Esoteric Lessons 1913–1923

GA 266III — Hildesheim

6. Memorandum to the Committee for the Free Anthroposophical Society For its Guidance!

Rudolf Steiner, March 1923¹

1. With regard to the external constitution of the Free Anthroposophical Society, efforts should be made to ensure that this society corresponds to the “Draft Statutes”² This makes it possible to unite people in a society in which they feel completely free as individuals, without the society being constantly threatened with dissolution. Anyone who understands the “draft” in the right sense will find all this fulfilled in it.

2. First of all, it is necessary to bring together all those personalities who are already members of the Anthroposophical Society and who, in the opinion of the committee formed, proceeded from those points of view which, in a justified manner, had to bring about the division into two groups within the society as a whole. Mere dissatisfaction with the old leadership is not sufficient; rather, there must be a positive orientation toward an anthroposophical goal that must be assumed to be unattainable by the old leadership.

3. First, from this circle of the Free Anthroposophical Society thus formed, persons of trust must be appointed who are recognized by the committee. Only those who have an interest in giving anthroposophy to the present civilization should be appointed as trusted individuals. Those who are already members of the Anthroposophical Society will then be joined by those who are newly admitted. But it is important to ensure that these new members have made the positive aspects of anthroposophy the fundamental direction of their own lives. People who only have a general social interest, without any intensive anthroposophical influence, should not be appointed as trusted individuals, even if they are accepted into the Society with the idea that they will grow into real anthroposophists.

4. For admission itself, a certain degree of familiarity with the anthroposophical worldview should be decisive. However, openness should prevail for admission to the general Free Anthroposophical Society. Strictness should only come into play when closer communities are formed.

5. The Free Anthroposophical Society should become a tool for spreading anthroposophy throughout the world. Lectures and other dissemination work should emerge from its bosom, and institutes and other entities should also be formed from it.

6. The general Free Anthroposophical Society is one thing, and the communities to be formed within it are another. In these communities, whether exoteric or esoteric, people who feel an inner connection and who want to experience the spirit together should come together. Alongside such communities, it is entirely possible that the branch life described in the “Outline” will develop. The branches would then be groups of the Free Anthroposophical Society in general. However, it could well be that members of the Free Anthroposophical Society join the branches of the Anthroposophical Society and work together with the members of these branches.

7. The work in the communities will be such that it is completed within the community itself. It is directed toward the spiritual perfection of the members. Whatever a member of such a community undertakes outside the community, he or she does as a representative of the general Free Anthroposophical Society. Of course, such a community may become active in the outside world, but it is desirable that its individual members then act as representatives of the general Free Anthroposophical Society. This does not, of course, require the bureaucratic administration of an association, but can be a free act of consciousness on the part of the individual.

8. A committee of trust should be established from each of the two committees, that of the Anthroposophical Society and that of the Free Anthroposophical Society. These two committees are responsible for handling the common affairs of the entire Anthroposophical Society.

9. All institutions of the entire Anthroposophical Society should fall within the sphere of interest of the Anthroposophical Society and the Free Anthroposophical Society. This can work well if a central administrative office is created to manage the affairs of the entire Society on behalf of the two committees (mediated by their committees of trust). The division into

two groups within the Society should by no means lead to an anthroposophical institution — especially one that already exists — being regarded as the concern of only one group.

Quotas of the membership fees, to be determined by the committees, should be paid into the central fund so that the affairs of the Society as a whole can be properly taken care of.

1. It should be understood that the two groups arose solely on the basis that there are already two sharply divided sections among the members, both of which want the same anthroposophy but want to experience it in different ways. If this is correctly understood, the relative separation cannot lead to a split, but to a harmony that would not be possible without separation.

2. The Free Anthroposophical Society should not attempt in any way to destroy the historical forces of development within the Anthroposophical Society. Those who want freedom for themselves should leave the freedom of others completely untouched. The fact that there are imperfections in the old Anthroposophical Society should not lead to further hostility towards it, but rather to the formation of a Free Anthroposophical Society in accordance with the opinion of the leading personalities, which avoids these imperfections.

3. The separation has created all the conditions necessary for young people in particular to feel at home in the Free Anthroposophical Society. For the communities will be free groups of people who understand each other, and this will form the basis for no one feeling restricted in their freedom in the general Free Anthroposophical Society.