Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00152)

Martin: Thank you for your many kindnesses to me in this posting. I
appreciate it more than you can know.

By the way, Alan Bain, when printing the Pamphlet "Ruminations on the
Subject of Theosophy" (in the first edition) misspelled the bejesus out of
Dolgorukii (which is easy to do). So I asked him politely to change it, and
laughed about it with him.

Now, why do I need to be able to discuss Bishop Leadbeater? Well it's
clearly not out of purient interest, or a desire to "spread gossip".
Firstly, in this case, it's public record and not gossip. But, as you
already know, my perceptions and conceptions vis a vis the theosophical
movement, and the philosophy it contains, absolutely requires that I refute
those aspects of the philosophy and doctrine with which I disagree. Now, it
is my perception that Bishop Leadbeater, and Mrs. Besant are very much the
source and fountain of everything with which I disagree strongly. Therefore,
if I am prevented from discussing the flaws I see inherent in their input, I
am effectively silenced.

Both the Bishop and Annie Besant are long passed away, but their influence
on the society, which I view as pernicious, has not. I cannot  explain why I
consider that influence to be pernicious if I cannot discuss the source of
the influences. Is that not so?

It is also, I think, impossible to have any kind of rational discussion when
one party is basing their discussion of history and the public record and
the other party is basing the discussion on the Akashic Records as "read" by
a friend. Is this not so?

Apropos, it might be good were I to make my views on Dora van Gelder-Kunz
clear. I have met Dora, and she is a funny, nice, and interesting person. As
to her psychic qualities, I have been in the "psychic community" for over
thirty years now, and I have met an enormous number of psychics. I have met
many psychics I feel are not as talented as Dora, and I have met some who I
believe to be far more able and talented than Dora. This is not to devalue
her, but it is also not hagiography. I have attended a seminar and
demonstration on healing that she gave, and I find her a competent healer,
but no more. That by the way is not a disparagement, there are very few
competent healers. But as to the connection between the van Gelder family
and Bishop Leadbeater, I believe that the closeness creates a "conflict of
interest" and makes any van Gelder unable to accurately and fairly judge the
Bishop. He was like family to them, and most courts wisely recuse family
from testifying.

Now I hope this gives you a better idea where I am coming from.

alexis