The Fateful Year of 1923

GA 259 — 23 November 1923, Dornach

Report on the Founding of the Dutch National Society

Introduction to Mystery Centers, Lecture 1

Dear friends, Last Sunday the Dutch Anthroposophical Society was founded in the Netherlands, and with that the last of the national societies has come into being, which are to be there as preparatory foundations when the International Anthroposophical Society is to emerge from these individual national societies here at Christmas. The task will be to take what is now happening on the basis of these individual national societies and make it into something real, so real that the Anthroposophical Movement can perhaps find in it an instrument for society. Today it is already the case that one can see from the most diverse individual phenomena, from the most diverse symptoms, how this anthroposophical movement is taken much, much more urgently elsewhere than it often is within the Anthroposophical Society. I do not mean by this – please do not misunderstand me, my dear friends – I do not mean that there is a lack of individuals within the Anthroposophical Society who are wholeheartedly committed to the movement and who constantly develop their feelings in the direction of the Society's thinking and feeling, as it must be one day. But what is missing within the Society, what underlies the words that I have to speak about this absence, is real activity in the direction given by the impulses of the Anthroposophical Movement.

I said that much more is happening in this direction in another place: namely, with the opponents. It is indeed the case that today, from a more or less opposing — or often, as it is often called, objective side, hardly any comprehensive presentation of the spiritual currents of the present day appears without the anthroposophical movement being forcefully taken into account – usually, of course, in a derogatory sense, or if not in a derogatory sense, then in such a way that the anthroposophical movement is harmed anew.

All these things cannot be taken into account unless active interest within the Anthroposophical Society can develop in the same way as it does among those outside, whether as opponents or as so-called objective observers. This is what you encounter everywhere. Especially the opponents take Anthroposophy very seriously.

I would ask you to consider just one thing. If you look at things from the outside and assess the importance of anthroposophy today based on the number of members of the Anthroposophical Society, it seems almost laughable, one might say, that the opposing side takes this anthroposophy so seriously. You only have to consider that, if you count the number of members of the Anthroposophical Society, it is truly a terribly small group in relation to any other society or spiritual context. And the great old spiritual movements should not care what is believed or not believed by such a small group of people. It is not because the opponents know full well what Anthroposophy is. They appreciate Anthroposophy, in their own sense, and they actively appreciate it.

Now, of course, it can be said that we simply do not have personalities within the Anthroposophical Society who are predisposed to activity. That is certainly a factor, because the vast majority of personalities have come precisely to absorb a world view, not to be active in some direction within the Society. But on the other hand, there is this necessity today: if the Anthroposophical Society is to continue to exist, it needs active work and activity. This must be said again and again. It may be a mishap that we need it, but we need it.

This is particularly evident when we see, and I want to say this quite positively, how necessary it is today to be able to count on the fact that a very strong international anthroposophical society will emerge from the individual national societies at Christmas; because we really cannot leave the whole anthroposophical movement as it is.

The necessity exists that, regardless of who it is, people must find each other within the Anthroposophical Society who are interested in what is happening in the world, who know how to deal with what is happening in the world! It is always actually a great astonishment to see when something of what is happening in the world is mentioned.

Of course, I know that many excellent people within the Anthroposophical Society actually take umbrage when the Society is asked to place itself in the spiritual evolution of contemporary humanity. I can also understand that many would prefer the Anthroposophical Society to be an association of people who sit quietly in their chairs and pursue their world view and do not need to worry about what is otherwise going on in the world. I can understand it, certainly; from the whole process that has taken place in the founding and development of the Anthroposophical Society, it is understandable. But on the other hand, the necessities of the world are also there. And there it is absolutely essential that we at least submit to these necessities in a certain sense.

Purely anthroposophical work goes well everywhere. One can only say: it goes well. There was an excellent atmosphere in The Hague with regard to this anthroposophical thinking and feeling together. The lectures that I gave as a branch on the connection between man and the supersensible world were given in an excellent atmosphere. The public anthroposophical lectures also created an excellent atmosphere. The lectures that were organized with a pedagogical focus also created an excellent atmosphere.

Furthermore, we were delighted to see a small Waldorf School established in The Hague with a first, fourth and eighth class, which makes an extraordinarily satisfying impression. We were able to take a step forward in what can be achieved in the field of anthroposophic medicine, just as we have already done in London and Vienna, by organizing lectures on anthroposophic medicine for doctors in The Hague. These were held at the invitation of Dr. Zeylmans, who has set up a clinic there along our lines, lectures on anthroposophic medicine were given by Dr. Wegman and myself. All this could be achieved. As I said, this is all without the slightest criticism. The practical things are going very well. But when it comes to holding things together through the Anthroposophical Society, then, of course, there are still problems as far as feelings and perceptions are concerned; but then the fact arises that the Anthroposophical Society would like to be a bit of an extended family that shuts itself off from the outside world. And that is also how it is in its practices. Isn't it, for my sake the statutes can be made as one wants; they are not the essential thing. The essential thing is how one behaves, even when admitting members. When admitting members, one can proceed in such a way that one closes the Society, or one can enlarge it as much as possible. And the way of thinking about admitting members is simply such in many respects that we cannot count on seeing the Anthroposophical Society grow in the direction in which it must grow if it is to bring into the world — I do not say wants to bring into the world: Today, one is no longer free to want to carry something into the world or not — what the Anthroposophical Society has become through its substance. Today, one is no longer free: certain things just have to be done! And enthusiasm is often lacking. One would so much like to see this enthusiasm develop in the Society!

I am not saying this just because it is an experience that was made in the last days in The Hague, but rather an experience that has now arisen from the establishment of the national societies and which must be stated before we proceed to establish the one for which the national societies exist: the International Anthroposophical Society, which should have its center in Dornach.

This is a report on what took place in The Hague that appears to be not entirely objective, but perhaps it is more objective internally than it initially appears externally, to be given.