To the meeting of group leaders and the AGM
To the meeting of group leaders and the AGM

To the meeting of group leaders and the AGM

29 May 2019 Heike Oberschelp 17 views

After the ‹cardiac arrest› experienced by some members at the AGM in 2018, the response was quite different this year. There was a noticeable will to look towards the future, cautious optimism and a lack of the kind of emotional reactions that were so prevalent last year.

At the meeting of group leaders, conversations were held about the most diverse forms of approaches to the work of the branches work. One question that seemed to gain ever more urgency was how we deal with oppositional views. Do I have to tell others ‹the truth›? And how do I tell it without hurting them? Or do I try to develop tolerance for the other’s way of looking at the world?

«What you understand with inner tolerance in the least of your fellow human beings, even if they are mistaken, you have understood of me, and I will let you overcome these prejudices when you seek to attenuate them by entering with tolerance into the thinking and feelings of others.» (GA 189, lecture of 16 February 1919) This question was described and evaluated variously by the participants – in the end it was left open without giving in to the urge to find consensus.

The next meeting of group leaders in November will be on the topic of «Practising a culture of conversation». There will be a facilitator who will practise this with the group leaders.

The agm, with its inspiring presentation of initiatives in the various countries and the solid support for Justus Wittich as an Executive Council member, has made many members feel more optimistic and enhanced the impression that the Anthroposophical Society can be strengthened when the membership and the Executive Council work together.

Looking at the flood of motions, on the other hand, dampens some of this enthusiasm. What lies behind these motions? Every year, so many motions are submitted.

• In 2018, there was, for instance, a motion that the Goetheanum journal should have one page with texts by Rudolf Steiner every week. The vote on this motion received a majority in the Auditorium.

• The 2018 motion that Executive Council members should be affirmed with a two-thirds majority was withdrawn in 2019.

• In 2018 and 2019 there were requests to evaluate the balance sheet differently. This proposal assumed that everyone present was capable of carrying out highly demanding accounting tasks in their head and expected them to grasp and assess everything that was said within minutes.

• And the question as to the salaries of retired Executive Council members that had been answered by the Council in writing but was nevertheless discussed again in detail in front of a large audience.

Why is this happening? It is clearly not only about the personal quest for answers. What are the motions about?

How can the motions and those who submit them, the membership and the Executive Council contribute to a situation where we are working together on the future while being aware that a living being stands behind the Anthroposophical Society? These are unresolved questions that should be worked on in some form because they have such a strong impact.