Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01727)

"Lucifer...opens its columns to writers whose 
views...may...be diametrically opposed to the 
opinion of the editors."

>From H.P. Blavatsky's LUCIFER magazine:

"Free discussion, temperate, candid, undefiled
by personalities and animosity, is, we think,
the most efficacious means of getting rid of
error and bringing out the underlying truth;
and this applies to publications as well as
to persons. It is open to a magazine to be
tolerant or intolerant; it is open to it to
err in almost every way in which an individual
can err; and since every publication of the
kind has a responsibility such as falls to
the lot of few individuals, it behooves it
to be ever on its guard, so that it may
advance without fear and without reproach.
All this is true in a special degree in
the case of a theosophical publication,
and Lucifer feels that it would be unworthy
of that designation were it not true to
the profession of the broadest tolerance
and catholicity, even while pointing out
to its brothers and neighbours the errors
which they indulge in and follow. While
thus keeping strictly, in its editorials,
and in articles by its individual editors, to the spirit and
teachings of pure theosophy, it nevertheless frequently gives room
to articles and letters which diverge widely from the esoteric
teachings accepted by the editors, as also by the majority of
theosophists. Readers, therefore, who are accustomed to find in
magazines and party publications only such opinions and arguments as
the editor believes to be unmistakably orthodox--from his peculiar
standpoint-must not condemn any article in Lucifer with which they
are not entirely in accord, or in which expressions are used that
may be offensive from a sectarian or a prudish point of view, on the
ground that such are unfitted for a theosophical magazine. They
should remember that precisely because Lucifer is a theosophical
magazine, it opens its columns to writers whose views of life and
things may not only slightly differ from its own, but even be
diametrically opposed to the opinion of the editors. The object of
the latter is to elicit truth, not to advance the interest of any
particular ism, or to pander to any hobbies, likes or dislikes, of
any class of readers. It is only snobs and prigs who, disregarding
the truth or error of the idea, cavil and strain merely over the
expressions and words it is couched in.

Theosophy, if meaning anything, means truth; and truth has to deal
indiscriminately and in the same spirit of impartiality with vessels
of honour and of dishonour alike. . . .

Justice demands that when the reader comes across an article in this
magazine which does not immediately approve itself to his mind by
chiming in with his own peculiar ideas, he should regard it as a
problem to solve rather than as a mere subject of criticism. Let him
endeavour to learn the lesson which only opinions differing from his
own can teach him. Let him be tolerant, if not actually charitable,
and postpone his judgment till he extracts from the article the
truth it must contain, adding this new acquisition to his store. One
ever learns more from one's enemies than from one's friends; and it
is only when the reader has credited this hidden truth to Lucifer,
that he can fairly presume to put what he believes to be the efforts
of the article he does not like to the debit account."

LUCFIER, January 1888, pp. 342-343