Theos-Talk Archives (March 1998 Message tl00115)

K. Paul Johnson wrote:

> >
> > [P95.] 1) The eradication of the 'make-believe' Leadbeater influence - in
> > all departments including literature, and severance from the Society of all
> > other organizations, i.e. the Liberal Catholic Church and Co-Masonry.
>
> Much as the CWL influence disgusts me, I will fight against any
> effort to "eradicate" it which smacks of the Inquisition.
> Publicly discuss it, yes.  Let people know all the contradictions
> and all the evidence concerning CWL, yes.  Eradicate his
> influence?  It's not the Society's business to set about to do
> any such thing, any more than it was right to treat him as a
> sacred cow all these years in order to preserve said influence.

    Emily Sellon once told me how she originally became attracted to Theosophy by
the more fanciful writings of Leadbeater, which she later thought of as fairy
tales; not true in and of themselves, but with a point that is true. Sometimes,
in determining WHY something is bull, you discover the truth. I suspect that
parts of the SECRET DOCTRINE have this specific intent. For example, the infamous
"Hyptnotism is Satanism" page header, and the subsequent quote seemed patently
false on the surface. In researching exactly what she was saying, I learned what
I consider an important truth that, while we should not take on the karma of
another, we do have an obligation to reduce the suffering that karma causes, if
possible.

> > [P99.] 5) Commercialism in any form, i.e. book selling or publication as
> > such, without specific reference to the promotion of a knowledge of
> > Theosophy, is not part of the legitimate activities of the Society.
>
> Tell that to HPB who advertised non-theosophical books in her
> magazines, and reviewed them favorably, etc.

    Not to mention her declaration that it is better to charge for services than
it is to beg for donations (I have quoted her exact statement here at least once
in the last couple of months).

> > 'Fringe' literature can be obtained in ordinary bookshops or from  other
> > organizations, e.g. the Arcane School, the Anthroposophical Society, etc.
>
> The mentality that decides Bailey and Steiner are "fringe" while
> their own favorite post-HPB authors are "mainstream" is
> responsible for driving many people away from the Society.  The
> Baileyites and Steinerites are dogmatic about their own stuff
> being authoritative.  The TS is called upon to be open, eclectic,
> and nondogmatic.

    I have come to at least one conclusion that a lot of my own anti-Bailey
feelings come from my Jewish upbringing. First of all, she was a
near-fundamentalist Christian (Leadeater's Christian symbolism is also a turn-off
for me). Second is the attitude among many Baileyites that Blavatsky started
Theosophy, but Bailey completed it, which smacks of the Christian telling the Jew
that they are not a true Jew, because Jesus completed what Judaism started, and
you need to be a Christian to be a Jew.

    Bart Lidofsky