Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00452)

Again, comments added re: Theosophy

--- In whitherare@y..., "Paul Johnson" <pauljo@c...> wrote:
Dear group,

In a Baha'i discussion, someone objected that the label 
"fundamentalist" shouldn't be applied to conservative Baha'i leaders, 
because they weren't part of the specific Protestant movement that 
gave birth to the name. Someone else replied that in his book 
Defenders of God, Duke Professor Bruce B. Lawrence "debunks this 
rather narrow definition." In Lawrence's words "Fundamentalism is 
the affirmation of religious authority as holistic and absolute, 
admitting of neither criticism nor reduction; 

[the authority of HPB and the Masters in the case of Theosophical 
fundamentalism]

it is expressed through 
the collective demand that specific creedal and ethical directives 
derived from scripture be publicly recognized and legally enforced." 

[not within society at large but within the Theosophical movement, 
e.g. the demand that there be no questioning about the Masters-- 
although some would silence non-Theosophists on this score too]

Lawrence sees examples of this in Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Baha'i, 
and Sikhism not just Christianity. He delineates 5 common traits of 
fundamentalists:

"1. Fundamentalists are advocates of a pure minority viewpoint 
against the sullied majority or dominant group. They are the 
righteous remnant, the vanguard...

[Only Theosophists who realize that HPB is always right are real 
Theosophists, the righteous]

2. Fundamentalists are oppositional. They do not merely disagree 
with their enemies, they confront them...the evil other...is located 
in particular groups who perpetrate the prevailing `secular' ethos.

[Groups like those people try to discuss HPB as they would any other 
figure in history rather than as a Messenger beyond reproach or 
question]

3. Fundamentalists are secondary-level male elites. They claim to 
derive authority from a direct, unmediated appeal to scripture, yet 
because the interpretive principles are often vague, they must be 
carried out by church leaders who are invariably male...

[No, not invariably in this case, although the vast majority of 
Theosophical fundies who denounce people for asking the wrong 
questions or floating the wrong ideas about Theosophy are males]

4. Fundamentalists generate their own technical vocabulary...terms, 
each of which is open to several interpretations but which 
fundamentalists invest with particular meaning...

[like the word Theosophy which is *always* used by Theo fundies to 
mean "exactly what HPB taught in her books and nothing else" despite 
the word's venerable history of much broader meaning]

5. Fundamentalism has historical antecedents, but no ideological 
parents.... [being entirely a 20th century phenomenon]

[Not until the twentieth century was there enough perspective for 
some folks to decide they wanted to go "back to Blavatsky" 
and "purify" the movement]

Hope this helps,

Paul