Theos-Talk Archives (December 2006 Message tt00291)

Daniel,
I see both the Lodge Secretaries and the Secretary General as 
officers (as I think you do to). The Lodge Secretaries, at lest 
officially (in fact it is the working group of the lodge in Los 
Angeles), are appointed by the Secretary General. The Secretary 
General is elected within the working group (this group exists in al 
lodges, and is self recruiting, and on local lodge level it is often 
the Lodge Secretary that is in "command") in the lodge in Los 
Angeles, and is the leader of the administration of the ULT (the 
real leader is informal), and the one that signs al ULT papers, such 
as charters and the card where a person applies to be an associate. 
These cards are often put on display within the lodges, so every one 
can see them, and also the two lines, with the titles under, were 
the Secretary General and the Lodge Secretary signs. 

The DES is governed and organised in the same way. There is the 
international leader of the administration called Secretary (the 
real power is in the "DES Council"), and the local "DES Groups" 
Presidents. 

I can't understand way this has to be secret; hence I can't see 
anything reasons for it. I have asked leading ULT-ians about it 
several time, and the answers was al the time that they don't want 
anyone to stand in the way of Theosophy. If this is the truth, I 
respect them, but I felt al the time that it al was about power and 
control.  

Carl

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> To Carl Ek,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> ===========================================================
> Carlos, you wrote; "The ULT is no corporation. It has no officers."
> Do you remember the yellow card you signed to become an associate?
> On one side was the Declaration, and on the other side you
> read; "Being in sympathy with the purposes of this Lodge, as set
> forth in its "Declaration," I hereby record my desire to be 
enrolled
> as an Associate, it being understood that such association calls 
for
> no obligation on my part, other than that which I, myself,
> determine." Do you remember? Under this was the line where you 
wrote
> your name, and under that was two lines. Under the left line was 
the
> word "Secretary" and under the under the right one "Secretary
> General". No officer? No, of course not!?
> =========================================================
> 
> So is the "Secretary General" an officer and if not an "officer",
> then what is this person?
> 
> Also who elects or appoints this person to be "Secretary 
General"???
> 
> Is this written out somewhere for all associates and even the 
public 
> to read?
> 
> Same questions apply to "Secretary".
> 
> Daniel
>