. LIBRARY CRITIC, March, 1933, Vol. XXII, No. 4). Why does 
the
U.L.T. suppress the following from an address given by their Founder, 
Robert
Crosbie, in the Fisher Opera House, San Diego, California, at a 
series of
meetings in honor of William Q. Judge, on March 29th and April 1st, 
1901 - five
years after Judge's death?:

"It should be noted that the Leaders of the Theosophical Movements 
did not
become so by virtue of an election by vote - nor were they self-
appointed. Mme.
Blavatsky was the first leader, by the force of her wisdom and power 
of
leadership, and all the true students of Theosophy accepted her as 
such. And
when she appointed William Q. Judge as her suc-cessor, his leadership 
was
accepted for the same reason - and so, too, with Katherine Tingley, 
who was
appointed by William Q. Judge as his successor. And when she dies she 
will
appoint her successor who will be followed by the faithful members - -
And thus
is pre-served the line of teachers and the continuity of the 
Movement."

A later change of attitude which led Mr. Crosbie to found the United 
Lodge of
Theosophists, cannot alter the historic facts on which he based his 
judgment
consistently and continuously for at least five years following Mr. 
Judge's
death. 
One phase of this brief historical review closes with the following 
item which
appeared in The Theosophical Forum (Point Loma), June, 1937:

"E.A. Neresheimer
The passing of our old and much loved Brother, E. A. Neresheimer, 
last April
16th, at his home in Santa Monica, California, in his ninety-first 
year,
recalls his long years of member-ship in the T.S. and his devotion to 
Theosophy
dating back to the time of H. P. Blavatsky and W. Q. Judge. As Dr. de 
Purucker
said in a telegram of sympathy to Mrs. Neresheimer: 'Nere's memory for
magnificent past work for us all in Society will remain ever green and
cherished.'"

But what of the succession of spiritual leaders in the Point Loma 
Theosophical
Society, so positively proclaimed by Robert Crosbie?
When Katherine Tingley died in 1929, her office as "Leader and 
Official Head"
and Esoteric Teacher was assumed by Dr. G. de Purucker, not though 
any written
appointment but by the 'divine light' of intellectual and spiritual
qualification - recognized and tested by his predecessor through long 
years of
discipline and confidence. In his case, in superlative de-gree can 
one apply
the infallible rule given by Jesus: "By their fruits shall ye know 
them."
For a more detailed - though -, for one who knows the facts, notably 
restained
- account of what happened to the Theosophical Society, following the 
death of
Dr. de Purucker on Sep-tember 27. 1942, see Charles J. Ryan's H. P. 
Blavatsky
and the Theosophical Movement, Appendix IV, to the new special 
edition issued
by Point Loma Publications, Inc. in 1975. This Appendix was reprinted 
in The
Eclectic Theosophist Newsletter No. 29, July 15, 1975.

[From: The Eclectic Theosophist No. 37, Nov. 15, 1976, p.2-3.]