Thoughts in Answer to Correspondents
We are in receipt of numerous letters from correspondents. asking for information and for our opinion on certain questions. We shall endeavor to answer them to the best of our ability.
"Can a person, other than a medium,” do or see certain things, is a most common inquiry?
There should be some conventional definition adopted for this word medium in our spiritual science. For instance, in a seance for physical manifestations, there may be in the circle three persons, recognized as mediums, in the present acceptation of the word, yet one only is in reality a medium for the occasion. True, we have already divided mediumistic powers into general classes, bat the word medium has no definite meaning. If we say, “a medium is a person who furnishes the necessary powers by which spirit-force or intelligence is enabled to demonstrate its existence, and without which power there can be no such demonstration,” then if one should say, "I have seen materialized forms of spirits appear in the absence of a medium,” he would mean that none of those who witnessed the apparition furnished the power which is commonly supposed to be necessary; and yet all present may have possessed some phase of mental mediumship. The spiritual faculties of each individual have much to do with his perception of spirit-manifestations one thinks the Eddy circles are dark, another easily distinguishes everything in the room,—simply because one is developed into a higher spiritual condition than the other.
When we are asked, "Is not a study of the secret laws t of nature apt to develop ones spiritual or mediumistic condition, and thus furnish an explanation as to his remarkable powers and visions;” we answer, “yes.” Pythagoras in his secret lodges, prescribed a certain manner of life, distinguished by a most cleanly but not luxurious clothing, a regular diet, a methodical division of time. See. The Cabbalists taught virtue, and were thus auxiliaries to the sacred teachings of the holy laws, though perhaps having no connection with the dorminant religion. The Chaldeans transmitted their learning from father to son. The most learned and eloquent of the Persian Magi did —
“Renounce rich attire; their Rayment is white upon occasions, their Beds, the ground, their Food, nothing but Herbs, Cheese and Bread; instead of a Staff they carry a cane, in the top whereof they put their Cheese, which as occasion served they did eat.” — Laertius.
We might quote the habits and manners of living of many of the ancient “mediums’” all tending to show that they developed a spiritual condition, and were thus channels for the inspiration that was suited to those times. The oracles of Zoroaster tell us that “The ungirders of the soul which give her breathing are easy to be loosed;” that is, it is easy for the soul to loose itself from the bonds which confine it to the body, and travel as a spirit, almost unrestrained. Col. Olcott has advanced a theory of “elementary spirits” to accouut for the presence of some unexplained force in spiritual manifestations that causes confusion and error. The proposition has been declared, by some writers on Spiritualism, to be unprovable. Perhaps so; we are not sufficiently read up in Col. Olcott’s views to express an opinion. But the power of an embodied spirit, to travel out and away from the body, has been proved; the power of a mesmerist to influence a subject at a distance of hundreds of miles, has been proved; and both propositions can undoubtedly be proved at any time by experiment. Col. Olcott’s “elementary spirits” may be human thoughts, traveling as entities, for aught we know to the contrary; certain it is that we are responsible for our thoughts, they reach the source for which they were intended, and they go to make up our “future mansion.” All these matters should be subjects for contemplation, argument and experiment, rather than denunciation or ridicule. “Try to Understand Yourself and Things in General,” is the motto of the Scientist; we believe that a study of the powers of our own spirit or the spirit in the body, will be productive of much information concerning our relations with the Spirit-World. That our departed friends # (That’s right.) can and do return, has been proved and we know it #.–Let us go farther.
# It is not proved at all. How … every … belief is a blessing.
Plain Statements and Explanations
The new theories recently advanced as principles in the Spiritual Philosophy, have, as we predicted last week, drawn many writers into the field. Dr. G. Bloede is a correspondent of the Banner of Light, who rushes into print with an “Important Caution” against the recent “Important Notice,’ issued by Emma Hardinge Britten, as secretary for a proposed book, treating of “Art Magic; or Mundane, Super-Mundane and Sub-Mundane Spiritualism.” He sees in this book, “but a new snare to Spiritualism itself, laid by its ever-watchful and active enemy, —the Ecclesiastical Power all over the world;” and this “Ecclesiastical Power” is “THE JESUIT ORDER.”
Now far be it from our purpose to belittle or to smother any attempt to awaken Spiritualist! to the knowledge, that “the Jesuit order does plot in secret and work by stealth to regain its lost ascendency.” The Scientist has persistently taught this and urged Spiritualists to unite and organize for the coming contest; but to express such an opinion, concerning the probable methods to be employed by Jesuits, shows the author to be ignorant of the past history, and the present condition of these powerful enemies. If the forthcoming work was destined to accomplish what the learned Dr. Bloede seems to fear it will, money in any quantity would be at hand and not only five hundred, but five hundred thousand copies would be printed, and every Spiritualist would find one under his nose.
No! No! When Jesuitism strikes at Spiritualism it deals a powerful blow. It has little to fear in countries where Protestantism reigns. The tendency of Spiritualism is to weaken Protestant churches. Spiritualists in the United States are not yet united; they will not acknowledge a common belief, however simple, nor recognize the necessity of any work, however important, as a basis upon which they may unite. Their leading organs, for the past twenty-seven years, have discouraged Organization, and have been content to follow, rather than attempt to lead, public opinion. Catholicism, on the contrary, has been silently propagated, constantly increasing its ratio of proportion to the sum total of all other beliefs. Catholics are united, acknowledging one head and his authority through subordinates. They bide their time, but the issue will come.
But according to Dr. Blode the Jesuits are at work—how? Publishing a small book of which only five hundred copies will be issued in any event.
And, as he says,—“By capturing the minds of the most earnest and influential Spiritual leaders, by persuading them that Modern Spiritualism is nothing but the old ‘occultscuence’ of by-gone centuries; the ‘magic art’ practised by the adepts of a secret order in the Orient, by affording them, as ‘advanced thinkers,’—as Mrs. Britten says — ‘the clue they need so badly to the understanding of all the mysteries of Ancient and Modern Spiritualism?’ Should this view of the ‘important notice' before us be considered only as the promptings of black-seeing? We think not. The captivation of earnest and influential Spiritualist leaders has already commenced. Dating from the advent of a remarkable foreigner in our country, Madame Blavatsky, we have seen the Spiritual Scientist fill its pages with learned and abstruse stuff on occult art and secret orders.”
It is this paragraph that drew our attention. Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten is too well known to our readers, and Spiritualists in general, to need any defence at our hands. She will, without doubt, reply in such a manner that those who read will gain information.
We thank Dr. Bloede for classing us among the ‘‘earnest’’ Spiritualists; we are, indeed, too earnest to be captured by any person or order, and hope we may be sufficiently influential to lift Spiritualism to a higher plane than it at present occupies. And, as the only fact alleged in proof of our captivity seems to be that our pages have been filled with “learned and abstruse stuff" since the advent of Madame Blavatsky. we beg the favor of our readers, while we refer to several of our able correspondents.
At what date Madame Blavatsky came to this country we do not know; we did not see her until July last, and then but several times, nor have we seen her since. In the month of March, without previous acquaintance or preliminary correspondence, we received from her the article, “Who Fabricates?” This had been refused by all other Spiritual journals, for it contained direct charges against Dr. H. G. Child, indicting him as a conspirator with the Holmes in producing the photographs of Katy King and his wonderful book. And this Spiritualist, this leader, has attempted no reply to the evidence adduced, and is still accepted and endorsed by “leading Spiritual journals.”
Previous to this time, the month of November, we think, she alone undertook a reply to Dr. Beard, who charged the Eddy’s with fraud; her evidence at that time was the most conclusive proof we have yet seen produced, of the genuineness of the mediums at Chittenden, Vt. The defence was an able article.
The Brotherhood of Luxor circular was published; the last week in April; but we have not asked our readers to accept any wonderful explanations, nor do we intend to at this time of writing.
Madame Blavatsky recognized in the Spiritual Scientist a spiritual paper; it was plain and outspoken in its opinions, recognizing the evils which encumbered and checked the progress of Spiritualism, and calling for a reform which would divest it of its tricksters, hypocrites, and sensualists We believe the Scientist owes it success to this policy, from which it has never deviated. We think Col. Olcott, Gen Lippitt, Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten, Prof. Wm. Denton, J. M. Peebles, and our many other correspondents and warm, firm friends made since the first number of the Scientist was printed, are such for this reason and no other. We stepped from secular journalism into Spiritualism, having no acquaintance with Spiritualists. We were actuated by a stern sense of duty, which was ours: consequences or results belong to God. The columns of our paper are open to Spiritualism and knowledge; but closed to sensualism and ignorance. We can say with Paul, “our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience."
Dr. Bloede says further: —
“Should any further indications of the same designing power be needed, we may refer the reader to the article in No. 2 of the Spiritual Scientist of Sept. 16th entitled, ‘A Theosophical Society.’ There we are informed that ‘One (tic) movement of great importance has just been inaugurated in New York under the lead of Col. Henry S. Olcott, in the organization of a society to be known as the ‘Theosophical Society.’ This event, which occurred in the parlors of Madame Blavatsky and under her auspices and those of one M r. George Henry Felt, (as we are told ‘the discoverer of the geometrical figures of the Egyptian Cabala’) is hailed by the Scientist ‘with great satisfaction’ as likely to bring order out of our present chaos, (?) furnish cs a true (?) philosophy of spirit intercourse, and afford a neutral ground upon which the tried wrestlers of the Church and College may rest from their cruel and illogical strife. (!!!)”
When Dr. Bloede writes concerning what the Jesuits may do or are doing, he should glance his eye over the field and see what “Free Love” HAS DONE. Had he told us that this was an engine of destruction, invented by departed spirits of Jesuits, we might see some consistency between cause and effect. Compare Spiritualism and its societies to-day with Spiritualism and its societies of four years ago, before the advent of these jesuitically controlled individuals who consider sensualism paramount to Spiritualism. Judge a tree by its fruits; then will he welcome, as we do, the discussion of “occultism,” “elementaries,” or aught else that has the slightest bearing upon Spiritualism, or furnishes a subject upon which the learned, and those giving instruction can write, and upon which the ignorant and monomaniacs must be silent. Then he may see, as we do, that a society devoted to Theosophy, will attract able and philosophical minds, who will unite for an object, incite others to do the same, and thus “bring order out of chaos.” The object will be to experiment and study for FACTS, on which, perhaps, we may build a “true philosophy” of spirit intercourse; our present philosophy is imperfect and full of mystery. The minds thus attracted will stand upon the “neutral ground” of ignorance seeking for information, rather than on the positive dogma of “what, ever is, is right” And they will cease denouncing each other as fools, knaves, or Jesuits, which we call “cruel and illogical strife.” We hope when Dr. Bloede reads this courteous explanation, he will regret having so far lent himself to the “mysterious” as to use, when quoting our remarks, such cabalistic signs, as (?), (?), (!!), (!!!) in so great profusion.
He “hopes the Banner will reprint the entire article for the instruction of its readers.” We think it will not It has passed over too many similar golden opportunities through its prejudice to any new and powerful enterprise in Spiritual journalism. It does not give credit to the Scientist, for Col. Olcott» letter used in its last issue. Dr. Bloede is on dangerous ground, if he gives much of this advice, and we wonder that he had sufficient influence to gain us a notice in its columns, even though it was loaded with the damaging insinuations which called forth the above explanations.
Editor's notes
Sources
Spiritual Scientist, v. 3, No. 7, October 21, 1875, p. 78