The Rudolf Steiner Archive

7. On the Expansion of the Anthroposophical Society

[ 1 ] Rudolf Steiner: We have now reached the point where at least a draft of a circular letter to the Anthroposophical Society has been prepared. This lays a kind of foundation on which negotiations would be possible. I believe it might now be a good idea for you to discuss your own wishes in joint negotiations with the committee that will remain in place until the delegates’ assembly. This committee is composed purely on a functional basis—so functional, in fact, that unlike the “Committee of Thirty” you are familiar with, it does not include members of the individual institutes, but rather those who are tasked with representing the existing institutions. This committee is composed as follows: from the former Central Executive Committee, Mr. Leinhas representing Der Kommende Tag, Dr. Unger as the remaining member of the old Central Executive Committee, Dr. Rittelmeyer as the representative of the Movement for Religious Renewal, then Wolfgang Wachsmuth, Mr. von Grone, Dr. Palmer, Dr. Kolisko, Miss Mücke representing the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing House, and Mr. Werbeck from Hamburg representing the other external interests. I have asked the seven from Stuttgart to work together with you to take the steps you have in mind. I myself will have to leave for Dornach tomorrow morning and will be back on Monday. I regret that I will not be able to participate in the upcoming meetings. I now believe that the very best course of action—since there can be no disagreement on your part regarding me—is for you to conduct the negotiations with these individuals entirely on your own initiative. As things stand, these individuals are the ones available, since all shades of opinion are represented among them; the younger generation is represented by Mr. von Grone and Wolfgang Wachsmuth—I’ll leave it to you to decide whether you find these two likable—who are, of course, completely new to any leadership role. Furthermore, Dr. Palmer has stated that he wants to build every possible bridge to the younger generation.

[ 2 ] The appeal to the members of the Anthroposophical Society is currently in draft form. It will essentially contain what the Anthroposophical Society has had to say at this time. Naturally, it had to come from those who have led the Anthroposophical Society up to now. From February 25 to 28, a delegates’ assembly will take place, in that the individual branches and groups that consider themselves part of the same body will send their delegates here so that a kind of general assembly can be held. This will provide an opportunity to present all views regarding the Society’s future development. Until now, we have faced the alternative of either proceeding in this way or allowing the Anthroposophical Society, as it was, to come to an end and founding something entirely new. In 1918, it would have been easier to found something new. Now we are faced with established institutions through which we are committed to the world and from which we cannot extricate ourselves; therefore, everything must arise from within the Society. The Society itself must be structured in a way that allows for greater freedom within it, and it must be impossible to feel constrained within it. I think it will work, but I would like to hear what you have to say on your own initiative. The fact that it has taken so long for us to reach this point must be attributed to the deliberateness of old age. We will be happy to hear what you have to say at this moment.

[ 3 ] A youth representative speaks about the place of young people in society, with reference to what Dr. Steiner said in his most recent lecture at the Stuttgart branch on the individual phases in the history of the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 4 ] Rudolf Steiner: What you said about the dividing line that has emerged in connection with the first, second, and third phases of the movement—which are very clearly distinct from one another—is correct. One must, of course, take into account that the individual phases lasted approximately seven years, just as the Society itself is now in its twenty-first year, so to speak. What is true is this: the impulses for joining and participating were actually different among the earlier members than they are now among the predominantly academic and youthful circles. They differ in that the people who joined during the first phase came with a whole complex of longings—arising, admittedly, from the circumstances of their time, but entirely unconscious; they were not aware of their connection to any particular historical context and were at an age when one does not yet clearly reflect on one’s relationship to the times. They came with very general human interests related to the times, but they were not aware of this. This was still largely the case in the second phase as well. Anthroposophy had advanced considerably, but the anthroposophists, with a few exceptions, were less interested in questions pertaining to contemporary issues. The third phase was unsettling for those who had joined earlier. They came together with all those who were dissatisfied—not with vague temporal circumstances, but in a very specific way with what these people had experienced in today’s educational institutions. They would not have come to anthroposophy if there had not been a strong contrast within them to today’s educational institutions. They came with impulses different from those who, even to the slightest degree, had actually viewed anthroposophy in relation to the times. I myself had to speak about this. What I said about the relationship of anthroposophy to the times was actually taken in very little. Yet, strangely enough—and yet not so strangely—they came with a longing that actually points to the very heart of anthroposophy.

[ 5 ] A curious fact has now come to light: namely, the misunderstanding regarding the School of Spiritual Science courses. I do not wish to speak against their value. But the School of Spiritual Science courses were a misunderstanding. What was expressed there was not at all what you were seeking. You were seeking anthroposophy in and of itself. Those who had joined the Anthroposophical Society in earlier times as academics could not understand this. They wanted to fuse their academic work with anthroposophy. They did not accept this. So, over time, they will not come into any conflict at all with what I have called the main body of the Anthroposophical Society. The real conflict existed only with the academics, because they believed they wanted to represent anthroposophy in a biological, chemical-physical, and historical manner. They do not want that. They want pure anthroposophy. They face the difficulty of getting over this mountain, together with the entire Society. The academic element that has crept in is like a mountain; but it must be crossed, one way or the other. If both sides work with good will, this may prove beneficial. On the other hand, however, if one wants to make progress, a certain degree of specialization is ultimately necessary. If good will exists on both sides, it will work out.

[ 6 ] A participant discusses some of the younger people’s wishes regarding the reorganization of branch activities, particularly the lecture and presentation programs.

[ 7 ] Rudolf Steiner (interrupting): This little book by Albert Steffen [The Pedagogical Course at the Goetheanum] is worthwhile because it conveys the content of my lectures in a truly artistic way. It is not a journalistic report; it stands on its own. Nothing like this has happened before. We’ll see if it catches on. That would be fortunate.

[ 8 ] Isn't that right—the call will essentially have to encompass two things. First: an emphasis on the necessity of inner work within the anthroposophical movement. Second, it is already essential that the Anthroposophical Society be so strongly united that it can fend off the opponents who arise. Defense not through polemics, but through genuine, substantive work before the world. If, in the face of opposition, nothing is ultimately done, then anthroposophy will perish. One cannot work in a way where one person asserts something and another refutes it. With the most significant opponents, one cannot reach their audience. If slanderous claims about anthroposophy are spread today from the circles of the Pan-Germans and German Nationalists, there is an audience that believes everything under any circumstances. One cannot reach that audience. One must know the people who make up this audience. Certain things cannot be said to a Catholic audience. If the refutations are false, then they are false. But if they are correct, they do us no good; rather—I must use this word—they only harm us, especially among Catholics. They take offense when one is in a position to refute the opposing claims. Being right harms us today; being wrong, perhaps, less so. These things can only be refuted through positive work. Be as strong as the others are. Dr. Rittelmeyer was right to use the expression the other day, and I myself have often pointed this out: One has no idea how widespread the situation is—one can say that fires are being started everywhere! Our opposition will manifest itself in a truly dreadful way in the near future. In the face of this, it is necessary to form a united body. All things that are good pose a danger to society. It is indeed true that the movement for religious renewal poses a danger to the Anthroposophical Society. The fact is that no one imagined that we would achieve anything in this area as well. And if we—which is, of course, highly desirable—continue to work our way deeper into the academic sphere, then the Leisegangs will emerge everywhere. This truly worries me, because the old reactionary forces are growing ever stronger. When the University League was founded, there were far more opportunities to hold back the old powers. Today, those opportunities have diminished. You will have to suffer greatly. But even if anthroposophy were to be destroyed, it would rise again, for it must exist, and it is a necessity. Either there is a future for the Earth or there is not. The future of the Earth is inseparable from anthroposophy. If anthroposophy has no future, then all of humanity will have no future. The trend alone is enough. Anthroposophy may go through various phases as it spreads. I do believe that you will have to overcome this obstacle, which I alluded to earlier, for the benefit of society, and do so in complete peace.

[ 9 ] A participant talks about a different relationship that young people should have with society.

[ 10 ] Rudolf Steiner: You must simply bear in mind that in ancient cultural movements—those that have already matured over the course of world history—the spiritual attitudes were quite different from those in movements that are historically very young. Today, people simply have no idea how difficult it was to be a Christian in the early centuries of Christianity. Today, it is easy to be a Christian. In the past, the difficulty lay not in external martyrdom but in an inner struggle of the soul. It was difficult to be a Christian in one’s own eyes. Today, it is difficult to be a true anthroposophist. In a certain sense, it is difficult. Those who have been anthroposophists for a long time carry within themselves, in their entire spiritual attitude, the full difficulty of being connected to the very beginnings of a spiritual movement; in them, the understanding of certain aspects of life is not as strong. Those who have been anthroposophists for a long time—longer than the younger ones—sometimes talk right past one another when speaking to them. Just the other day, I encountered a very striking example of this. These friends were having discussions; the mood there was one of belief that all bridges had now been built, that they now understood each other down to the last detail. Over there, people were completely sincere. With you, on the other hand, I sensed a mood that we needed to organize the opposition; we simply couldn’t find common ground. This certainly reflects a tendency to be easily deluded about the realities of life when one is in a certain state of mind, which I have described. It is difficult to be an anthroposophist; it is not easy to overcome a certain rigidity. The illusionists are honest. They come with the freshness of the soul, and that is why you, as someone who has not yet grown weary, are less inclined to harbor these illusions than someone who is weary. Many have grown weary and worn down by the difficulties we have faced. That is also why there has been so much talking past one another these days.

[ 11 ] A participant speaks about his original plan to redirect the forces working for the opposition—particularly those from the youth—and organize them in a productive way.

[ 12 ] Rudolf Steiner: Some things are simply such that realistic thinking must also take them into account. Somehow, there must continue to be something like your educational institutions in the future. Even if, in this regard specifically, all hopes for the future are nipped in the bud, it must not be the case that the university remains a mere sham. It truly worries me how far we still are from that. On the other hand, the university system is in a terrible state. A century ago, people at least still had a unified worldview; that is now completely gone, even in terms of the concept of human dignity. You see, Leisegang—it doesn’t really matter how he treats me—but Leisegang, who is about to become a professor, since he certainly has all the aspirations for it, has now published a work on Plato, the first volume. He doesn’t treat me nearly as badly as he treats Plato—he treats Plato much worse, turning him into a caricature—only, people don’t notice it. You see, and that’s what worries me, truly worries me: how far we are from the possibility of creating a university.

[ 13 ] One participant points out how the prisoners at the prison camp where he worked established a college, and cites this as an example of the creation of a college for the science of the spirit.

[ 14 ] Rudolf Steiner: After all, one cannot simply establish a university today, because the prerequisite for that is the presence of individual scholars. Ideas and approaches do indeed already exist. But as long as the people who are supposed to work within the movement—I must put it bluntly—can only be considered starving souls, things will be difficult. This is becoming more difficult every day because the time is approaching when it is hardly conceivable that the preceding generation will provide scholarships for the next. The possibility of bringing about a completely new form of education in a different way is becoming more difficult every day. For purely spiritual reasons, I must emphasize two things at every opportunity: first, to strive with all one’s intensity to become as strong as possible; second, to devote all one’s energy to expanding the circle of friends; it would not be necessary to focus on numbers, but only in view of the circumstances of the times. In spiritual matters, the opposite must certainly be true, but in relation to the times, this is how it is. Expanding the circle need not come at the expense of superficiality, but efforts must certainly be made in this direction in order to gain a large number of friends. Otherwise, the downfall of the individual and of the movement as such is more likely. That is indeed the case. However, you must not shy away from being quite strong—even as young people—in order to achieve outward expansion.

[ 15 ] A participant talks about how difficult it is to communicate with older people.

[ 16 ] Rudolf Steiner: Setting aside judgments, however, it is true in a certain sense that this lack of understanding is mutual! Old age is such that one can say: The way it is, it is not his fault, but his fate. Yet youth’s resistance to old age is both a defense mechanism and a sign of weakness!

[ 17 ] Become a genius through interest!