What exactly is a Christian Spiritualist?

While I have no problem with the thought of Christians embracing Spiritualism, or vice a versa, I can't see how it is possible to have a "foot in both places" as it were.

How is it possible to reconcile some very fundamental differences between Christianity and Spiritualism?

Just look at the two words for a start, one places Christ at the top of their tree and the other places Spirit at the top. While there is room for spirit in Christianity's Holy Trinity, Spiritualism's possible equivalent: "Mind, Body & Soul" has no room for putting Christ in a preeminent position.

While I am happy to accept that Jesus is divine, in the same way that we are all divine, and that Jesus is the son of God/Spirit in the same way that we are all sons & daughters of God/Spirit, I cannot accept that Jesus has exclusive rights to divinity or divine parentage to the exclusion of all other humans. However, I can accept that he was a highly evolved/aware human being and one of many great role models for service to spirit.

To me, the notion of God as portrayed in the bible is straying into the realm of fantasy and myth. To have a manic deity as the focus of your religion really does need a leap of faith. A god that is one moment full of anger and intolerance, then at other times full of love and forgiveness. A god that needs to be worshiped and adored by all must have self esteem problems. We can put up with that sort of behaviour from our celebrities but do we really need that from our god?

Compare this to Spirit, which to my understanding has no body, gender or set of rules that we must follow, and places on us no obligation other than to fulfill our souls' desire to learn, love and grow. Spirit has no foibles or inconsistencies and has no human-like qualities apart from love that is unconditional and intelligence that is infinite.

How can a christian spiritualist reconcile the divine christ with the human Nazerene, and the flawed god of the bible with the formless grace that is Spirit?

There are some other differences that spring to mind, like the notion of good and evil, sin, needing to be baptised/confirmed to go to heaven.

I have to say I am really confused by these fundamental differences and would appreciate some enlightenment on the matter.

Well Wes,

I don't think I can help resolve your confusion but I can certainly say I endorse and support your insightful reflections on the subject.

Lis

Thank you Lis, it is an ever increasing source of frustration for me as I look for somewhere in Brisbane that fits my understanding of the word Spiritualist.

A recent case in point is the Boundary Street church in the city. The first time I went there I saw a picture of Jesus prominently placed on a wall and wondered if I was in a christian spiritualist church, but the reverend that greeted me told me that no, it was indeed a spiritualist church. After sitting through the doxology and the Lord's prayer in the opening few minutes, I had to wonder if I had misheard her...

I don't do churches in general (although I'm a great supporter of Modern Spiritualist churches generally) but I've visited both persuasions.

Much mainstream teaching is anathema to me. That hasn't happened, incidentally, only since I became a Modern Spiritualist although my earlier feelings made far more sense after I learned what I did.

I am emotionally assaulted by the nonsense so sincerely (well, apparently) preached by mainstream religions' priests. I wince when the minds of our beautiful children are filled with meaningless, religious mumbo jumbo called religious education in the UK.

Consequently for a Spiritualist church to be contaminated in any way with the teachings, trappings or iconology of Christianity - or for that matter any other religion - is equally anathema to me.

That goes for displaying or wearing crucifixes too....

rant over - sorry

The underlying purpose of Christianity and similar concepts is to primarily underpin and provide a foundation for theology and its systems. These in turn serve, not a god, but further human systems of control and manipulation.

All their trappings of sanctimoniousness, robes, language, etc are simply to 'impress the minds of the gullible' which is their real purpose.

Keep these sinister outfits well away from young/ school children and let them prove their ideas in the popular everyday marketplace of common sense.

Christianity has had over 1500 years to provide evidence of their claims and have consistently failed to do so, yet Spiritualism provides this on an individual basis virtually daily.

Edit to say that I attended a church wedding in Dunlaoghaire, near Dublin, some years ago and was looking around at the multi-changes adopted since boyhood days. As I quietly gazed around in the peaceful atmosphere, the vibrant thought as I saw the Confessional Boxes, was that these were originally used for Private Interviews given by the real 'Priests' who had psychic ability.

Greetings. May I contribute some input into the subject of Christian Spiritualism? I hope you can bear with me if I fail to convey my deeper thoughts properly, I realise everybody is different yet I hope that this helps to add something of interest to this discussion.

If labels define people then I am a "Christian Spiritualist". I do not speak for others who may go by the definition of Christian Spiritualist - I only speak for myself and perhaps those I know who accept the main principles which I accept.

My understanding comes from spirit communication (spirits and humans communicating with each other) which is where "Spiritualist" comes into my belief.

In order to cut a long story short, my chosen belief can be summarised as follows...

1] I believe in One God Who is Love.
2] I accept the Leadership of Jesus Christ.
3] I believe that God manifests through the illimitable Power of the Holy Spirit.
4] I believe in the survival of the human soul and its individuality after physical death.
5] I believe in the Communion with God, with His angelic ministers, and with souls functioning in conditions other than the earth life.
6] I believe that all forms of life created by God intermingle, are inter-dependent, and evolve until perfection is attained.
7] I believe in the perfect justice of the Divine Laws governing all life.
8] I believe that sins committed can only be rectified by the sinner himself or herself, through the redemptive power of the Christ, by repentance and service to others.

Of these, number "8" may perhaps pose most difficulty. I suppose that it may help to understand this last point by considering whether or not there is a primary source of redemptive Power that can heal and spiritualise souls; and if so, does this initial source of healing Power have intelligence, consciousness and awareness?

Then, if it is accepted that there is a conscious initial source of regenerating Power that can heal, uplift and spiritualise souls, is it possible, should it be desired, to attribute to that source of redemptive Power a name such as that of Spiritual Christ?

My understanding of Christian Spiritualism is that God is Spirit and that all souls belong to God as they are of the same essence as God - except in miniature - and who can never be separated from God, and who are all subject to spiritual laws which are based on Divine Love because they spring from the source of Divine Love - and God is Love.

So I do not find any sense of separation because of my belief, rather the beautiful opposite because there is ultimately a perfect harmony and unity of all souls in Divine Love regardless of what they believe.

What is often promoted today as Christianity and which is associated in the minds of many non-Christians as Christianity, is far from the true meaning of Christ's appearance on Earth according to my interpretation of the many Spirit messages from the World of Spirit I have studied. The perception of God that mainstream Christianity portrays is so far removed from the God of Love that Christ represented.

Christ was not a "blood sacrifice" to "appease" an angry God and grant instant "sainthood" and freedom from consequences of actions to all who accept such a primitive idea. That bizarre and absurd idea is in man's mind only and the vociferous "pastors" continue to spread this manmade belief.

Man decided that once he accepted a metaphysical belief then he achieved "salvation". Christ never spoke of such an idea but instead spoke of altruistic morals and a spiritually noble life - that is how He spent His time on Earth. An element of Spiritualism is tasked with setting the record straight for those who wish to know.

I am told from the Spiritual World that Christ came to demonstrate God as a living example. Part of His Plan was that mankind would look at Him, assess Him, judge Him, and in doing so would see the God who is Love through Him - would see how their God feels towards them, how He is hurt when they are hurt, how He cares for them with an undying love, how He would dearly learn their difficult lessons for them if only it was possible, and of course, that He would even die for His children. In turn they would find that they could truly adore their God, yes and to love their God (which is His deepest desire) - and again in turn they would pour out love on to their fellow beings which in turn would heal this world and which, again in turn, would prevent unnecessary wrong actions which brought unsavoury consequences to their souls.

A simple Plan - too simple it seems, as we can see from the complicated dogmas that men have created around Christ Jesus which mask the truth and which are passed on in the name of a religion that bears His name.

I believe that as God's Christ, He was the "visible manifestation of the invisible God" for the purpose of showing mankind in the most instructive way possible what his God is like - demonstrating unstoppable Divine love which cannot ever be withheld, pouring out compassion on all, revealing self-denying love and spiritual teachings in words and by example, showering healing on thousands and thousands, inspiring and raising up the downtrodden and fallen - and more.

Then, I suppose, comes that misunderstood thought that a man could be God? May I put it like this? I believe that Jesus Christ was a man like any man, woman or child, and yet, being the Christ of God, His soul was (is) perfect and pure in every way, therefore making Him unique like no other human and indeed very different to any other.

The teachings and philosophy that have come to us from the Greater World of Spirit via Spiritualist methods go into great depth concerning the Divinity of Christ. This could not be explained in an online forum. However, I would perhaps point to...

"The Zodiac Messages" (Zodiac Circle)
http://www.christianspiritualism.org/messages/zodiactable.htm

"The Life Beyond the Veil" series (Rev. Vale Owen)
http://www.christianspiritualism.org/articles/lbtv.htm

...as good complimentary sources of how Christ and Spiritualism can be holistically blended, and which reveal a loving yet powerful belief system handed down by Spiritualist means.

Perhaps to give a short example of how I have reached my point of view concerning Christ and Spiritualism, it might help to read a summary given from the Spirit World by Spiritualist means which explains the creation of our physical universe and how the Christ Spiritual can become the Christ Incarnate...

http://www.christianspiritualism.org/articles/ChristisGod.htm#leader

There is also a Spiritualist classic ("Spirit Teachings") which helps strip away the manmade ideas attributed to that which men and women have called "Christianity"...
"Spirit Teachings" (Stainton Moses)
http://www.christianspiritualism.org/download/Spirit%20Teachings%20Moses.zip

For myself, Spiritualism does not end with but only begins with consciousness that there is continuity of life after physical death, and through Spiritualism I have discovered that there is something deeper yet, something so rare and wonderful that its expression is nigh impossible - and yet something so simple that it can be overlooked.

I can say that the words attributed to Jesus the Christ recorded in the records of His life: "Seek and you shall find", have a very profound meaning for me.

Thank you for reading this.

Peace.

Tony Bisson.

8] I believe that sins committed can only be rectified by the sinner himself or herself, through the redemptive power of the Christ, by repentance and service to others.

Hi Tony, you are right, number eight is difficult to accept from a spiritualist viewpoint. Are you saying that before the time of Christ, there was no way to cleanse yourself of your sins?

Seeing as a lot of sins can be put down to ignorance, poor judgement and rash impulsiveness, surely you can deal with them by acknowledging them, learning from them, and then moving on. Does Jesus really need to be involved in this process?

Hi Wes, thanks for responding. I do understand what you are saying.

In terms of our spiritual philosophy - the Christ (Redeemer-aspect) of God existed before the material cosmos was formed and is one and the same as the Christ who exists today, and has not changed in any way because a human body was taken on 2,000 years ago and dropped later on the Cross.

This means that acknowledging and dealing with those things we realise are selfish in that they harm others (“sins”) does not require that the Spiritual Christ is in human form or not – the process has always been the same and the Redeemer aspect of God has always been the same.

In the circumstances it may be a similar thing to say “…through the redemptive power of the Redeeming-Healing aspect of God”.

This might help to make things more easily understood, yet from my point of view gained from the spiritual philosophy, I see the Redeemer-Healer aspect of God as the “Spiritual Christ”, and it is this Spiritual Christ (we are told from Spirit) that thought Himself forward into matter and became an individual Soul to take on a human body.

My personal preference then would be to say when attempting to summarise it: “…through the redemptive power of the Spiritual Christ” (Who became the man Jesus the Christ) because I think it is less of a challenge to comprehend.

So it may be true to say that earthly names are that - names - but the Redeeming aspect of the Supreme Being is a reality regardless of whether we accept that He became man or not. But as I said, I choose to accept that He did become a man on the strength of the Spirit Messages that have come my way.

Personally, I find it truly beautiful to think that the “formless” God who is Divine Love can be brought instantly to mind by realising that His Divine characteristics can be summed up concisely in the “physical manifestation” of the one I call Jesus of Nazareth, about whom I have heard much from the Spirit World.

I do hope this helps Wes.

Thanks Tony its good to see someone representing the views of the Greater World Spiritualist Church so clearly. Although it is unlikely to convert me from my rational religious (with a small r) approach it does help to indicate the two approaches are compatible. Indeed I know several mediums who work both in SNU centres and the Greater World (or other) Christian Spiritualist Churches.

Your position clearly excludes Vicarious Atonement and presumably an exclusive Christian Heaven amongst other of the many add on's that the conventional Christian Churches have. It would be interesting to know some of the other positions on the Bible. I understand your focus on the reported words of Jesus but how do you view the Old Testament part of the Bible.

I think we all make claims to Stainton Moses but from my reading he was not very interested in a separate religious Spiritualism and Imperator did define it separately as if the Christian religion had, as others, fallen victim to man made theology.

I also feel that even rational Spiritualists like those of the SNU would say they agree that there is to quote you

Spiritualism does not end with but only begins with consciousness that there is continuity of life after physical death, and through Spiritualism I have discovered that there is something deeper yet, something so rare and wonderful that its expression is nigh impossible - and yet something so simple that it can be overlooked.

That is why this forum exists not just to consider the phenomena but also the philosophy and life meaning. Thanks for sharing your information I am sure it has helped many to understand Christian Spiritualism more clearly.

Sadly I never managed to visit Jersey where your Church is based but I have visited your web site a number of times.

Jim

Hi Jim,

Thank you for letting me know that I made some sense, it's kind of you to say so.

I have friends who do not affiliate themselves with the philosophy that I have adopted but who have wonderful spiritual experiences. I read this thread: "What exactly is a Christian Spiritualist" a while back and when I came here again I felt I should offer some feedback as to my own personal viewpoint - which includes entering into life-changing realisations and experiences about Christ which are beyond description, courtesy of the Spiritual World.

I was not consciously expecting such realisations or experiences during my early attendances at a Spiritualist church. But that is, no doubt, why I include the word "Christian" with "Spiritualism". For myself, it does not go away, it is here to stay - the Christ part that is...and I feel I should say this is specific to the Christ Jesus spoken of in the New Testament.

I made reference to "Spirit Teachings" by Stainton Moses because it does a good job of showing what Christianity is not, rather than it being Spirit messages that teach of Christ specifically - in relation to my preferred philosophy which has a different "flavour". I make no claim to it - I just think it's sensible reading for anyone getting involved with Spirit Communication as it provides truth, warnings and encourages a person to take care, and as it seeks to protect the soul I include it.

It also does a fairly good job of describing how I view the Old Testament in general from the true historical perspective, to the stories which did not have Divine Spirit as their author but were the result of the minds of men, to the delivery of the messages of the prophets and how they were coloured by individuality - but I find care should be applied not to take points out of context.

Thank you once again.

Peace,
Tony.

Edit:

lastpost wrote:
I made reference to "Spirit Teachings" by Stainton Moses because it does a good job of showing what Christianity is not

This is not very clear. Stainton Moses was something of a
traditionalist Christian with the common-place Christian idea of salvation.
The main Spirit band transmitting the messages within
"Spirit Teachings" shows to Stainton Moses by noble logic and ethical
deduction how wrong mankind's idea of Christianity is.

You might as well ask "what exactly is a Christian".

hiorta wrote: I attended a church wedding in Dunlaoghaire, near Dublin, some years ago and was looking around at the multi-changes adopted since boyhood days. As I quietly gazed around in the peaceful atmosphere, the vibrant thought as I saw the Confessional Boxes, was that these were originally used for Private Interviews given by the real 'Priests' who had psychic ability.

Now that's an interesting thought! It just might be so.

lastpost wrote:

In terms of our spiritual philosophy - the Christ (Redeemer-aspect) of God existed before the material cosmos was formed and is one and the same as the Christ who exists today, and has not changed in any way because a human body was taken on 2,000 years ago and dropped later on the Cross.

This means that acknowledging and dealing with those things we realise are selfish in that they harm others (“sins”) does not require that the Spiritual Christ is in human form or not – the process has always been the same and the Redeemer aspect of God has always been the same.

In the circumstances it may be a similar thing to say “…through the redemptive power of the Redeeming-Healing aspect of God”.

This might help to make things more easily understood, yet from my point of view gained from the spiritual philosophy, I see the Redeemer-Healer aspect of God as the “Spiritual Christ”, and it is this Spiritual Christ (we are told from Spirit) that thought Himself forward into matter and became an individual Soul to take on a human body.

My personal preference then would be to say when attempting to summarise it: “…through the redemptive power of the Spiritual Christ” (Who became the man Jesus the Christ) because I think it is less of a challenge to comprehend.

So it may be true to say that earthly names are that - names - but the Redeeming aspect of the Supreme Being is a reality regardless of whether we accept that He became man or not. But as I said, I choose to accept that He did become a man on the strength of the Spirit Messages that have come my way.

Personally, I find it truly beautiful to think that the “formless” God who is Divine Love can be brought instantly to mind by realising that His Divine characteristics can be summed up concisely in the “physical manifestation” of the one I call Jesus of Nazareth, about whom I have heard much from the Spirit World.

This is an excellent explanation. The redemptive power of God, and individual responsibility, are not mutually exclusive, when viewed in this light.

Lastpost certainly provided much food for thought in his few Posts. I hope that he's still in touch with our Forum.

Left Behind wrote:Lastpost certainly provided much food for thought in his few Posts. I hope that he's still in touch with our Forum.

I doubt that....

The difference is simply that one side of the debate holds that Life, in all its forms, cannot die.

The other position holds that human life must be 'saved'
 to survive physical death, i.e. be 'born again.'

This boils down to the contradictory position: If there is no death - there can be no Resurrection - without Resurrection there can be no Christianity.

I wonder.  Does so-called Christian Spiritualism have any relevance to the plain-vanilla Spiritualism that's the focus of this website anyway?

I certainly do not subscribe to the CS philosophy. Does any member?

No. If detailed, ongoing Mediumistic evidence should point to the individual surviving beyond death, why continue to try to ride both horses simultaneously?

belt and braces?

I don't think they're necessarily mutually exclusive, 'Christianity' is a broad belief system. Silver Birch used to refer to the Nazarene with respect iirc.

Christianity is fine for those who see themselves as Christians. Spiritualism works for adherents to its philosophy and teachings. Mix the two, though, and perhaps it's at that point they become poor bedfellows?

Spiritualism and Christianity are incompatible only if you're thinking of traditional Christianity: the idea that you need to be saved from the torments of an eternal hell by placing your faith in Jesus Christ.

But what Lastpost discusses above is something different: the idea of the Christ-principle: that mankind can draw nearer to God, the source of life, because the Christ-principle is an aspect or emanation from God. If we're operating in a context of love, we're molding our lives according to the Christ-principle.

Following this line of thought, Jesus of Nazareth -- Christ, or "The Christ", or the Nazarene, as Silver Birch repeatedly calls him -- becomes the prime exemplar or way-shower, because he, more than anyone else, molded his life on that Christ-principle. Therefore whether he was Divine in the traditional Christian-accepted sense of the term doesn't matter that much.

I find the whole concept not contradicting Spiritualism but as adding a more -- warm? humanizing? -- aspect to it.

hiorta wrote:The difference is simply that one side of the debate holds that Life, in all its forms, cannot die.

The other position holds that human life must be 'saved'
 to survive physical death, i.e. be 'born again.'

This boils down to the contradictory position: If there is no death - there can be no Resurrection - without Resurrection there can be no Christianity.

Yet I believe that we'd all agree that the physical body dies. If Jesus resurrected - whatever that means, whatever he did -- wouldn't that point to the ultimate triumph of spirit over body? Wouldn't that make him the ultimate medium?

Left Behind wrote:Spiritualism and Christianity are incompatible only if you're thinking of traditional Christianity: the idea that you need to be saved from the torments of an eternal hell by placing your faith in Jesus Christ.

But what Lastpost discusses above is something different: the idea of the Christ-principle: that mankind can draw nearer to God, the source of life, because the Christ-principle is an aspect or emanation from God. If we're operating in a context of love, we're molding our lives according to the Christ-principle.

Following this line of thought, Jesus of Nazareth -- Christ, or "The Christ", or the Nazarene, as Silver Birch repeatedly calls him -- becomes the prime exemplar or way-shower, because he, more than anyone else, molded his life on that Christ-principle. Therefore whether he was Divine in the traditional Christian-accepted sense of the term doesn't matter that much.

I find the whole concept not contradicting Spiritualism but as adding a more -- warm? humanizing? -- aspect to it.

The way you've expressed things here I don't disagree with the first part of your last sentence - not the warm and humanising bits though as I don't find Spiritualism cold or inhuman anyway.

But is that either mainstream Christianity or Christian Spiritualism?  I ask seriously because I'm not a Christian and haven't been exposed to mainstream Christianity for over 6 decades.  

As for God well I have a very different perspective of that concept and Jesus the Nazarene isn't part of it.

@leftbehind - I agree, Spiritualism is incompatible only with certain strands of Christianity. In fact, far from being unusual, Spiritualism teaches that all humans are ressurected and were long before Jesus and Christianity.

I am not a fan of Christanity or any organised religion however what and who Jesus was is difficult to discern for certain and doesn't cause a problem for me until someone insists it is 'just so'.