New age or Spiritualism

What is the difference between new age or spiritualism. I tried searching on it, but dont get any clear answers. What would a new age person do that a spiritualism person wouldnt do, or vice versa.

Kahlon

I've been to one or two "spiritualist" churches that don't know the difference either

To me, being a spiritualist means using the guiding principles of spiritualism as a starting point towards putting spirit first in all things and ego second.

New Age can be about adding "bells and whistles" to the above, some of which may be complimentary (if used correctly) like crystals and tarot.

Other New Age things, like ascended masters, indigo children and cult-like figures (Ramtha springs to mind) can end up putting spirit to one side and massage the ego instead.

New Age at its worse is all about making you, and you alone, feel special, where as Spiritualism is about you and everyone else being special

A very good simple explanation Wes to something that could become long and cumbersome.

The New Age is a grab bag of ideas for which everyone may decide what to add.

So an individual may decide they are a wiccan, believer in angels so does angel readings who is a proof of survival medium who loves North American Indians They will probably use rituals and magic to whilst waiting for their DNA to be magically changed prior to ascencion to the 5th dimension in 2012. To them Spiritualism is old hat not the wonderful simple natural thing it is.

ok, that all makes sense. Wes, you say that ...crystals and tarot if used correctly...do they serve a purpose?

Kahlon wrote:What is the difference between new age or spiritualism. I tried searching on it, but dont get any clear answers. What would a new age person do that a spiritualism person wouldnt do, or vice versa.

Kahlon

I'd find it tricky to list differences. I can tell what's one or the other and I suppose Modern Spiritualism has a simplicity of message and form that New Agism doesn't. Whistles and bells as Wes says or a grab bag as Jim sees it, each making up their personal variation.

Crystals and tarot? They have no place for me but if they led to a practitioner being able to reassure an enquirer of the survival of someone they were seeking then I'd accept their use. To me, though, they smack of the psychic and not the spiritual.

"New Age at its worse is all about making you, and you alone, feel special, where as Spiritualism is about you and everyone else being special" Brilliant, Wes - wish I'd said that!

Some of my son's friend are a mixture of both and "New Age at its worse is all about making you, and you alone, feel special, where as Spiritualism is about you and everyone else being special" is the best way to describe the difference.
Thanks
Kahlon

Yes Wes its a great phrase





I hope you now feel special

Jim, there is only one Special One: Jose Mourinho. Google will back me up on that

As for Tarot & Crystals being complimentary, I see them as tools, or props, to use as you get a footing on the road to awareness. Once you're on the way you can keep them or discard them as you see fit.

For example, an energy healer I used to go to never used crystals, expect on one occasion when her guide suggested she use a specific one. That's what I mean by complimentary.

I also remember going to one of Jim's classes, where he used tarot-like cards with odd shapes on them to help us develop & focus our unformed psychic skills.

So if you use them as a means to an end (hopefully a spiritual one), rather than as an end in themselves, they are helpful.

Agreed Wes

For example, an energy healer I used to go to never used crystals, expect on one occasion when her guide suggested she use a specific one. That's what I mean by complimentary.

If the healer's guide suggested that she us a crystal, is it possible that the crystal kicked in when she didnt have the strength to do what was needed. If so, then we could learn some points of what the newagers do?

I wondered about crystals alot recently and that is interesting.

Kahlon

I don't understand the difference between 'energy healing' and 'spiritual healing'.

How would a crystal have any benefit?

This is where the issue sounds distinctly 'New Age' and is outside of my comprehension.....

Maybe religion (of all shades) is about belief but Spiritualism used to be about providing evidence.

I found an article on a person who went from spiritual healing to Reiki healing. http://www.reiki-evolution.co.uk/reiki-spiritual-healing.htm I dont know if reiki healing is considered new age but if one does spiritual healing or energy healing, I dont see anything wrong with either if you dont exploit the situation. I believe if each has their cup full of love, then they will end up on the otherside in the same place.
It seems that it could be if one needs to rely on crystals then that is the method they are capable of doing healing and may not be able to do well in the spiritual healing side of things. It seems both are good.

Maybe religion (of all shades) is about belief but Spiritualism used to be about providing evidence.

It seems we still live in a society where we still need to prove spiritualism, but maybe some just move on and no longer try to prove that anymore. Maybe spiritualism is more common than we think. Maybe this and maybe that, but one can only hope things are moving on.

Kahlon

The underlying views that we might accept as 'Spiritualist' seem to be very like those held in general, so it appears 'Spiritualist views have taken root. Folk in general are melding better - perhaps the racial and cultural mixing is blossoming now, but the tone is more tolerant than in the dark days when 'Xtianity' held sway. Great, I'd say.

The younger folk have all 'tried' Spiritualist meetings and simply moved along, which seems exactly in line with the fast-moving computer age. If they now have a skewed view it is because we could not accommodate them. However, when Life takes them to the time of parental death, who knows how te seeds will germinate.

We have entered a new phase of thinking across the board, by the look of it.

Sometimes I think people dont feel comfortable sharing things. Like I decided to one time force a person to accept that sometimes messages or thoughts can travel back between 2 people when they are in different cities. When someone is thinking of me I hear their voice calling out my name. So I got brave and phoned my sisters husband up and asked him, "were you thinking of me at so and so time". Well it happened that he (my sister's husband) had a dream of me. He felt very weird about it. But the next couple of times, once more by me and then once by my husband, he found out it is true and he decided to share more with us. And once he knew it could happen, he and my sister found out that they could communicate also, even tho very little. This made them more spiritual.

For me, things happen that I cant explain. Just before I am fading off to sleep, pictures (visions) of dead cows in a field, or a few times I seen dead horses around a pond with weeping willow trees around me. Those terrify me and I just stay awake for awhile so I dont see them again. Is this part of a past life. I dont know.

My mom was a deaf mute and used to say the Lord's prayer by sign language to us all the time. It was beautiful. About 3 months after she died I heard the Lord's prayer being song in my ear. Not coming out of a space in a room, but in my ear. It was so beautiful, the music not of this earth. I could only assume it was my mom. With that happening I started to study into the spiritual realm of things. There had to be more that what was stated in the bible. But the bible has such a taboo on these things that I went forward slowly. I am more comfortable with this now. I dont know why I didnt do it years ago. I guess I needed a happening.

Kaylon

I would say that while spiritualism is about providing evidence of survival, it is not limited to just that, as it is also concerned with healing the mind, body & emotions where appropriate, and being of service to spirit in whatever way is chosen.

Early spiritualists threw themselves into the anti-slavery movement and later into the cause of equal rights for women, and there are plenty more opportunities today to be of service, one soul at a time, or in groups or even masses.

I would also say that you don't have to be a spiritualist to do the work of spirit, as any genuine desire to be of service can only benefit the greater community and one's soul.

I would think most religions would claim some element of healing the mind body and emotions in one way or another. I don't see how spiritualism differs much from other organised religions in that respect. My reference to evidence was intended to mean one of the few (perhaps the only) differences that set it apart.

Without evidence to support spiritualist teachings, how does it differ from other organised religions?

"Without evidence to support spiritualist teachings, how does it differ from other organised religions?"

I agree now, obi. Contemporary evidence is all but missing...

mac wrote:"Without evidence to support spiritualist teachings, how does it differ from other organised religions?"

I agree now, obi. Contemporary evidence is all but missing...

Duck and Mac of one mind on this one - there is fortunately a great deal of historical evidence though isn't there Mac - some of it is quite astonishing. However today I can find very little to attract me in organised Spiritualism. That isn't to say there is no contemporary evidence out there of course.

I totally accept the historical evidence but I live in the present...

There's little contemporary equivalent of the many past decades' evidence.

obiwan wrote:

mac wrote:"Without evidence to support spiritualist teachings, how does it differ from other organised religions?"

I agree now, obi. Contemporary evidence is all but missing...

Duck and Mac of one mind on this one - there is fortunately a great deal of historical evidence though isn't there Mac - some of it is quite astonishing. However today I can find very little to attract me in organised Spiritualism. That isn't to say there is no contemporary evidence out there of course.

How I wish my duck friend could find the personal evidence he has sought for so long....

I'm now of a mind that Modern Spiritualism can not provide what once it proudly could - evidence in so many forms, from so many sources. That won't change me because I'm already 'there' but I find that I can no longer refer others with the confidence I once felt.

As obi mentions there is some of the most astonishing and persuasive historical evidence but what's missing for so many is the simple persuasiveness of a personal message or experience. The few who do get theirs, or the budding mediums of today, may find all they need to understand and accept survival et al but for the rest it's a mixed picture with few places to which one might refer them for help.

When I post so negatively I'm always hopeful that someone will come back at me to show how wrong I am to feel that way.

I'm still waiting....