Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00307)

At 055400 AM 12/18/95 -0500 Keith Price wrote:
> To what extent are theosophical organizations and democracy compatible?
>To what extent is theosophy compatible with organization and
>institutionalization? I ask these questions as I am tangentially aware of the
>concerns over the proposed change in by-laws as well as other larger issues.

<<<clip>>>
> To what extent
>are the proposed by-law changes consistent with our overall mission?
>
>Namste
>Keith Price
>
> Keith:

You have raised some valid and fundamental issues. I have been
around Theosophy for several years. From what I have seen the lodges and
study centers have always functioned most autonomously and democratically.
>From the early days of TS even this is the case.

It is only recently I have seen that there is an attempt to
introduce some structure and the bylaws currently proposed is a quantum leap
in that direction. From the point of branch autonomy and day to day
functioning the most serious change is in the financial area that the
National Headquarters in the US seeks to impose. Even though the motivation
may be good the changes if implemented have a great potential to cripple
and/or paralyze the functioning of the lodges. These changes can be and in
all probability will be used to control the type of programs carried out in
the lodges and for all practical purposes most of the fianancial decisions
have to have the "Amen" of the National Board.

Added to the above is the fact is the sudden change in the strategy
of how these changes are proposed and to be voted. As I pointed out in an
earlier message in the past when changes are proposed they are first
published in AT and several months time was available for members and lodges
and study centers to discuss all the issues surrounding the proposed
changes. After this it is presented to the Annual Meeting and then later a
referendum voted upon. In the changes currently proposed the procedure now
adopted by the National Board the members discussion of the issues and
dissemination of any dissenting opinions were truncated to the point of
elimination. Moreover not much explanation and information is forthcoming
from the National Board as to specific background reasons why the changes
are proposed so that we can explore why the problems cannot be handle by
some other way. When specific issues like the sale of Boston Lodge were
raised they were dismissed by simply saying the issues are too complex as
if some of us cannot understand complex matters.

Overall as I had indicated in my mailout as well as my posting
here the only best way to make any necessary changes yet preserve the
autonomy of lodges and unity of membership is to REJECT every change
proposed. Let us go back to square one and start all over again.

This may be the only and last chance we all may have for a long time
to save TSA as we have known in the past.

...doss