In reading all the concern about the split between the traditional BD people and the new BD inventors, I was reminded of the Hixite split in Quakers around 1872. (Quakers were started by George Fox as a reaction to the Church of England and William Penn settled Pennsylvania before the Protestant reformation.) The Reformation was such a strong movement that many Quakers wanted to change Quaker worship (which is silent meditation without a minister) to a more Protestant model. There were many changes. It became a major split. Right now there is a Friends "Church" in Coeur d'Alene that has a minister and there is the Sandpoint Friends "Meeting" who are unprogrammed Quakers. Never the twain shall meet, but there are some activities we have together on the national level.
I'm so sorry that people are taking the split personally. Is it possible for traditional BD people to not to be threatened by strong people who have a different way of looking at things , but still are practicing Biodynamics? I'm right in the middle of this. I like being on this list--the spirituality and getting a lot of information about BD, but I have spoken with Hugh Courtney for years over the phone and he's helped me with many things. Do the two groups entirely diavow the efficacy of each other's methods? If you had as a goal harmonizing the two groups, how could you go about it? What do the two groups have in common? Could you use a mediation process, especially around the issue of using the name "Biodynamic"? Could you have two strains of Biodynamics recognized by under some kind of larger umbrella? Or does it take awhile to forgive the hurts and is it proper to establish an identity with events like the MidAtlantic Conference and helpful ongoing things like BDNow?
