Theos-Talk Archives (December 2006 Message tt00776)

In his posting at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/38884
Mr. Aveline tells readers on Theos-Talk:

=========================================================
As to what Caldwell asks with regard to Crosbie, well, it is well 
known that Crosbie made no "special claims", and more: the ULT is 
based on common sense and on the absence of claims. That was the 
ULT's special 'landmark' by contrast with what was going on in the 
movement.
=========================================================

It is "well known".  This is of course the ULT mantra.  But what are 
the real facts?  More about this later.

Furthermore, Mr. Aveline wants us to believe that "the ULT is based 
on . . . the absence of claims."

Well, is this actually true?  Of course, if the ULT never offically 
offers any statements, then literally this may be true.

But one can find in material published by the Theosophy Company all 
sorts of claims.

For example, at Crosbie's death, THEOSOPHY magazine proclaimed in no 
uncertain terms:

"Robert Crosbie preserved unbroken the link of the Second [Esoteric]
Section of the Theosophical Movement from the passing of Mr. Judge in
1896, and in 1907 - just eleven years later - made that link once
more Four Square amongst men. In the year 1909 the Third Section was
restored by the formation of the United Lodge of Theosophists ...."

"...There is always one Witness on the scene. After the death of Mr.
Judge, Robert Crosbie kept the link unbroken." Theosophy magazine,
August, 1919.

This is certainly a claim and has been repeated time and time again 
ever since by ULT associates and Theosophy Company writers.

The late Dallas TenBroeck has often repeated this claim.

But I have never received a straight forward answer when I have asked:

Please tell me HOW Crosbie preserved UNBROKEN the link from 1896 to 
1904 when he was a loyal and devoted follower of Mrs. Tingley?

What is this claim based on?  What evidence?

And can you illustrate what you mean by PRESERVING UNBROKEN?  Or is 
this like a theological or metaphysical claim?  Not historical?  

Not once have I ever received coherent answers.  Either no response 
or a response that was essentially double talk.

These TYPES of responses initially turned me off when Leadbeater 
students would answer my questions about Leadbeater with double talk 
so you can imagine my reactions when I received similar types of 
responses from ULT associates about Crosbie.

I saw no reason to believe unsupported statements by Leadbeater 
devotees and I later saw no reason to believe unsupported statements 
by Crosbie partisans.  In both cases we have the creation of 
IMAGINARY biographies....

Daniel
http://hpb.cc