Esoteric Spiritualism
To the Editor.—Sir.—A view of Death was stated in the article on Garfield in last week's issue of your paper, which as far as I know occupies a solitary position in Spiritual Literature. The writer, who ever he may be, has, whether he is aware of it or not, given expression to one of the least understood phases of Esoteric Spiritualism.
I allude to the theory set up in the article in question, that the assassination of Lincoln and Garfield promoted the work of human progress, by—in addition to evoking sympathy for the grandeur of their motives, and censure for the opposite party—acting as a compensating sacrifice to that lower spiritual plane, whose objects were thwarted by the acts of these distinguished statemen.
This is a truth so purely esoteric, that it cannot be truly expressed or rendered exoteric. It is true in spirit, but liable to be falsely construed by all who are on a more external plane, than that on which it takes effect on human life and conduct.
Vulgarised and perverted, this grand spiritual truth becomes the sacrifice of the fetish worshipper; and gives the reason, also, why the devil or the evil power, received all such sacrifice. In other words, the God of these idolaters, is the devil of more spiritual nations. But the Christian notion of the sacrifice of Jesus partakes of the same vulgar error, and has caused many a liberal religious thinker to say of the strictly orthodox, in allusion to this: “Your God is my devil.”
The nature of the subject is snob, that I cannot find language to reach the undeveloped, capable of conveying my meaning to them. I may succeed in indicating a few suggestive considerations.
All spiritual development is acquired through suffering: That is, when the soul socks a higher or more interior piano of expression, it suffers a separation of its outward or lower environment to that lower power, to which it appropriately belongs. As man rises spiritually, his life in a series of sufferings and privations, the more spiritual and inexpressibly agonising, us they culminate in the separation of the last shred of that which is earthly from the naked spirit.
I will not dogmatise and say that the evil genii of the barbarian are not propitiated by the aura derived from the meat-offerings presented; as the Jewish God was wont to be regaled by the reek of the blood of bulls. All I say is, that any spiritual mind would revolt from such spiritual surroundings with horror and alarm. A higher form of initiation wax indicated in the requirement, that all the sacrifice that the Deity desired wax a “broken and a contrite heart.” And yet of all forms of suffering, possibly, the attainment of this state inflicts the most terrible.
The chief perversion to which this spiritual truth is subject, is in the practice oi imagining that we can appropriate to our own spiritual benefit the sufferings incurred by others in the performance of high spiritual duties. This is the grand mistake, and God dishonouring superstition of the Christian Church. Another perversion in, that we can benefit our souls by self-inflicted penances, and unnatural privations as substitutes for the tear and wear which we sustain in the performance of genuine spiritual duties. No man nerd scourge and mortify himself to please God and purify his Soul; let him ask his conscience—What is troth? and, what God desires of him in respect thereto. Let him boldly go forth at the behest of truth as a reformer, and a reprover of wickedness, and ho will soon find suffering enough without becoming his own executioner. This is the only means of gaining spiritual good, and development from suffering.
I am reminded that “J. K,” in his admirable articles on “Jesus Christ” seemed to be unacquainted with the esoteric truth upon which I am endeavouring to write. He gives a reason for the despairing exclamation of Jesus—“My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?”—which I cannot but regard as evincing a much lower plane of spiritual development than he assumes for himself. In short, though his Essay I regard as “admirable” from the position of a spiritual sciolist to those who know no better, I must say, that I have many times longed to trouble your readers with a short criticism of it. I have been chiefly debarred from venturing on this task from the consideration, that possibly my remarks on the views of a favourite Contributor would be regarded by the Editor as an unwelcome intrusion upon his columns. On the present occasion, I scarcely euro to go all the length I would like in reference to Garfield's article of last week. It is a dangerous point to touch upon—that of the merits of personal sacrifice—and it might in these stirring times become far too fashionable to inflict it on inconvenient agitators. Therefore, though I admit that the writer of last week has struck on to a great truth, it is more than likely that Its tendency will be misconceived, and that a general preaching of such views would lead to more misconception than enlightenment.
Hoping that I have not, on the present occasion, said too much to warrant these remarks appearing in the Medium.—I remain yours, etc.
[We beg to assure our correspondent, that we have no pet contributors, nor have we any pet dogmas or notions of our own. We are anxious to know more, and be the vehicle of convoying information to others, and if our friend can aid us in any way, even if at the expense of a little of our self-conceit, we will gladly make room for him on our platform. As for “J. K,” he courts criticism and possibly feels disappointed that he has had so little of it.—Ed. Μ.]
Criticisms on "J.K'S" "Adeptship" etc.
Miss A. Terry takes “J. K” severely to task for making “authoritative declarations” in a manner in which “the pope himself could hardly go further;” and for making “assertions which cannot be made to agree with the gospels, the only history of the words and deeds of Jesus Christ which we possess.” She proceeds:—
“We read in the seventh Chapter of St Luke, twenty second verse, these words, spoken by Jesus Himself, ‘to the disciples of John the Baptist:’ ‘Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen, and heard; how that the blind see, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.’—If Jesus only raised men or women from trance, he, (as an honest and truthful man) would have said so; nor laid claim to powers to which he had no right.
“It is quite open, of course, to ‘J. K,’ to make what assertions he likes, but in the absence of proof, they are of no more value, than those of anyone else; and why (I would ask) are we to take ‘J. K’ for our infallible teacher, on the above points; and, by what divine right does he, (an ordinary mortal like ourselves) claim our obedient assent to his ‘unproved’ statements?
“I may draw your attention, perhaps, to a mis-statement of ‘J. K’s it is this. No one can read the account of the life of Jesus, without seeing that he did not rush on his death in a ‘foolhardy’ manner, but that he went to it knowing well, what he was doing—and, more than once foretold his own death, long ere it took place; he foretold, also, the manner of it.”
Notes and Comments
This number of the Medium savours largely, it may be presumed, of Esoteric Spiritualism. Mr. Howell’s Theosophical discourse is an attempt to present in intellectual form the grandest relations of man; and Mr. Fitton’s discourse fills in the shady side of the picture. It remains for Mr. Ware to give a spiritual halo to the scene of man’s Godward strivings, and show that by a personal experience derived from the interior a man may be exceedingly glad amidst the wreck of material things. This is a grand answer to “J. K’s.” “Manure” theory. Mr. Ware’s method of thought should form the basis of all Spiritualism.
It is somewhat of a serious matter to be a Spiritual Editor now-a-days. The powerful cerebral magnetisms of “J. K.” and “I. A. Μ.” coming in, one on each side, like a cross- magnetism, pierce the flaccid tissues of a poor, over-worked printer most cruelly. Gentlemen! “Canny! Canny!” Do not quarrel; define your terms. Both have used the words “exoteric” and “esoteric” without the slightest attempt at definition, and if we desired to be critical we might successfully discover self-contradictions arising in the use and subsequent repudiation of these terms.
“J. K.” is not very complimentary to our columns, nor to the Clause, in attributing to this sheet a capacity for giving publicity to “balderdash,” being a “Spiritualistic paper.” Possibly he intended the somewhat uncourteous and uncalled-for remark as an apology for his present contribution. We are not at all thin-skinned in such matters, knowing that every writer is responsible for his own conduct, and we leave our readers to judge for themselves as to how they must think about what they read. We hope our new contributor, “I. A. Μ.,” will favour us with any views which may occur to him, notwithstanding the somewhat brusque reception he has met with. We would rather he would state his teachings, irrespective of what other writers may have advanced.
More Elucidations to "The Adeptship of Jesus Christ"
We are aware that the attention of the Clergy has been drawn to the Articles on the “Adeptship of Jesus Christ” by many readers, yet why has not one of the highly overpaid canters and ranters taken it upon himself to refute those heinous heresies of mine, as he would be officially bound to designate them. Have the Clergy suddenly been struck with a superabundance of modesty? Have they taken the warning closing sentence of the last Elucidatory Article to heart, or do they delude themselves with the futile hope that by pretending to be deaf and dumb, or, as they would call it, “by a masterly silence” they will quash the subject, and prevent further enquiry?
To dispel that fond hope, we beg to inform them, that a German version of the said treatise entituled “Der Magus Jesus Christus und die Magie Christi,” is actually in the course of publication, and will appear as a Christmas volume, no doubt to the great satisfaction of the Orthodox. French and Italian translations being also in preparation; the fond hope, that by ignoring the thing it will be suppressed, may well be given up.
While the Christian Clergy have been keeping a most cowardly silence, only a solitary Lady has since my last article stepped forward to defend some indifferent ideas, by some equally indifferent remarks.
Has it come to this? Is all Christendom left to the defence of one woman? Shades of the Champions of Christianity come and defend your Cause! This is a Spiritualistic paper, and no matter what balderdash you may talk, if yon only tag some heavy name to it, some one is sure to believe therein. Honi soit qui mal y pense.
<... continues on page 11-280 >
Editor's notes
- ↑ Esoteric Spiritualism by unknown author, Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 605, November 4, 1881, p. 295
- ↑ Criticisms on "J.K'S" "Adeptship" etc. by unknown author, Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 603, October 21, 1881, p. 663
- ↑ Notes and Comments by unknown author, Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 606, November 11, 1881, p. 712
- ↑ More Elucidations to "The Adeptship of Jesus Christ" by J.K., Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 606, November 11, 1881, pp. 709-11
Sources
-
Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 605, November 4, 1881, p. 295
-
Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 603, October 21, 1881, p. 663
-
Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 606, November 11, 1881, p. 712
-
Medium and Daybreak, v. 12, No. 606, November 11, 1881, pp. 709-11