HPB-SB-14-117: Difference between revisions

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title continued|Sir,—It is necessary to give a reply…|14-115}}

{{Style P-No indent|to teach any such thing as that he asserts we ascribe to him, we declared our conviction that his doctrine on the subject of Spirit and matter was one with our own!}}

[''The discussion on the “Teachings of ‘The Perfect Way’” must end here.''—{{Style S-Small capitals|Ed.}} “Light.”]

{{HPB-SB-item

}}

{{Style S-Small capitals|Sir,}}—Your correspondent, “Student,” has, in a very considerate manner, touched a weak point in the conduct of your excellent journal—the want of an open column for the discussion of questions relating to “the highest interests of humanity.” On referring to the original prospectus, I read that the promoters promised to issue “a high-toned and impartial weekly journal, devoted primarily to the interests of Spiritualism, and secondarily, to the fair discussion of such other topics as may occupy the attention of men and women of advanced thought.” Inquiries have frequently been made by one or another why the “secondary” feature of the undertaking has been so completely ignored, but no satisfactory answer has been forthcoming. To my knowledge, the clôture which the management have exercised towards all reforms has been a disappointment to a large number of subscribers, and I also believe, detrimental to the financial success of the paper. Spiritualists are naturally thinkers and reformers, and they look to see some of the utterances of the earnest men and noble women who are devoting their lives to the abolition of social evils (the existence of which so much wars against a higher spiritual development) in the columns of their journal. I have, on occasions, been present at gatherings of from fifty to a hundred of these social reformers, all interested in particular humanitarian projects, of whom two-thirds, at least, were avowed Spiritualists; but not one word relating to the object that so deeply enlisted their sympathies would be permitted to appear in the columns of “Light.” This policy of exclusion has not found favour with “men of light and’ leading” in other countries any more than at home. William Lloyd Garrison, the leader of the Anti-Slavery movement in America, and one of the greatest reformers of this century, while devoting his journal, the Liberator, mainly to the great object of his life—the emancipation of the slave—gave hospitable welcome to Spiritualism, and all other philanthropic movements of his day, no matter how unpopular at the time. A similar policy governs the leading weekly class-journals in America; and the most liberal of those devoted to Spiritualism is the one that has obtained the widest circulation.

{{Style P-No indent|December 4th, 1882.}}

{{HPB-SB-item

}}

{{Style S-Small capitals|Sir,}}—I see with a feeling akin to dismay that “Allied Topics,” which have lately slumbered, are again shewing signs of activity. This vivacity is of evil omen. Your readers are probably divided into two broadly defined camps. Of these one contains a considerable number of persons who interest themselves in such subjects as are mentioned in the letter of “A Student.” Some would alter the laws respecting the position of women; some would abolish property in land; some think that lunatics should be better looked after. But very few indeed, except some unbalanced minds to whom mere novelty and change are in themselves attractive, agree among themselves. Each has his private fancy. On the other side you have those who are Spiritualists proper, and who are united in a common desire to advance what they believe to be the truth, and to leave absolutely alone, so far as publication is concerned, most questions on which they are by no means agreed, and some of which they cordially detest, and all of which they regard as outside of the sphere of action marked out for them.

[We give the above letters as specimens of a considerable number which have been addressed to us on the subject. So far as we can at present judge the balance of opinion amongst our readers is strongly ''against'' any departure from the course which we have adopted hitherto.—{{Style S-Small capitals|Ed.}} “Light.”]

{{HPB-SB-item

}}

{{Style S-Small capitals|Sir,}}—There is a sentence in my last week’s article which I particularly wished to be intelligible, but which the mysterious introduction of a single syllable in the press—I thought I had struck it out in the proof—has rendered absolutely nonsensical. I am made to speak of “objective ''un''consciousness”! Will you allow me to reproduce the sentence correctly? “What took place in Devachan was the gradual ''in-drawing'' of the past-life experience till it ceased to be objective consciousness, and became the subjective basis of another external life or personality.”

{{Style P-Signature custom|C.C.M.|1 style=plain}}