Theos-Talk Archives (November 1997 Message tt00376)

Brenda S. Tucker wrote:

> What I would like to know is this: Was Steiner saying "no" to his members
> or was he saying "no" to Besant, because if he was saying "no" to Besant,
> then I feel that innocent people had to suffer.
>

Steiner was saying "yes" to his conscience by saying "no" to the job. When he
accepted the position of General Secretary of the German Section, the OSE was
not part of the original bargain. It's kind of like hiring a Jain to be a
bank accountant, then tell them six months later that their duties have been
expanded to include working part time in a slaughter house killing animals,
then firing him for refusing to do the work. The OSE was a separate
organization from the TS and I contend that it was not appropriate to expect
Steiner to take on extra and unrelated duties that were against his beliefs.
If Besant wanted someone to charter OSE Lodges in Germany, then she could have
very easily appointed a believing member in THAT organization to do the job.
In that way Besant would get her charters, the OSE member would have an
authorized place to meet, and Steiner would not have to do something that was
against his beliefs and outside of his original job description. In other
words, there was a obvious solution where no one would have to suffer.

JJHE