Theos-Talk Archives (August 1994 Message tl00014)

A few minutes ago, I started a response to another "off-theos-l"
message; however, I soon found that I didn't quite know how to
approach the subject involved.

The message was concerned with my "overly noncommittal attitude"
regarding the "Elder Brothers who founded the TS." Basically
(after some overly generous praise for me--thanks), the comments
suggested (in a nice way) that my recent postings "are at odds
with what is regarded as a 'given' [by the membership--or most of
the membership]." (I think, In other words, it is being asserted
that membership in the TS really implies a straight-forward
belief in the Elder Brothers, rather than any complicated form of
fence-sitting like mine.) A few passages from John Algeo's recent
writings in the AT were referenced; e.g.: "But esoterically, it
is an organization started by some wise elders of our species,
for their own purposes."

Well, I can see what the problem is, but I don't have an answer
for it.  On the one hand, the president does seem to be writing
(and the writing does have an "official-position" quality about
it) as if a straight-forward acceptance of Elder Brothers
(including ideas about "where _they_ want us to go") is a
"given." On the other hand, the AT has published a goodly amount
of my "somewhat-oblique-on-these-issues" material over the years,
and I have never had the slightest hint that the TS was
interested in censoring or rejecting anything because of my
"non-given" views.

Frankly, I don't know what the majority of the membership
believes.  Personally, however, I would go so far as to say that
it does seem at least a little dangerous if our official plan for
the Twenty-First-Century now includes becoming known as "the
organization which believes in Elder Brothers."

I would be interested in seeing what responses others in the
electronic study group might want to give on this subject.

Warm regards,

Richard Ihle