Theos-Talk Archives (October 1996 Message tl00709)

In message <961027195535_1913293126@emout12.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com
writes
>And, all in all, perhaps changing ~brotherhood~ in THE THREE OBJECTS won't
>set the dominoes falling in the way I fear it might.  Who knows?  I'm not a
>prophet; I'm just a guy, hmm . . . , who suddenly has a itchy tes. . . .

I think I see what you were trying to get at [chews bottom lip
thoughtfully].  Being in England, I don;t get the American Theosophist
(no surprise there!) but I did see some of the dismay expressed by the
"3 aims" item by JA which appeared on the list.  So ... given the status
quo rather than the quo some of us would prefer, yes, I take your point,
which is, I think, that those in charge should play be the existing
rules at the very least.  Yes?

Alan [drools into coffee cup]
---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age:
http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk