last update: March 11, 2008
New Developements
> Official News Report, March 4, 2008
see: > "The Receptive Ear"
By Dr. Corsin Bischoff
By Dr. Gian Bischoff
The Executive Council of the General Anthroposophical Society is now finalizing the expulsion with which it first threatened over 40 members in December of 2006. In letters dated March 14, 2007, the Council notified the members to be expelled that the decision is now definite.
During the “hearings” held in January and February of 2007, the Council could not furnish any proof that these members had ever been guilty of any action out of keeping with anthroposophical tasks and goals. (see the reports and documents below, on this page). On the contrary, the talks revealed clearly that the members to be excluded are very strongly bound to the Anthroposophical Society and the Christmas Conference. This deep bond is precisely what, in recent years, led them to fight for the preservation of the General Anthroposophical Society, which the Council had planned to dissolve and was actually already in the process of dissolving -- a plan that could thus be cancelled. It is deeply regrettable and most hurtful that the Executive Council is now expelling the very members without whom the Anthroposophical Society would no longer exist today.
The members concerned have not yet made known their reactions to this announcement. We will keep you informed of further developments.
This form letter was sent out to 46 members of the GELEBTE WEIHNACHTSTAGUNG – Gesellschaft zur Bewahrung der Allgemeinen Anthroposophischen Gesellschaft 1923/25 (LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE SOCIETY for the Preservation of the General Anthroposophical Society of 1923/25). That is its full name. The members to be expelled are Austrians, Swiss, and Germans, but not always the ones who have been most active in Dornach. Some have never brought a single motion and have attended very few meetings.
The one-half hour individual hearings, conducted mainly by Paul Mackay, were just that – hearings, rather than a free exchange of ideas, and apparently intended mainly to satisfy legal requirements.
You may read the letter in its original German on www.888GOYA.org or request it from Christiane Marks at 518-329-5377
Executive Council turns down the plaintiffs' compromise offer without discussion.
Two Swiss Branches are Being Fully Recognized and Fife Motions, Initially Denied, Will be Presented at an Extraordinary Members' Meeting
February 2006 from Christiane Marks
from the Christmas issue of the newsletter of Gelebte Weihnachtstagung/Living the Christmas Society, Society for the Preservation of the General Anthroposophical Society of 1923 and 1925
On the Second Anniversary of the November 15, 2003, the Day on Which the General Anthroposophical Society Voted to Dissolve Itself.
What effect has it had? Where is the Vorstand headed? What are the disturbing trends to watch?
New Trends in the Leadership of National Societies
Financial Scandal in the German Society
Why does the Executive Council spare no pains to try to make us believe that our General Anthroposophical Society does not contain the Christmas Conference impulse?
On Sunday, May 15, 2005, at 5:00 PM, Cornelius Pietzner (member of the Board of the GAS), Joan Almon and Marijo Rogers, (American General Secretaries f or Foreign and Domestic Affairs respectively), will be visiting the Ghent area for a few hours to establish contact with the many Society members here. The meeting is being sponsored by the local Berkshire-Taconic Branch of the Anthroposophical Society, which has about 250 members from Western Massachusetts and Eastern New York State.
The program includes music, a short Eurythmy performance, and a talk by Douglas Sloan, a local Class reader and very active in the Society. Each of the three visitors will also give a brief talk. There will be a simple shared evening meal, and then the three visitors will answer questions from members, which were sent in a few weeks in advance. There will also be an opportunity to write down and present questions during the meeting. The question and answer period of the meeting will be moderated by Douglas Sloan.
Around 9: 00 PM, the visitors will be returning to Spring Valley.
The questions of a local Branch member >Thomas Tommi
Two courts, two judgments, two sets of authorities, now attest to the fact that our General Anthroposophical Society is in direct continuity to the Christmas Conference – that it is the undisputable bearer of the Christmas Conference impulse. Paul Mackay has always claimed that he is only trying to come to complete clarity regarding the constitution of our Society. If that were so, then he should be satisfied now. But from the beginning, this has simply not been about constitutional clarity; if it had, the highly destructive, turn-of-the-century constitution-related events would have been organized quite differently and would have come to a different conclusion. We are facing the destruction of our Society, and this work of destruction will be completed unless enough members have the courage to wake up. We must continue to work for this awakening, or we will soon be standing around a pile of rubble like that of the first Goetheanum after the terrible fire that destroyed it. But this pile of rubble would have much more serious consequences: Between the Goetheanum fire and today’s destruction, the Christmas Conference took place -- an impulse for spiritual renewal. And the the Foundation Stone for a new Mystery Center was placed in the ground, but also in members’ hearts. The life and the traditions flowing from this Christmas Conference will only survive through our faithful guardianship, and guarding them will take everything we are able to give.
In memory of Rudolf Steiner’s
144th birthday, February 27, 2005.
I would be glad to enter into dialogue with those who take these lines seriously.
Michaela Jordan
(from the GELEBTE WEIHNACHTSTAGUNG (LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE) newsletter; 2005, second issue,)
held in Dornach by LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE on March 19, 2005.
After the Dornach General Members’ Meeting, at least sixty people gathered in the meeting room of the Hotel Engel in Dornach to discuss the events of the day and to inform themselves about the lawsuit, now concluded, and the background and extent of the financial scandal in the German Society.
During the course of our lively exchange, the main sentiments were great joy and relief because the Board had now accepted the judgment of the high court, which makes its terms legally binding.This, in turn, means that the dissolution of the “General Anthroposophical Society founded in 1923 and reorganized in 1925” (the court’s words) has now been prevented.
However, the majority of the gathered members were very angry about the way the Board totally falsified the judgments in reading its “Explanation” that afternoon. The Board continues to assert, in an untruthful and confusing way, that the court declared the society of the Christmas Conference to have been dissolved, and therefore to be nonexistent. Yet quite the opposite is the case! The court declares that today’s General Anthroposophical Society is the society of the Christmas Conference! On the surface, the Board members seem to accept the judgment, yet in reality they pervert it into its opposite and act as if it didn’t exist.
Attenders were also angry and puzzled at the fact that Board members are not willing to resign, even though their constitution plans have turned out to be legally untenable and even though these plans even endangered the continued existence of the General Anthroposophical Society, which the court has just confirmed to be the bearer of the Christmas Society impulse.
Most gathered members also vehemently opposed the Board’s announced intention of upholding the distortion of Rudolf Steiner’s Principles undertaken at the December 2002 members’ meeting as well as the intention of curtailing member rights, through a new definition of the role of general secretaries as well as in other ways.
This meeting proved once again that open exchange on the current issues so important to the Society is essential and deeply satisfying. It also proved that constructive dialogue is quite possible even in larger circles of members who do not all share the same views, and that in future it should be much more often made possible.
Michaela Jordan
The Dornach Board has accepted the judgment of the Solothurn High Court of February 12, 2005. Their acceptance means that the judgment is now in full force legally.
Since the court decreed the Board’s theoretical society, the General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference) legally nonexistent, the members’ November 15, 2003 decision to dissolve the existing society is now nullified, also. The High Court characterizes our society, the society saved from dissolution, as
"The General Anthroposophical Society founded in 1923 and refocused ["angepasst"] in 1925" ( Solothurn Court’s report, item 11). Thus, the court legally confirms that our present GAS is the society founded during the Christmas Conference.
However, unbelievable as it may seem, the Board still continues to deny this fact. In a declaration read at the Members’ Meeting of March 19, 2005, the Board continues to lie to members in claiming that the society of the Christmas Conference "is legally no longer in existence". The Dorneck-Thierstein Court as well as the Higher Court of Solothurn have now clearly stated in their judgments that the society of the Christmas Conference is
fully alive in our present Society today.
The Dornach meeting left no doubt in members’ minds that, in spite of the judgments against them, Board members will pursue their original plan, that of doing everything possible to burden the Anthroposophical Society with authoritarian bureaucratic leadership. The ideal of the open, participatory members’ society will thus continue to fall victim to these plans. Bodo von Plato announced at the members’ meeting that further constitutional changes will be planned by closed groups without any member participation. The distortive changes to the Principles, which take away the members’ right to participate in shaping the society will be made in spite of the fact that the court nullilfied them when they were first made in December of 2002.
The Work Continues!
A heartfelt plea for help to all members who would like to make sure that Anthroposophy can continue to live within the General Anthroposophical Society
The plaintiffs represented by Lawyer Thaler still owe about 250,000 Swiss franks in legal fees over and above the 50, 000 franks the court ordered the losing party to pay in damages. Friends who would like to help carry these expenses incurred in saving our society may send their contributions the following way:
Switzerland: Postcheckkonto 80-24048-8. Germany: Postbank-Girokonto 326808-755, Karlsruhe, Bankleihzahl 660 100 75. Austria: Bankhaus C. Spängler, Salzburg, Kontonr. 100 133759, BLZ 19530. Friends from America who would like to send checks may make them out to “Gelebte Weihnachtstagung”, marking them “Gerichtskosten” and send them to “Gelebte Weihnachtstagung” C/O Ursula Ruchti, Bockenweg 31, CH-8810 Horgen, Switzerland.
>The Society Founded at the Christmas Conference Has Been Preserved!
The Board of Directors of the General Anthroposophical Society is not taking the case to the Supreme Court. The Board’s decision not to appeal again means that the judgment made by the Dorneck-Thierstein District Court and the Higher Court of Solothurn of January 11, 2205 is now in effect. All resolutions that the Board made in December of 2002 to “reactivate” its theoretical second society, as well as the November 2003 decision to dissolve the GAS are therefore null and void. See the First Brief Report of the Dornach General Members’ Meeting of March 19, 2005
10.3.2005
As many of you know, the Board of Directors of our society in Dornach intends to dissolve our existing 80-year-old society, which is our continuity with Rudolf Steiner and the Christmas Conference, and replace it with a proposed new society officially called General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference) and based on an alleged second inactive GAS which they say recently came to light and is in true continuity with the Christmas Con-ference.
On January 12, 2005, a day after hearing the Board’s appeal, the Solothurn High Court announced that it concurred with the first judgment made a year ago by the Dorneck-Thierstein District Court. On February 23, the Solothurn Court issued an explanation of the judgment.
"We have established that the General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference) is not a society according to Article 60ff in the Swiss Book of Civil Law."
On February 3, 2004, the Dorneck-Thierstein District Court had already ruled the same way. No evidence was found by either court for the existence of the inactive second society which was to serve as the basis for the Board's GAS(CC), so the GAS(CC) has no legal existence, either. The term "Christmas Conference" may make up a part of its name, but it has no legal existence, let alone any continuity with the Christmas Conference. It is our existing General Anthroposophical Society which has now been judged by two courts to be in full succession of the society founded during the Christmas Conference, and to be completely legal and fully capable of running the society, esoterically as well as exoterically. It goes without saying that the exoteric, as crucial as the esoteric, must include full compliance with the Swiss legal system.
That judgment came as no surprise, since, even before hearing the appeal, the court had already told the Board and their lawyer Dr. Furrer that the judges agreed with the first judgment and therefore asked them to drop the appeal, which they wanted heard, nevertheless.
Please note, to begin with, that despite countless corrections, the Board continues to misrepresent the object of the lawsuit. The lawsuit was not brought to prove the nonexistence of the society founded in 1923/24, but to prove the nonexistence of the Board’s recent claimed, artifical society [Gesellschaftskonstrukt] known as the General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference).
The court also makes clear that members rights were violated when they were not allowed full participation in the December 2002 members’ meeting on the basis of their membership cards alone. According to the court, when the Board tried to get them to commit to the proposed GAS (CC) with a separate signature by withholding the meeting participation rights that were legally theirs already anyway until they signed was putting them under duress (Noetigung).A sizeable number of members refused to sign such a document under such circumstances and thus did lose full participation rights. Dr. Furrer then claimed that since they had not committed themselves to the Board’s proposed new society, they were not entitled to bring a suit regarding its existence. The court declared this action of Dr. Furrer’s to be close to malfeasance [Rechtsmissbrauch].
Are You Against Continued Legal Action?
Then Please Let the Board Members Know!
The Board is now considering whether to take the appeal on to the Supreme Court, even after two clear rulings.
If you feel that this would be a useless and wasteful course, if you feel that the Society has already been harmed enough in the eyes of the world by this legal battling and that all resources should now finally be focused on doing the important work of Anthroposophy within the existing, original and true society, call, fax, or write the Board at the following addresses:
sekretariat(at)goetheanum.ch , phone: 011 41 61 706 42 42 or fax, replacing last four digits with 43 14. or To the Vorstand, Goetheanum, Postfach 41 43, Dornach 1, Switzerland.
Why did the Plaintiffs Bring this Suit? What are they Trying to Prevent ?
• the destruction of spiritual continuity
• the disavowal of the 80 years of living history of the General Anthroposophical Society
• the illegal usurpation of the identity of their society
• the dissolution of their society through its fusion with a legally nonexistent society
• the denial of the right of members fully to participate in society affairs.
• the creation of – unanthroposophical – authoritarian power structures
• the pretense that the constitution was undertaken for the sake of society reform
• continual falsifications
• the distortion of Anthroposophy
This is what the plaintiffs, represented by Lawyer Dr.Thaler put up nearly 300,000 Swiss franks to prevent. These objectives, notably the main objective -- maintaining spiritual continuity with the Christmas Conference --, have now been achieved through two court judgments. The first court judgment may be downloaded from the Gelebte Weihnachtstagung website www.888GOYA.org The second is summarized below.
• The plaintiffs’ case is upheld. The Court decrees that the General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference) is not a society in the sense of Article 60 ff. in the Swiss Book of Civil Law. The Board’s claimed GAS(CC) cannot be the society founded in 1923, because this society was totally taken up into our present 81-year-old GAS and continues to live in it.
• The registry office of Canton Solothurn… is ordered to delete the name of this society from the register when this judgment goes into effect.
• The defendants owe the courts a total of 49,750 Swiss franks for which the six Board members are jointly responsible.
• The defendants owe the plaintiffs 51,000 franks.
The Board of Directors now has to decide if it will appeal again, taking its case to the Swiss Supreme Court, the Bundesgericht. The decision may be made in time to be announced at the March 19th General Members’ Meeting in Dornach. The deadline for making it is late March.
If you would like more background on this and other society developments and current events, visit the new LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE website at www.888GOYA.org . or contact us.The full name of the society is LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE, Society for the Preservation of the General Anthroposophi-cal Society of 1923 and 1925. It does not rival the GAS, but, as the name suggests, has the vital function of preserving it.
Could you Help with Legal Fees?
Certainly there is still a lot of work ahead in order to give Anthroposophy the best possible home from which it can spread, but Rudolf Steiner’s unique esoteric/exoteric form of 1923, in which this can happen, has been saved, and affirmed so far been by two courts. It is possible that the Board might appeal again, but in view of the Society financial crisis outlined in the Nachrichtenblatt (3/2005) by treasurer Cornelius Pietzner, it seems less likely.
Thus far, the plaintiffs have put up 300,000 Swiss franks to preserve the Society. If the Board wins the final appeal, the plaintiffs will owe another 50,000 franks. Even if the plain-tiffs win, they will only get back 50,000 franks.
If you can help with legal fees, please make checks out to “Gelebte Weihnachtstagung” marking them “c/o Ursula Ruchti/lawsuit” and send them to GELEBTE WEIHNACHT-STAGUNG, 8810 Horgen, Bockenweg 31, Switzerland.
The Receptive Ear
In “The Receptive Ear” 888GOYA is making available to members and friends of the General Anthroposophical Society a forum for expressing their thoughts, concerns, and viewpoints to the anthroposophical public, and especially to the Board of Directors in Dornach. It is the purpose of “The Receptive Ear” to provide space for meaningful encounters and constructive dialogue.
If you would like to take part in this open forum, please send your contributions to the editors at the below address by regular mail, fax, or email. Don’t forget to sign them and include your address. LIVING THE CHRISTMAS CONFERENCE (GELEBTE WEIHNACHTSTAGUNG) Bockenweg 31, CH-8810 Horgen, Switzerland. Fax ++ 41 44 725 80 15, administration(at)888GOYA.org.
“When members truly understand Anthroposophy in their hearts,
these hearts will beat in unison,
without heads knocking into each other.”
Rudolf Steiner,
Christmas Conference lecture,
December 26, 1923, 10 A.M.Lecture.
Dr. Michaela Jordan
10.3.2005
Questions Frequently Asked by Puzzled Members
Why were membership cards not honored at the December 2002 Members Meeting in Dornach as the passports to full meeting participation they legally are? Why did members have to sign a separate document committing to the Board’s new society or lose their vote?
Why did the Board have a second legal opinion drawn up so soon after ordering (and at first fully endorsing) the Riemer legal opinion which stated that there was only one society? Why did the Board fly in the face of accepted legal procedure and have the second opinion drawn up by its own legal adviser, Dr. Furrer? This was a case of conflict of interest, and one of the reasons why the courts did not accord nearly as much weight to the second than to the first legal opinion. Predicably, the second legal opinion came to a different conclusion,that of the two-society theory, the theory the Board needed to proceed with its plan.
Why did the Board have members vote to dissolve the society on November 15, 2003, when the legality of their alternative society was still being challenged in court?
Why didn’t the Board proceed more slowly with the constitution plans and give members the opportunity to understand and participate in there crucial decisions?
Why have the anthroposophical media published so few details about the constitution procedure and the court procedures? Many members complain that they feel the Board considers them children rather than full-fledged, coresponsible adult members, they have gotten so little information.
Why couldn’t the Board determine in advance that its constitution plans had no legal basis, before this had to be proved by two expensive time-consuming lawsuits which damage the Society internally and in the eyes of the public? How could the Board lead us out onto such a brittle legal limb?
Why, above all, was the whole cataclysmic process embarked on in the first place?
Note: Those American members who would like to read the Board’s presentation of its constitution plan may find it in the Spring 2003 “News for Members”.
> Print Version
On January 11, 2005, the Solothurn Higher Court held a hearing to determine whether the Board of Directors’ claimed theoretical society, the General Anthroposophical Society (Christmas Conference) has any legal existence. Before the hearing even began, Ms. Jeger, the speaker for the three-judge team, stated that the judges agreed with the > Dorneck-Thierstein District Court’s February 3, 2004 judgment: “We find the first judgment convincing.” This judgment was that the Board of Directors’ theoretical society had no legal existence. The spokeswoman stated that, after studying the available material, the higher court believed that the General Anthroposophical Soci-ety founded during the Christmas Conference does definitely live on in its entirety in our present, 80-year-old General Anthroposophical Society.
On February 8, 1925, the entire thought content of the Christmas Conference were entirely transferred to the Building Society, which was transformed into the General An-throposophical Society. (On that date, the Building Society was given an entirely new set of statutes, a new board of directors, and above all, a new name – that of the society founded during the Christmas Conference: The General Anthroposophical Society). All members were transferred to this new society. Only the empty shell of the original society remained, and it is not possible to revive or reactivate a dead, empty shell. In the court’s words: “The fact is, that in 2002 the intention was to fuse the empty shell with the General Anthroposophical Society. But that is an impossibility. We are of the opinion that the previous court judgment is correct.”
The first court judgment and the second court’s pre-hearing decision show that the position of the suing members is sound. And, indeed, it is identical with the position that every board of directors shared until 2001. It now becomes clear that the plaintiffs are not mere agitators and complainers, as they were claimed to be.
The court urged that the defendants and appellants (the Board of the Directors and their lawyer Professor Furrer) withdraw their appeal in order to save all parties expense, time, and effort, but Paul Mackay declined to drop the appeal.
The official judgment will be handed down before the end of the month.
You will find background information on our website 888GOYA.org. under the heading >Constitution Issues and Lawsuit.
The German Anthroposophical Society is currently trying to cope with a financial crisis forcing it to reduce expenses to a bare minimum for years to come. The responsibility for this situation lies with financial speculations made by the Board of Directors and particularly by general secretary and treasurer Dieter Pommerening, who had to step back from all his posts. Over the last few years, without the members’ knowledge, they have been transferring Society funds and responsibilities to three corporations. One of these, set up to manage funds related to real estate left to the Society or, in some cases, purchased at high prices, has now lost millions. Due to inaccurate real estate appraisals, excessively high loans, and greatly overdrawn annuity funds, this corporation, also headed by Dieter Pommerening, is now insolvent. The German Society lost not only its share of half a million Euros and the real estate left to the Society, but is in danger of losing its status as a taxexempt organization, as well. The members were not told about this situation until quite late, and are just beginning to learn the basic facts now. In spite of all this, the Board is hastily and unilaterally carrying out a questionable restructuring plan to privatize the corporation and separate it from the Society.
The 19,000-member German Anthroposophical Society is the largest of the national so-cieties and, until recently, it was the wealthiest, and this financial crisis also endangers the financial well being of the General Anthroposophical Society.
(Januar 2005)