School van Ooijen!
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:59 pm
Hi Suzanne,
Good to see you here, and see some direct touches from people with close SvF experience. First one small thing: I've never used the alias to hide my real identity, only because my last name (De Ruijter) is not very easy to repeat everywhere especially in an English-speaking forum.
Now some main points on which we agree but also disagree.
Rumours: well that depends. What you've read from me in the forum is nothing about your aunt but all about your father, and the role he played in the dictatorial cult hierarchy which was the SvF for a long time over here. (Having had an 8-year 'career' in the eighties, including long time in youth groups, gives me some basis to talk from.)
And as for the 'matters discussed', e.g. his breakup with the SvF: if I had the chance I'd ask him to state his own vision more clearly than he does on his website. What he states there looks QUITE a lot like 'massaged facts' to me and sometimes far worse, later in my post more about it.
Again you didn't hear ME saying that. Tomorrow I'm also off to a reunion with some ex youth group fellows & families
Now we run into disagreement, I'm afraid. Before you deny me (and anyone else here) the right to criticise the behaviour of Paul and others in the hierarchy, please explain:
a. Why that same hierarchy, the ones on top the most, took the right to have opinions (prejudices?) and make far-reaching decisions on almost ALL students without EVER asking them their own opinion? (Or in case they asked for their wishes, usually doing 180' the opposite just 'because the wishes must have been the student's ego...).
b. How that hierarchy could act all in secrecy 'behind our backs' and now wants to deny us talking things slightly secretly about them without directly informing?
Sounds a bit like 'karma and counterkarma' to me, a popular SES/SvF terminology applied a bit differently than the (former) tutors would like...
Aahhh... you are a candidate to defend his 'massaged facts', I presume. Below a quote from his site summarising the breakup. (Sorry PaGaN, I remembered most of the site was in Dutch but I mistook. Must be that I'm working too much bilingually now...)
Well a few points here:
* According to my sources, and two of them were still in SvF in '97, Paul was forced to resign to avoid being kicked out. And it was definitely not only 'himself becoming disenchanted', it was at least as much the other way round; because Paul, using his less positive qualities, became too much of a dictator even towards the other board members and did not listen to ANY sound advice anymore.
* Spiritually spoken there is absolutely nothing new I can see about his direction after '97. Same Gurdjieff/Ouspensky, same Vedanta touches, same (sometimes well-qualified) comments on gnostics and enneagram. Of course the new organisation he started is much less formal and hence with less cultish risks than the SES, but further...
So if you have any facts and points to defend your fathers version of the truth, be my guest. Without that, I'm afraid my accusations still stand.
Well for a start he doesn't make that too easy. Having your own website but not even mentioning an address (neither Oxerhof nor Obrechtstraat) or phone or comment form, solely an e-mail which he might or might not read, is not really inviting.
But if people around (ex-) SvF here in the forum agree that we SHOULD send him an e-mail and invite to either the board or an IRL meeting, I'm happy to compose that mail. Myself I have no personal regrets or clashes with/about him. Just a general set of both bad and good memories about SvF, and as no tutor has EVER apologised for causing the bad ones and the whole system behind it I'm not that certain that Paul would be willing to discuss this openly with us. Especially because he still openly sympathises with Gurdjieff (and McLaren) in his website, and both are a root cause for the cultish mess which also was/is a dimension of SES/SvF...
PS Thanks for having YOUR own website which contains a lot more open and personal information that that of Paul!
Good to see you here, and see some direct touches from people with close SvF experience. First one small thing: I've never used the alias to hide my real identity, only because my last name (De Ruijter) is not very easy to repeat everywhere especially in an English-speaking forum.
Now some main points on which we agree but also disagree.
The only thing I read here are rumours. Now I'd like to ask you all: did
any of you personally ask my father or aunt anything about the matters
discussed in this topic?
Rumours: well that depends. What you've read from me in the forum is nothing about your aunt but all about your father, and the role he played in the dictatorial cult hierarchy which was the SvF for a long time over here. (Having had an 8-year 'career' in the eighties, including long time in youth groups, gives me some basis to talk from.)
And as for the 'matters discussed', e.g. his breakup with the SvF: if I had the chance I'd ask him to state his own vision more clearly than he does on his website. What he states there looks QUITE a lot like 'massaged facts' to me and sometimes far worse, later in my post more about it.
Therefore I doubt that it has all been bad. On the contrary.
Again you didn't hear ME saying that. Tomorrow I'm also off to a reunion with some ex youth group fellows & families
If you're a real guy/woman, you discuss something with the people whom it concerns instead of discussing it on an Internet Messageboard anonymously.
Now we run into disagreement, I'm afraid. Before you deny me (and anyone else here) the right to criticise the behaviour of Paul and others in the hierarchy, please explain:
a. Why that same hierarchy, the ones on top the most, took the right to have opinions (prejudices?) and make far-reaching decisions on almost ALL students without EVER asking them their own opinion? (Or in case they asked for their wishes, usually doing 180' the opposite just 'because the wishes must have been the student's ego...).
b. How that hierarchy could act all in secrecy 'behind our backs' and now wants to deny us talking things slightly secretly about them without directly informing?
Sounds a bit like 'karma and counterkarma' to me, a popular SES/SvF terminology applied a bit differently than the (former) tutors would like...
After all he has never given any comment except for the correct
statements on his website.
Aahhh... you are a candidate to defend his 'massaged facts', I presume. Below a quote from his site summarising the breakup. (Sorry PaGaN, I remembered most of the site was in Dutch but I mistook. Must be that I'm working too much bilingually now...)
"After the passing away of his master and guiding light, Leon MacLaren, in 1994 Paul van Oyen became increasingly disenchanted with the ensuing turn of events in the School in Holland. In 1997 he resigned as leader of the School voor Filosofie. This enabled him to set out on his own and to take a complete new direction."
Well a few points here:
* According to my sources, and two of them were still in SvF in '97, Paul was forced to resign to avoid being kicked out. And it was definitely not only 'himself becoming disenchanted', it was at least as much the other way round; because Paul, using his less positive qualities, became too much of a dictator even towards the other board members and did not listen to ANY sound advice anymore.
* Spiritually spoken there is absolutely nothing new I can see about his direction after '97. Same Gurdjieff/Ouspensky, same Vedanta touches, same (sometimes well-qualified) comments on gnostics and enneagram. Of course the new organisation he started is much less formal and hence with less cultish risks than the SES, but further...
So if you have any facts and points to defend your fathers version of the truth, be my guest. Without that, I'm afraid my accusations still stand.
I am sure my father would be quite willing and happy to talk to all of
you.
Well for a start he doesn't make that too easy. Having your own website but not even mentioning an address (neither Oxerhof nor Obrechtstraat) or phone or comment form, solely an e-mail which he might or might not read, is not really inviting.
But if people around (ex-) SvF here in the forum agree that we SHOULD send him an e-mail and invite to either the board or an IRL meeting, I'm happy to compose that mail. Myself I have no personal regrets or clashes with/about him. Just a general set of both bad and good memories about SvF, and as no tutor has EVER apologised for causing the bad ones and the whole system behind it I'm not that certain that Paul would be willing to discuss this openly with us. Especially because he still openly sympathises with Gurdjieff (and McLaren) in his website, and both are a root cause for the cultish mess which also was/is a dimension of SES/SvF...
PS Thanks for having YOUR own website which contains a lot more open and personal information that that of Paul!