Theos-Talk Archives (September 2000 Message tt00024)

----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Reitemeyer <ringding@blinx.de>
To: <theos-talk@theosophy.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World the future of religion


> Dallas writes:
> > As any aspiring theosophist might say:  The unassailable basis
> > for union among Theosophists, wherever and however situated, is
> > SIMILARITY OF AIM PURPOSE AND TEACHING.  This will remove all
> > barriers of any kind.  I find that it is a phrase used by one of
> > the Messengers.  It is significant, and avoids all conflict with
>
>
> I agree, but that is only a dream as we Theosophists even agree not
who was
> a messenger and who was not.
> HPB appointed Judge as her successor, but Adyar rejects it.

+++I saw and have read where HPB appointed Judge as the sole
representative IN AMERICA for the Esoteric Section only, just as she
appointed Olcott the sole represantative IN ASIA for the Esoteric
Section. In the Collected Works, there is a photo of the certificate,
as well the text printed separately. Whatever she was appointing him
to was limited to the designated area of America. Isn't it streching
it quite a bit to proclaim that HPB appointed anyone to anything other
than that limited post, since the Theosophical Society at that time
was governed by a board or a committee, which both HPB and Olcott had
problems with when they were last together in India? There must be
some reference that I have missed, where she designated someone as her
successor in all matters. And, at that particular time, what exactly
was she, that she felt she needed, and was entitled to name a
"successor".

In the organization that I am a member of, the governing body is
nominated, and then each member gets a vote. It looks like Judge only
needed one vote to be designated as "successor for life".
+++

> Judge appointed Tingley as his successor, but ULT and Temple of the
People
> rejects it.
> Purucker appointed no one, but his collegues didn't accept Conger's
claim to
> be in touch with Masters.
> Conger appointed Hartley as successor, but Pasadena people didn't
accept it.
> Long claimed to be the new messenger, but many Pasadena people
didn't accept
> it.
> The 1975 messenger didn't appeared (or is not known). At least one
group
> claims to have him in their ranks.
>
> And some Theosophists even allow not discussion about that matter.
> Far more complicated is what is the teaching and what not.
> For example the Adyar TS has several teaching a Point Loma
Theosophist
> cannot subscribe to.
> Their website even doesn't accept Judge as a Co-Founder as HPB did.

+++If you are going to do the "founder" thing, weren't there 13 or
more in the group who signed up as "founders", and out of that group,
Judge nominated Olcott to be President, and Olcott nominated Judge to
be Secretary?
The Masters were referring to the two founders in India most of the
time as the "Founders" in their letters, even though there were
originally more than 2 or even 3 "founders"?
Dennis+++



-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.