Mr Alan Donant changes his Conger "Story"
Mar 20, 1999 07:02 PM
by David Green
In Mr Alan Donant's article "Colonel Arthur L. Conger", as first
published in "Theosophical History", one finds the assertion-----
"On October 22, 1945, Colonel Conger was elected by the Cabinet as the
Leader of the Theosophical Society. At this time he was confined to a
wheelchair by Parkinson's disease. It was a prejudice against this
illness that lay at the heart of the turmoil to come." page 45
In my recent criticism of this statement, I pointed out that Mr Donant
gave no evidence to support his claim about the "prejudice".
I went on to contend that what really "lay at the heart of the turmoil
to come" was in fact Mr Conger's claims in regards to being the new head
of the Covina T.S. Esoteric School. I quoted Mr Emmett Small's
testimony (*ignored* by Mr Donant) which reads----
"The position that Colonel Conger was elected to fill, it should be
emphasized, was one of purely exoteric and administrative authority. An
E.S. Council at the time was directing the activities of the Esoteric
Section. . . . . . . .Within three months of his election Col. Conger
assumed headship of the E.S., declaring he held the same status as
H.P.B. did. Within the next few months he had summarily dismissed from
office all who did not immediately acknowledge him
in this capacity, even though they had conscientiously asked for more
time to give it careful and full consideration. Those so uncharitably
and swiftly deprived of former duties and responsibilities included,
among others, the Chairman (Iverson L. Harris) and the Secretary (W.
Emmett Small) of the cabinet. . . . . . . . . . ."
It is quite interesting to find that in the newly revised edition of the
Conger article recently posted on the TUP Online website, Mr Donant has
*changed the statement* (quoted at the beginning of this post) to
"For a few, it was a prejudice against this illness and his being head
of the ES that lay at the heart of the turmoil to come."
In the revised article, Mr Donant does *not* indicate why he has made
this significant change from the original version in "Theosophical
History." Also Mr Donant doesn't provide any new evidence in the
revised version to support this change in his thesis. Why is he totally
silent on this issue? No doubt, he has full access to many firsthand
documents that would clarify this significant change he has made in his
Very curious & strange!
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application