Supposed Denigration of Mr Robert Crosbie & other U.L.T. items
Mar 20, 1999 06:45 AM
by David Green
Leon Maurer wrote---
"I'm pretty sure you are quite 'serious' about looking for ways to
denigrate the one [Mr Robert Crosbie] who made that original statement."
I'm not looking for ways to denigrate Mr Crosbie. But I'm interested in
examining whether Mr Crosbie made "occult" claims & exactly what those
claims were. I find it somewhat ironic that U.L.T. associates are
generally very skeptical & even sometimes disdainful of the claims of
Mrs Tingley, Mrs Besant, Mr Hargrove, Mr Leadbeater, Mrs Bailey &c, but
apparently accept without question Mr Crosbie's claims. (Many
associates naively believe that Mr Crosbie made no claims. I've
published several citations documenting some of Mr Crosbie's claims &
also documenting that writers of U.L.T.'s publications have made special
claims for Mr Crosbie.)
I'm even more puzzled & quite interested in the type of hysterical
response many U.L.T. associates have to any questioning of the claims of
Mr Crosbie & U.L.T. Mr Richard Taylor's latest effusion on the subject
& his harsh words directed towards me are the most recent example of
this quite (IMO) paradoxical & even somewhat bizarre behavior.
Examining U.L.T. publications, one finds considerable amount of
historical material in which annoymous authors have harshly criticized &
(some would say) have denigrated other Theosophical societies & their
 series of articles "Masters and Their Message: Some Chapters from
Theosophical History" written by Mr Crosbie & published in "Theosophy"
 series of articles "The Theosophical Movement" written by Mr
Garriques et al & published in "Theosophy" magazine 1920-1922.
Reprinted in book form same title 1925.
 series of articles "Aftermath" published in "Theosophy" magazine
1935. These articles contain snide, sarcastic & vitrolic language in
their denunciation of all other Theosophical groups, officials &
leaders. It is hard for me to conceive how I or anyone else could write
more negative or partisan material than what is found in this 1935
 updated edition of "The Theosophical Movement" by Mr Henry Geiger.
Still sold by The Theosophy Company. I've seen the book for sale on ULT
 Numerous other "negative" articles appearing in the pages of
"Theosophy" magazine especially in the time period 1920-1950.
Let me make myself clear---above material on Theosophical history is
valuable in many respects. At same time there's harsh criticism,
vitrolic statements, sarcasm, etc. in much of this writing. And all of
it was written annoymously. As far as I can determine, "Theosophy"
magazine during years in question never allowed other side to respond in
either articles or letters to the editor in their publication
["Theosophy" magazine]. This is in sharp contrast to the editorial
methods of Mrs Blavatsky. She allowed her critics equal time to respond
in her magazines "The Theosophist" & "Lucifer". Again Mrs Blavatsky
didn't attack her opponents under the cloak of annoymity. Mrs.
Blavatsky's editorial practices stand out in sharp contrast to those of
"Theosophy" magazine. Why?
In regards to esoteric groups & material, Mr Crosbie, Mr Garriques, Mr
Geiger & other annoymous U.L.T. writers have heaped harsh criticisms &
scorn upon esoteric schools, esoteric leaders & esoteric claims of
other Theosophical organizations. All of the above sources contain such
negative material. These U.L.T. writers also show no hesitation in
quoting (sometimes volumiously) from esoteric material written by Mrs
Blavatky, Mr W Judge, Mrs K Tingley, etc. In U.L.T.'s harshly worded
"expose" on Mrs Tingley, many esoteric douments marked "private and
confidential" are quoted with sometimes snide & sarcastic commentaries
added. Who gave U.L.T. authors the permission to use in a very public
manner material marked "private and confidential"? Yet when I mention
in a very general way that U.L.T. has had for decades its own esoteric
school, Mr Richard Taylor starts foaming at the mouth. And I haven't
*yet* published any of the esoteric material issued by U.L.T.'s esoteric
group. Yet where is Mr Taylor's indignation toward Mr Crosbie, Mr
Garriques & Mr Geiger for invading the privacy of other esoteric groups
& publishing for public view various esoteric documents? No, Mr Taylor
saves his "venom" for me. Why?
Also on this theos---talk forum, I've read fairly constant stream of
postings (usually Mr Dallas Tenbroeck's) "advertising" United Lodge of
Theosophists. In his "pitch" Mr Tenbroeck has made number of
questionable statements. In one posting Mr Tenbroeck wrote that the
Thesophical Societies (Pasadena & Adyar) engage in politics but the
U.L.T. doesn't. As far as I can determine, this is a patently false
statement. What organization or society or association consisting of
human beings doesn't have its own share of "politics"? I've received
various accounts & documents showing that United Lodge of Theosophists
has had its share of "politics". For example, in the 1930s when Mrs
Crosbie, the widow of the founder, & a group left Los Angeles U.L.T. A
court battle ensued. Another example. The politics, bickering, & power
struggles during the time of Grace Clough. A Mr Victor Endersby (see
citation in Dr Bruce Campbell's theosophical history), a U.L.T.
associate & writer for "Theosophy" magazine, recounted some of the
internal struggles & politics he was involved in within the U.L.T. Los
Why does Mr Tenbroeck whitewash all of this and maintain that his U.L.T.
is different (& better?) than other Theosophical organizations? Mr
Tenbroeck may be quite sincere in what he wrote; but such unrealistic &
unfounded statements should be questioned by any thinking human being.
I'm still working on next email dealing with certain aspects of U.L.T.'s
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application