Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00530)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Mauri <mhart@i...> wrote:
> Casanova's story seems 
> kind of one sided to me about St G. 
> Aren't there any positive stories that 
> might tend to be supportive of St G

If you read it and take care to distinguishe between fact and opinion 
I think you will agree his account is quite valuable. He draws an 
excellent porttait of St. G and the only thing he says that is not 
positive is that he considered St. G. to be a fellow impostor. Given 
the kinds of claims St. G was making and given that Casanona was 
working the same rackets, it is inevitable that he would have reached 
that conclusion. That he was a trader in dyes and jewels, that he 
was a great conversationalist, that he ate nothing in the presence of 
others, etc., is, I suspect, all true. And none of that is negative.

One thing that distinguishes St. G. from Cagliostro is that St. G. 
never seemed to teach anything of a metaphysical nature. Unless you 
consider making diamonds to be metaphysical he also never 
demonstrated anything, except for claims that he was personally 
present at the Council of Trent, etc., which are untestable claims. 
Given that he was interviewed by German Rosicrucians and determined 
not to be a metaphysical person, I tend to wonder if some of the 
claims made by Cooper-Oakley and other have been a bit over 
enthusiastic. If he had really been a predecessor of HPB one would 
expect he would have founded a lodge, or joined one of the many 
organizations that existed in Europe then. So far as I know, no 
claim has ever been made that he did so.