Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt00520)

 [[All prepared with (apparent) support of the Anthroposophical 
Society and access to (and use of) materials in all relevant 
archives. None of the works thus published gives any indication of 
being a "true believer's" version of history, although clearly 
published by those who can be desrcibed as "true believers".

I am therefore led to wonder why groups deriving from Steiner seem 
able and willing to support, or even produce, scholarly studies of 
his esoteric activities, but TS groups appear incapable of rationally 
discussing their equivalent activities.]] 



While some Anthroposphical publishers may be prepared to support or 
produce scholary studies on Steiner's quasi-Masonic activities, I 
would not say this represented the whole picture in relation 
to 'groups deriving from Steiner'.  

Recently a lineage was granted by Golden Dawn author Pat Zalewski to 
one of his students, this having derived from Steiner's 'quasi-
Masonic' activities.  A transmission which was conveyed through 
Felkin in the New Zealand GD originating temple 'Whare Ra' to 
Zalewski and hence to his student.  

When the gentleman given the lineage joined a few Steiner discussion 
groups to examine this interesting history further, the reception 
given both to him and the revived Steiner lineage was little 
different to here.  

What could have been a scholarly discussion quickly descended into a 
bovine stampede of emotion and hysterics. 

It became clear many of Steiner's disciples had both an intact 
personality cult surrounding their founder, accompanied by 
several 'no-go' areas in relation to his quasi-Masonic activities, 
which controversially involved a connection with the OTO. 

Added to this their disdain for what they saw as less 
evolved 'Piscean' Age occult groups as distinct from Steiner's 
Aquarian new dispensation.

Surely a case of 'do as I say, not as I do' in relation to these camp 
follower vis-a-vis Steiner himself.

I've observed similarly silly behaviour in pursuing my own research 
of AMORC founder HS Lewis.  Again, a personality cult, a mythos which 
zealous members will protect to the extent of falsifying information, 
character assassination, the whole gamut of foolish behaviour. And 
again, that link to the OTO . . .  just to spice things up. 

Add to this the neo-Rosicrucian obsession with lineage and apostolic 
succession -none of the neo-Rosies have one, ergo we see in this 
field 'metaphysical penis envy' of a high order. 

And you end up with groups operating not so much as speculative 
mystical fraternities but more as fully fledged small religions, 
complete with camp followers willing to sabotage any notion of 
reasoned debate around their founding myths.

Plus ca change.

With all that in mind, I'm looking forward to reading these Steiner 
histories. 

Ben Scanlon