Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
13,397
edits
Blavatsky H.P. - Muddled Meddlers (view source)
Revision as of 07:15, 15 April 2026
, Wednesday at 07:15no edit summary
(Created page with "{{HPB-CW-header | item title = Muddled Meddlers | item author = Blavatsky H.P. | volume = 12 | pages = 117-119 | publications = Lucifer, Vol. V, No. 30, F...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| previous = Blavatsky H.P. - Colonel H. S. Olcott and the British Section | | previous = Blavatsky H.P. - Colonel H. S. Olcott and the British Section | ||
| next = Blavatsky H.P. - Miscellaneous Notes (60) | | next = Blavatsky H.P. - Miscellaneous Notes (60) | ||
| alternatives = | | alternatives = | ||
| translations = | | translations = | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
{{Vertical space|}} | {{Vertical space|}} | ||
{{HPB-CW-comment|view=center|[''Lucifer'', Vol. V, No. 30, February, 1890, pp. 517-518]}} | |||
{{Vertical space|}} | {{Vertical space|}} | ||
In the Supplement to The Theosophist of January, 1890 (p. lxxv) its subscribers will read with amusement, and Theosophists, with pain and disgust, a personal—very untheosophical and undignified—attack made by one officer of the T.S. on another officer of the same. It is headed “Muddled Rule-Makers,” and its editorial (?) remarks are directed against a good Theosophist and a personal friend, who has all our gratitude and esteem for the unselfish work done by him for the good of the cause. His crime in the sight of the acting editor consists, it appears, in his having failed to express himself in the “Constitution and Bylaws” of the “Blavatsky Branch” of the Theosophical Society at Washington (U.S.A.) according to the personal hobby of the writer at Adyar. | In the ''Supplement'' to ''The Theosophist'' of January, 1890 (p. lxxv) its subscribers will read with amusement, and Theosophists, with pain and disgust, a personal—very untheosophical and undignified—attack made by one officer of the T.S. on another officer of the same. It is headed “Muddled Rule-Makers,” and its editorial (?) remarks are directed against a good Theosophist and a personal friend, who has all our gratitude and esteem for the unselfish work done by him for the good of the cause. His crime in the sight of the acting editor consists, it appears, in his having failed to express himself in the “Constitution and Bylaws” of the “Blavatsky Branch” of the Theosophical Society at Washington (U.S.A.) according to the personal hobby of the writer at Adyar. | ||
Now, if the terms used by our Washington Brother, such as | Now, if the terms used by our Washington Brother, such as “''International'' Theosophical Society,” “''Chief'' President” and “''Chief'' Corresponding Secretary” are not absolutely correct and official, then, and at any rate— | ||
(1) It is no business of the “acting” editor of The Theosophist to take a President and officers of a Branch Society to task for it—least of all in a public magazine. The President-Founder would alone have such a right; and when (or if) using it, he would certainly have the requisite tact and delicacy not to snub a respected member and a good Brother Theosophist—publicly. | (1) It is no business of the “acting” editor of ''The Theosophist'' to take a President and officers of a Branch Society to task for it—least of all in a public magazine. The President-Founder would alone have such a right; and when (or ''if'') using it, he would certainly have the requisite tact and delicacy not to ''snub'' a respected member and a good Brother Theosophist—publicly. | ||
(2) Such harsh expressions as “foolishness” and “tomfoolery” and “absurdities” when used in our chief theosophical magazine and coming from the Headquarters of the T.S.—especially if applied to a Brother-Member—are not only objectionable on account of their offensive character, but detrimental and dangerous to the T.S. They lower the magazine to the level of a scurrilous Methodist Weekly and give the right to our opponents to add to the scoffing {{Page aside|118}}epithets of “Mutual Admiration Society” given to our Body, that of “Mutual Detraction and Vilification Brotherhood.” On lave son linge sale en | (2) Such harsh expressions as “foolishness” and “tomfoolery” and “absurdities” when used in our chief theosophical magazine and coming from the Headquarters of the T.S.—especially if applied to a Brother-Member—are not only objectionable on account of their offensive character, but detrimental and dangerous to the T.S. They lower the magazine to the level of a scurrilous Methodist ''Weekly'' and give the right to our opponents to add to the scoffing {{Page aside|118}}epithets of “Mutual Admiration Society” given to our Body, that of “Mutual Detraction and Vilification Brotherhood.” ''On lave son linge sale en famille''—is a wise advice. | ||
Such sentences | Such sentences as—“''We'' ask . . . . . the meaning of this ‘tomfoolery,’ “ and “''We'' call upon Mr. W. Q. Judge” . . . . . etc., may sound very grandiloquent, but the real point is, has any “We,” apart from the President, the right to “ask,” or “call upon” any officer of the T.S. publicly and in such a tone? I, for one, and in the name of the Theosophists of the British Section of the T.S. protest against and deny the “We” any such privilege. | ||
Since the offensive remarks have been made in one theosophical periodical, I feel it my bounden duty to protest against them as publicly in another theosophical magazine. It is, I say, my bounden (and very painful) duty, and for the following reasons: | Since the offensive remarks have been made in one theosophical periodical, I feel it my bounden duty to protest against them as publicly in another theosophical magazine. It is, I say, my bounden (and very painful) duty, and for the following reasons: | ||
a) I am the founder and was the editor of The Theosophist for several years—Colonel Olcott having consented to act in my place only pro tem. | ''a'') I am the founder and was the editor of ''The Theosophist'' for several years—Colonel Olcott having consented to act in my place only ''pro tem''. | ||
(b) Together with my beloved colleague and co-worker, H. S. Olcott, we are to this day the sole proprietors of that magazine, and therefore must feel responsible for all that appears in it. | (''b'') Together with my beloved colleague and co-worker, H. S. Olcott, we are to this day the sole proprietors of that magazine, and therefore ''must'' feel responsible for all that appears in it. | ||
(c) I have a voice and many other rights in the management of the T.S. and its magazine, which even its present irrepressible acting editor would hardly take upon himself to question or deny. | (''c'') I have a voice and many other rights in the management of the T.S. and its magazine, which even its present irrepressible acting editor would hardly take upon himself to question or deny. | ||
In view of this, and the foregoing, I feel it my first duty to offer public apologies and sincere regrets to our esteemed Brother, the President of the Washington “Blavatsky Theosophical Society”—for this unjust and unbrotherly attack upon himself, in which apologies Col. H. S. Olcott would be certain to join were he still in London. | In view of this, and the foregoing, I feel it my first duty to offer public apologies and sincere regrets to our esteemed Brother, the President of the Washington “Blavatsky Theosophical Society”—for this unjust and unbrotherly attack upon himself, in which apologies Col. H. S. Olcott would be certain to join were he still in London. | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
{{Style P-No indent|Brighton (England), Feb. 1890.}} | {{Style P-No indent|Brighton (England), Feb. 1890.}} | ||
{{Style P-Signature|H. P. | {{Style P-Signature in capitals|H. P. Blavatsky}} | ||