Honorary Vice-Presidential Bombshell?

Lone Stranger gives some kudos to my questions to the Bishop in "Burning Issues, Burning Questions".

However, it was this comment by David, on that blog entry, that pricked up my ears:

I almost forgot to mention that in the 1990’s, Devendra Varma wrote to myself to request a copy of my book Beyond the Highgate Vampire as he wanted to compare ii with the ‘other version’ he’d read. I sent him a copy and he informed me that the book was very well written and informative and cleared up quite a few things he had not understood. I remember him well; especially as he wrote from America but his cheque was drawable from an English bank (thus avoiding 4 or 5 pounds in conversion charges.

At this time, he was also in contact with Jeannie Youngson of the Count Dracula Fan Club, who informed me that Devendra regretted the day he had ever got in contact with Bonky who had been ‘driving him mad’ and misquoting him without his permission.

Does that really surprise you?!?

The bombshell nature of this "revelation" (if it is indeed true), is quite significant.

Devendra P. Varma (1923-1994) was a scholar on the Gothic, and also happens to be the Vampire Research Society's "Honorary Vice-President".

I asked David for proof of his claims.

He addressed this by saying:

I’ve got to find it first Overseer. I’ve got boxes upon boxes of past book requests and followup letters (including loads of privately signed ones from Bonky) after all the decorating work done here. Luckikly, I throw nothing (important) away, so yes, the correspondence is here somewhere.

As of this writing, it hasn't yet been produced.

The Rest of the Questions, Answered

In "Questions Answered...Mostly!", I noted that the Bishop had left a couple of questions unanswered.

Well, he has since gotten around to answering them...by editing them into the same post.

In regards to whether he takes offense to my username, "The Overseer", and to one who has "appropriated" it (i.e., ripped it off from me), he simply says, "No".

As to why no disclosure is made in the first edition of The Highgate Vampire: The Infernal World of the Undead Unearthed at London’s Famous Highgate Cemetery and Environs (London: British Occult Society, 1985), that the woman labeled "Luisa" in several photographs is actually a model (and why he even included such representations of her in the first place), he writes:

Given the outcome [i.e. Luisa's death and return as a vampire, later to be staked by Manchester -ed.], it would have been inappropriate to have done anything else. That particular edition was published just three years after the case had been finally closed. It is made clear in the text that "Lusia" is a pseudonym.

Yes, it is made clear that Luisa is a pseudonym. On pages 45-46 of The Highgate Vampire (1985), he wrote:

Among the many people who contacted me as a direct result of this public pronouncement [i.e. his claim that dead foxes, found drained of blood in Highgate Cemetery, were killed by a vampire -ed.] was the sister of a beautiful twenty-two-year old woman, whom I shall call Luisa.

However, that side-steps the actual question I asked:

In the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), why was there no disclosure that the photographic depictions of Luisa were actually those of a model? And, why did you choose to employ a model to recreate "scenes" with Luisa, in the first place?

That's right: the "photographic depictions".

As I noted in "The Mystery of Luisa, Pt. 1", there are several pictures of a woman clearly referred to as "Luisa".

That is where the next part of the question comes in: if the woman in the picture isn't Luisa, then why go to the trouble of hiring (presumably) a model to "recreate" her, and then insert her in "scenes" supposed to have taken place? This even includes having a picture of her on the cover.

Especially when no disclosure was made in the book, that a model had been used in the first place.

Either way, he has since included a picture of the actual "Luisa" in an entry for his blog, Metaphysical Meanderings:

Lusia has never been identified by her real name and, until now, a photograph at the time of my knowing her has not been published. Sufficient decades have perhaps passed to permit one.

Now, in question 10, I asked him:

In 1973, you founded the Ordo Sancti Graal. Yet, in the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), you refer to yourself as "not pre-eminently religious" and "a secular person handling consecrated material as a protection against hostile psychic forces, I am practicing "white magic"." What happened in the gap between you founding a Christian order and engaging in the occult (like the necromantic summoning of Luisa, as detailed in the same book)?

The quotes are from page 18 of The Highgate Vampire (1985) (not page 12, as I mistakenly cited in "An Open Query on Religious Belief").

His direct response to these citations was:

I stand by what I wrote. I find it neither incompatible with my founding Ordo Sancti Graal, nor my later taking holy orders; though, of course, I was not in holy orders at the time. I have known many pre-eminently religious people throughout my life and do not count myself among them. I neither belong to a monastic order, nor am I imbued with the ideals of churchianity (see From Satan To Christ and The Grail Church). If I am to be pre-eminently anything it would be "spiritual," not "religious."

That's fair enough, except here's more from page 18, which draws on more of an occultic/pagan/new age parallel:

The set of symbols I work with are predominantly Christian, yet you will find in the text that I cast a circle, what some might call a Magic Circle. While I am not a witch in any sense of the word, I suppose as a secular person handling consecrated material as a protection against hostile psychic forces, I am practicing "white magic". The Circle once cast is a ritualised barrier, a consecrated sanctuary; like a church, a mosque or synagogue - like Avebury, Stonehenge and Glastonbury.

Now, in regards to my question about him engaging in necromantic acts (specifically as an occultic practice), he says:

Every exorcist engages in the summoning of demons. Vampires/demons are not the dead. They might masquerade as such, but they are not God's true dead. Hence the act of summoning a demonic manifestation for the purpose of its banishment is not the occult art of necromancy, but rather the Christian practice of exorcism. Necromancy is divination by raising the spirits of the dead.

He is correct in asserting that necromancy, by definition, is used for this purpose (i.e. divination).

However, when he describes his intent to summon the undead Luisa through an invocation on page 134 of The Highgate Vampire (1985), one must wonder about such semantics:

But what I was about to do fell under a shadowy category whose purpose was usually more sinister. Did not the Encyclopedia of Occultism state: "There is no doubt that Necromancy is the touch-stone of the dark arts for if, after careful preparation, the adept can carry through to a successful issue the raising of the dead from the other world, he has proved the power of his art."

Indeed, the incantations used on pages 143-144 are modified versions of necromantic spells cited in such works as Arthur Edward Waite's The Book of Ceremonial Magic (1911).

Questions Answered...Mostly!

I recently posed some questions to the Bishop on his blog, in comment form.

The comments have been deleted, but were subsumed into his blog entry, "From DNA to Demons".

Let's have a look at some of his responses.

Firstly, he absolves himself of making the claim that he is the descendant of Lord Byron:

The claim that I am connected to the poet by blood is not mine; it is that of my forebears, supported by Byron scholars, chief among whom is Professor Leslie A Marchand (see Acknowledgements in Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Know). Their claim is my legacy.

Yet, in his unpublished memoir, Stray Ghosts, he writes:

Nonetheless, I was conceived during October 1943, as the war in Europe prepared to reach its climax. Thus, nine months later, came into the world “the great, great, great grandson of the famous poet, through an illicit liaison between his lordship and a maid at Newstead Abbey.” [The Highgate Vampire, British Occult Society, 1985, page 123.]

The citation from The Highgate Vampire: The Infernal World of the Undead Unearthed at London's Famous Highgate Cemetery and Environs (London: British Occult Society, 1985) is particularly interesting for its incompleteness.

You see, the actual sentence in the book is prefigured with, "According to a family legend".

Next up is his refusal to disclose other members of the World Union of Vampirologists.

The only mention I have seen of this elusive, apparently global organisation is in Manchester's entry in the 2004 edition of International Who's Who of Authors and Writers (p. 366), in which, under "Honours", the group is referred to as, "World Union of Vampirologists and Exorcists".

Indeed, this seems to be the only allusion to its very existence.

Try googling it. You'll see what I mean.

Coupled with Manchester's refusal to disclose the names of any of its other members, and we are left with a very troubling picture.

Next up, is whether or not he received any payment for the publication of his article, "The Kirklees Vampire" in The Unexplained 38 (1992).

He maintains that he wasn't "the beneficiery" of the payment. "Any sum would have been donated to Ecclesia Apostolica Jesu Christi."

To supplement this altruism, I should mention that a note in The Highgate Vampire (1985) says that, "All proceeds from this book will be contributed to the Church of the Holy Grail".

In this light, I should also disclose that on Good Friday, 1973, Manchester lead the foundation of the Ordo Sancti Graal for "the restoration of the Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ in Great Britain."

This, in turn, lead to the founding of the modern incarnation of Ecclesia Apostolica Jesu Christi, which is presided over by...The Right Reverend Seán Manchester, O.S.G.

Now, onto the matter of speaking on the Bishop's behalf.

I've frequently said (read the comments here) that "Demonologist" (TFO) does not have this right. Manchester backs up my assertation when he says:

Nobody is authorised to speak in my stead. This does not preclude friends and associates coming to my defence, which choice is theirs to make and not mine to deny.

This is especially amusing in light of VRS member, TFO, saying, "You have no no way of knowing whether what I do has the "authority" or not of Bishop Seán Manchester."

He then answers my query about his thoughts on Matthew 5: 39-44, saying:

Without wanting to take this passage out of context from the entirety of what Jesus Christ is recorded as having said, I feel it nonetheless crucial for those who follow Him.

For the record, here's what the verses say (King James Version):

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have [thy] cloke also.

And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

In light of the "feud" between Manchester and Farrant, his response is quite poignant.

The Bishop stopped answering my questioned at number 8, stating, "TO BE CONTINUED WHEN TIME ALLOWS ..."

As quoted by Manchester, he's the rest of what I asked:

8. Do you disapprove of my username, "The Overseer", and, if so, do you approve of its use by a VRS member who appropriated it "in protest"? 9. In the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), why was there no disclosure that the photographic depictions of Luisa were actually those of a model? And, why did you choose to employ a model to recreate "scenes" with Luisa, in the first place? 10. In 1973, you founded the Ordo Sancti Graal. Yet, in the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), you refer to yourself as "not pre-eminently religious" and "a secular person handling consecrated material as a protection against hostile psychic forces, I am practicing 'white magic'." What happened in the gap between you founding a Christian order and engaging in the occult (like the necromantic summoning of Luisa, as detailed in the same book)?

I eagerly look forward to the answers for those questions, as well.

Mmmm. Stake.

I perhaps jumped the gun a bit in asking the Bishop, "How many vampires have you dispatched in the "ancient and approved manner"?"

That is, staking them through the heart and cutting off their heads.

Rita Miller, a cultural anthropologist, already expressed interest in this facet of the Bishop's career, and queried him thusly:

In the “So Weird” interview with the BBC, you state you have exorcised scores of vampires. Can you elaborate a little – just how many and where were these beings were located? Can you give the year you exorcised the vampires?

The "So Weird" interview in question, can be read here.

A bloke by the name of Mr Papachumba asked him, "So how many vampires have you caught?"

To which the Bishop replied, "Scores. I have personally exorcised quite a number. Precise number I couldn't tell you. But after 33 years of vampire hunting, quite a few."

A similar line of questioning can be found in the VRS website's "FAQ" page.

The question responded to is, "How many vampires has the Vampire Research Society encountered?"

The response claims that, "The Vampire Research Society has probably now lost count of the number of vampires its members, and those who bring to it their knowledge and experiences, have encountered."

Let's get back to Rita's questions.

Regarding the "So Weird" interview, the Bishop makes the following claims in his blog post, "Exorcism":

Throughout the BBC internet interview, which followed a vampire programme on BBC2 television, much of what I said became altered and sometimes lost in translation. As I am sure you will appreciate, the questions came thick and fast. Moreover, as I replied with what I felt to be minimum yet essential detail, some poor soul was attempting to type an abbreviated form of my responses into a BBC computer. So when looking through the dialogue one must take into account its transliterated summary of my actual answers. That notwithstanding, the bare bones of what I was attempting to communicate managed to surface, albeit the worse due to an unavoidably hasty exhumation.

There's still the question over just how many vampires the Bishop has dispatched. Note that even the years of these alleged encounters (as per Rita's request), has also been side-stepped.

The closest we get to a direct answer is this:

There are obvious reasons why I would not want to get involved in just how many have been encountered by me and my colleagues. It is, of course, more than the two recorded encounters and exorcisms in the published account of the Highgate investigation.

The only other case even given a modicum of such publicity, by Manchester, is the 1990 vampire-hunting vigil that took place in the woods near Kirklees Hall Estate. He originally wrote about it in "The Kirklees Vampire", which appeared in The Unexplained 38 (1992). It is also given some coverage on the VRS website.

The VRS's "FAQ" page also mentions an investigation at Abney Park Cemetery.

Apart from those, we are told very, very little else about the allegedly numerous cases in the VRS's archives.

Why is this?

Why have these cases been aired for the public and the multitude of other cases they claim to have investigated, hidden from the light of day?

What is it about Highgate, Kirklees and Abney Park that take precedent over the rest?

Some Questions for the Bish

I decided to post some questions to the Bishop's blog, Bishop † Seán † Manchester. The same blog, incidentally, that Lone Stranger gave coverage to, here.

In respect to the Bishop's "sign off with your real Christian name" policy (and because there could be a chance my questions wouldn't get responded to, otherwise), I posted my queries under my real name.

Here's what I asked:

1. Have you ever had DNA testing to verify your claim that you are descended from Lord Byron?

2. Can you name any other members of the World Union of Vampirologists?

3. Did you receive any payment for your article, "The Kirklees Vampire" for "The Unexplained"?

4. Do you use any other usernames online? If so, what are they?

5. How many vampires have you dispatched in the "ancient and approved manner"?

6. Have you given anyone any authorisation to talk on your behalf, on the Internet? If so, who?

7. What are your thoughts on Matthew 5:39-44?

8. Do you disapprove of my username, "The Overseer", and, if so, do you approve of its use by a VRS member who appropriated it "in protest"?

9. In the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), why was there no disclosure that the photographic depictions of Luisa were actually those of a model? And, why did you choose to employ a model to recreate "scenes" with Luisa, in the first place?

10. In 1973, you founded the Ordo Sancti Graal. Yet, in the first edition of "The Highgate Vampire" (1985), you refer to yourself as "not pre-eminently religious" and "a secular person handling consecrated material as a protection against hostile psychic forces, I am practicing "white magic"." What happened in the gap between you founding a Christian order and engaging in the occult (like the necromantic summoning of Luisa, as detailed in the same book)?

I eagerly await his responses.

Trespassing on Private Property

In a recent comment, "Demonologist" (TFO) disputed some items I wrote concerning the Bishop's investigation into the Kirklees Vampire.

I stated that the Bishop had trespassed on private property to carry out his "vigil". I also said that Manchester himself, admitted this.

TFO's response was, "Where? Please provide the source reference with a verbatim quote."

Let's turn to "The Kirklees Vampire", an article by Sean Manchester that appeared in The Unexplained 38 (1992), p. [761].

The alleged scene of this vampire haunt was a "dense woodland not far from an old, almost forgotten priory gatehouse in the precincts of Kirklees Hall Estate", says the article. However, as this land was in private ownership, Manchester had to obtain permission to conduct his investigation.

In Manchester's own words, here's what happened:

I approached the landowner, Lady Margerete Armytage, and requested permission to hold a vigil and carry out a number of experiments near the tomb. Unfortunately this was not granted.

Take note of the admittance, "this was not granted."

Especially when just a couple of paragraphs later, Manchester says:

It was now time to organise an unofficial vampire hunt, which finally went ahead on the evening of Sunday, 22 April 1990.

This sentence helps kill two birds with one stone.

You see, TFO also previously disputed that it was Manchester's intention to hold a vampire-hunting vigil:

Except that Seán Manchester's vigil was not a "vampire-hunting vigil." It was a vigil to determine what the nature of the disturbances might be.

There's not much room to determine what the "nature" of a "disturbance" might be, if one blatantly admits to holding "an unofficial vampire hunt", is there?

I also stated that Manchester had "anti-vampire gear" on his person. Demonologist's response was: "What "anti-vampire gear"?"

Let's refer back to the article again:

I unfastened my large bag of accoutrements and removed an armoury of crucifixes, holy water, garlic, candles and all known vampire-repellents, before continuing.

That anti-vampire gear.

Props for Lone Stranger

In spite of its satiric tone, I've really gotta give Lone Stranger's Net Curtains Lurkers due credit.

Sure, David might have fastened himself to it like a sea lamprey so he'll have yet another outlet for his usual anti-Manchester diatribes, but that doesn't detract from some great stuff being printed there.

As of this writing, I'm talking specifically about "Crybaby Manchester Tries Another Take Down", in which the Bishop is revealed to be a tad overzealous (and misguided) in protecting his "copyright" (thus, inadvertently revealing himself to be a reader of Mr. Stranger's blog); "Sean's Fake Medal Uncovered", in which the validity of certain medals and titles in Manchester's possession, are questioned; "The Smoking Gun", an exposé of an eBay member who ships satanic paraphernalia from the good Bishop's home address; and, of course, "Paper Credentials in Flames – Sean Rumbled Yet Again", which dissects the Bishop's entry in the 2004 edition of the International Who's Who of Authors and Writers.

I give a teeny bit of coverage to Manchester's entry in that book in the previous entry.

I always did suspect there was something a tad suss about the "World Union of Vampirologists".