Correspondence from Karl Germer to Wilfred Talbot Smith

 

     

 

 

[13 October 1953]

 

 

I cannot recall any attempts of Jane Wolfe's to mislead me re: intentions of Louis Culling's, or to influence me. What I know and have is from half a dozen disconnected and rather confused letters from Culling direct to me!

 

Now, having annotated the 14 points of your letter, let us become positive, with the hope it might lead towards something constructive.

     

You and Culling appear to have directed a wave of gossip and a wave of hostility against Jane Wolfe, who, with a very few others is the shining example of selfless devotion to the Great Work of Thelema, the Master Therion, and the Work he stands for. Well, I hope she consoles herself with the lesson of history that abuse is the wages of all who like her, devote themselves unfalteringly, with precision, steadfastness, never wavering across a period over thirty years to ONE CAUSE.

     

Naturally, you all envy her for this capacity for a subtle formula of high Magick. But it is not noble to attack this venerable senior Sister of the Order in the way it has been done. Louis Culling, in his present phase of insanity and imbalance, only refers to her as the "Gestapo"!!—when he ought to go and kiss her feet. However, the Vision where this is seen as simple Truth and not an exaggeration—seems beyond all you folks.

     

Now a plain word to you. V.O.V.N.—I renewed indeed 666's injunction to break off relations with you. But I saw myself forced to this step when one Brother after visiting you several times, wrote me in August several strange letters, inspired by you and then, finally, on Aug. 30, an 11 point document, culminating in your demand "that I prove my authority to you." and that you "insist on a personal show-down with me"!!

     

I reacted, after severe consideration, with the injunction. (To bring in Soror Estai [Jane Wolfe] is plain silliness or malice, or crazy fantasy; or Choronzon.)

     

Why did you not have the courage to challenge me in my face? Why use an intermediary?

     

I will be quite frank as to what I have been thinking about your possible place in the scheme of things and the Work for Thelema and the Master Therion.

     

You are the oldest living, consistent—and loyal in your way—Thelemite. Old Achad [Charles Stansfeld Jones] files, reports and papers show that you have been in the Work since 1917 (I think, cannot check exactly at this moment, the letters are all here) and I believe, never faltered. You established Agape Lodge in 1931 (was it?) and you kept the flag flying (or fluttering) on the West Coast for many years. Do not fear that I forget, or neglect this, or fail to appreciate it. You can see the proof of this in my attitude to you in that I encouraged Soror Estai some years ago to resume contact with you (and also Dr. Montenegro [Gabriel Montenegro] for one purpose). Also, when Mr. [Ero Sihvonen] and Mrs. Sihvonen [Jean Sihvonen] returned from here to California, Ero S. came to me and asked me: when we return, would it be all right if I see Smith? I said: sure, go and see him! I added: you may be able to learn from him things I cannot teach. (I expected him to see you, and to hear about it; it was months later that I heard he had not done so.)

     

We all have our qualities and our defects (if you will permit me this banality). I wish I had met you personally. What I considered, for instance, as a serious defect in you was that you were unable to collaborate with Viator [Max Schneider], and—with you two as a team of stallions—succeeded in galloping the Chariot of, Thelema straight to the Sun, with 666 as the charioteer.

     

I had known Max since 1925 in Chicago and New York. I had watched his plus and his minus. However, I found him changed and matured when I cooperated with him again after 1941. With A.C., I was distressed by your continued failure to be able to find a method of cooperation with him. I am still convinced that—had you been able to do it—your combined qualities would have been crowned with success. Overwhelmingly. Instead you showed pettiness, bickering, jealousy—and, last, not least, that silly national angle came in: that Max was a German; and all the rest. You and your dependents are still nursing such unThelemic notions.

     

I disregard the sordid sexual angle in your running of Agape Lodge. I view this as youthful beginner's folly, and thus adding to experience.

     

But you showed "Lack of Devotion" in that you failed to subordinate All efforts to Grand Lodge and appeared set on viewing the local lodge as the Supreme thing. Is this a trait of subtle selfishness in your make-up? That ultimately you pursued (and pursue?) personal ends? That you failed to see that all we can hope to accomplish is to be a little gear in a huge machinery whose supreme head we do not see or know? The fact is that we have to obey orders from our direct chief—in this case 666. Philosophy recognizes that all true organization is within a Hierarchy.

     

You want a "show-down"? "Proof of my authority"? Congenitally I would answer by silence. Courtesy makes me say: the unqualified appointment by 666 in 1941; reiterated in 1946; and his final appointment as his successor and sole heir. You can add: and the possession of all the files and rights.

     

BUT: no one is more acutely aware of his own limitations than I. For that reason I welcome collaborators in all lands. The supreme goal is to establish the Law of Thelema. We must join forces with those few who have received and heard the Call. It was mainly with that in view that I renewed contact with you. I hoped cooperation with little friction, with no intrigue, or self-seeking might be possible, once you had resigned yourself to accepting my authority, without reservatio mentalis, firmly, steadily, without changing by every blow of wind.

     

I go one step further, so as to establish my position, and not to have to open this subject again. 666 deplored that he had not insisted on military strictness and discipline and enforcement of the rules. He asked me to change this in future.

     

Then there is the question of finance, contributions, dues, etc, When I resumed contact with you, for instance, you promised to add a share of $6.00 per month (I believe it was?) towards the expenses of Aleister Ataturk's education. You did send this for a few months, then stopped.

     

How could even Saint Peter build up a solid Hierarchy like the Roman Church with such erratic material? I will, for once, also throw the local, national angle in your face and quote the slogan on many united States Post Offices as to how the American letter carrier works: rain or shine, ice, snow, or sunshine: there is no thing on earth that can prevent him from doing his daily duty and routine.

     

All the people over whom you had influence in these many years kept harping and rasping at the money angle. Your letters, directly and indirectly, and those letters that people with whom you worked, wrote that with Crowley it is only money, money, money. That, of course, poisoned your souls, and rotted them. They and their money are gone and no one will ever remember their names. But the money sent to the creative genius that appears once in centuries or a millennium will remain, effective, productive in his works, and the helpers names entered in a Golden Book.

     

I simply state. This is not to convince or convert you. If anyone cares to work with me in the future, let him prove himself by carrying his or her little share of the burden.

     

I believe I have said what I set out to say, though I apologize for not having condensed my thoughts. I wrote down the thoughts as they came. I have no time or will to re-write this.

 

 

[226]