James Ingall Wedgwood
was the first "bishop" to preside over the Liberal Catholic Church.
While on the other hand, T.H. Martyn was an important member of the
Theosophical Society in Australia and about this question he wrote the
following:
Excerpt from T.H. Martyn's letter to Annie
Besant
(Editor's
note: The author of the following letter is Mr. T.H. Martyn, of Sydney,
Australia, who has been a member of the Theosophical Society for thirty years, he
has recently been president of the Sydney Lodge, which is the lodge of the
largest Theosophical Society in the world, and he has also been General
Secretary of the Australian Section Theosophical Society, Corresponding
Secretary of the Australian Esoteric Section, and close associate of Mrs.
Besant and Mr. Leadbeater. to the Theosophical Society in that part of the
world.)
« Then there cropped up the matter
of Wedgwood’s initiation. You told me he was not an initiate. I could not be
surprised at that, naturally, if the other was true how could he be?
The statement prompted me to
wonder to what extent you confirmed or otherwise all the many other
declarations of Leadbeater about various other people being disciples,
initiates etc. My notes (written down immediately after I left you) remind me
that I asked you what I was to do with regard to them and of your reply.
After my interview with you I left
London immediately for Australia via America, and for a couple of months was
busy readjusting my own ideas about things as well as I could. I found comfort
in certain help which I believed my Master (M) gave me. I understood I was to
do all I could to support you in a difficult crisis.
To me you had committed a
distinct breach by discarding blind subservience to Leadbeater’s every word. It
was easy for me to do this where in view of what I am telling you it would be
impossible to accept Leadbeater’s infallibility in all things.
In America after
leaving you certain people came to me and told me they had heard that the truth
about Wedgwood was coming out at last and explained that he had in London admitted
his trouble to one of them (or both I am not sure); that great efforts were
made to help him overcome it; that things went on well for a time, but that
later on he dropped back again into his evil ways. I can give you names if you
want them.
When I reached Sydney, Raja [Curuppumullage Jinarajadasa]
accepted the message with evident
reluctance, and rather foolishly I repeated bits of your conversation in
addition to the directions.
The central point with Raja became your denial of
Wedgwood’s initiation and I soon saw that the breakdown of Wedgwood involved to
him nothing short of the collapse of Leadbeater as an Arhat; of the divine
authority of the Liberal Catholic Church; and of all reliance on the
genuineness of reported initiations, discipleships, etc, in which great numbers
of people are supposed to have participated.
Prom Raja's viewpoint this must
not be permitted at any cost for the sake of the peace of mind of members and
of the cause in general and he just became the politician pure and simple
scheming to maintain what to me was —on the evidence available— a falsehood; he
showed no desire at all to find the truth and follow it. I may have been a
little unfair in this conclusion because I afterwards found that Raja is an echo
of C.W.L. and that he takes his occultism directly from what the latter says
without question. For some time until I could no longer stand his attitude up
to a certain point.
Then followed the cable to you
from Raja explaining what your statement —that Wedgwood was not an
initiate—involved. He made no reference in the message to the immorality — that
was apparently unimportant and you replied accepting Leadbeater's statement
about the initiation as decisive and cancelled your instructions. But I will repeat
the cables to make this point clear.
Sydney Dec. 17. 1919. to Besant,
Adyar.
“Martyn reports you said Wedgwood not initiate. Leadbeater asserts you
were present at initiation. Am most anxious members sake there should be no
fundamental divergence between you and him on such important occult matter
since at same time. . . . and . . . . took second . . . . and . . . . first. Do
you mean that since you have no recollection you cannot assert Wedgwood
initiate but do not wish to be quoted as saying that he is positively initiated.”
Dec. 22, 20. Bombay.
“Brother’s statement enough accept fact, cancel message sent.”
Before Raja’s cable was sent I
had interviewed Leadbeater alone. He wanted to hear all he could. I told him
about the evidence thrust on me in America about Wedgwood having confessed and
he said “well we had better get rid of him then.” I have often since remembered
this incident. If Leadbeater knew Wedgwood to be innocent because he was an
initiate why should he have said that? »
(O.E. Library
Critic, vol, 11, No. 11, January 4, 1922, p.4-8)
OBSERVATIONS
Charles Leadbeater was an immense charlatan and this
testimony shows once again the enormous control he had over Annie Besant, since
she was faced with the proven accusations of pedophilia against Wedgwood, she
decided to expel him from the Theosophical Society and she had also correctly
concluded that Wedgwood was not an initiate. But just because Leadbeater said
otherwise, then she blindly accepted what Leadbeater said.
No comments:
Post a Comment