Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00201)

On 14 199512 John R Crocker wrote:

> On 13 199512 Richtay@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > If there is ANY need for "control" from the top of the T.S. then we have a
> > problem. The way to lead IMHO is not by force or legal proceedings but
> > by excellent and persuasive example and moral worth.
>
> Yes.
>
> > So if Wheaton or Adyar want others to conform to their wishes if they
> > feel a need to lead and direct the Theosophical Movement then let them
> > lead by example by argument by persuasion and by demonstration that
> > such-and-such works.
>
> Yes!
>
> > But let there be no high-handedness manipulation slander or force. This
> > is not only unbrotherly but hinders individuals from growing into their
> > own Buddhic consciousness which is the personal ability to discriminate
> > wrong and right and to approach one's own personal ULTIMATE AUTHORITY --
> > the Self.
>
> YES!
>
> > How can another dictate to us how that can be accomplished? Suggestion
> > only never force.
>
> *YES*!
> > Rich
>
> Upon much we have great differences Rich but you frame the heart of the
> orginizational matter here IMO. TSA HQ I think would have no need to
> resort to political and bureaucatic methods of control if the moral force
> it generated established an appropriate tone throughout the Society. It
> faces now a crisis of legitimacy brought about by its own behaviour ...
> behaviour often selfish rather than altruistic concerned with protecting
> turf rather than the growth of Theosophy overly secretive about not
> occult secrets but about its *finances* ... doing a *major* revision of
> its Bylaws and keeping it hidden until almost the last moment -
> but all this really is secondary to a more primary level: If HQ
> Board Members and Officers saw themselves as *facilitators of a large
> family of spiritual equals - whose respect had to be earned who it is an
> honor to serve and whose voices were to be *genuinely* listened to*
> much of the ridiculous politicing would be renedered unnecessary. Instead
> the attitude towards the membership seems to be that of people who
> believe they stand above the members they serve who actually operate as
> though the membership *cannot be trusted* with information with money
> or even to freely *vote* do not all the restrictions being placed on who
> can run for board & officer positions implicitly state that the
> membership can't be trusted not to elect completely unsuitable people?.
> William Blake I think somewhere described the spiritual world as
> "a democracy of kings" - and this I believe is the attitude with which
> to serve as a board member or officer of a spiritual organization: as
> though every member were *royalty* ... fully capable of governing their
> personal kingdoms but still willing to listen to those who would
> facilitate the communications between themselves and others - but *not*
> willing to listen to those who approach them with the attitude that they
> are *serfs* being "permitted" a certain degree of freedom so long as they
> operate within parameters imposed from above but who are also expected
> to simply accept that they need rules and regulations to keep them from
> making bad choices and hurting themselves and their organization.
> IMO the *last* Theosophist who possessed the spiritual and moral
> force to get away with behaving as HQ is now behaving was HPB - and she
> never behaved that way.
> -JRC
>
MKR

JRC has summed up the fundamental problems we have in TSA today.
Before it is too late if the Board moves swiftly and openly and
convincingly comes out and states where they are headed and also open up
the financial and other books and records and promptly respond to
inquiries about administrative and financial and policy matters the
situation can be turned around. To allow matters to continue in the
current mode and justifying them on legality or any other excuse is not
going to help. I hope someone in TSA HQ makes copies of the various
messages posted here and distributes them to the Board Members and also
International President so that everyone get a good feedback from the field.

..doss

"One can only take the horse to the water but not make it drink."
Anon