http://www.philosophyoffreedom.com/node/1780#comment-2608 [1]

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

 

There is a tremendous debate going on about whether local groups would be invigorated if they were to elect their leaders.  I wonder what the 3-fold principles might have to say about this question...

From the Principles of the Anthroposophical Society (http://www.goetheanum.org/255.html?&L=1 [2]):

"1. The Anthroposophical Society is to be an association of people whose will it is to nurture the life of the soul, both in the individual and in human society, on the basis of a true knowledge of the spiritual world."

So the aim (expressed more dynamically using the word will) is to nurture the life of the soul, both individually and in the society as a whole.

Wider soceity will be effected if individuals are effected, but if individuals are not effected the wider society can not be effected.  I would therefore suggest that nurtring the soul in the whole of society is a secondary aim, which means the primary task of the Anthroposophical Society is to nurture the life of the soul of the individual.

 

"2. ... there exists in our time a genuine science of the spiritual world ... civilisation of today is lacking the cultivation of such a science. This cultivation is to be the task of the Anthroposophical Society."

Which clearly establishes another task as being to research the spirit.

 

"3. ... 'Anthroposophy, as fostered at the Goetheanum, leads to results which can serve every human being as a stimulus to spiritual life, whatever his nation, social standing or religion. They can lead to a social life genuinely built on brotherly love. ... depends upon spiritual-scientific training, which is to be acquired step by step."

And here we have the most glorious beautiful possibility of a social life build on brotherly love (fraternity) through careful training.

 

Clause 4 says what the task isn't, 5 explains how the training will be run, 6 sets out the rights of the members.  Clause 7 is interesting as it allows that the succesion of control of the Society will be decreed by the existing leadership.  Clause 8 seems to be tyring to control time wasters,

 

"9. The purpose of the Anthroposophical Society will be the furtherance of spiritual research; that of the School of Spiritual Science will be this research itself. A dogmatic stand in any field whatsoever is to be excluded from the Anthroposophical Society."

Which is a restatement of the tasks already identified, but with an explanation about respective responsibilities.

 

Clause 11 says there will be an annual meeting.  Clause 11 says that members should join through local groups and that the leadership of these groups will have officials that coordinate with the Head Office, and these officials will be either elected or appointed.

Clause 11 interestingly says "and shall be signed by them out of their confidence in the officials of the groups."  This is an up front and unequivocal assertion of trust.

Clause 11 does not explicitly elucidate leadership responsibilities to the officials. 

Clause 11 asserts that "the Vorstand shall bring to the attention of the members or groups of members what it considers to be the task of the Society." However I could not find any such assertion apart from these founding principles on the AS web site, so I assume for now that the tasks given in these principles are the ones that stand today.

 

Clause 12 is all about money.  Clause 13 allows groups to form their own statutes, but insists that they are compatible with these.  Clause 14 says there will be a regular newsletter.  Clause 15 says who will kick things off.

 

So there are 3 tasks set out in these Principles:

1. To nurture the life of the soul of the individual (as a member of society).
2. To undertake spiritual research.
3. To offer training to promote a social life built on brotherly love.

For my own clarity of mind I would rephrase that "To carry out spiritual scientific research and out of that, to nurutre the soul life of the individual through training and so transform the social life."

This is a headline Cultural Realm agenda with joint-endeavour (will) requiring Economic Realm organisation and there is a Rights Realm basket in which this organisation is carried. 

There is a need for Spiritual Science and its fruits that is real and out there in society as a whole which the Society can meet, and so it is worth asking if it is really founded in the Economic Realm.  However, the intention in these principles is not that the Society's activity should be sustained through making a profit.  Rather, it is the will of the members that should sustain it, which is a strong indicator that it's foudnation lies in the Cultural Realm.

The only real reason why I could see that leaders should be elected from within this organisation would be if the members accrued benefits from belonging. However, the membership of the Society seems more to be a committment to supporting a shared task than to gaining access. Although that is implied in the Principles, it isn't explicitly stated that non-members can't partake of the fruits of the Spiritual Research undertaken by the Society.

In conclusion (there is at least 1 book, probably more, to be had from this analysis, but I'm just going to jump to the conclusion because it's nearly bed time) there is no evidence that local branch group officials should be elected, although they could be. There is no evidence that those officals are responsible for leading the groups, although that might be expected.  Finally, my hunch for why the society is totally failing to transform wider society is because it hasn't focussed on its core pupose, in particular it's training course provision hasn't been kept up to date. 

My guess for why this is?  A fear of the competition and striving that is part of a cultural endeavour, a distaste for economic style endeavour amongst those attracted to Antrhoposophy, and an understandable attachment to the founding structures which keeps the whole organisation trapped in the past (Steiner casts an enormous shadow).  I also rather suspect that there is a tendancy amongst the officials and members of the Society to think that it exists for them, rather than as clearly shown by these Principles, for the whole of mankind.