Theos-Talk Archives (August 1997 Message tl00353)

Dr. A.M.Bain wrote:

	Before I start, I will say that, had I been on that Committee (Board of
Directors, I assume), I would have voted against on all counts which you
deemed valid. Given that:

> "We hereby request and require that you refrain from handing
> out any leaflet or literature not approved by the Committee,
> or by the President in office at that time, and that you desist
> from intimating that you are an official spokesperson
> for this Lodge or the Theosophical Society in England".

	The former part I would deem to be directly anti-Theosophical. We have
quite a bit of cross-membership in the New York Lodge, and, during our
general discussions, people from other groups are encouraged to tell us
the other points of view (kind of parallel to Subba Row's recommendation
that members study other religions and present a theosophical analysis
to the other members).

> "The Committee's further decision which was confirmed by
> 9 votes in favour, with 1 abstention. That we repeat our
> warning that you, whilst a member of this Lodge, do not
> undermine the Lodge or T.S. by promoting or proposing
> alternative Theosophical Organizations on paper, or the
> Internet or other electronic media, and to desist from
> any such activities that you may be engaged on at present.
> Failure to do this may result in your being requested to
> resign from the Lodge.

	OK, to me that does not sound like they were throwing you out for being
on the Internet; it was what you were saying. And, in my opinion, and
the opinion of those at Wheaton to whom I have spoken, there is a
difference between what a person says on their own, and what they say in
the name of the TS. The former s ENTIRELY their own business. I am sorry
that the Committee at Bristol thought otherwise.

> "Furthermore the Committee felt that it would not be appropriate
> for you to give the scheduled lecture 'My Theosophy', and that
> the invitation to do so should be withdrawn. 8 votes in favour,
> 1 abstention, 1 member having withdrawn from the meeting.

	That is their privilege. Once again, I would have voted against. 

	Bart Lidofsky