Theos-Talk Archives (September 1999 Message tl00080)

	Sorry, Doss, but I didn't see the original message, so I will reply to
the quote, as well.

M K Ramadoss wrote:
> At 08:19 PM 09/16/1999 -0600, JRC wrote:
> They *won* Bart. The beat all their opponents, spun the story well, and got
> their control. Don't try now to claim that they don't have it. But beware of
> centralized control. You may agree with the current lot in power,

	Not entirely; I personally think that the E.S. lost it's steam when
Annie Besant died, and find the "unofficial" organizations, like the LCC
and the co-Mason's, a little too official for my taste. (Every now and
then when an LCC'er complains about the neo-pagan movement, I say,
"Yeah, all they want to do is wear funny costumes and burn candles and
incense while performing their ceremonies!")

	However, I am not quite as pessimistic about what happens if a new
group gets into power; it would require a major change in both national
and international to change the TS THAT much, and I believe (naively in
JRC's opinion, apparently) that the courts will protect Lodges acting in
good faith (note that whatever else you can say about the Boston Lodge,
they did NOT act in good faith, rather, they took a "we'll do whatever
we want to do, screw you!" attitude).

> Theosphy goes in a direction *they* choose. And the centralized power you
> seem to find so positive now could easily be wielded in other directions -
> and against you and your Lodge.

	I do not support centralized power; I state that the new by-laws do not
do this as much as you (JRC) claim they do. I accept that there is a
disagreement here, please do the same.

> group of radical Hindus (who the hell *would* try to take over a
> Theosophical branch?) to sieze Branch assets ... it would now take a much

	Any group seeing that currently, the value of the property compared to
the membership of the Society is quite out of balance, who wants to cash
in. A special bonus would be if the existence of the Theosophical
Society is anathema to that group. I can think of several right-wing
so-called "Christian" groups that might try that trick.
---

	Now for Doss' part.

> In the early days, when there was a problem in London Lodge, one of the Founders mentioned that the reason for success of TS was decentralization, not central control. So centralization is sync with shrinking of the TS. Of late I know of some members who are not in a mood to give any large funds to lodges specifically because of this. They are interested in the funds use locally and with local control nor remote control.

	Which can, of course, be used in a court case.

	Bart Lidofsky