Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00365)

Poor Pedro has to carefully avoid a basic - and to most historians and 
indeed most human beings a really simple - issue by (Adyar's preferred 
methods rides again!) attacking critics rather than dealing with 
substance. Poor Leadbeater is being persecuted, etc., etc. This was, of 
course, Leadbeater's preferred response to any criticism. But the 
question of when someone was born is hardly a great occult mystery!

So - let's cut out the spin and challenge Pedro to answer some simple 
questions:

1. Did Leadbeater consistently lie about his background (including his 
birthdate) up until the time when he began to prepare for the Anglican 
ministry, and cause others to lie about it too?

2. If "no" - then what is the explanation for the conflict between the 
official public record (e.g. the UK Registrar-General's records, the 
British census returns, the Anglican diocesan records) and Leadbeater's 
public claims?

3. If "yes" - then on what basis can claims about the "invisible" be 
believed when made by a man whose claims about the mundane are 
demonstratbly false?

Given that Pedro is a priest of the Liberal Catholic Church, I might also 
ask:

4. On what basis did the Liberal Catholic Church accept the corrected 
Leadbeater birth date (as, e.g., in the Shearman book and the Shearman 
biographical preface to "A Christian Gnosis") and then revert to the old 
birthdate (as, e.g. in the General Episcopal Synod resolution that, since 
Leadbdater could not lie, he must have been born in1847)?

Assuming "there is no religion higher than truth" (and accepting at face 
value Leadbeater's teachings on the necessaity of truthfulness, honesty, 
the avoidance of any untruth, etc. as found in, e.g. "Talks on 'At the 
Feet of the Master'"), plain-speaking answers would be appreciated.


Dr Gregory Tillett