Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01390)

M. Sufilight wrote:
> Try for instance to read the following - and if
> you are interested let me or others know your views on it:
OK.

> a) The Bailey books are not a balanced multicultural presentation on
> Theosophy.
That, in and of itself, is not relevant to me. I believe that Theosophy 
has many expressions, and should be explained in terms the receiver can 
best understand.

> b) The Bailey books leans heavily towards a Chrisitan outlook unto the
> world. The consequences of this will show up in the present information
> society.
The aspect of this that I dislike is the "One True Path(tm)" point of 
view, when most other Theosophical writers state that there are many, or 
even an infinite number of paths.

> e) Bailey groups are connected with work at The United Nations,
> Headquarters.
> f) Because of that they are politically involved, and that on an
> international level.
Blavatsky DID write that the Theosophical Society itself should not be 
involved in politics, although individual Theosophists are encouraged to 
do so. The exception is that it is within the realm of the Theosophical 
Society to create greater understanding between adversaries. The U.N. 
has the potential of doing this, but it has lost its way over the years. 
A number of Baileyites that I know are working on ways of making the 
organization more effective and relevant in today's world as a force for 
increasing understanding.

Thanks for outlining your views, by the way.

Bart