{"id":47173,"date":"2023-05-05T13:31:23","date_gmt":"2023-05-05T11:31:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/?p=47173"},"modified":"2023-05-05T16:24:46","modified_gmt":"2023-05-05T14:24:46","slug":"steiners-vision-of-the-anthroposophical-society","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/steiners-vision-of-the-anthroposophical-society\/","title":{"rendered":"Steiner\u2019s Vision for the Anthroposophical Society"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Having been asked what kind of vision Rudolf Steiner developed in 1923 for the Anthroposophical Society after the Goetheanum burned down and on the way to the Christmas Conference \u2013 an Anthroposophical Society fit for the future, which makes possible, deserves and needs a second Goetheanum \u2013 I will briefly report on what was important, indeed essential, to him in doing so.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling wrote in his 1811 work \u2039The Ages of the World\u203a: \u00abThe past is known, the present is comprehended, the future is anticipated. That which is known is told, that which is comprehended is depicted, that which is anticipated is prophesied.\u00bb<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We therefore have the task of \u00abknowing\u00bb and \u00abtelling\u00bb the past, of practising \u00abspirit recollection\u00bb and talking about it. Furthermore, we have the obligation to \u00abcomprehend\u00bb and \u00abdepict\u00bb the present, i.e. to spiritually contemplate the current situation and its challenges \u2013 and to highlight it and our behaviour. After all, we are facing an open future which, however, should not be a tabula rasa but which we must at least \u00absense\u00bb, anticipating in outline; otherwise we will be completely surprised, if not ambushed by it. We should live towards it in an awake state, learn to \u00abprophesy\u00bb it \u2013 \u00abpractice spirit vision\u00bb, including the coming spirit, the spirit (or demon) of what is to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But we are still \u2013 at the very least also \u2013 preoccupied with the past and partly burdened by it. Why? \u00abHow few know the actual past\u00bb, writes Schelling.<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span> He does not write \u00abactually know\u00bb, but \u00abknow the actual\u00bb. His statement is complex. It not only implies that we have far too little knowledge and awareness of history. Schelling was far ahead of most of us, not only with regard to the \u00abages of the world\u00bb. However, he is concerned with still more and other things. He is concerned with the abolition of the past as the \u00abactual\u00bb past \u2013 through the human tendency to cling to it and to miss out on the present and future as a result, indeed making it impossible. \u00abThose who always wish for the past to return, who do not want to move on while everything is moving forward, prove through impotent praise of times past as well as through powerless scolding of the present that they are unable to have any effect in the latter.\u00bb<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lastly, Schelling describes a second aberration or lapse in dealing with the historical: \u00abThe human being who is incapable of confronting their past has none, or rather they never get out of it, they live constantly in it.\u00bb<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Here lies the problem of the unredeemed, still abandoned past; because we have not mastered it and its challenges, we continue to live in its spell, to perpetuate it, without another present, indeed a \u2039present\u203a at all becoming possible, possible with presence of mind. We are surrounded by examples of this problem \u2013 a self-perpetuating past that is not a past \u2013 in the realm of politics and society; but also in the field of psychotherapy and traumatology. Schelling’s statement has long been common knowledge: \u00abThe person who is incapable of confronting their past has none, or rather they never emerge from it, they live constantly in it.\u00bb I will now leave Schelling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having been asked what kind of vision Rudolf Steiner developed in 1923 for the Anthroposophical Society after the Goetheanum burned down and on the way to the Christmas Conference \u2013 an Anthroposophical Society fit for the future, which makes possible, deserves and needs a second Goetheanum \u2013 I will briefly report on what was important, indeed essential, to him in doing so. We should \u00abknow\u00bb and \u00abtell\u00bb about it in detail \u2013 in the sense of Schelling \u2013 but I want to keep it short here, so I will pick out seven points. Keeping these seven points or problems in mind, we are not in danger, I think, of falling into the first temptation, that of \u00abpraising\u00bb times past; rather, we find ourselves confronted with the second situation, that of the unresolved past, which to a large extent continues into the present. And this prevents real presence, presence of mind, from arising as a prerequisite for an actual future. Put positively: in the course of a general meeting and in the affairs of the Anthroposophical Society in general, it is necessary to \u00abcounter\u00bb this past criticised by Steiner, indeed to act in a completely different diction.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Model of the First Goetheanum, Photo: Xue Li<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

1. Representation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The first point: the representation of anthroposophy in public. Rudolf Steiner made it clear in 1923: the building was destructible because no Anthroposophical Society effectively protected it \u2013 and the \u00abcause of Anthroposophy\u00bb. Because the distortions and defamations of the daily press and various brochures and monographs had remained unanswered and a destructive mood had gained the upper hand. Because the members preferred to concern themselves with the \u00abcycles\u00bb or their internal conflicts, personal desires, and ambitions, instead of looking after the public image of anthroposophy and countering the distortions with the true image of anthroposophy. \u00abFor in a certain sense the Dornach building, which spoke out aloud to the whole world, lacked the background of the protective Anthroposophical Society.\u00bb<\/span>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Rudolf Steiner certainly regarded the Anthroposophical Society as a public \u00abbody\u00bb, a public society, a society with an \u00abobjective spirit\u00bb, as \u00abobjective\u00bb as that of other specialist societies. It was intended to represent anthroposophy knowledgeably in the world, as a \u00abworld society\u00bb \u2013 just as the Society for Internal Medicine represents internal medicine, its expertise, scope, and dignity. This was not the case in 1923 in and through the Anthroposophical Society \u2013 a largely self-absorbed, conflict-ridden, publicly invisible or, according to Steiner, \u00absectarian\u00bb Anthroposophical Society. Can we really say that this is the \u00abactual past\u00bb or do we still \u00abconstantly\u00bb live in it?<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Preparatory work in the garden, Photo: Lin Bautze<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

2. Interest and Shared Responsibility<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The second point: Steiner wanted and needed \u2013 not for himself, but for the \u00abcause of anthroposophy\u00bb to flourish in the world \u2013 an Anthroposophical Society that would take shared responsibility for the anthroposophical institutions in the world, be existentially interested in them, and committed to them, take their destiny upon itself and not stand on the sidelines as a mere study society. \u00abThe Society must grow along with anthroposophy.\u00bb<\/span>6<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Conversely, Steiner demanded of the teachers of the Waldorf School and all the other initiators of the anthroposophical establishments that they continue to commit themselves to the Anthroposophical Society from which they had all started. He considered the distance between the Society and the anthroposophical institutions, which had been developing since 1919, to be dangerous and momentous. The Society lost more and more contact with operative anthroposophy in the world \u2013 and the activists of the establishments left behind (and abandoned) that community of destiny to which they had once pledged themselves. The institutions will, Rudolf Steiner \u00abprophesied\u00bb, lose more and more of their spiritual substance and spiritual identity if this course is continued \u2013 and the Anthroposophical Society will become smaller and more and more insignificant. Can we say that we have overcome this \u00abpast\u00bb?<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Street sign in Freiburg, Photo: Fabian Roschka<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

3. Taking on Social Tasks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Very closely connected with this \u2013 it actually all belongs together \u2013 is my third point: Rudolf Steiner wanted the Anthroposophical Society as such, as a society, to take on tasks in civilisation, tasks for which people \u2039outside\u203a can have respect. Only then, he said, would the Society become \u00abreality\u00bb \u2013 through positive formation of will, through concrete content and commitment, \u00abso that it stands as such in the world and the world finally knows what the Anthroposophical Society as such wants\u00bb.<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Steiner was not speaking here of \u00aboccult\u00bb tasks that members \u2013 then as now \u2013 ascribe to themselves, but of those that are seen and recognised in the public sphere: \u00ab[\u2026] that even the opponents say that there is something there for which they have respect, which is being worked on in the Anthroposophical Society.\u00bb<\/span>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Rudolf Steiner wanted such publicly relevant tasks to be spoken of in the meetings \u2013 including the general meetings \u2013 to be considered and mutually agreed upon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I do not want to specifically raise the question here and in the following points as to whether we have mastered this problem or this task in 2023 \u2013 although I am very much of the opinion that intensive work has been done on this over the last hundred years. We are not living in 1923. And yet we are not rid of the past in Schelling’s sense, on the contrary.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Street crossing in Tokyo, Photo: CC<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

4. World Awareness<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

He, Rudolf Steiner, fourthly wanted \u00abworld awareness\u00bb instead of a sectarian consciousness. He demanded of the members that they should make the problems of the time their own, instead of losing sight of the world of their time and activities in history over the multitude of their own problems. \u00abA Society that places a Goetheanum in the world must itself look like a Goetheanum, at least in a certain way. But compare what the Goetheanum was and what the Anthroposophical Society is [\u2026].\u00bb<\/span>9<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The members should not \u00abcocoon themselves in a sect\u00bb, but lead a life in the world with \u00abopen eyes, with a practical sense\u00bb. In reality, the Anthroposophical Society was damaging the reputation of anthroposophy and was actually becoming an \u00abobstacle\u00bb to its further development. \u00abThen anthroposophy must be completely misunderstood by the world because of the detours through the Anthroposophical Society.\u00bb<\/span>10<\/sup><\/a><\/span> All this also became an obstacle for young people who sought anthroposophy but could not \u00abbreathe\u00bb in such a society.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Publication by Tom\u00e1\u0161 Zdra\u017eil, Photo: Xue Li<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

5. Knowledge and Respect<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The last three points: Rudolf Steiner wanted the members of the Society to know about the scientific work and publications that had been done in their own ranks and were counted by Steiner as belonging to the realm of the School. He demanded respect for internal achievements \u2013 how could you demand that the \u2039outside world\u203a recognise anthroposophy if you yourself were incapable of similar attention and selflessness? It was a matter of \u00abrecognising human achievements and selflessly supporting making them known to the best of one’s ability, instead of simply \u00abaccepting\u00bb good publications \u00abwith tremendous apathy, as if it was all hugely a matter of course\u00bb.<\/span>11<\/sup><\/a><\/span> If the Anthroposophical Society continued in this way, Steiner said in 1923, no anthroposophical book would be sold anymore in five years’ time. It was the task of the Anthroposophical Society to bring the results of anthroposophical work into the world \u2013 \u00abin all things it is a matter of placing them before the whole world\u00bb<\/span>12<\/sup><\/a><\/span>, the results had to be made effective in the world \u2039through\u203a the Anthroposophical Society. But for that, you first have to have a fundamental knowledge of the works, you have to be interested in them. The Anthroposophical Society is not a family or a social end in itself, but a serviceable tool or organ in the work of Michael.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
World Educators’ Conference 2019, Photo: Xue Li<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

6. Sense of Community<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

And this is my penultimate point, in international cooperation and community. The year 1923 was the one in which Rudolf Steiner initiated the founding of \u00abautonomous national societies\u00bb in many countries of the world; they were to combine at the end of 1923 to form an international or \u2039general\u203a Anthroposophical Society. It was for such a world society in the spirit of Michael and with the above-mentioned tasks that Steiner wanted to construct a second building \u2013 and for no other.<\/span>13<\/sup><\/a><\/span> All \u00abspecial interests\u00bb of groups were to be overcome; every new member should be able to feel that they are representing a \u00abgreat cause\u00bb throughout the world by becoming a member of the Society. The Goetheanum had to contribute to \u00abcreating anthroposophical understanding throughout the world\u00bb<\/span>14<\/sup><\/a><\/span> \u2013 so that something effective could happen for the future of humanity and the earth. Results of the School of Spiritual Science in the various fields of civilisation must be worked on and brought into the world \u2013 with the help of the cosmopolitan Anthroposophical Society.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Head of the Humanity Representative, Photo: Xue Li<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

7. Relationship with the Being of Anthroposophy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

And this \u2013 and this brings me to the last point \u2013 in responsibility before and for the being of anthroposophy. Rudolf Steiner repeatedly emphasised in 1923 that anthroposophy should be regarded \u00ablike a living being\u00bb, \u00abwhich walks invisibly among us\u00bb, towards which we had to feel responsible. Anthroposophy as a \u00abliving entity\u00bb could be consulted at every moment of life \u2013 and it should be. This belonged to the conditions of life of the Anthroposophical Society: to see anthroposophy as a living being and to follow it, to feel it pulsating in our own heart \u2013 \u00ablike something knocking at the gate of our heart with anthroposophy and saying: let me in, for I am you yourself; I am the true being of your humanity!\u00bb<\/span>15<\/sup><\/a><\/span> In our own heart and in the heart of our fellow anthroposophist, in the I and in the Thou, in the social space of an Anthroposophical Society that had to find itself anew spiritually and socially in order to do justice to its mission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rudolf Steiner wanted \u00absincerity in love\u00bb in the Anthroposophical Society, instead of a culture of criticism and paralysis; he wanted purposeful work in the world and built on corresponding developments, which, however, did not really happen in 1923, despite countless meetings. \u00abStubbornness\u00bb and \u00abfanaticism\u00bb, \u00ababstract idealism\u00bb, \u00abmysticism\u00bb and \u00abspecial interests\u00bb continued to determine the being of the Society, Steiner said, even though people subjectively felt they were doing the best they could. The fundamental questions raised by Rudolf Steiner \u2013 such as the image of anthroposophy in the public sphere, the connection between the Society and the \u2039movement\u203a, \u2039world awareness\u203a and public tasks \u2013 were hardly addressed, as the study of historical documents shows; instead there were overly complicated social processes, votes and wishes of all kinds, with a predominantly subjective character. Steiner’s hope for a \u00abforward-looking\u00bb Anthroposophical Society with a cosmopolitan orientation, with worldwide participation in the progress of anthroposophy and \u00abthe mission of Michael\u00bb, was not fulfilled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Needless to say, Rudolf Steiner in no way criticised the study work of the Society and its branches, which continued to take place and which he highly respected, indeed considered indispensable; but through this alone neither the Goetheanum nor the Michaelic age could be saved. At the end of 1923, Rudolf Steiner finally took over as chair of the Anthroposophical Society himself in order to show what he meant, how he meant it, and that what was meant \u2013 with regard to the Society and the School \u2013 was possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is important to commemorate the Christmas Conference comprehensively in 2023, but also the processes that preceded it.<\/span>16<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Without solving the problems described by Rudolf Steiner and addressing the challenges and responsibilities associated with them, there will be no present and future in the meaning of Schelling. If, however, the gradual accomplishment of the determined tasks succeeds, in the meaning of the \u2039Leading Thoughts\u203a, the future is at least open and with it a goal, oriented towards the \u00abever-returning shore of the sun\u00bb (Ingeborg Bachmann).<\/span>17<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Translation<\/strong> Christian von Arnim
Title image<\/strong> West Staircase at the Goetheanum. Photo: Xue Li<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Having been asked what kind of vision Rudolf Steiner developed in 1923 for the Anthroposophical Society after the Goetheanum burned down and on the way to the Christmas Conference \u2013 an Anthroposophical Society fit for the future, which makes possible, deserves and needs a second Goetheanum \u2013 I will briefly report on what was important, indeed essential, to him in doing so. Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling wrote in his 1811 work \u2039The Ages of the World\u203a: \u00abThe past is known, the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9186,"featured_media":47188,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8846,8790],"tags":[11329,8798],"class_list":["post-47173","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-history","category-society-en","tag-2023-18-en","tag-deepening"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47173","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9186"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=47173"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47173\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47188"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47173"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47173"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47173"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}