- Jan 2, 2002Dear friends,
Recently, I read a very engaging article by Henry Barnes, revered old
man, in the latest issue of the Newsletter of the Anthroposophic
Society in America (it may also be in Das Goetheanum--I can't
remember). The article was about "The First Class" of the School of
Spiritual Science. Did any of you read the article? I thought it was
helpful in understanding a bit of the origins of the School of
Spiritual Science and the meaning of The First Class.
To an outsider, the term "First Class" can sound foreboding or
elitist, but it is not meant that way at all. What is interesting is
that the term comes from Steiner's making a lesson (which was to be
in three parts) for a first class, which was to be followed by a
second class and third class, but never completed before his death.
Why, in the 75(?) years since STeiner's death has no one developed
the work so that the other parts of the First Class can be completed,
and also progress made into the second and third classes? Or is this
being done? Or is it not being done, and is this part of the
paralysis in the Anthroposophic Society and its esoteric heart in the
first class? These are questions, and not meant to be combative or
offensive, but rather meant to ask if within the outer expression of
anthroposophy there are still wounds and if these contribute to a
paralysis. I know there was much controversy within the Society at
the time of Steiner's death, and I wonder how this all figures in to
the development (or lack thereof?) of the first and subsequent
In any case, as one who feels called to represent the being of
Anthropo-Sophia, I humbly ask these questions and would be grateful
for the discussion of any concerned souls.
Have a Blessed New Year!
- Next post in topic >>