Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00345)

That is a very interesting post! Thank you!

Erica

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kpauljohnson" 
<kpauljohnson@y...> wrote:
> Dear theos-talkers,
> 
> This is a post from 2001:
> 
> Here is an excerpt from a Baha'i academic about the difficulties 
of 
> rapprochement between the fundamentalists in control of the 
religion 
> and the liberals who have been expelled or put in internal exile. 
> The fundie/liberal divide reaches across all religions, and it
> appears to divide the ARE too.
> 
> [and boy, does it divide the Theosophical movement]
> 
> I invite comments on this description of the phenomenon, to which 
I 
> have added my remarks in brackets:
> 
> [accusing the leaders of fundamentalism] is not just a polemical 
> rhetorical ploy. I urge you to look at the 5-volume work on 
> comparative fundamentalisms in world religions edited by Martin 
> Marty and Scott Appleby, covering everything from the Hasidim to 
> Sikhism, rather far afield from early 20th century Princeton. X has
> summarized the Marty/Appleby typology of fundamentalism in the 
study 
> of religion thusly:
> 
> "1) It mounts a protest against the marginalization of religion in
> secularizing societies
> 
> [In Theosophy the reference is to the marginalization of 
> spirituality, but that's because Theosophists deny that their 
belief 
> system is a religion]
> 
> 2) It selectively reshapes the religious tradition (i.e. it may 
> represent itself as a restatement of the essence of the religion, 
> but in fact it picks and chooses from the tradition) and it 
accepts 
> some aspects of modernity while rejecting others
> 
> [While claiming to honor HPB, Theosophical fundamentalism totally 
> ignores large chunks of her writings, including whole works like 
The 
> Durbar in Lahore and Caves and Jungles of Hindustan, plus 
important 
> elements in her so-called major works.]
> 
> 3) It sees the moral world as divided sharply into good and evil
> [If you don't see HPB and the Masters as we do, you're inspired by 
> greed or destructiveness or the dugpas; there's no such thing as 
> honest disagreement in a friendly atmosphere]
> 
> 4) it emphasizes the absolutism and inerrancy of its scriptures 
(and 
> thus rejects academic scholarship on that corpus)
> 
> [Since the Masters know everything and HPB was their chosen 
> Messenger, how dare any so-called scholar take them other than at 
> face value]
> 
> 5) It has a millennialist emphasis
> 
> [This one only applies to some offshoots like the Bailey and 
Steiner 
> and Ballard movements]
> 
> 6) it has an elect, chosen membership
> 
> [Fundamentalist Theosophists regard all other Theosophists as 
> enemies within the gates]
> 
> 7) it draws sharp boundaries between the saved and the sinful
> 
> [ditto]
> 
> 8) it maintains an authoritarian, charismatic leadership structure
> [which in the case of ULT is completely denied despite the obvious 
> state of affairs]
> 9) it has strict behavioral requirements for its people."
> [only in the ES and DES to the best of my knowledge]
> 
> The bottom line with fundamentalism is the position that you can't 
> or shouldn't evaluate the claims of the scriptures by the tools 
and 
> standards of academic scholarship. It all starred with people who 
> freaked out over higher criticism of the Bible. When the 
scriptures 
> for which this special status are claimed emanate from HPB and her 
> teachers, the fundamentalism in question is Theosophical in 
nature. 
> But the bottom line is the same-- "keep your filthy secular hands 
> off our sacred mysteries."
> 
> PJ