Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00114)

In message <2.2.32.19960502195709.006a5240@mail.slip.net>, alexis
dolgorukii <alexei@slip.net> writes
>>Thank you Alan that is very interesting. Perhaps you can clear something up
>for me, Hadn't both Leadbeater and Wedgewood been "defrocked" by the
>Anglican Church for their sexual peccadillos?

I have no evidence to support this claim, though it is an old one.  It
is possible that Wedgwood *resigned* but so far as I know CWL left of
his own accord.

> As "defrocked Priests'
>wouldn't their consecration as Bishops have been irregular to say the least?

Note the title of my book!  The view of the Church of England was and is
that their later consecration was invalid and irregular.  The view of
the Church of Rome was that they were valid but irregular. But the view
of Rome is that the orders of the Church of England (at all levels) are
totally invalid.  On this argument, CWL's (and mine) holy orders are
more valid than those of the Achbishop of Canterbury! :-)

>Obviously Wedgewood found another source of authority, what was it? I don't
>know about either of them "dying insane" but shrewd or not, it could
>reasonably be argued, based upon their lives and works, that both of them
>"Lived insane", could it not? After all "living in a dream world of his own"
>is practically the dictionary definition of psychosis. Why do you suppose
>the silly man lied about his date of birth?

Their source of authority derived from the Dutch Old Catholic Church
which had broken ties with Rome, which had failed to destroy them (the
Dutch Old Catholics).  The differences were doctrinal.  Later they broke
with the Old Catholics to form the [theosophical] Liberal Catholic
Church, in which (today, but not then) reincarnation is an article of
faith.
>
>It's a shame Routledge & Kegan Paul has changed ownership and policies, they
>were one of the better sources of alternative philosophical works.
>
>By the way, have you encountered Liesel's accusations that Chuck and myself
>are "E.S. agents provocateur" sent in to "destroy Theos-List"?
>Your thoughts please.

I think Liesel perceives you both as making a lot of disruptive noise,
and looks for a familiar explanation.  She does not accuse, she
speculates.  Personally, I doubt that there is any ES conspiracy of any
kind to disrupt theos-l, which has less than 100 subscribers out of tens
of thousands of potentially pliable theosophists!  The worldwide TS may
be small, but theos-l is miniscule by comparison, though its capacity to
broadcast *information* is huge.

I would personally like to see *more* information being broadcast, and a
great deal less combativeness.
>
>fondly
>
>alexis d.
>
ditto

alan b.
---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL:
Ancient Wisdom for a New Age
TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk
http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html