Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt01607)

	I came across, a decade or so back, a guide to Lodges dating from the 
1940's or 1950's, which enouraged social get-togethers. The New York 
Lodge has occasional ones; we used to have sort of a combined program 
called "First Friday at the Movies", where members would meet tee first 
Friday evening of every month to see a popular movie with a Theosophical 
theme (a few examples:  CASABLANCA, MONTY PYTHON'S THE LIFE OF BRIAN, 
LOST HORIZON, and GROUNDHOG DAY) refreshments, and a discussion after 
the movie (copyright laws prevented it from being a public program). The 
reason it died was a lack of people willing to be in charge (I had run 
it for a couple of years, but my job kept me from getting there in time 
to set up).

	I got the idea from one of the Florida lodges (one I think Jerry was 
associated with).

> Competition.  Churches engage in that too quite often.  Although 
> churches tend to center their methods moreso around trying to steal 
> members away from each other, versus infiltrating one another with 
> hostile property takeovers.  Not that those are unknown in 
> churches.  Church takeovers usually originate from factions 
> internally residing within core membership bases.  They seldom come 
> from without.
	I don't have the records in front of me, but, as I have mentioned, 
there have been attempted takeovers in Denmark, Ireland, and Yugoslavia; 
in at least one of those cases the takeover was successful, and all TS 
properties were transferred over to the Arcane School.

> "For example, there are many Theosophists who believe that if the 
> Mahatmas couldn't find someone who could be both a managerial and 
> spiritual leader of the TS, then an electoral process almost 
> certainly can't, either, and that the directors of the Theosophical 
> Society should stick to management, and not set themselves up as 
> spiritual leaders, as well. Others feel that the Mahatmas said that 
> the Esoteric Section shouldn't interfere with TS business, and if 
> it's good enough for the Mahatmas, it's good enough for them."
>
> So who decides?
	Therein lies the problem. Technically speaking, the TS votes for the 
directors. However, the current directors have control over 
communications with the TS membership, so no communication which they do 
not wish to have heard gets disseminated. Therefore, anybody who has 
major problems with the way the TS is being run will not be heard by the 
membership, unless they find their way to power by deceitful means, or, 
like Nathan Greer, see the value in allowing free debate (and he was 
tossed out on his ear for acting on this). Chuck was on the premises at 
the time, so could probably give better info on this.

	Bart