Theos-Talk Archives (October 1995 Message tl00029)

According to Aki Korhonen:
>
> I don't see your point.

My point is that many groups are moving toward theosophical
ecumenism, but the anthroposophists aren't likely to
participate given their attitudes toward the rest, as found in
Steiner's writings.
 Steiner didn't mention much about his
> Theosophical background that is true. I see that he wanted to go by his own
> way. And what is wrong with that?
Nothing at all. However, to use theosophical ideas but claim
to derive them elsewhere looks somewhat manipulative. Another
who did that was Max Heindel.

 If Antroposofists want to follow
> Steiner and his teachings instead of Blavatsky - it is not a bad thing as
> I see it. The point in co-operation is not to believe in same things,
> Teachers and such - but to understand, respect and maybe work together.
As individuals, of course that's possible. Organizationally,
don't hold your breath. (Sorry, that's an idiom-- meaning it
won't happen anytime soon.)

> And if RS said some unpleasant things, I don't know. But what we really
> are dealing with here, is a group of individuals, and not every Antroposofist
> say bad things about Blavatsky and so on...
True
>
> I want to say, that we can't put a blame on every Antroposofist because of
> what RS said or did. Every person is responsible of his own deeds and words.
True
>
> I also think that the goal is not to make every, would be spiritual
> aspirant, identical but just the opposite.
True

Namaste