The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Something else About the Impact of the Christmas Conference

[ 1 ] The impact of the Christmas Conference should also include the fact that members who want to be active would make it increasingly clear to the world what anthroposophy is and is not in its essence. As long as the opinion can still be discussed: Shouldn't this or that which has been gained on anthroposophical ground be “incorporated” here and there, without scaring people off by telling them that this is anthroposophy? As long as this is the case, many things within the Anthroposophical Society will not be right.

[ 2 ] Now it is a matter of really striving for clarity in this direction. There is a difference between sectarian advocacy for something that has been constructed as dogmatic anthroposophy and straightforward, open, undisguised, and unadorned advocacy for what anthroposophy reveals about the spiritual world in such a way that human beings can gain a dignified relationship to this world.

[ 3 ] It is the task of the Executive Council at the Goetheanum to understand the work for anthroposophy in the latter sense; and this must also be properly understood by the members who want to be active in this particular aspect of its work. The Christmas Conference is intended to bring about a growing together of anthroposophy and the Anthroposophical Society. This cannot happen if the seeds continue to blossom that have been sown by repeatedly distinguishing between “orthodoxy” and “heresy” within the circle of those who have come together in the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 4 ] Above all, it is important to know what makes anthroposophy possible as a spiritual attitude in this regard. It does not consist of a sum of opinions that “anthroposophists” must hold. The words “We believe this; we reject that” should not even arise among anthroposophists. Such a thing may arise as a natural consequence of anthroposophical activity, but it must never be presented as a program. The only judgment that can be made is: “Anthroposophy exists; it has been developed; I advocate that what has been developed should become known in the world.” The fact that there is a difference between the two judgments mentioned here, like night and day, is still far too little recognized in anthroposophical circles. Otherwise, one would not hear the grotesque statement “The Anthroposophical Society believes this or that” time and again. Such a statement has no real content. What matters is that people feel this.

[ 5 ] If one were to ask around in order to gain clarity about anthroposophy: What kind of opinion or attitude to life does this or that person who is a member of the Anthroposophical Society have? One would be taking a completely wrong path to arrive at the essence of anthroposophy. Nevertheless, many members who want to be active act in such a way that this question must arise again and again. But the only opinion that should arise is: Anthroposophy exists in the world; the Anthroposophical Society provides an opportunity to get to know it.

[ 6 ] Everyone who joins this society should feel that they are joining solely to get to know anthroposophy. The attitude of members who want to be active can help to ensure that this feeling arises in the right way. Today, however, the effect is often quite different. People are afraid to join the Society because the attitude of active members gives them the impression that they must commit themselves to certain dogmas with the innermost being of their soul. Naturally, they shy away from this.

[ 7 ] There must be a willingness to increasingly dispel this impression. Many active members believe that if people are admitted to the Society solely for the purpose of learning about anthroposophy, they will leave again once they have done so. And we will never have a self-contained Society.

[ 8 ] However, this cannot happen if the Anthroposophical Society is understood in the right way by its members who want to be active. But it will always happen if membership of the Society is made dependent on adherence to even the smallest dogma. And every point in the program is a dogma.

[ 9 ] But if the members of the Anthroposophical Society are oriented toward getting to know anthroposophy through their membership, then whether they stay or not will depend on something else entirely. It will depend on whether they can hope to continue learning more and more within the society.

[ 10 ] But that in turn will depend on whether the core of the Society is truly alive or whether it is dead; and whether the conditions exist within the Society for the living core not to die prematurely when it wants to grow into the Society. That the core is alive is the concern of the Executive Council at the Goetheanum. It does not administer dogmas; it feels itself to be merely the bearer of a spiritual heritage whose value it recognizes, and it works to spread this spiritual heritage. It is pleased with every person who comes and says, “I want to take part in what you are doing.” This results in the living structure of the Anthroposophical Society. And this is kept alive when all members who want to be active agree with the Executive Council at the Goetheanum in their attitude and way of working.

[ 11 ] Everything that can rightly be called “trust” within the Society can only grow on such a foundation. If this foundation is in place, then it will not happen again and again that the Anthroposophical Society appears to the world as something quite different from what it is.

[ 12 ] I am well aware of the judgments that arise in many active members of the Society when they read the above. They will say: We cannot understand this; now we know even less what is actually intended. But this is precisely the worst prejudice. Just read the matter carefully, and you will find it is not vague and ambiguous, but only that a certain sensitivity of understanding is needed to take it into your heart. But this should be present in those who want to be active in the Anthroposophical Society.

Further guiding principles issued by the Anthroposophical Society at the Goetheanum

[ 13 ] 59. An unbiased observation of thinking shows that the thoughts of ordinary consciousness have no existence of their own, that they only appear as mirror images of something. But human beings feel themselves to be alive in their thoughts. Thoughts do not live; but human beings live in their thoughts. This life originates in spirit beings, which (in the sense of my “Occult Science”) can be addressed as those of the third hierarchy, as a spirit realm.

[ 14 ] 60. Extending this unbiased observation to feelings shows that feelings arise from the organism, but that they cannot be produced by it. For their life carries within it a being that is independent of the organism. Human beings can feel themselves with their organism in the natural world. But when they do so with self-understanding, they will feel themselves with their emotional world in a spiritual realm. That is the realm of the second hierarchy.

[ 15 ] 61. As a being of will, human beings do not turn to their organism, but to the outside world. When they want to walk, they do not ask what they feel in their feet, but what is the destination they want to reach. They forget their organism by willing. In their will, they do not belong to their nature. They belong to the spiritual realm of the first hierarchy.

(Continued in the next issue.)