Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: Re: Fw: Re: Fwd: Re: Menzer re AAG history - final?

Expand Messages
  • Robert Mason
    ... Willy Lochmann apparently feels somewhat the same way, but anyway, here is his latest and apparently last comment. And BTW again: for those who read
    Message 1 of 2 , Dec 30, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Frank wrote:
      >>Btw, the A.S. constitution question is a dead issue.<<

      Willy Lochmann apparently feels somewhat the
      same way, but anyway, here is his latest and
      apparently last comment. And BTW again:
      for those who read German, here are some
      links to more discussions with and about
      Menzer -- with Saacke, Boegner, et al.
      --- On Mon, 12/29/08, info@... <info@...> wrote:

      > From: info@... <info@...>
      > Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Fwd: Re: Menzer re AAG history
      > To: "Robert Mason" <robertsmason_99@...>
      > Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 3:28 PM
      > Dear Robert,
      > Thank you for sending me this comment of Frank Thomas
      > Smith, as well as two translations. I will not get in a
      > discussion with F.T.Smith, as we have here a kind of
      > religious problem, where is no way to change wrong opinions.
      > Saacke has really founded a kind of religous group, where
      > the members believe to be free in here thinking; but they
      > are not. There is a kind of "okkulte
      > Gefangenschaft", so there is no hope, as it goes into
      > fanatism.
      > We have everything printed for people who are honestly
      > interested in the tragical matter. I will no longer waste
      > time to discuss with people, who believe to have found the
      > latest truth in these questions. Finally it was a criminal
      > act in several steps and not only misunderstandings of the
      > intentions of Rudolf Steiner. His plans were perfect, but he
      > was linked by some anthroposophs like G. Wachsmuth.
      > Best regards,
      > Willy L.
    • Robert Mason
      OK, not so final . . . . The first six parts of Menzer s historical article are now on Willy Lochmann s website, in English:
      Message 2 of 2 , Jan 14, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        OK, not so final . . . .

        The first six parts of Menzer's historical
        article are now on Willy Lochmann's website, in
        (He also has some comments about Rudolf Saacke's
        recent contributions on the topic:

        Despite my throbbing head
        I'll risk just a few comments:

        Aside from the dispute over the names *AAG* and
        *AG*, there is the more important question of
        the motives behind the bungling of the formal
        arrangements of the Anthro Society in Dornach.

        In Menzer's account the word *deception* occurs
        over and over; it even turns up as *cunning
        deception*. For Menzer, the primary "heavy" in
        the drama is Wachmuth; he is cast as the agent
        of a conscious, deliberate deception
        perpetrated against Rudolf Steiner, the members
        of the Society, and the very soul and spirit of
        the Christmas Conference. The notary Altermatt
        and even Albert Steffen are cast as conscious
        accomplices. The putative motive for
        Altermatt is that he was allegedly a friend of
        the local Catholic priest Kully, who was a
        dedicated enemy of Rudolf Steiner and
        Anthroposophy. The putative motives for
        Wachsmuth and Steffen are less clear.

        Going back almost eight years to my first
        incursions into Anthro e-discussions, in
        Steiner98, I have been involved in lengthy
        discussions of these questions (and going even
        further back, in private e-mails). I don't
        want to put my hand into this tar-baby yet
        again, but I would like to offer the opinion
        that deliberate deception by Wachsmuth and
        Steffen seems very unlikely to me. Considering
        the tremendous contributions of both these men
        to Anthroposophy, it seems incredible to me
        that they would have deliberately, consciously
        connived to thwart Steiner on his sickbed and
        to thwart the spirit of the Christmas

        But besides such large-scale "strategic"
        considerations, there are "tactical"
        circumstances that make the deliberate-
        deception hypothesis very unlikely. Menzer
        himself almost makes this point when he writes:

        "The nagging question continues to arise: How
        much of these manipulations and the whole
        intrigue involved did Rudolf Steiner get to
        know of while on his sickbed? After reading the
        Newssheet of 22.3.1925, however, he had the
        entire deception clearly before him. But what
        should or could he do? Apparently, he did not
        give in to a mood of resignation, because he
        gave instructions that the room should be
        prepared in which he intended to continue
        carving the 'Group' (wooden sculpture).

        "But then he died unexpectedly (?!) on

        Menzer doesn't quite state the implications of
        these thoughts, beyond the enigmatic question
        mark and exclamation point. But here is
        something I wrote in S98 years ago:

        "But a crucial point about 'manipulation'
        scenarios is this: The manipulation, if that
        is what it was, was essentially effected before
        Steiner's death. For this scenario to make any
        sense, the manipulator(s) would have to have
        known that Steiner would not rise from his
        sickbed and find out that his (apparent) plans
        were being thwarted. But, from what I
        understand, it was generally expected that
        Steiner would recover from his illness. So, it
        seems to me that a 'manipulation' scenario
        would have to include Steiner's murder, and the
        foreknowledge of it by the manipulator(s).
        This is not an impossible scenario, but it does
        seem to make the 'manipulation' hypothesis even
        more farfetched."

        All these years later I see no reason to change
        this opinion: to impute conscious deception to
        Wachsmuth is also, by implication, to impute
        Steiner's murder to him, and possibly Steffen,
        or at least their complicity in it. Thus, the
        deliberate-deception hypothesis becomes even
        more outlandish.

        I'll quote myself again from S98, because,
        again, I see no reason to change my opinion:

        "So, again, [Wilfried] Heidt presents a picture
        not of manipulation, but of confusion. . . .

        [quoting Heidt:} "In truth however, a
        fundamental constitutional change had taken
        place at the institutional centre of the
        anthroposophical movement at the Goetheanum in
        Dornach. It took the form of a change of
        sovereignty, through which the points were set
        for a world-historical paralysing of the
        anthroposophical impulse for civilisation
        to the present day: the former arrangements for
        the leadership, which at the same time was an
        essential element of the freedom of the
        organisation 'of a Society of the most modern
        kind' was turned on its head and apparently
        emphasis] . . . .

        "Again, the overall impression that I get from
        reviewing the history (what I have done of it,
        certainly not all) is that of *confusion*:
        total, abject, stupefying, unrelenting
        confusion all around, in all the actors, from
        the Vorstanders to the general members. We
        don't have a clear record of how much Steiner
        was aware of what was happening, but I see no
        conclusive reason *a priori* to exclude him
        from the general confusion. . . .

        "Really, in contemplating all the confusion,
        don't you get the picture of everyone walking
        around in a fog? -- Nordwall's word,
        *enchantment* does not seem at all out of place
        to me. Neither does my hypothesis of
        *diminished consciousness*. Picture it:
        everyone walking through the re-constitution
        process in an enchanted fog of dimmed

        *My hypothesis of diminished consciousness*
        refers to something I wrote even earlier,
        bringing the considerations into more recent
        times. I'll quote myself yet again, because
        yet again I see no reason to change my opinion:

        ".... here's one expanded thought on the
        'inexplicable 'actions of the Vorstand/Society:

        "Consider the story of the Disciples around the
        time of the Crucifixion. Steiner says they
        were in a state of dimmed consciousness, which
        lifted only, as I recall, at Pentecost. And
        consider Steiner's account of the crucial days
        leading up to the outbreak of WWI, The very
        few people who were in the critical positions
        of power were in a state of dimmed
        consciousness at the critical moments; this
        dimming of consciousness opened them up to
        influence or control by Ahrimanic spirits.
        More, consider Steiner's account of the Second
        Crucifixion of Christ in the Etheric, which
        took place in the Nineteenth Century, because
        of the passing of dead human souls, imbued with
        the then current materialism, into the ethereal
        regions and beyond. The noxious effects of
        their materialistic soul-poison was so great
        that even the Ethereal Christ succumbed to the
        extent that He lost consciousness.

        "The inference I draw (tentatively) from these
        examples is that individuals placed in
        positions critical to world-karma may be so
        overcome by the 'sins of the world' that they
        may lose consciousness, to a lesser or greater
        extent, not necessarily due to their individual
        failings, but because their individual
        characteristics and destinies are overwhelmed
        by world-destiny. Apparently even the Christ
        Himself is affected according to this

        "Now extrapolate this principle to the
        individuals who occupied and occupy decision-
        making positions in the Anthroposophical
        Society. Perhaps they made the
        incomprehensibly self-destructive decisions
        because, to put it bluntly, they were not in
        their right minds at the times. And this was
        not {necessarily} because of any personal
        failures; anyone who occupied those positions
        would have been in a state of diminished
        consciousness, just because those positions
        critical to the Society were also therefore
        critical to world-destiny -- hence all the 'bad
        karma' of the earth came down so hard on those
        individuals that that their own personalities
        were to an extent extinguished and that they
        executed the destructive dictates of world-
        destiny, or of the Adversaries, almost as
        automata. In the mid-30s world-karma was so
        heavy that the Adversaries could oppose the
        ethereal Parousia with the Depression,
        Roosevelt's machinations, Hitler’s power-grab,
        the Japanese onslaught in China, and Stalin's
        depredations. At the same time the Adversaries
        were enabled, through the 'diminished capacity'
        of the leaders in Dornach to almost destroy the
        Society from within. And more recently, in the
        Soratic year 1998, the 'sins of the world' bore
        down so hard on the Vorstanders that they
        expelled Bondarev. (And completed the
        mutilation of the Goetheanum?) And they are
        not to be held entirely responsible; they
        weren't in their right minds, just as anyone in
        their positions wouldn't have been. If world-
        karma could extinguish the consciousness of
        Christ, would mere human beings be any less
        susceptible, if they happened to be placed in
        harm's way, so to speak?

        "Maybe this hypothesis could be the answer to
        the question of 'how'? .... maybe those in
        high places in Dornach don't know the answer
        themselves? -- If so, it's no good blaming
        'them'; we are all to blame; we all share in
        the 'sins of the world'."

        -- And, as Steiner said when speaking about the
        dimmed consciousness of the few ministers who
        made the disasterous blunders at the outbreak
        of the First World War: the Ahrimanic spirits
        can enter and influence us especially when our
        consciousness is dimmed.

        So, it seems that in the "Constitution
        Question" -- as in human evolution, both
        large-scale and individual -- it all comes down
        to *consciousness*.

        Robert M
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.