Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00171)

I personally visited the Boston Lodge on 191911 1995 and spoke to their
officers at length because I wanted to get their side of the story. What I was
told at Wheaton during the Jul convention by Fernando de Torrijos did not ring
true to me and I could not understand how he as a member of the national board
and the northeast director could have brought the lawsuit that he brought.
Further I could not understand how our national board could have financially
backed that lawsuit paying attorneys etc. the funds for which ultimately came
out of the assets of the Boston Lodge. The Boston Lodge building was sold to
Boston University for between $800000 and $850000 I have been given 02
different figures by the parties but believe that the sale price was somewhere
right in there. Fernando did confirm that the attorneys for both sides split up
about $200000 in legal fees and expenses. From what I found out subsequently
it does appear that the figure is closer to $270000. I don't know about
$400000 that Rich Taylor indicates but if Rich was treasurer and on the
inside perhaps his figure is correct. Like Rich I do not believe that there
was any misappropriation of funds. I know that the Boston Lodge used their
share of the lawsuit settlement about $390000 to buy a new building in
Arlington. I visited it. What did Fernando's small minority do with their
share about $195000? He told me in Jul that it was still in the bank. I
would hope that by now they have bought a property with which to present
Theosophical studies.

The point in all this and the real tragedy in my view is that in the so-called
interests of preserving Theosophical assets which is the reason that has been
given me for the proposed By-Law revisions #15 #16 and #17 our national
directors engaged in activities which dissipated large amounts of Theosophical
assets in addition to losing the 60+ members of the Boston Lodge. I consider
what the national directors did was outrageous. If they had not butted in at
great cost to our Society the Boston Lodge could have moved to Cambridge where
they really wanted to locate and have gotten a top notch location. i.e. maybe
off Harvard Square and put Theosophy right out there to expose more people to
it. As it is they bought a quite nice building in Arlington with what they
could afford. But they could have done something really great to make the
Theosophical Society better known in a key metropolitan area had the lawsuit
not been forced upon them which only created divisiveness and bitterness and
dissipation of assets.

Behind this all is I think was an effort on the part of Fernando and the other
national directors to oppose the eclectic studies going on in the Boston Lodge
and especially the Alice Bailey studies. Where in any of HPB's or the Masters
writings does it say what people must or must not study?

The Boston Lodge does have a Secret Doctrine study group and it is going on
right now. It probably is not well attended but at least they are trying to
keep it out there. Maybe some people who are drawn to the Lodge by their wide
array of other studies will begin to look at the works of HPB. This is what we
find at our Miami Lodge. We have a Secret Doctrine study group also and 03
other specifically Theosophical study groups. We give them prime time in our
schedule but we have a lot of other studies too. Because of this our Lodge is
active and growing over 100 members. Because we have all these members some
come along and begin to study HPB. How else is the Society going to grow and
stay alive? The decision to study the Secret Doctrine or anything else for
that matter must be left to the local Lodges and Study Centers. This is what
the second and third declared objects of the Society are all about.

Rich Taylor says that he strongly disapproves of the Boston Lodge studies
meanwhile saying that he founded their Secret Doctrine study group. The fact
that it was poorly attended is in my view because of the difficult nature of
the material. Boston Lodge is still trying with apparently only mediocre
success to put the Secret Doctrine out there so the public can be exposed to
it. How many of our Lodges have people clamoring to study the Secret Doctrine?

If we start telling Lodges what they can and cannot study the membership will
only continue to shrink. Look at our Society 4200 members and declining year
by year. What is going on and why this attitude on the part of Wheaton that
they know best that they can and should tell Lodges what to do? The sorry
state of our membership size is ample evidence that national must put its own
house in order and stop trying to tell good people in Lodge work who want to be
of service what to do. Wheaton should be serving the Lodges with resources to
provide lecturers to provide funding for bookstores and libraries to show
Lodges how to attract more members so that Theosophy can become better known.
Wheaton does some very good things along these lines and for that I applaud
them. It is when they choose to be masters rather than servants as in the
Boston case that they disparage the Theosophical Society.

In my view Wheaton must be the servant of the Lodges and Study Centers if they
are people who genuinely want to serve Theosophy and not try to be the masters
of those Lodges and Study Centers and I believe this also should apply to Adyar
on the international level. There appears to be something very wrong there
also.

Sy Ginsburg