to Dottie
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Fri Feb 13, 2004 6:09 pm
Subject: to Dottie
Dear Dottie,
You've recently said, at least a couple of
times, that you would prefer that I take down Catherine's article
from my website.
As I have no intention of doing this, I nevertheless
feel that I ought at least to share with you why.
First of all, my website clearly states:
"This essay became the
object of much controversy, because of its views of Rudolf Steiner.
The most aggressive critic was offered an opportunity to place
his criticism along side the essay on my website, but did not
take up this offer. Even so, the reader should realize that some
individuals find this essay to contain a very incorrect assessment
of Dr. Steiner's character."
That statement is preceded by the following:
"It is the fall of 1915,
and some members of the anthroposophical society are expelled.
The problem of "sex" is raised. In this deep and warm
essay Catherine MacCoun examines these events and discovers remarkable
meaning, for our time, in this unusual event."
Anyone who can read will realize that I have
carefully not advocated for or against the truth of particulars
in Catherine's essay , but instead pointed out the disagreements
that surfaced as to her assessment of Steiner's character. I
also pointed out, as the essence of the article to me, the "remarkable
meaning, for our time, in this event".
This meaning, which as far as I can recall
was never discussed by Malcolm, and certainly has never been
discussed on this list (and please remember that the whole reason
Catherine's essay is discussed here at all, was in an effort
to MaCarthyize me (guilt by association), which is always a ludicrous
and meaningless form of argument. In fact the continuous use
of this form of argument really shows that its proponents have
nothing of real import to say on the actual issues that I was
raising at the time Catherine's article was placed into the discussion.
This leads to the question of whether Catherine's
article has anything to say (if we set aside the unresolved controversial
elements concerning Steiner's character), to which attention
should be paid over and above whether her assessment is correct.
Now usually authors place their conclusions
at the end of what they write. The beginning and the middle are
a kind of journey, but it is the end that counts. We can ask
questions about the end: Is it supported by the beginning and
the middle? and so forth, but it has to be asked, in terms of
those who have criticized her characterizations of Steiner, whether
the conclusion has a validity that pales in connection with any
errors in the process.
This is all the more important, given that
in the argument regarding Steiner's possible "racism"
even the Dutch commission found about 20 quite regrettable statements
(referring to Native Americans as "savages" for example).
We don't tar and feather all that Steiner said, because of these
flaws (yes, they do on the WCList, but we are trying here - I
assume - not to engage in similar behaviors), but instead try
to see through the rare human flaws to the reality. The same
values of appreciation need to be applied to Catherine's article.
Now I'm not going even to try do justice to
the main themes of Catherine's essay, except to quote this from
the last part, which I believe gives an excellent touchstone
of its essence (while not quite covering all the riches):
"Knowledge gained in
the vertical does not become moral until it moves one's will
in the horizontal. It must enter the life of feeling and of action
where, inevitably, it becomes personal. Say for example that
out of the altruistic part of his being, a person desires to
lead and therefore decides to run for public office. Both the
redeemed and the fallen aspects of this person's nature will
then want to win the election. It is both a selfish and an unselfish
desire. If he were to wait until, through strenuous work on inner
development, he had purged his soul of all selfish ambition,
many election years would come and go without his declaring candidacy.
The longing for purity would become paralysis.
"To say that spiritual
motives should not be offered for ordinary actions is to deprive
higher knowledge of moral resonance. And alas, this attitude
seems to have taken hold. Far too often, anthroposophical discussion
has become an exchange of esoteric factoids that have no discernable
relevance to life as it is lived. In order for anthroposophy
to become a moral force in the world, its practitioners must
integrate the vertical and horizontal dimensions, even at the
risk of getting them mixed up sometimes.
"In other words, anthroposophy,
if it is to regain its vitality, must risk making more messes
like the Dornach mess. Its life force at that time consisted
in the very circulation among the various dimensions that made
the events of 1915 so chaotic and embarrassing. When Steiner
attempted to erect a police barricade between the vertical and
the horizontal, the result was that stagnation described by the
hexagram ku: rigidity above, gentle indifference below. To overcome
that stagnation, anthroposophists must get the circulation going
again. The spiritual must become personal and the personal spiritual."
Now when this list wants to bother to have
a conversation that has this depth to it, then it will be true
to what it tries to promise with the title "anthroposophy
tomorrow".
warm regards,
joel
...................................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:41 pm
Subject: Re: to Dottie
Joel wrote:
You've recently said, at least a couple
of times, that you would prefer that I take down Catherine's
article from my website.
As I have no intention of doing this, I
nevertheless feel that I ought at least to share with you why.
Dear Joel,
I have read your post and have a few questions
but not alot of time this evening. My main question to ask you
is, if you believe the authors point of view on the Sprengel
Steiner moment in time? I am not interested in the idea that
it offers a different point of view and so forth but rather if
you agree she was correct in her summation of the events?
As regards to this piece being warm and deep
I would have to disagree with you. I think it is a very lopsided
piece where the authors bias can clearly be seen in how much
leeway she gives to Sprengel and the consistant disregarding
of Steiners own explication of what had passed.
The ending you share with us is insightful
to the spiritual search of a thing but that truly has nothing
to do with whether or not her summary of events are credible
or not. The author in question has an amazing grasp of the spiritual
workings of our world and I hold her in high esteem. With that
being said I do not think one can use the fact that her mind
is great and even if her point is not proven we should put her
work on the website to share with others. Is her point clearly
proven in your mind or is it not?
In wondering if you might take it off your
list was not a slight to the author, rather what I perceive of
my self as a question as to if you believe she has shown her
point to be proven or if you just like her mind and that her
work shows the community needs to be revitalized. There are other
ways of revitalizing the community than promoting a paper one
is not clear to the validity of the claim. And this kind of article
does nothing to prod or enlighten the community. Rather it helps
them to dig in even deeper due to the apparent bias of the author
and how she negated explicitely Dr. Steiners understanding of
the moment. She readily agrees with Sprengel with nothing truly
to back it up except for her own suppositions, imo.
Gotta hit the hay,
Sincerely,
Dottie
...................................................................................................................................
From: VALENTINA BRUNETTI
Date: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:47 am
Subject: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] to Dottie
----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Wendt
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 3:09 AM
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] to Dottie
to erect a POLICE BARRICADE
(!!!!!) between the vertical and the horizontal,
Hi listmates,
consider such a sentence and compare it with
the facts and, most of all, with the whole of your knowledge
or cognition of Steiner's work and life and tell me if here we
are or not on the same standard of Studenmaier or Dugan when
they chat about Anthroposophy.
Andrea the cave dweller.
...................................................................................................................................
From: Gisele
Date: Sat Feb 14, 2004 5:03 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] to Joel and all
Joel Wendt wrote:
(snip)
That statement is preceded by the following:
(snip)
In this deep and warm essay
Catherine MacCoun examines these events and discovers remarkable
meaning, for our time, in this unusual event."
~~~~This, Joel, seems to me a very warm, encouraging
and praising introduction to that essay from yourself.~~~~
I also pointed out, as the essence of the
article to me, the "remarkable meaning, for our time, in
this event".
~~~~So could you explain what this remarkable
meaning for our time is, in this event, because if human, earthly,
and universal development could be hindered by ignorance of such
deep remarkable meaning, ALL human beings ought to know, don't
waste any time, and thanks to God there are such inspired beings
like the author of the essay in question walking on the earth
at these times, to point us to the right direction~~~~
(snip)
This is all the more important, given that
in the argument regarding Steiner's possible "racism"
even the Dutch commission found about 20 quite regrettable statements
(referring to Native Americans as "savages" for example).
We don't tar and feather all that Steiner said, because of these
flaws (yes, they do on the WCList, but we are trying here - I
assume - not to engage in similar behaviors), but instead try
to see through the rare human flaws to the reality. The same
values of appreciation need to be applied to Catherine's article.
~~~~Sorry, but I cannot apply the same values
of appreciation to what has been said by an Initiate of Steiner
calibre (stature) and the unhappy musings of an obscure north
american writer with dubious claims of spiritual standing. In
my experience, I have had the honour to meet very few personalities
who could say something with remarkable meaning for our time,
as you know there are various spiritual streams and on various
levels, true teachers don't resort to attempts at tearing down
the moral standing of other teachers in order to put their message
across.~~~~
(snip)
Now I'm not going even to try do justice
to the main themes of Catherine's essay, except to quote this
from the last part, which I believe gives an excellent touchstone
of its essence (while not quite covering all the riches):
"Knowledge gained
in the vertical does not become moral until it moves one's will
in the horizontal. It must enter the life of feeling and of action
where, inevitably, it becomes personal. Say for example that
out of the altruistic part of his being, a person desires to
lead and therefore decides to run for public office. Both the
redeemed and the fallen aspects of this person's nature will
then want to win the election. It is both a selfish and an unselfish
desire. If he were to wait until, through strenuous work on inner
development, he had purged his soul of all selfish ambition,
many election years would come and go without his declaring candidacy.
The longing for purity would become paralysis.
~~~~Please compare this with the following:
"...This leadership,
what does it require? This leadership requires the following,
and I have, since the Christmas Conference, often had to refer
to the specific particular requirements for this leading of the
anthroposophical movement: it requires that that which happens
in connection to myself, I myself be capable of carrying up into
the spiritual world, so that I not only fulfill a responsibility
toward something or other here on the physical plane, but a responsibility
which ascends entirely into the spiritual world......
.....Of course, amongst the
people who are in the anthroposophical movement, various personal
things come to expression. That which is represented on earth
as personal, that is just the element for which responsibility
cannot be claimed in the spiritual world if it remains personal
when it is mixed with what is to happen for the sake of Anthroposophy.
And what difficulties will arise for the person who has to represent
something responsibly before the spiritual world, if he has to,
at times, bring along with that for which he is responsible whatever
personal aspirations come from the participating people. You
really ought to be a bit conscious of the effect that has. It
effects the most dreadful reaction from the spiritual world,
if one has to meet the spiritual world in the following way:
One or another works in the anthroposophical movement. He works
along: but into his work, he weaves personal ambition, personal
intention, personal qualities...Most people don't know they are
personal, most people consider what they do to be impersonal,
because they delude themselves about what is personal and impersonal.
That then must be carried along. And that really effects the
most dreadful reaction from the spiritual world for whoever has
to carry into the spiritual world these things which well up
out of the personalities...
....Certainly, it is terrible
that we have such terrible foes, but these foes must somehow
be dealt with appropriately by us. But in regard to the inner
life, which is how Anthroposophy must be represented, it is much
more terrible, if it become necessary, to carry what is worked
on within the anthroposophical movement into the spiritual world
when it is weighted down with the personal interests of one sort
or the other. And really, this fact is thought about very little." (GA261, Dornach, 1961, p.305,ff.)~~~~
(snip)
When Steiner attempted
to erect a police barricade between the vertical and the horizontal,
the result was that stagnation described by the hexagram ku:
rigidity above, gentle indifference below. To overcome that stagnation,
anthroposophists must get the circulation going again. The spiritual
must become personal and the personal spiritual."
Now when this list wants to bother to have
a conversation that has this depth to it, then it will be true
to what it tries to promise with the title "anthroposophy
tomorrow".
warm regards,
joel
~~~~no problem Joel, I've got a copy of the
I Ching here, although I know all the exagrams almost by heart
since I have studied them since I was 18. I have also 'studied'
American Indian philosophy for a long time, belong to Granma
Twylah school (Seneca) and I have met Steiner's teachings in
1993: I honour any valid teacher that cross my path.
Gisele
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
February/March
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
