Denise McDermott King


William Q. Judge was a co-founder of the Theosophical Movement along with H.P. Blavatsky and Olcott.  Unfortunately, this ardent supporter of the true cause, as well as faithful supporter of H.P.B. until her death, was judged mercilessly by people calling themselves theosophists, and professing to follow the basic objects of Theosophy.
Though the past has gone the stigma remains keeping the theosophical movement splintered around the world.  Those who join groups and lodges worldwide are given a biased opinion, whether consciously or not, or worse still no opinion at all out of caution not to upset others, depriving many of the true teachings and the great works of this founder. 
“Supporter of Judge or not a supporter that is the question.”  Another question is where is brotherhood? 
W.Q. Judge wrote a profound letter when in the midst of ridiculous charges, when he was challenged on his beliefs. Here is part of it.  I do trust you will read further into it the meaning of what he was saying here.  The “Judge Case” is worth reading, for one discovers a true theosophist, one who knew who he was, and also who the Master was.  He was a man of integrity, honour, and in the face of adversity kept to the precepts.  What an example to follow.  This letter was written after much hunting and accusing, and cold entrapment, and his response was thus.


Dear Brother, I have your last long and welcome letter.  The fears you express of the T.S. leading to dogmatism or fanaticism seem to be groundless to me. If we had a creed there would be danger; if the Society declared any particular doctrine to be true, or to be the accepted view of the T.S., great danger would result. But we have no creed, and the T.S. has not declared for any doctrine.  Its members have asserted certain beliefs, but that is their right.  They do not force them on others.  Their declaration of their own beliefs does not unfit them to be members.  I have my own settled beliefs, but I do not say that another must accept these.  The eternal duty of right thought, act, and speech, is not affected by my theories.  Hence all I ask of another is, to do his own duty and let me do mine.  Such, indeed is the very genius of our Society, and that is the very reason why it still lives and has an influence.

And when we come to examine the work and the foundation of the T.S. and its policy, I find it perfectly proper for me to assert, as I do, in accordance with my own knowledge and belief, that our true progress lies in fidelity to Masters as ideals and facts.  Likewise is it perfectly proper for another to say that he does not know anything about the Masters-if such be his case-but is willing to work in and for the T.S. But he has no right to go further and deny my privilege of asserting my belief in those Beings.

So also further; I have the right to say that I think a constant reliance on Masters as such ideals and facts-or either-will lead the T.S. on to greater work.  And he has his right to say that he can work without that reliance.  But neither has he nor have you any right to say that my belief in this, or any assertion of it, is wrong or in any way improper.

I belong to that class of person in the T.S. who out of their own experience know that the Masters exist and actually help the T.S. You belong to a class which – as I read your letters and those of others who write similarly-express a doubt on this, that, or the other, seeming to question the expediency, propriety and wisdom of a man’s boldly asserting confidence and belief in Beings who are unprovable for many, although you say (as in your present letter) that you believe in and revere the same Masters as I do.  What, then, must I conclude?  Am I not forced to the conclusion that inasmuch as you say you believe in these Beings, you think it unwise in me to assert publicly and boldly my belief? Well, then, if this is a correct statement of the case, why cannot you go on your way of belief and concealment of it, and let me proceed with proclamations? I will take the Karma of my own beliefs.  I force no man to accept my assertions.

But I am not acting impulsively in my many public statements as to the existence of Masters and help from Them.  It is done upon an old order of Theirs and under a law of mind.  The existence of Masters being a fact, the assertion of that fact made so often in America has opened up channels in men’s minds which would have remained closed had silence been observed about the existence of those Beings.

What a letter?

Today almost by osmosis, those who come to our lodges and groups for the first time, have little to no knowledge of this great man, and if they happen to attend a group that does not favour him, then this original evil deed is perpetuated.
The desire for power, strongly within the movement at the time, showed clearly where its weakness lie, brotherhood one was area, honesty the other.  But unfortunately the human ego was greater. I am ever grateful to those who carry the torch of truth high, yet carry it without judgement, and find it my duty to give as much truth as I am permitted without thought of repercussions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.