– Primatial See of North America and Columbia
by Tau Guillaume II
A number of documents have appeared over the course of the past couple of decades which attempt to relate the history of the French Gnostic Church, from its inception with Jules Doinel to the present era. All of these attempts contain much valuable information; and all of them are flawed, either because of scarcity of reliable source materials or because there is a particular agenda being promulgated by the author which causes a skewing of facts, or the willful suppression of information deemed inconvenient.
This present account will undoubtedly fall short as well, and for some of the same reasons.
First, because the history of the modern Gnostic movement has not been documented nearly as well as an historian would like. A fair amount of the documentation that does exist is either ambiguous, or flatly contradictory to other accounts. So, we still have the problem of a lack of reliable source material. Hopefully, as more original material are tracked down, this document can be updated to reflect any such new revelations.
There is also the issue of agendas to be addressed. This author is not without his own goals, which are: 1) to give an overview of the modern (French) Gnostic Church; 2) to help clarify some misleading and erroneous information previously disseminated; and 3) to show that His Beatitude, the Most Reverend Valdiveso Paschal Matthews, in ecclesia Tau Mikael III Basilides, is the sole and rightful heir to the Primatial Sees of North and South America for the Eglise Gnostique Catholique Apostolique. Of these three goals, it is only the last that could be seen to constitute an “agenda.” But this agenda is not hidden, and the author believes that the given facts of history will, without any subterfuge, lead to this inevitable conclusion.
Although the early history of the Gnostic Church has been covered sufficiently in other works, which we will cite as needed, in order to satisfy our purposes we must give at least a summary of the key events that have led to the present state of affairs. Let us begin our recollections, then, with the founder of l’Eglise Gnostique, Jules-Benoit Stanislas Doinel du Val-Michel (1842-1903). Jules Doinel was an acquaintance of the famous Spiritist, Lady Caithness (1842-1895), who was well known among nearly all the influential esotericists of the belle époque. It was in the private oratory of Lady Caithness that, in 1888, Doinel had a vision of the “Aeon Jesus and received a spiritual consecration as Bishop of Montségur and Primate of the Albigensians. This designation is, of course, a reference to the persecuted and decimated Cathars of medieval France, who held certain doctrines which were reminiscent of those of the ancient Gnostics. Upon his “consecration” Doinel took on the episcopal nomen of Tau Valentine II in honor of Valentinus, the second century doctor of the Gnosis who nearly became Bishop of Rome. The “Tau” prefix is in reference to the tau-cross (T) and has been used ever since by Bishops of the Gnostic Church whose succession may be traced to Doinel.
It was in 1890, two years after Doinel’s “spiritual” consecration, that he received another vision in the presence of the same Lady Caithness, instructing him to re-establish the Gnostic Church. Doinel’s church, which was more Neo-Cathar than strictly Gnostic, at least initially, was known under a number of different names under Doinel, but is most commonly referred to as l’Eglise Gnostique – the Gnostic Church. This is the definitive beginning of the modern Gnostic movement, and 1890 was designated by Doinel as the first year of the Era of the Gnosis Restored. The Gnostic Church was immediately popular with the most influential mystics of Paris, which at the time was a, if not the, hub of European esotericism. It is reported that the first Bishops consecrated in the Eglise Gnostique were Papus (Dr. Gérard Encausse, 1865-1916), Paul Sédir (Yvon Leloup, 1871-1926), and Chamuel (Lucien Mauchel, 1867-1936). Papus, who was a prolific author on mystical and occult topics, including an introduction and overview of the Amélineau translation of the Pistis Sophia, and who is also well known for his role in establishing the Ordre Martiniste, an initiatic society dedicated primarily to the teachings of the 18th century Christian mystic Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, and secondarily to those of Saint-Martin’s first teacher, Martinès de Pasqually and to those of Saint-Martin’s fellow student of Pasqually, Jean-Baptiste Willermoz, was consecrated as Tau Vincent, Bishop of Toulouse. Sédir, also an author of mystical treatises, and an early member of the Ordre Martiniste, was consecrated as Tau Paulus, Coadjutor of Toulouse, Bishop of Concorezzo. Chamuel, whose Librairie du Merveilleux served as a sort of headquarters for the initiatic activities of the Ordre Martiniste and so many other projects, was consecrated Tau Bardesanes, Bishop of La Rochelle and Saintes.
There were many other well-known figures associated with Doinel’s Gnostic Church. One such personage was the Symbolist poet Léonce-Eugène Joseph Fabre des Essarts (1848-1917), who was consecrated by Doinel as Tau Synésius. Fabre des Essarts was also a close friend and student of the famous priest-healer Abbé Julio. Julien-Ernest Houssay, or Abbé Julio, had been a priest of the Roman Catholic Church until he was strong-armed out for daring to expose the excesses and corruption of some of his fellow clergymen. Abbé Julio was a keen student of Catholic history and ritual, and adopted a mystical theology similar to that of the Church Father Origen, as Robert Ambelain points out convincingly in his biography of Abbé Julio. The Abbé was also an advocate of a type of theurgic or thaumaturgic healing that he learned from Jean Sempé, for whom Abbé Julio had enormous respect as a teacher and healer, and as a pious and saintly man in general. We may never know the extent to which Abbé Julio influenced the early Gnostic Church through Tau Synésius, but he would have a decisive impact upon the Church in later years, which we shall return to shortly.
In 1895, Doinel seems to have had something of a crisis of faith. He appears to have fallen under the sway of the notorious anti-Masonic zealot Leo Taxil, the nom-de-plume of one G.A. Jogand-Pages. During this time Doinel left the Gnostic Church that he had founded only five years previous, and joined the laity of the Roman Catholic Church. Doinel would, a few years later, re-enter the Gnostic Ecclesia as a Bishop, but he would not re-claim the Patriarchal seat. It is said that Doinel may have left the Gnostic Church only in order to expose the lunacy of Leo Taxil, never having truly left the Gnostic faith, but in truth we may never be sure of what his motivations may have been. Nevertheless, it does not change the fact that he is to be seen as the founder and father of the modern Gnostic movement.
In absence of a Patriarch, the Holy Synod of the Gnostic Church elected, in Doinel’s stead, Fabre des Essarts – Tau Synésius. The Patriarchate of Tau Synésius would last until his death in 1917. In 1899, Tau Sophronius (Louis-Sophrone Fugairon) is said to have written a catechism for the Church based upon the theology of the Pistis Sophia, but we have been unable to track down a copy of this work for verification. We do not doubt that it existed, but we cannot comment upon the particulars thereof. In 1906, Tau Synésius drafted a Constitution and Bylaws for the Eglise Gnostique, which unfortunately did not uphold some of the principles laid out in the Decrees of 1893, which had established a special relationship between the Gnostic Church and the Ordre Martiniste. This deviation from the founding principles of the Church led to discontent among some of the senior clergy, and ultimately resulted in a schismatic branch.
In 1907 Papus and Tau Sophronius, along with Jean “Joanny” Bricaud, broke with the Eglise Gnostique to form the Eglise Catholique Gnostique. Jean Bricaud (1881-1934) had been consecrated a Bishop in the Eglise Gnostique in 1901 by Tau Synésius as Tau Johannes, Bishop of Lyon. Bricaud, who had previously studied in the Roman Catholic seminary, and who had taken part in the Oeuvre de Miséricorde, or Work of Mercy, founded by Eugène Vintras (1807-1875), as well as the Eglise Johannite of Bernard Raymond Fabré-Palaprat (1777-1838), had also received the S.I. degree of the Ordre Martiniste in 1903. The Church formed by Papus, Fugairion, and Bricaud seems to have adhered to the principles of Martinism and the Western Mystery Tradition in general much more closely than the Eglise Gnostique under Tau Synésius, who was not a Martinist and is said to have incorporated certain eastern traditions into the Church.
In 1908, Jean Bricaud was elected Patriarch of the new Eglise Catholique Gnostique, assuming the new episcopal name Tau Jean II. This same year there was held a Masonic and Spiritualist Congress hosted by Papus, Téder (Charles Détre), and Victor Blanchard as secretary of the Congress. Several mystical and Masonic orders and rites were represented a the Congress, and it was here that Theodor Reuss would receive authorization to represent the Gnostic Church of Papus, Bricaud, et al. Tau Synésius even spoke at the Congress, emphasizing that he was the sole Gnostic Patriarch, and that “any reformation connected with this church without our approval is considered a schism and a heresy,” (translated excerpt as given in Milko Bogaard’s historical essay). There can therefore be no doubt that the Church of Bricaud in no way represented a licit continuity of Doinel’s Eglise Gnostique, which continued under its Patriarch, Tau Synésius, until his death; at which time the Patriarchate was assumed by Léon Champrenaud (Tau Théophane) until 1921. Patrice Genty (Tau Basilide) became Patriarch in 1921 until 1926, when he brought the works of the Eglise Gnostique to a close. There is some amount of confusion over when, exactly, these latter events transpired, some sources suggesting that Tau Théophane did not actually become Patriarch until 1921, but it seems to be universally agreed that 1926 is the year that the Basilide put the Church to rest. Thus concludes the history of the Eglise Gnostique proper.
The Eglise Catholique Gnostique, though technically an illicit and schismatic branch, may be said to have earned its legitimacy on its own merit. And it is indeed this branch that we must look to in order to trace our ancestral lineage. During the year of Bricaud’s elevation to the Patriarchate, the same year as the Masonic and Spiritualist Congress, the name of the church was changed to the Eglise Gnostique Universelle. It is under this name that the church would be known for the next 52 years.
The members and clergy of the EGU remained tirelessly productive over the next several years, and in 1913 they secured for the Church an irrefutably valid line of Apostolic Succession. This would come through a former Trappist monk, Louis-Marie-François Giraud, who had been consecrated a Bishop by Abbé Julio in 1911. This brought to the EGU the famous “Vilatte” succession. Joseph-René Vilatte (1854-1929) was an Old Catholic priest who received the episcopate under the authority of the Syrian-Jocobite Patriarch. Vilatte established churches and ministries throughout Europe and North America. The succession of Bishops that trace their lineage through Vilatte is extensive, not only within the Gnostic Church, but within the Independent Sacramental Movement at large. Vilatte had befriended Abbé Julio, and had him consecrated in 1904 by Paolo Miraglia. Abbé Julio was Vilatte’s successor in the Eglise Catholique Française. It is interesting to note that although Abbé Julio had been good friends with Tau Synésius, it is by him, through Mgr. Giraud, that the EGU – the “schism” and “heresy” according to Fabre des Essarts – received a valid line of Apostolic Succession; a line which, to our knowledge, was never transmitted to Tau Synésius. We can only assume from this, it seems, given the close relationship between Abbé Julio and Tau Synésius – a relationship close enough that Fabre des Essarts was entrusted by Abbé Julio to write a biographical essay of him which was published in Abbé Julio’s Grands Secrets Merveilleux – that Tau Synésius simply was not desirous of obtaining the Apostolic Succession, considering the spiritual succession of Doinel sufficient for the Gnostic Church. We can appreciate this position, for we too, today, cherish the spiritual succession of Doinel; however, we recognize the immeasurable value of the direct succession of the Church founded in person upon the earth by our Lord Jesus Christ some two-thousand years ago.
We need not trace every step of the Church which, besides, would prove most difficult. But we must note the consecration of Victor Blanchard as a Bishop (Tau Targelius) in 1918 by EGU Patriarch Tau Jean II (Bricaud). Blanchard, remember, was the secretary of the Congress in 1908. He was also well respected in the Martinist Order. There is a bit of confusion during this time period regarding rights of succession, etc. I doubt that we can arrive at the sort of definitive statements sought by the academic historian, but we can at least give some general statements that may help to sort out the events.
Let us begin our account of this phase of development with the death of Papus in 1916. Although we are primarily concerned here with the history of the Gnostic Church, not that of Martinism, the two are so interconnected that the events of one often have a direct impact on the other. In this case we are going to look at the Grand-Mastership of the Martinist Order. Briefly, Papus was succeeded by Téder, who had written, or at least arranged definitively, the Martinist Rituals, published in 1913, at which time he was already acting, on appointment of Papus, as the de facto head of the Order. Téder (Charles Détre), however, would reign in his official capacity after the death of Papus for only a short while, as he would pass on to the Eternal Supreme Council in 1918.
It is at this point that Bricaud, already Patriarch of the Eglise Gnostique Universelle, Grand Master of the Rite of Memphis-Misraim, and holding high-ranking titles in several other esoteric orders and societies associated with Papus and Téder, assumed leadership of the Ordre Martiniste. This self-appointment (as many believed it was, despite a document supposedly issued by Téder naming Bricaud as successor, but which was held by many as fraudulent) was not well received by many in the Martinist Order, including Victor Blanchard, who was Téder’s deputy. Without getting into the minutia of the various issues, which are well documented in other sources such as Ambelain’s work on Martinism, as well as the historical overview by Milko Bogaard, etc., let it suffice to say that a number of schisms resulted within the Martinist community, including that of Blanchard, which would come to be known later as the Ordre Martiniste et Synarchique, or Martinist Order and Synarchy, the latter term referring to the socio-political ideals of Saint-Yves d’Alveydre, who was very influential upon Papus and company.
The reason that this falling-out between Bricaud and Blanchard concerns us in our examination of the history of the Gnostic Church, is that not only did Blanchard remove himself from Bricaud’s Martinist activities, but it seems that he also allied himself with another Gnostic Church founded by Lucien Mauchel (Chamuel/Tau Bardesanes). It is said that there was some sort of rivalry between Chamuel and Tau Basilide (Paul Genty), the last Patriarch of the original Eglise Gnostique, who may have appointed himself to the Patriarchal throne. At any rate, Chamuel, president of the High Synod and one of Doinel’s original bishops, formed his own branch, probably sometime in the 1920s, of the Church under the name, confusingly enough, of Eglise Gnostique Universelle. It was to this church that Blanchard, Tau Targelius, affiliated himself, leaving the EGU for the…EGU! And it was this latter EGU of Chamuel/Blanchard that was represented at the famous FUDOSI meetings, beginning in 1934.
This year of 1934 is also the same that Patriarch Bricaud left this plane for his life in the Aeons of the Pleroma. Succeeding Bricaud in the Church, as well as in various orders he represented, was Constant Chevillon (1880-1944), Tau Harmonius. It was actually not until 1936, however, that Chevillon received episcopal consecration at the hands of Mgr. Giraud, the same Bishop of the Vilatte succession that had consecrated Bricaud in 1913. The year of Chevillon’s consecration, 1936, also saw the death of Chamuel, leaving Blanchard to lead his Church.
In a few years World War II would break out, and following the activities of the Church(es) becomes very difficult, especially since all such bodies and activities were strictly prohibited by the Nazis. We know, however, that there were many brave souls who kept alive the spark of the light of Gnosis during this darkest of times, including Victor Blanchard, Georges Lagrèze, Robert Ambelain, and Constant Chevillon, who paid the ultimate price when he was assassinated at the hands of the Nazi-led Vichy régime on March 23, 1944. The succession of Chevillon after his death is a rather confusing matter. It appears that no attempt was made to replace him as Patriarch until the war had ended. We can be fairly certain that Chevillon had ordained Lucien Raclet, Charles-Henri Dupont, Antoine Fayolle, and René Chambellant as Deacons, But it is unlikely that he ever ordained them as priests, and it is known that none of them received the episcopate from Chevillon. Some sources state that René Chambellant was elected successor to Chevillon in 1945. And while it does seem that Chambellant did receive episcopal consecration at some point, it is not clear when this happened or through whom; nor is it at all clear that he ever actually assumed the Patriarchate of the EGU. Another of Chevillon’s deacons, Charles-Henri Dupont (1877-1961), appears to have been consecrated a Bishop by Marcel Cotte, who held the episcopal succession of Doinel’s Eglise Gnostique. It is not clear, though, whether this consecration passed on any valid Apostolic Succession. Nevertheless, in 1948 Dupont assumed the Patriarchate of Chevillon’s EGU.
Meanwhile, within the other EGU, the one now led by Victor Blanchard, Roger Ménard was consecrated by Blanchard in 1945 as Tau Eon II. Ménard, a year later, consecrated Robert Ambelain, who will be instrumental in carrying on not only the succession of the Gnostic Church, but also that of many of the traditional rites and orders associated with it, including Martinism, the Elus Cohen, Memphis-Misraim, and the Rose+Croix d’Orient, among others. It is through Ambelain that we will trace our venerable heritage to the present day.
When Blanchard transitioned from the vale of sorrows into the heavenly ecclesia in 1953, Robert Ambelain founded his own church which he calls Eglise Gnostique Apostolique. Tau Jean III, as Ambelain known, worked tirelessly to spread the light of Gnosis, including to the Americas where, in 1956, he consecrated Pedro Freire as Tau Petrus, Primate of Latin America, and who would continue to play a vital role in Ambelain’s church, the EGA. Other Bishops consecrated by Ambelain in this era were Roger Pommery (Tau Jean IV) and Andre Mauer (Tau Andreas), who would both eventually serve upon the Patriarchal throne. In 1960, Charles-Henri Dupont, Patriarch of Chevillon’s EGU, transferred Patriarchal authority to Robert Ambelain, thus fusing the two Patriarchal lines. Ambelain’s church from this point was known as the Eglise Gnostique Apostolique Universelle. The transmission of the EGU Patriarchate to Ambelain is recorded in a document by Dupont which, according to Milko Bogaard and Marchel Roggemans, charges Ambelain “to unify the two Churches.” But beyond this point in our historical survey, the verifiable facts become scarcer and the accounts less reliable. The history of Ambelain’s church throughout the 1960s and 1970s is rather poorly documented. One of the only accounts presently extant is that the late EGCA Bishop Robert Cokinis (Tau Charles Harmonius II), which, largely due to the lack of reliable source material at the time of its writing in 1996, is woefully inaccurate on many points throughout the essay. Because of the many known and verifiable errors in the document of Cokinis, the work as a whole is rendered suspect and cannot be considered as definitive. In spite of this, we will struggle through as best we can, giving the known facts where they are available, and making best guesses in other places.
We know that Robert Ambelain abdicated the Patriarchal throne in or by 1967 in favor of Roger Pommery, Tau Jean IV; for in this year Pommery consecrates Willer Vital-Herne in France as Tau Guillaume, Primate of the Antilles and the Caribbean. It would seem, though, that the reign of Tau Jean IV would be relatively short-lived, as he would die in 1969, at which time the Patriarchate passed to Andre Mauer. During his short Patriarchate he appointed the expatriate Haitian Priest, Roger Saint-Victor Herard, as Apostolic Prefect of North America. Now, at this point we should mention that the Church, in the Americas, began to be referred to as the Eglise Gnostique Catholique Apostolique, also the Ecclesia Gnostica Apostolica Catholica, as well as a couple other variations. It is with great regret that we cannot say for certain at what point, exactly, these variants were introduced. We hope that documentation will emerge to further elucidate this matter. In August of 1969, Tau Andreas resigns, and the High Synod elects Pedro Freire, Primate of Central America, as the next Patriarch of the Church. In December of the following year, Freire is consecrated sub-conditione by Dom Antidio José Vargas of the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, and installed as Patriarch of the EGCA. Later that very month, Tau Petrus appoints Roger Herard, who had been consecrated Bishop of Bethany in New York the previous September by Tau Guillaume, as Primate for North America. It is from this very Primacy that our present Church descends, and of which our present Primacy is the sole and direct perpetuation.
His Beatitude, Roger Saint-Victor Herard (Tau Charles), began immediately promoting the Gnostic Church in America, especially in the Midwest and on the East Coast. In 1973, His Beatitude consecrated Gaspar Mervilus (Tau Louis) as Archbishop of New York with right of succession to him. Mgr. Mervilus appears to have been the only Bishop consecrated by His Beatitude whom he appointed to succeed him. For reasons given by Cokinis in his “Historical Brief,” and which we shall elaborate on later, Bishop Mervilus was unable to fulfill his original mandate. In fact, it seems that many, if not all, of the first Bishops consecrated by His Beatitude in the early 1970s left or were removed from the Church by the time of His Beatitude’s death in 1989.
On April 23, 1977, the Patriarch of the EGCA, Pedro Freire, transitioned to the Light. Later that year, the Holy Synod elected Edmond Fieschi (Tau Siabul) to the Gnostic Patriarchate. Within a few months, however, Fieschi abdicated the Patriarchate in favor of Fermin Vale-Amesti (Tau Valentinus III, 1923-1999) whom Freire had consecrated as Primate of Venezuela and Central America. Amesti, however, in April of 1978, declared “the independence of the ecclesiastical provinces,” (“Hist. Br.” Cokinis). This action of Tau Valentinus III, the last Patriarch of the EGCA, rightful heir to the EGA and the EGU, effectively made each Primacy a sovereign and autocephalous jurisdiction.
It is at this time that Cokinis and others have claimed that the French Bishop René Chambellant assumed the Patriarchate of the Church by “taking back” the title of Primate of the Gauls, which in his mind authorized him to become Patriarch. Additionally, there was, apparently, an appeal to Synésius’ Constitutions of 1906 to support this claim. This claim, however, cannot possibly hold any validity, for multiple reasons. To date, we have only ever seen one serious attempt to analyze this claim, which was done by Tau Phosphoros in his ”Brief History of the Gnostic Church.” And although Tau Phosphoros somewhat erroneously refers to the EGCA as “Ambelain’s Church,” which, strictly speaking, it was not at this time, he nevertheless helps to elucidate the matter a bit, and it is to his essay that we will refer in our attempt to show that Chambellant could not possibly have a valid claim to the Patriarchate of the EGCA. We must emphasize here, however, that we hold absolutely no ill will towards the legacy of Chambellant, who was instrumental in the years following WWII in helping the Gnostic Church and its related movements such as Martinism and the Elus Cohen to thrive. At the same time, we must depict an accurate historical narrative, which, as we are about to show, means that the ecclesiastic successions deriving from Chambellant are independent of those of the EGCA.
Let us look, then, at the claim that is supposed to have been made by Mgr. Chambellant (Tau Renatus). After the EGCA had been declared, by the legal and rightful Patriarch of the Church, to be autocephalous – that is, its “ecclesiastical provinces” or Primacies – Chambellant is said to have claimed to be a “Constitutional Patriarch” according to the Constitution of Synésius in 1906 (cf. Bogaard), and this because he had either “retained” or “took back” the title of Primate of the Gauls after having been elected successor to Chevillon (cf. Cokinis). But, as Tau Phosphoros demonstrates, neither Synésius’ Constitution nor the titles issued by Chevillon’s church would have any bearing here. First, Synésius was Patriarch of the Eglise Gnostique founded by Doine, and his Constitution of 1906 would have no impact whatsoever upon the EGCA, or any of its predecessors, such as the EGU, which Synésius called a “schism and a heresy.”
Moreover, it was largely due to the 1906 Constitution that Papus and Bricaud broke with the EG to begin with. Secondly, in regards to Chevillon’s EGU, it is not clear that Chambellant ever actually served as Patriarch of that Church. But, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that he did. In 1960, the recognized Patriarch of the EGU authorized its absorption into the EGA, fusing the two Churches definitively under Patriarch Robert Ambelain. And after Ambelain there were four more Patriarchs: Pommery, Mauer, Freire, and Fieschi. And it was the last of these Patriarchs who licitly emancipated the various Primacies from any centralized Patriarchate. In short, Chambellant never held the Patriarchate of the EGCA, and thus was in no position to make a claim on the Patriarchal throne. Furthermore, the Primates of the EGCA never elected him or authorized any such assumption of the Patriarchal authority.
It would seem that Chambellant himself was well aware of the situation, for in 1982 he incorporated a Church which he called the Eglise Gnostique Apostolique. But just as, many years earlier, Lucien Mauchel had formed the EGU that was completely distinct from Bricaud’s Church of the same name, Chambellant’s EGA was an entirely new creation, seeing as the Church founded by Ambelain under the same name in 1953 had gone through many revisions under its various Patriarchs until, ultimately, declaring its jurisdictions autocephalous. It seems that Chambellant’s church would be dissolved and then reincorporated in 1993, but Chambellant passed on that year without naming a successor. There have been rumors in recent years about attempted revivals of this branch, but this does not really concern our present study, being as it is a separate branch of the Gnostic tree. It should be clear, in any case, that the Church of which Chambellant was ultimately the head was not the EGCA, however close he may have worked with some of its clergy.
His Beatitude, Roger Saint-Victor Herard (Tau Charles), continued his work in the United States as Primate of the independent and autocephalous jurisdiction. In 1984, assisted by Mgr. Karl St. Cyr (Tau Patrick), he consecrated Robert Cokinis as Tau Charles Harmonius II, Bishop of Wisconsin. A year later, Herard conferred some new episcopal dignities upon Cokinis, naming him “Diocesan Bishop of Bellwood, Illinois and consequently Auxiliary of the Metropolitan of Chicago, sine nulle jure successionis.” The Latin text at the end reads “without any right of succession.” Bishop Cokinis operated his Diocese of Bellwood until his death in 2015, though often not in communion with the broader North American Primacy.
In January of 1985, His Beatitude, Roger Saint-Victor Herard (Tau Charles), consecrated Jorge Enrique Rodriguez-Villa as Tau Johannes XIII, Bishop of Miami, Florida, Archbishop of Bogota, Primate of Colombia, and Patriarch of Hispanic Ministries in the United States, Central, and South America. Now, one may question whether Herard had the right to establish a Patriarch, but he was certainly within his right, as the Primate of a sovereign and autocephalous jurisdiction, to create another Primate of the EGCA, even more so since there was a vacuum which needed to be filled in the Gnostic communities of Latin America. It does not appear, in any case, that Bishop Rodriguez ever claimed the title of Patriarch as regards his EGCA ministries, but only the of Primate of South America.
According to Cokinis’ essay, it was around this very time that Mgr. Mervilus, coadjutor to the Primate, resigned from the EGCA over a dispute concerning the rights of EGCA clergy to communicate freely with the Grand Master of the Ordre Martiniste in France. This left Herard without any appointed successor. And when Tau Charles ascended into the company of Saints in 1989, there was only one Primate left within his jurisdiction: Bishop Jorge Rodriguez, Tau Johannes XIII, Primate of South America.
It has sometimes been claimed that Bishop Rodriguez set aside his Gnostic activities in favor of more orthodox movements. And while it is true that Rodriguez did maintain an extensive Orthodox ministry, he never renounced Gnosticism or his Gnostic Primacy. He remained a faithful steward of the Gnostic filiation. In 1999 our late Primate performed a sub-conditione consecration on the Most Rev. Valdiveso Matthews, who had already been consecrated a Bishop the previous year by William George Spaeth Jr. in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. With Bishop Matthews’ consecration into the Gnostic lineage, he took the new episcopal nomen of Tau Mikael III Basilides. And exactly one year later, on October 30, 2000, Primate Rodriguez issued the following proclamation from the Primatial See of South America: “Whereas, with the passing of His Beatitude, Roger St. Victor Herard, Primate of North America, left a vacancy unfilled for eleven years for the autocephalous Eglise Gnostique Catholique Apostolique, and whereas there is a need to appoint a Primate for the continuing business of the Primatial See of North America, we announce to all the Faithful in Christ that on October 30, 2000 A.D….we have appointed to all the Primacy of North America for our Holy Gnostic Church … VALDIVESO MATTHEWS … Metropolitan of Ann Arbor, Michigan, Titular Bishop of Edessa, and Primate of North America for our Holy Gnostic Church…etc.”
Our beloved Primate, His Eminence Tau Mikael III Basilides, has since that time operated continually a Autocephalous and Sovereign Primacy of the EGCA. And since the passing of His Beatitude, Jorge Rodriguez, the Primate of North America has assumed the duties and responsibilities of the Primacy of South America as well, since he is the only Primate of the EGCA left to do so, and he possesses a document giving him the right of succession of the Primacial See of South America.
At the present hour, the EGCA, Primatial See of North and South America, operates along the lines intended by our venerated Patriarch of old, Robert Ambelain, working with the traditional Apostolic currents, as well as the Martinist/Martinèsist and Rose+Croix currents promulgated by him. The EGCA and its associated rites and orders maintains fraternal relations with a number of other Gnostic and Apostolic jurisdictions. But it will not condone or tolerate the illegal use of its name or emblems by schismatic jurisdictions falsely claiming association with our Holy Gnostic Church.
In conclusion, we hope that this short study has sufficiently met our initial goals of giving a concise overview of the modern Gnostic Church, clarifying some of the mis-information long disseminated regarding the history of the Church, and establishing the facts surrounding the licit succession of the North American Primacy of the EGCA. For those who wished to find herein a more detailed historical account, we apologize, for such a task would require a much more extensive format, such as a book. Perhaps such a work will be forthcoming in the future, but this is not that work. We will include, however, a bibliography which contains not only works cited, but also source material for further reading. Unfortunately, some of the best resources
are available only in the French language, but we intend to rectify that over time.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ambelain, Robert. Le Martinisme: Histoire et doctrine. Editions Niclaus, 1946.
Apiryon, Tau. “History of the Gnostic Catholic Church.” 1995.
Bogaard, Milko. “Ecclesia Gnostica.” 2000.
— “F.U.D.O.S.I.” 2000.
— “Martinism.” 2001.
Churton, Tobias. Occult Paris. Inner Traditions, 2016.
Cokinis, Robert (Tau Charles Harmonius II). “A Historical Brief of the Gnostic Catholic Ecclesia.” 1996.
Galtier, Gerald. Maconnerie Egyptienne, Rose-Croix et Neo-Chevalerie. Editions Rocher, 1989.
Le Forestier, René. L’Occultisme en France aux XIXème et XXème siècles, l’Eglise Gnostique. Arche Milano, 1990.
Phosphoros, Tau. “A Brief History of the Gnostic Church.” 2012
Also consulted: various private documents and personal conversations held over the past two decades.