Barking mad?

Sergei O. Prokofieff (who apparently is related to the Russian composer Sergei Prokofiev) is one of the leaders of the General Anthroposophical Society. The original founder of the Anthroposophical movement was, of course, the Austrian clairvoyant Rudolf Steiner.

And yes, Prokofieff is on a heresy hunt...again!

Prokofieff's number one enemy is the late Valentin Tomberg, a defected Anthroposophist who converted to the Catholic Church and attempted to create a synthesis between traditional Catholicism and Hermeticism. Tomberg's main work is titled "Meditations on the Tarot". It's usually published anonymously. Strangely, some editions contain an afterword by Cardinal Hans Urs von Balthasar! There is some contention whether Tomberg was a Hermetic infiltrator within Catholicism, or a Catholic fifth-columnist within Hermeticism and occultism. Prokofieff believes the latter, while Tomberg's admirers presumably hold to the former position.

Prokofieff's opening salvo against Tomberg is the book "The case of Valentin Tomberg", where he claims that Tomberg was a Jesuit agent under occult imprisonment and literal devilish influence. The book really challenged my credulity when I read it a few years ago. At the time, I didn't know that Anthroposophists had a long list of really bizarre and frankly cultic beliefs, which the Russian author seems to have swallowed hook, line and sinker. He swallowed the fish, too, I'm afraid. Thus, Prokofieff claims that Christian Rosenkreutz sent Gautama Buddha to the planet Mars in AD 1604 to save humanity from some kind of grave spiritual danger. (Read that again, slowly.) Now, I don't deny that Tomberg himself had some pretty strange ideas, but he seems to have become *less* strange when he left the Anthroposophists to become a Hermetic Catholic!

"Valentin Tomberg and Anthroposophy: A problematic relationship" is a sequel to the above-mentioned book. It's quite short, a pamphlet rather than a book. Still, it does contain sensational information for those who consider this conflict of cosmic importance. Prokofieff quotes a private letter from Tomberg in which the old man admits that he no longer believes in Anthroposophy, that Rudolf Steiner's revelations were entirely subjective, and that he (Tomberg) would rather not be associated with the Anthroposophical writings he penned in his youth. Prokofieff also quotes several witnesses who heard Tomberg deny that he was a bodhisattva, something his supporters maintain to this day.

Will the Tombergites be shaken to the nasty core of their brutish beings by these revelations? I doubt it. They will probably point out that Jesus never explicitly called himself "God", that Jiddu Krishnamurti denied being the "World Teacher", that Krishna walked the Earth as a chariot-driver, that Maitreya once pretended to be a dying dog with maggots in his wounds, etc. You get the picture. Since Tomberg was the Bodhisattva esoterically, he naturally feigned ignorance about being the Bodhisattva. Or maybe Sorath faked the letter and gave it to Prokofieff at an auspicious moment. Or something.

The rest of the pamphlet gives us the usual "guilty pleasure" glimpses of the strange worldview of Anthroposophy. Apparently, true Christianity today is true Rosicrucianism, which in turn is Anthroposophy. It's symbol is a cross with seven roses (this is very important). Prokofieff strongly implies that Rudolf Steiner was a reincarnation of Christian Rosenkreutz, and/or that Steiner had a secret Rosicrucian master. He also claims that Michael (the archangel) founded a spiritual school in Heaven, where he taught the true Christian message to the departed souls of Platonist and Aristotelian philosophers. Today, these philosophers have been reborn on Earth and joined forces with the Anthroposophists. Those not fortunate enough to be educated by Michael in the supersensible realm, are preaching false Christianity. Tomberg himself was probably under occult imprisonment by the Jesuits or even darker forces, just as St. Boniface (?!).

I'm sorry, but somehow I find all this very hard to believe! Richard Dawkins would presumably be even less charitable, and call the poor author "barking mad" (twice).

OK, next week I'm finally going to read Owen Barfield's "Poetic Diction". :P