Theos-Talk Archives (September 1997 Message tl00183)

Titus wrote:

>Diana, on the other hand ... Let me don my "bullet proof and flame proof vest"
>.. She was a good woman, but no saint. It is right that she be honored, but
>the public response seemed quite out of proportion to me.  Writing a check,
>meeting with dignitaries, or attending a banquet for a few hours, while
>spending many other hours in resorts, luxury hotels and BMW's is different
>from getting your fingers dirty and giving your *whole* life to a cause.

I believe you're overlooking the "symbolism" of Diana.  It has been said
that most of the grief over Diana has been from women - I don't doubt this.
It's hard to explain - unlike Mother Theresa, who is hailed to have had none
(save Chuck) - it was Diana's "faults" and her overcoming of them, her
stumbles, her dumb choices, etc. . .that brings her closer to people's hearts.  

Most of us know we'll never be a "Mother Theresa," but Diana showed us that
we can still be compassionate, loving, able to laugh, to retain composure -
despite our faults.  

"Mother Theresa," kinda like Theosophy, hover just above "the masses."  But,
it's people like Diana who know how to communicate to the general public who
end up getting more of the message out there.  

"Devotions to God" take many forms, I think.

SIDE NOTE: I find it interesting, though - many people automatically think
that since someone is so loved by "the masses," his/her message or works are
somehow lacking.  If one is so loved by so many, they've got to be on the
wrong path. . .isn't the "path" supposed to be full of suffering and
self-denial. . .one isn't supposed to have a good time. . .one can't
possibly be a "Way-shower" if it seems they haven't, at least, missed a
meal. . .

Kym