Can someone be active in several theosophical organisations?

[Katinka Hesselink]

In other words:

How should we deal with members of the Theosophical Society Pasadena or the ULT in the TS Adyar?

We had this come up in our local lodge the other day. We were talking about the program for next year, and the topic of who should go in the board of the lodge came up. The lodge is small: only about 15
members. It’s been very active lately, and three new members came along
in the past year alone. So things are looking good, but still, it’s a
small lodge. In fact, the board is only two people. One chair &
money person (what are those called?), the other the secretary.

Of the members there is one who is very active: she helps out with coffee, tea, selling books, digitalizing the library etc. Yet she’s also a member of one of the ‘rival theosophical organizations’. For
that reason she was not asked to be in the board in the past. Yet she has been
asked to check the books for the lodge building (a separate
foundation). It’s starting to be a bit silly to not ask her in the
board.

So she IS going to be asked.

There are several reasons why:

• Active members should be rewarded with recognition for their work. Being a member of the board is a form of recognition.
• Active members who are Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, Freemason etc. are not kept out of such responsibility, why should someone who is active in another theosophical organization be suspect?

Do you agree, or did we break an important rule by asking her to take on more administrative responsibility?

First published here:

Can someone be active in several theosophical organisations?

[Katinka Hesselink]

I also think it's important to make sure it's not a majority within a lodge board that has a certain affiliation. I'd cringe as much at a board with only Blavatskyites, as I would at a board with a majority of Bailey fans.

[Joe Fulton]

It all depends on correctly ascertaining the motives of that person. If their presence is primarily to promote the interests of that organization to the detriment of the group. Let's say as an example the Boston Lodge takeover. In that situation the Boston Lodge was taken over by individuals promoting the interests of Lucis Trust and Alice Bailey related organizations. If you know someone is moving in just to take over for a purpose contrary to the goals of the existing group, then there is no problem (in my mind) of excluding them, since their role is essentially predatory in nature.

If the member is productive and working for the good of the group as a whole then they should be given every opportunity to grow, participate and add to the life of the group.