Theos-Talk Archives (August 2002 Message tt00274)

Frank Reitemeyer wrote:
> P.T.S. Radha Burnier was very angry about it and said that anyone who 
> speaks bad about John Algeo should be kicked out of the TS as it was in 
> the days of the "founders" (I assume in Adyar parlance this are Olcott, 
> Besant and Leadbeater).

A hell of a lot of people spoke against Leadbeater, and it was
Leadbeater who got thrown out. Steiner did more than speak against them;
he tried to throw out people from his Branch of the TS if they were
followers of Krishnamurti, in clear violation of the 1st Object.

I have found that Radha in person is a different face than she is in
public. In public, she preaches tolerance, but in private, she allows
her personal prejudices overcome her better judgment all too often for
my own personal taste. John Algeo is far more diplomatic. I have
disagreed with him numerous times, but I am careful never to say
anything behind his back that I wouldn't say to his face (well, I try to
do that with ANYBODY). There is a lot I like about John Algeo, and there
are certainly many things I dislike about him, as well. On the balance,
I think he was and is good for the Society. 

Radha Burnier is another case entirely. Even if her motives are 100%
pure, her autocratic demeanor puts off many members of the Theosophical
Society. In particular, her abuse of her power to unilaterally dissolve
sections (I say abuse, as she refuses to give her reasons for doing so,
making them suspect) has been particularly damaging. Her writings are
exemplary; it would probably be a good idea for her to actually READ
them...

The current President of the New York Lodge, Don Conte, is a follower
of Alice Bailey. He has been an excellent President, and is careful not
to allow his religious viewpoint interfere with the operations of the
Lodge. But no matter how successful he is, there are still whispering
campaigns against him. (Most here know that my attitude towards Alice
Bailey is highly negative, so my support of Don Conte should be good
testimony as to how successful he has been; too bad others are too
narrow-minded to see it). Luckily, he has the support of a number of
members whose reputation is sufficiently strong to avoid a Boston
incident from happening in New York.

> I think these qeustions are not for little ones like us. You should 
> have a higher spiritual level to be allowed for that, f.e. member of 
> the E.S., Co-Mason, LCC bishop or initiated into the Egyptian rite.

I still maintain (quite publicly) that being a member of the LCC clergy
and a member of the E.S. at the same time is hypocrisy, and have stated
this, in person, to people like Ruben Cabigting and Robert Ellwood
without being struck by any bullets in the back. (My contention is based
on the fact that the fiduciary control of the church is in the hands of
the priesthood, which means that women are excluded from that. Even
given the contention that the ceremonies can only be properly performed
by men, there is no reason why the priesthood also needs to be in charge
of the material aspects of running the Church, and therefore clearly
shows a lack of acceptance of the 1st Object, which should exclude them
from the Esoteric Section, if not the Theosophical Society in general). 

There! I said it again. And nothing terrible has happene