Re: TangentialigniprimumFebruary 9 2006, 16:18:31 UTC
"Note that we do not expect the Man of Earth triad to make a lifetime of commitment."
True, but that doesn't mean that we, as sponsors and local membership, can't expect their time with the OTO to entail commitment. In truth, the process of initiation and their experience in OTO would be utterly meaningless without it.
Without quoting any degree material, it is safe to say that every degree presupposes a commitment on the part of the candidate to attain a greater degree of personal refinement and responsibility, in alignment with their oaths. This is the nature of initiation, and anybody who isn't prepared for it should stay the hell away. If they don't make a commitment, then they haven't really taken an oath, and they aren't really an initiate.
The Minerval degree is supposed to be the probationary degree, where people survey the OTO to determine if their commitment is well-founded. To informally extend this probationary period throughout the entire MoE is more likely than not to result in weakness, ambivalence, and inability to take initiation or the initiating organization (that's us,) seriously.
Re: TangentialthiebesFebruary 9 2006, 16:41:09 UTC
Well I think that commitment to serve the order, and commitment to observe one's oaths are two different things. The thrust of your comments seemed to be regarding commitment to service.
Re: TangentialigniprimumFebruary 9 2006, 17:33:18 UTC
Your response is problematic on a few fronts.
First, nowhere in either of my posts so far, nor in any of my comments, have I written anything that could be earnestly construed as a demand that the MoE externally commit themselves to serve the OTO. The closest I came to that was when I wrote, in my first post:
"Their intentions for approaching OTO should be one of establishing a synergy of purpose, based on an informed and educated understanding of the mission of OTO, and a conscious determination to align one's self with it, and to serve it in any way possible, at every opportunity that would convey advantage."
The part I was trying to stress was
"informed and educated understanding of the mission of OTO, and a conscious determination to align one's self with it"
In other words, do they know what they are joining, and do they enthusiastically want to be a part of it?
As for commitment to service, "establishing a synergy of purpose" is an ongoing effort that grows and changes with time, and hopefully with each degree of initiation. In people with the proper motivation and clarity of intent, this process starts right out of the gate, and progresses quickly. If one approaches OTO with this motivation and clarity, they find opportunities to serve, and revel in doing so. This process does not and cannot wait until they are invited to upper degrees.
You and I both know this is true, and we also both know that SML could not have reached its present level of development without this voluntary level of commitment from many of our MoE initiates. So why would you lump it in with the kind of 'service' that 194 says the MoE is not called upon to give their life to? It's almost like saying that all of the hard work contributed by many of our MoE initiates is simply an unsolicited favor to the upper triads, and has no organizational value.
Second, this interpretation of 194 has pretty grim implications with regard to local dues. If you are saying that the MoE has no responsibility to the OTO whatsoever, then why are we wasting our time (and transgressing our governing principles) by encouraging anybody below KEW to pay local dues?
In such a scenario, the upper triads would be paying for everything, and the MoE would be completely above scrutiny or reproach with regard to their contribution (or lack thereof) on any level. The only way around this would be to treat the MoE as consumers, which is problematic in ways that I'll leave off examining, since I am fairly certain we both agree that this scenario is entirely preposterous, and bears no resemblance to our organizational reality, or to a proper interpretation of 194. However, whenever people try to use 194 as a basis for absolving the MoE from any kind of commitment or ownership (and you can't have one without the other) they approach this interpretation.
Re: TangentialthiebesFebruary 9 2006, 18:09:53 UTC
First, nowhere in either of my posts so far, nor in any of my comments, have I written anything that could be earnestly construed as a demand that the MoE externally commit themselves to serve the OTO.
That's your opinion, and maybe that means you think I am being disingenuous to "construe" as I have. That's fine, you're welcome to think whatever you like of me. It does not change what I was saying.
You wrote:
what can we do (or can we even realistically expect) to get our present membership committed to making their entire life a work in the service of the Order?
And I responded that what we can do is plainly described in an early rite, and that we do not expect MoE to have this level of commitment.
This process does not and cannot wait until they are invited to upper degrees.
Nor can we expect it.
could not have reached its present level of development without this voluntary level of commitment from many of our MoE initiates
Nor could we have reached the present level of development without commitment of much lower levels than you describe.
why would you lump it in with the kind of 'service' that 194 says the MoE is not called upon to give their life to?
I was responding to you saying:
what can we do (or can we even realistically expect) to get our present membership committed to making their entire life a work in the service of the Order?
If you are saying that the MoE has no responsibility to the OTO whatsoever
I am not saying that, and I think it is unfair for you to suggest it simply because I took exception to your clear words implying a lifetime of service. I was making a policy clarification, which I felt was necessary.
Re: TangentialigniprimumFebruary 9 2006, 19:03:48 UTC
"what can we do (or can we even realistically expect) to get our present membership committed to making their entire life a work in the service of the Order?"
Good catch, and I apologize for not catching it myself. Here's an attempt to explain my miswording, and to answer your previous question about 'three month schedules'
First, three month schedules. From my experience working on local volunteer projects, three months was what I determined to be the maximum amount of time a project coordinator can reasonably expect most volunteers to commit to.
It is a poor choice in terms, but I was contrasting the two:
1) people who commit to projects in three month blocks 2) people who commit to projects that may take generations.
The Mission of the OTO, if you want to look at it like a project, is on the latter scale, and needs the latter type of volunteers. It is the sort of thing that has already taken generations to develop thus far, and will most certainly take more.
If it is apparent that a good deal of our present membership can't be bothered to pay dues or contribute to local bodies, and/or can't approach EGC Thelema unless mediated by some other religious formula that appeals more to their personal aesthetics or popular moralities, how can we expect even the serious members to have a supportive and empowering environment in which to take our work to the next level?
For people to seriously participate, they have to be willing to make a long-term commitment, and that means knowing what they are a part of, being personally able to make a meaningful contribution, and having an informed desire to do so. I'm not talking about holding official posts in OTO government. I'm talking about the hard work that one has to do out there, in the non-OTO, non-Thelemite world, within one's own spheres of personal, professional, and public influence, to advance and promote the Law of Thelema, and the personal wealth and talent that they bring into the body, to keep it productive and illustrious. Liber 194 does not excuse any initiate from this kind of service.
This is the work of everybody who takes the mission seriously, regardless of their degree, or whether their service is required by 194. Their ability to work within the context of the Mission may change as they progress, but the content of our initiations engages every initiate in this process, from the very beginning. If it doesn't, then our initiations are either so open to interpretation as to be impotent, or somebody is misinterpreting them. I'm perfectly willing to accept that it might be me, but if it is, then what the hell is the OTO supposed to be?
True, but that doesn't mean that we, as sponsors and local membership, can't expect their time with the OTO to entail commitment. In truth, the process of initiation and their experience in OTO would be utterly meaningless without it.
Without quoting any degree material, it is safe to say that every degree presupposes a commitment on the part of the candidate to attain a greater degree of personal refinement and responsibility, in alignment with their oaths. This is the nature of initiation, and anybody who isn't prepared for it should stay the hell away. If they don't make a commitment, then they haven't really taken an oath, and they aren't really an initiate.
The Minerval degree is supposed to be the probationary degree, where people survey the OTO to determine if their commitment is well-founded. To informally extend this probationary period throughout the entire MoE is more likely than not to result in weakness, ambivalence, and inability to take initiation or the initiating organization (that's us,) seriously.
Reply
Reply
First, nowhere in either of my posts so far, nor in any of my comments, have I written anything that could be earnestly construed as a demand that the MoE externally commit themselves to serve the OTO. The closest I came to that was when I wrote, in my first post:
"Their intentions for approaching OTO should be one of establishing a synergy of purpose, based on an informed and educated understanding of the mission of OTO, and a conscious determination to align one's self with it, and to serve it in any way possible, at every opportunity that would convey advantage."
The part I was trying to stress was
"informed and educated understanding of the mission of OTO, and a conscious determination to align one's self with it"
In other words, do they know what they are joining, and do they enthusiastically want to be a part of it?
As for commitment to service, "establishing a synergy of purpose" is an ongoing effort that grows and changes with time, and hopefully with each degree of initiation. In people with the proper motivation and clarity of intent, this process starts right out of the gate, and progresses quickly. If one approaches OTO with this motivation and clarity, they find opportunities to serve, and revel in doing so. This process does not and cannot wait until they are invited to upper degrees.
You and I both know this is true, and we also both know that SML could not have reached its present level of development without this voluntary level of commitment from many of our MoE initiates. So why would you lump it in with the kind of 'service' that 194 says the MoE is not called upon to give their life to? It's almost like saying that all of the hard work contributed by many of our MoE initiates is simply an unsolicited favor to the upper triads, and has no organizational value.
Second, this interpretation of 194 has pretty grim implications with regard to local dues. If you are saying that the MoE has no responsibility to the OTO whatsoever, then why are we wasting our time (and transgressing our governing principles) by encouraging anybody below KEW to pay local dues?
In such a scenario, the upper triads would be paying for everything, and the MoE would be completely above scrutiny or reproach with regard to their contribution (or lack thereof) on any level. The only way around this would be to treat the MoE as consumers, which is problematic in ways that I'll leave off examining, since I am fairly certain we both agree that this scenario is entirely preposterous, and bears no resemblance to our organizational reality, or to a proper interpretation of 194. However, whenever people try to use 194 as a basis for absolving the MoE from any kind of commitment or ownership (and you can't have one without the other) they approach this interpretation.
Reply
That's your opinion, and maybe that means you think I am being disingenuous to "construe" as I have. That's fine, you're welcome to think whatever you like of me. It does not change what I was saying.
You wrote:
what can we do (or can we even realistically expect) to get our present membership committed to making their entire life a work in the service of the Order?
And I responded that what we can do is plainly described in an early rite, and that we do not expect MoE to have this level of commitment.
This process does not and cannot wait until they are invited to upper degrees.
Nor can we expect it.
could not have reached its present level of development without this voluntary level of commitment from many of our MoE initiates
Nor could we have reached the present level of development without commitment of much lower levels than you describe.
why would you lump it in with the kind of 'service' that 194 says the MoE is not called upon to give their life to?
I was responding to you saying:
what can we do (or can we even realistically expect) to get our present membership committed to making their entire life a work in the service of the Order?
If you are saying that the MoE has no responsibility to the OTO whatsoever
I am not saying that, and I think it is unfair for you to suggest it simply because I took exception to your clear words implying a lifetime of service. I was making a policy clarification, which I felt was necessary.
Reply
Good catch, and I apologize for not catching it myself. Here's an attempt to explain my miswording, and to answer your previous question about 'three month schedules'
First, three month schedules. From my experience working on local volunteer projects, three months was what I determined to be the maximum amount of time a project coordinator can reasonably expect most volunteers to commit to.
It is a poor choice in terms, but I was contrasting the two:
1) people who commit to projects in three month blocks
2) people who commit to projects that may take generations.
The Mission of the OTO, if you want to look at it like a project, is on the latter scale, and needs the latter type of volunteers. It is the sort of thing that has already taken generations to develop thus far, and will most certainly take more.
If it is apparent that a good deal of our present membership can't be bothered to pay dues or contribute to local bodies, and/or can't approach EGC Thelema unless mediated by some other religious formula that appeals more to their personal aesthetics or popular moralities, how can we expect even the serious members to have a supportive and empowering environment in which to take our work to the next level?
For people to seriously participate, they have to be willing to make a long-term commitment, and that means knowing what they are a part of, being personally able to make a meaningful contribution, and having an informed desire to do so. I'm not talking about holding official posts in OTO government. I'm talking about the hard work that one has to do out there, in the non-OTO, non-Thelemite world, within one's own spheres of personal, professional, and public influence, to advance and promote the Law of Thelema, and the personal wealth and talent that they bring into the body, to keep it productive and illustrious. Liber 194 does not excuse any initiate from this kind of service.
This is the work of everybody who takes the mission seriously, regardless of their degree, or whether their service is required by 194. Their ability to work within the context of the Mission may change as they progress, but the content of our initiations engages every initiate in this process, from the very beginning. If it doesn't, then our initiations are either so open to interpretation as to be impotent, or somebody is misinterpreting them. I'm perfectly willing to accept that it might be me, but if it is, then what the hell is the OTO supposed to be?
Reply
Leave a comment