We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
These words are from the United States Declaration of Independence. They were conceived to guide the highest ideals for the social formation of the United States of America. It maintains that it is a "self-evident" fact that all humans are equal, and that this endows them with certain basic human rights.These are:
Right to life
Life requires a basic economic existence.
Right to liberty
Equality is the gurantee of a free social order or democracy.
Right to the pursuit of happiness
A meaningful and creative life is the foundation of a culture worthy of humans.
One central spiritual value, the value of equality, becomes a foundation for realizing human rights in the economic, political, and cultural spheres. Society should reflect these rights in economic life by allowing each person to meet basic needs; in the democratic political state by allowing each person to freely participate, and in recognizing the right to a meaningful life as an essential human need in the spiritual sphere. This threefoldness is inherent in the Declaration of Independence.
The words "self-evident" implies that this equality of the essence of human nature can be known through direct perception or intuition.
While America's founding intuition is colored by the European liberationists traditions, the American spirit is striving to create new economic, political, and cultural realities. A constant struggle exists between the old European hierarchal forms that deny any "self-evident" intuitive self-reference to truth. Rather, truth must be mediated by higher authorities. This authoritarian rule is an enemy to the American spirit which stands on creative, spontaneous forces of perception and active intuition.
The attempted suppression of the true American free spirit by the Bush administration to be replaced by authoritarian Republican party rule was recently defeated in the recent congressional elections. Bushes popularity is now measured in the 20's. The final Republican power in America will likely disappear in the next 2008 elections for a very long time.
With the end of the Bush administration which has subverted the American ideal for their own elite empiricist ambitions, will anything change? Will America work toward freedom and equal rights globally for all or exploit others around the world?
Is there an American spirit that needs to replace the strong European influence in the Anthroposophical Society of America and it's authoritatrian organization? Is the New York branch of the Anthroposophical Society with its nomination and free election of council members by the general membership an example of an American expression of anthroposophy? Here is a link to New York branch web site where you can see the active participation of the members.
Compare this with the web site of the Sacramento branch of the Anthroposophical Society. With a heavy European authoritative influence this branch does not allow members to participate in the nomination or selection of its authoritative council. You notice the results on the web site as it lacks community activity.
If this American spirit of creative "doing" with the ability to organize action is allowed into the Anthroposophical Society will there be a renewal effect?
The views of Tom Last are his own and in no way represent the views of philosophyoffreedom.com. This web site does not take positions on any issues but merely facilitates communication between participants.
Aquarian Flag
I thought it interesting John Jocelyn wrote about New York under Cancer;
'Cancer being a sign of transformation, compelling change from the old to the new, the mode of motion and metamorphosis, it is of significant interest to observe that New York, the first city of the New World, is ruled by the sign Cancer. In New York one has left the Old World for the New, yet many evidences of Europe are still manifest, and certainly no one has seen or known America who has not lived outside this city which is the connecting link between the old and the new. New York is the sphere where many people change their consciousness, whether they know it or not.'
I know some people here who have gone to study at the New York Film Accademy - and they have all fallen in love with New York. They say it is the best experience they have ever had and they all hoping to save up to go back to study some more! The New York branch website projects life and love; it looks wonderful. I don't think any branch should be alienated though - any branch embracing life and love can only benefit - sometimes it just needs some joy to understand this.
This group is great; it has been said before and because it is so awesome it is good to say it again - extract of Aquarius from John Jocelyn;
The Christ-born and etheric-conscious Aquarian experiences all humanity in himself. He knows nothing of aliens or foreigners; he actually experiences the truth expressed in the motto of the Great Seal of the United States, ‘E pluribus unum’ – Out of many, one; or, many in one. Which portrays the gift of God into which humanity will come as ever more men open themselves to receive the Christ-Spirit. Since the United States of America – with the Moon in Aquarius and Uranus ascending – is an Aquarian-Uranian country, whose inhabitants are from all races and nations, we find here the early evidences of this spirit.
Love.
political?
Hi Tom,
This sounds interesting, but I hope it doesn't get too political. Should the PoF website try to stay away from national or sectarian politics?
Cheers,
patri
This philosophy of freedom
This philosophy of freedom web site doesn't hold views on anything. It is a community of individuals who hold a variety of views. I don't think anyone wants editors filtering through the "appropriate" views or actions as in most or all typical anthroposophy publications. If something over the line shows up the community itself will act as moderator.
Anything I do is my expression as an individual and doesn't represent anyone but myself. As administer of the site I just provide a communication vehicle for people.
Our local society branch is an authoritarian dictatorship that has an arrogant attitude to common members who have no voice. Politics would be a great improvement. This branch may be an aberration, we are making inquiries into the operation of other branches.
We have discovered a wonderful New York branch where the council is nominated and elected by the members as stated by the society statutes. Their branch is rich with member participation and initiative. We are using the NY branch as an example to aspire toward.
Member choice in the election of society council members is a right given in the statutes. It is not something up for negotiation. Any society member who doesn't demand the society follow the wisdom of community building in the statutes is sleepily indifferent or irresponsible and part of the problem that has suppressed the growth of the society and hindered the work.
OK, got that.
Hi Tom,
OK, understood and thanks for the clarification. The New York Branch (Manhattan) also has a nice website. Whenever I am in New York for the weekend I check to see what is going on there.
Your individual views are appreciated, even if we may differ on some things. There is a lot of fear surrounding change, how to work through people's fears is something I am thinking about. Good luck with your inquiries, it will be interesting to see the results.
Wishing you the very best.
Love,
patri
Splits
I understand your frustration too Tom, but I found your post very hard to deal with. It feels to me like you frustration is boiling over in to your words, and I feel attacked, just because I am European! I do not mention this because I am upset, but because if that is my reaction, at such a remove, then there could be much stronger reactions from people who are nearer.
If you deal with the Sacramento situation with anger then you will struggle to bring about change, although it will be easy to just leave a load of people behind as you create something new.
Ask yourself what is really fantastic about the Sacramento approach? What benefit or security does their attitude ensure? Once you have identified something positive then you will be in a better place to connect with them. Once you have a connection, you are in a better place to bring about transformation.
Anger and frustration can galvanize action but as Kristina has shown so clearly the call to freedom demands that we manage our emotions and act out of our I AM, out of our consciousness, out of love.
I do not see this web site as a break from the Society - it is an independent initiative of the Cultural Realm, born out of freedom, brought in to being with love.
However, to actively move against a part of the existing Society is to try to break it. I can't believe that Steiner intended the split in the Society between the Marie Steiner faction and the Ita Wegman. That split came out of the failure of everyone involved to mange their feelings. What a colossal set back that split was - no matter whose fault, it was a set back the world could ill afford.
It would be interesting to consider within the social threefolding context exactly what governance sturctures are appropriate for the Society. Democracy has nothing to do with the Cultural or the Economic realms...
Each have own skills
I'm not involved in talking with the old guard. Others skilled in that area are doing that. We each have our own set of skills. That is an advantage of working with others.
Spiritual striving among youth
Hi Sebastian,
Your thoughtful words brought up a lot of questions on my part. I think there are youth (under 30) out there who are seeking a spiritual path, but somehow Anthroposophy as we know it today, does not seem to attract them, and they may be Michaelic souls. In wanting to serve others, to reach out to those looking for some spiritual guidance and perhaps by chance finding this website, how best may we serve them? The thing I appreciate about the PoF website is that everyone contributes accordingly to their own interest, but we all have PoF and Steiner's Spiritual Science in common. Perhaps Tom, with two sons in their teens (or slightly over) is looking to how the future of anthroposophy will serve them, and if so how and in what way. Change that moves a movement forward in a positive way that serves the whole community is a welcome gain. How is this to happen if their may be those in the movement who would hold on to everything as is (strictly status quo), and out of fear of any change, not allow for a space to be created that would attract more of those who are striving to find their way spiritually in a world today that is much different from when Steiner lived and died in 1925. I appreciate what you said about allowing ourselves to work out of love, for how can we really make any positive changes needed if we do not try to work out of our "I AM" our highest self.
All the best.
Love,
patri
A generation already skipped?
I am very much concerned about the youth coming up but a whole generation may already have been skipped by the society.
I came across some information that says the society world membership was 50,000 33 or more years ago. Today it may have less. That represents no growth through a whole generation.
Anthroposophical Group on the POF Website
It is wise of Tom, who has two roles on this site: creator and individual participant, to post his individual posts as Tom Last, and his site-manager posts as admin. There is the danger, given his two roles, that his own personal views will be taken for the views of the community that participate in this site, but given his two operating names (Tom Last and Admin) and the clear signature statement, this danger should be avoided!
Tom, when I said that I understand your frustration I wasn't being placatory. I experience the same feelings of sadness and frustration at the obscurity of Anthroposophy, and I can't help wishing the Society was more dynamic. However I am aware that I am in danger of shifting the blame to allow me to feel ok.
The way we see the Society and the expectations we have of it are contributing to keeping it stuck where it is.
This is such a big topic, I wonder if you would organise a Group called "Anthropsophical Society" which I would very much like to moderate. The purpose of the Group would be to explore what and why the society is, how we feel about it, what we hope for it, how it works, and how we wish it worked.
I am aware that sites and initiatives such as this web site bring people towards Antrhoposophy and dynamise their experience of it. This site could be part of the transformation of the Anthroposophical Society simply by changing the way the community views it, and what it expects of it.
We have discussed on this site how ultimately ineffective force is, and we have watched the Goya888 group try to use force to effect the Society. Not surprisingly the effect has been entrenchment, peronal pain and another setting back of the Society. There is another way, the resolute attempt on action out of freedom with love. Perhaps a Group devoted to this subject on this website would help in some way .
The society and Bush
The way we see the Society and the expectations we have of it are contributing to keeping it stuck where it is.
Let me present an analogy. What I have witnessed locally at our society branch in the killing of personal spirit is similar to what I witness in Iraq by the Bush administration in the killing of material flesh. This angers me and I express negative feelings about the Bush administration.
Would you give me similar advise and say I should find the positive things that the Bush administration does rather than focusing on the negative? That I am keeping the Republicans "stuck" where they are by having low expectations? Or should I fight to have the Bush administration removed from a position of leadership?
According to the statutes of the anthroposophical society the membership has the right to select the society leadership of a branch but that right has been removed at our local branch. The Americans revolted in the American Revolution when they did not have a voice in selecting leadership so it is something that is important to Americans besides being in the statutes.
Without hatred
Hi Tom,
What you have said here is very important, the thing that upsets me and makes me feel uncomfortable is if there is hate expressed towards another. We may (I may) disagree with a politician (or anyone's) deeds or the mistaken direction they have chosen, but I chose not to get involved in any hatred towards an individual. Politics today seems to be a "feast of hate" to the point that it has become very ugly indeed and people from different parties or different points of view are unable to communicate on the most basic level, with any real understanding or respect.
I am really trying to look at what is happening behind the spiritual realm in regards to what is going on in our world today. The discord and hatred around the world that people are experiencing, what does this all mean in the spiritual world? There has to be a better way to resolve conflict, are we all searching for this better way of communicating and solving/resolving the immense differences in cultures and religions around the world that could lead to a better understanding, a better way of working with the other in respect and love. I don't have the answers, I see the ugliness, the meanness, the absolute disrespect for human life and I am overwhelmed.
Best regards as always.
Cheers,
patri
You are right about my
You are right about my attitude to Bush. That doesn't mean I would vote for him, or that I wouldn't try and persuade others to not vote for him either.
However all parties in the US government system are aware they are in a democracy and are thinking that way - or nearly all.
In the Anthroposophical Society this statute you refer to may not be well known. It may be a statute that was long ago set to one side - but no one remembers why, they just know it doesn't count. I don't know.
Is anyone in the Sacramento group aware of how alienated people feel? I don't mean that they have been told, I mean have they understood? If not, how can this sadness be shared with them?
People hear what they expect - if they expect anger they hear anger, even if an olive branch is proffered. Those proffering unexpected olive brances must be strong enough to offer them again and again and again.
I'm no expert on peace, I could cobble together some references from South Africa or Northern Ireland perhaps, but I think that the principle is strong enough to stand on its own - peace is only possible when someone decides that they are going to take the abuse and give it back transformed as love - again, and again, and again.
Ultimately, there is accepting love and there is rejecting love. You migth have to admit defeat - the Sacramento branch is not for changing. Then you can say: I did this, and this and this, all in an attempt to make a connection and to overcome the feeling of rejection and impotence that I feel with regard to you, the Sacramento Branch, however, I have exhausted my energy and my Anthroposophical roots are going to have to be planted in other soil. I wish you well.
Suppose you mean it - suppose you really do wish them well - then you are acting with love, but in this case it is rejecting love.
As long as someone is being attacked they can not change their position - they can only be overrun and defeated. It is only when someone is given space and love that there is any chance for them to move.
I really hope you don't feel attacked by what I am saying because I am not attacking you. I am trying to convey a perspective which I believe might be useful in transforming the situation - in the fullness of time.
My earlier concerns are
My earlier concerns are coming true that efforts to renew the society can turn into a black hole that will suck the life out of you and distrack you from being of much value. It's history is rich with examples.
Imagine going to the catholic church or any other established institution and proposing change. You would be ignored or eaten alive. We have so many new people joining the web site I think my efforts should be directed to the future rather than the past.
If people are happy with their group who am I or anybody else to suggest change? History shows you don't change older institutions, rather you build new forms. We have a lot of opened minded individuals on this web site who are excited about experimenting with and building new models. This isn't in conflict with the society anymore than it is in conflict with the catholic church. It is creative people expressing initiative.
History is full of
History is full of institutions that do change. I bet the NY local branch wasn't always so happening.
You express a justifiable fear of being drained (in effect anhiatated) by the local branch of the Society in response to which you very reasonably withdraw yourself from their world.
This web site isn't in conflict with the Society, but the Ssociety, or people who are fond of it, or a particular part of it, may feel that you are in conflict with it. So far you have compared it to Bush and Iraq, and to the Catholic Church.
I have experienced the ultimate potential of human beings to thwart each other with negativity. You can really see this as you look round the world, back through history, or at your own biography, from the time when you were a kid in the playground.
At a group relations conference I once joined a group called "Power" with the purpose of exploring the use of power in organisations. We achieved nothing due to a power struggle within the group about who would be the leader of it. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation the effect was nothing. We experienced the double (or reverse) of our expressed purpose. We lived our antithesis.
Think about the way that I find expression on this web site - it is the most wonderful place. Why would I attack it? Why is it either / or? Why can't it be both / and?
If you strip away the
If you strip away the sentimentality and the name "Anthroposophical Society" and examine it just as the institution it is in many society groups you find an institution following traditional values with authoritarian rule. Isn't this the complete antithesis of The Philosophy of Freedom and Rudolf Steiner's intentions?
How can a person be supportive of the values of the free spirit and not call for renewal to these kinds of institutions without being a hypocrite? Do we support the "philosophy" but implement authoritarian rule? That is like Prince Charles being an environmentalist and then honeymooning on a yacht with 100 servants.
Does the idea of free individuals selecting the leadership frighten the society? They will surely select heathens who will ruin anthroposophy? Then, as Steiner says, those in the society who believe this should drop the charade of POF and the free spirit.
free individuals selecting the leadership
Tom,
Yes, I think this is the big problem, the society members and the Vorstand themselves are afraid of free individuals selecting the leadership of the Society. When Rudolf Steiner was alive the Vorstand (Executive Committee) was an esoteric group because Rudolf Steiner, as a free initiate was part of it, but I think it lost whatever esoteric authority it possessed after Rudolf Steiner's death. Rudolf Steiner, of course, knew he would pass over to the other side, and I think the free deed on his part of renewing the Society at the 1923/24 Chrismas Conference was his way of trying to ensure that the General Anthroposophical Society would survive, thrive and grow into the future. The history of the Society since Steiner's death shows that this did not happen. Personally, I joined the Society to support the spiritual deed that Rudolf Steiner was trying to bring into the world. I will keep with the Society as my support of Rudolf Steiner's personal deed at the Christmas Conference 1923/24. Perhaps renewal is possible, when we look at the current world situation, there is renewal needed in many areas
Yes to PoF and yes to this website.
Best regards.
Love,
patri
The Statutes of the
The Statutes of the Anthroposophical Society make a distinction between the Vorstand and the other society group officers.
I am refering to the other society group officers in regards to the membership having a right to select them. If someone starts a local branch of the Anthroposophical Society the officers are not a mini-Vorstand. The statutes clearly state they have a different status than the Vorstand and are to be selected by the membership. The confusion among some in the society seems to be the difference between the Vorstand and some local officers who have annointed themselves as self-appointed mini-Vorstands in opposition to the statutes.
thanks for clearing this up
Tom,
Thanks for clearing up the fact of society group officers in regards to the membership having a right to select them. It would be interesting to know also how the Vorstand chooses its members. Perhaps this could be written up and explained to members in the membership newsletter. Interesting.
Best regards,
patri
Which answer works best?
I have written two answers, which one is more effective at bringing about transformation? The question is not: which most effectively communicates my position. My purpose is to support the process of transformation in the Society so that it transforms and enlivens and becomes a really useful resouce to the World. My engagement with this thread is because I believe there is a chance of furthering that purpose. Therefore the question: which of these answers is more effective at bringing about transformation?
ANSWER 1
I understand your point, as I have said before in this thread. You can't persuade me of the rightness of your frustration because I agree with you already.
We are all free to take POF up and apply it to ourselves, however, can we force it on to someone else? You can take the horse to water, but you can't make it drink...
Human Benigs have a tremendous capacity to apparently sustain a great deal of wrongness, apparently without effort. Gernerally speaking, they are helped in this by a strong belief that they are right.
As you reveal so clearly on this site POF reveals the possibilty to contemplate the other point of view. Put another way, If you can understand how they are right, or how they are right in their own eyes, then you have at least the possibility of communicating with them.
If you want an illustration of how difficult this is, take this thread as an example. From my perspective I have so far been unable to persuade you that I agree with your frustration, and I have equally failed in my effort to offer help as to how to bring about change which we do actually agree would be good.
When I try to engage with your perspective I ("Tom" in Sebastian) feel frustration that I have been unable to convince about the compelling and obvious wrong that is being perpetrated, and I assume that I have failed in that because no agreement about what to do is forthcoming. Action is clearly required, and all Sebastian recommends is contemplation.
That's just a guess of course, because I'm not you, but that is my attempt to understand your perspective. Of course, I don't feel that my fantasy version of your view represents what I am trying to do and so I try to explain myself again.
I care about this because I see the conflicts in the Society as a microcosm of the macrocosm. If the Anthroposophical Society can't resolve conflict - which it has shown it can't, time and again - then how can the rest of the world be expected to?
That is what is at stake in your situation, and why I consider this thread to be so important. I would like Anthroposophy to play a leading role in the world, to show, in this case, how to resolve conflict and manage transformation. As far as I can see, a plan which involves leaving people behind doesn't break the mold.
We have the opportunity in every action in our lives to act freely, to break the constrains of our biography and our context. It is up to us to take the opportunity, or not.
ANSWER 2 - me telling you how your are wrong and what you should do.
This thread is a microcosm of the macrocosm. We would hope that the POF is a route map for the world - witness the cartoon of a bookshop with only one book in it.
The argument in this thread is a mirror of the Sacramento Brand argument you are having out in the world. That conflict is a microcosm of all conflicts in the world, because all conflicts derive from more than one person in a situation thinking that they are right and the others wrong.
Surely, if we are do do justice to the book we all love, POF, we will try to manage our conflict in a way that is a model for the world, POF in action. Ideas take root and spread in an organic way - this struggle you are having could be important for the whole world.
Your approach is traditional in that you have identified how they are wrong and now you are demanding they change. Guess what? They won't. And if you got the Branch to change then you would leave the current leadership behind. What's different about that? How does that manifest POF in the world?
Ask how they are right, acknowledge how they are right, share the sad consequences of their path - the alienation of you and others for instance, build a shared understanding of what you have in common - love for Anthroposohia, perhaps - and seek to engage them in a review process.
If you don't think it will work then it definately won't. If it's too slow, then be more patient.
Community built out of contemplative conversation
I believe most issues can be resolved through open inspired conversation. The issue of member representation has been brought up to the Faust branch many times over the years but ignored with a refusal to discuss the issue.
So I am discussing it online out of frustration rather than with the people involved with the issue. I believe anthroposophical community is built out of Goethean conversation, spirit inspired contemplative communication where each voice is of value. I personally was told by a senior Faust member that I didn't have a right to speak an opinion because I hadn't logged in enough time at the branch. I have been involved locally two years split over two time periods, helped found a branch in minnesota, and been involved in anthroposophy for 18 years.
The authoritative model believes community is built out of common obedience to the authoritative leaders. I doubt if the Michaelic souls the society is meant to be home for will be attracted to an authoritative community model, thus no society growth.
Hopefully enough people will be voicing this issue locally so the self appointed authoritative society leadership will enter into conversation this Fall (as I mentioned, I am not talking about the Vorstand but local groups). I think they want to avoid conversation because how does a traditionalist defend policies that oppose Rudolf Steiner's intentions (members choice of officers) for the society structure as composed in the statutes he presented (Christmas 1923) and recently (2002) confirmed by the Vorstand?
I do appreciate the online forum here where two-way open communication is available 24 hours a day.
Fair enough :-)
Fair enough :-)
Branch leadership and Goethean conversation
Yo folks,
My subscription didn't inform me of this thread, so I wasn't aware of it until I checked the POF website this morning.
Tom's claim about Goethean conversation here is well-intended, but it looks wrong to me. Goethean conversation is not a "way to resolve issues." It is a form of human communication that uses spiritual principles for spiritual purposes. Issues may be resolved among people using Goethean conversation, and such resolution may come about in large part thanks to the use of Goethean conversation, but Goethean conversation can not in general be used for the purpose of "resolving issues." If this is attempted, Goethean conversation is downgraded into something like psychotherapy.
The issue of authoritative leadership in the local Branches is probably also a false one. The cosmos, after all, is governed by hierarchies of spirit beings, or so we are told. It may be true that certain local Branches need some reconstituting, and certainly there is nothing wrong in principle with direct selection of Branch officers, as New York appears to do, but the principle of authoritative leadership is a sound one. It cannot altogether be laid at the door of a current Branch government that no initiatives independent of them have arisen out of the capacities of the Branch rank and file. Although they may have done little or nothing to facilitate such initiatives, they have certainly done nothing to hinder them. Failing such capacity for initiative in the rank and file, a leadership is marginally justified in continuing in the accustomed way. Good leadership in a Branch, of course, would be something more. It would entail vision and inspired action on behalf of the Branch, but that would probably be asking for too much from people without fully awakened clairvoyant faculties.
Generally, my claim about Goethean conversation is that enough can be understood about it in logical terms so that it can be expected to arise spontaneously from the anthroposophical rank and file. To an extent there needs to be authoritative leadership in fashioning Goethean conversation into an established cultural form in anthroposophical Branches, because the general understanding of the rank and file needs to be educated. Anyone doubting this has but to sit in on a typical evening at a local Branch. But in real Goethean conversation you have a general and spontaneous exercise of pure freedom and moral intuition, and no reference to human authority or leadership. In real Goethean conversation, individuals function as Spirit-Selves in the presence of other literal Spirit-Selves. My Conversation - A New Theory of Language (Anthroposophic Press, 2006) is an attempt to make the exercise of pure freedom and Spirit-Selfhood in anthroposophical groups reliable, and thereby to put anthroposophical communities in the advantageous position of supplying a valuable commodity, namely sane, decent and sometimes exalted conversation, to a greater world. If I am right about what Goethean conversation really is, it should be possible for a new Cosmic Hierarchy to come into existence through anthroposophical groups working in the right way, and for the world itself to begin to respond quite explicitly to its influence. Under those conditions, issues about local Branch governance and leadership will recede to the periphery, and will resolve themselves spontaneously, as more compelling ontological, transformative and artistic issues take center stage.
Thanks to Tom Last for making this forum possible.
Carl Flygt
Dear Carl, Principle eleven
Dear Carl,
Principle eleven (11) of the General Anthroposophical states:
Members may join together in smaller or larger groups on any basis of locality or subject. The headquarters of the Anthroposophical Society is at the Goetheanum. From there the Vorstand shall bring to the attention of the members or groups of members what it considers to be the task of the Society. The Vorstand communicates with officials elected or appointed by the various groups.
The officials of the Faust Branch seem to appoint themselves.
As to the Spiritual Hierarchies in the Spirtual World, it belittles them to compare them to a few people with various personal needs and problems whom happen to be administering a branch group, however they may have gotten there.
Yes, Goethean conversation "is not a way to resolve issues," but issues may or could be resolved during a Goethean conversation.
Best regards,
patri
battles lost battles won
HI all,
Thisi is a very interesting discussion. On reading your post patri, something came to mind. I had the vision that a similar battle is being waged in the spiritual realm and could be spilling over into the world today. I have never really understood the battle that Michael endured and cast down other spirit beings being anything other than a great war waged. A battle seems to be a battle here or in the spirit realrm. Are we off balance in both realms? Perhaps Ahrimanic and Luciferic forces are working overtime.
Is not hatred the absence of spirit?
Cheers,
Cisco
Are Lucifer and Ahriman not
Are Lucifer and Ahriman not spirit?
Does the spirit dimension have time? If so, how can the recently departed be both processing their last life and being available as a support to those they were with when they were alive?
What is the purpose of Human Beings?
I always think that the angels can't help unless we ask them too. What's more they can't do it for us. So their help can not be experienced as an easing of the burden - only of the accomplishing of the task.
Which makes it hard to tell if you were helped. Unless you ask yourself honestly whether you could have done it on your own...
So Ahriman has dealt his cards - materialism is out of the bag and loose in the world. Steiner and others have brought out their devices, their weapons of understanding. Now we fight it out! Only there can not be a losing side or we all fail. Materialism is useful, powerful, but perhaps not the whole story.
Ultimately there is a plea for the possibily of more than one truth to be universally acknowledged. Not as a protected position - "you believe what you like, that's fine (but I know I'm right really)". But as a deeply felt "this is my path, what is yours?". Perhaps faith should be personal, but not private?
Indubitably
Well said, Sebastian.
How do you do that? Your writing here is akin to a velvet hammer. The softness of the hammer resonates never the less and I particularly love the last paragraph.
My hat is off to you.
Cisco
It surprises me to be
It surprises me to be perfectly honest, especially given the time it was written and the total chaos that was all around at the time! :-)
S.
part of one's karmic path
Tom,
Perhaps this is part of your kamic path to fight this battle (as you see it) in Sacramento. Is it possible to work for a justice one may feel is needed or missing without being attached to results, do what one thinks needs to be done to bring awareness to a situation perhaps to change it, with love and to not put a lot of emotion behind what the result will be. Done as a free deed, even if others cannot find the wisdom or courage to take a leap of faith to what should be done, being not attached to the results, maybe one is free.
Love,
patri
Sacramento Branch
Is it not possible to start a new Sacramento branch with like-minded members and leave the existing Sacramento branch as it is?
Starting a new branch might be an oportunity to revitalize Anthroposopy in Sacramento.
Study Groups in Fair Oaks
My current thinking about our local traditional branch of the Society is that it serves a useful purpose just as it is so I have abandoned renewal attempts as they just seem to result in the chaos that distracts everyone.
I think that a branch, in America anyway, is given a certain territory to coordinate, so it would be unlikely another branch in the same area would be recognized. Anyone can start a special interest or study group anywhere and be recognized by the national society if they want to be.
In Fair Oaks we are starting three study groups that may lead to a new anthroposophical free community based on the principles in The Philosophy of Freedom. Many in the area see this as a need. These study groups are starting this Fall. A Philosophy of Freedom group. A Free Community group, and an American Anthroposophy group. Each name is a link to more information.
Does Chaos Have to Be Distracting?
It seems to me that as groups continue for long periods of time, they become calcified and need an infusion of some sort.
I am not suggesting that your decision to abandon renewal attempts is not a good one. I am just pondering whether chaos needs to be distracting (in the sense you mean, which I interpret as "people could be doing something more productive with their time") and could it not be a way for us to develop powers of thinking that could get us through and to the other side with more knowledge and a clearer path?
I've just finished again reading "How to Know Higher Worlds." In it Steiner talks frequently about what I interpret could be chaos and confusion during our time between our death and rebirth. Developing the "experience" with chaos and confusion in which we learn to think through and deal with it can be useful. That is, just because something results in chaos and confusion doesn't necessarily mean it shouldn't be tried.
Your energy and concern come though in your writings. And I appreciate both.
Any ideas I had of renewing
Any ideas I had of renewing the Society were the result of being naive and not really knowing much about the history or the people. Since then I have learned to appreciate their role in preserving the history and archives of Rudolf Steiner.
You can't put new wine in old wine skins or they will burst. This new century brings a new Michaelic impulse that needs to be worked with by those who are experiencing it.
This may all seem abstract but try bringing up any issue that involves any change at the next Faust Society meeting and see what happens.
Branch root and leaf
As far as I am aware - and America may operate differently - a branch or group may co-exist with other groups in the same area. All that is needed is clear intention. I am not aware that there is any requirement to take on responsibilities beyond the ongoing work of the group.
I have a connection to a new group in Scotland which formed last year. The formation of the group serves the needs of the members. They have not been asked to do more. We have more than one study group locally who all meet together 3 times a year.
The work of holding Class Lessons is slightly different. Each Class Holder serves in the area for which we are appointed.
If you want to open up a group I encourage you to do so. If you wish to register as a group with the Society then that seems to be a simple matter of informing the appropriate office. I suggest that the ideal is to keep open communication with other local groups where possible.
Is it not the wish of the Society to foster initiatives?