Re: Paul's House of Cards
Dec 24, 1996 07:55 AM
by John Straughn
Tom Robertson writes:
>At 04:03 AM 12/24/96 +0000, M K Ramadoss <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> The study centers and lodges are put on *probation* and are watched
>>to see if their activities conform to *Theosophy* as interpreted by
>>whoever sits in judgment over what Theosophy is or is not. Once the
>>probationary period is over, only then the lodges/study centers are
>>given a permanent status.
>Someone, or some group of people, has to define "Theosophy."
>> What a change over a period of a century. When Olcott visited a city
>>in India where I used to live, during his visit he chartered not one but
>>two lodges in one single day in two parts of the city. These lodges were
>>not in any way or form put under *probation* neither by Olcott nor by
>>HPB, nor my the Real Founders.
>You seem to be implying that having no control over lodges is optimal. But
>there would be no reason for the founders to found lodges if they did not
>care what those lodges would study.
Not having any "lodge" experience, I have to ask: Do the founders of these
lodges put a probation period on their OWN lodge? That doesn't seem very
intelligent to me. I must deduce that they don't for now.
If that is the case, then it seems that the implications you recieved were
misconceived. From mkr's particular words, I think he was arguing against the
fact that, in the past, there was no elite group who decided who could and who
couldn't found a lodge and what you could or could not teach within it. I'll
stop here, for I have absolutely NO idea about what a lodge is supposed to
accomplish. I always thought that it was simply a place which provided
resources and companions for developing Theosophists. The more that I read
about them, however, the more they seem to be churches.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application