Lorraine Holloway-White

Quiet wrote:Does anyone know anything about Lorraine?

I was idly googling when I found her blog and also that she has written a few books which are available on Kindle, a boon for me. I bought a couple - they are a little over $3.00 each.

I don't think she is a member of a spiritualist church but she is British. Haven't read any of them but she does seem to focus on natural born 'sensitives'.

Would appreciate any comments. You can find her easily by googling her name.

Many thanks

Quiet wrote:Thanks Mac. I found her when I was looking for reading material for my Kindle. There is still a fairly limited range of this kind of material for the Kindle.

As a Natural Born Medium – I am a 'Sensitive' NOT a spiritualist

Wes wrote:You've touched on a pet peeve there Jim.

There are far too many damaged, vulnerable people that would rather see a psychic/medium than see a professional counsellor or psychiatrist, and they take as gospel anything they are told in a reading (it's coming from a higher power so of course it must be true) without any critical analysis.

So for this reason anyone who puts out their stall as a psychic or medium has an enormous burden of responsibility, both moral and legal, not to hurt or take advantage of these people in any way.

So I would ask what checks and balances these home grown "sensitives" have in place to stop them abusing the trust placed in them.

Admin wrote:Agreed Wes and of course it encourages those who just want to do it all...no need to prove survival just out and out psychism or alternatively the mind providing the information with neither psychic or mesiumistic ability. Sorry Mac those of us in Oz see the impact of her style, far too many do what she suggests ....the results are, by and large appalling..channelling aliens, ascended masters, indigo children...

Sometimes the idea of a ban on all of this until we can form some realistic accreditation system makes a lot of sense. I think people have to understand the harm so called "natural" psychic "mediums" can do to neeedy people.

I've seen it here too, Jim. But you can't control what folk are seeking - sensationalism and fantasy look to be on the agenda of many 'new-age' seekers. The simple truth of Modern Spiritualism just isn't sexy enough and they'll seek out the practitioners who are offering what appeals. Hells bells, even within our own movement we have ghost-hunters and others whose interest in physical mediumship is more in witnessing, experiencing the phenomena than in the demonstration of survival those phenomena are supposed to give.

Aliens, indigos, ascended masters et al are what some folk are turned on by and the teachings of Modern Spiritualism (in my experience thus far) and the teachers/guides who brought the simple truth leave these individuals cold and uninterested. I've argued and fought my corner for long enough to now accept it's me who's out of step with them and not the other way round. Now I just try to chip away at the edges of their illusions in the hope they may begin to question for themselves, to look deeper into what they're being fed by the self-styled gurus. Full-frontal challenge of their 'stuff' has achieved nothing but maybe that's just down to me on a personal level.

I ain't gonna change in my outlook - I'm an out-and-out Spiritualist who despises psychism. But when dealing with others, you can only lead the horse to water. No way it'll drink unless it wants to.

_Leslie_ wrote:At the risk of putting my neck on the line (nothing new there ), I think there's a lot of sense in what she says, as I agree, there are far tooooo many 'self' made mediums who, 'think' they know and understand the working of spirit. Without having any 'real' substance or inspiration from spirit themselves.
They tend to read a book, and regurgitate it chapter and verse, without even knowing if its correct. Then of course there are the ones who wave about 'I've been trained at Stanstead' as a credential, when in reality - they've merely attending a course or lecture... All of which can lead to someone being taught by (as she puts it) 'man-made mediums' as opposed to those developed, inspired and guided by the real teachers 'spirit'.

Just touching on the counselling bit... One of my pet dislikes are people coming along either to a church, sanctuary or in person and saying that they 'hear voices' or 'see images' etc.. and the first thing that many mediums / spiritualist etc.. say to them is 'oh your a medium', or something like 'that's spirit connecting with you'. All without having any previous knowledge of the person at all! How irresponsible of them! For all they know, the person could be experiencing the side effects of medication, drugs - or require professional psychiatric help. Advising people this way from a platform, rostrum or stage etc.., is for me, nothing short of irresponsible.

I do like the idea of an accreditation system - but think it has many flaws. Who certifies and verifies the testers? In my experience when an accreditation process is set-up, many of them are given their titles via the 'grandfather' system. Resulting in the entire process perhaps flawed from its initial conception.

There is much here with which I am in agreement.

The following piece, though, is quite alarming, quote: "One of my pet dislikes are people coming along either to a church, sanctuary or in person and saying that they 'hear voices' or 'see images' etc.. and the first thing that many mediums / spiritualist etc.. say to them is 'oh your a medium', or something like 'that's spirit connecting with you'. All without having any previous knowledge of the person at all! How irresponsible of them!" Yes, indeed, it is irresponsible but perhaps simply in line with what they've been taught, or have learned for themselves, from their exposure to whatever influence they came under. Nothing unusual in that.

Isn't that how many of us operate? From what we were taught, from what we have learned? And if those sources of information are not authoritative, how are we to know? But if the teachings of Modern Spiritualism, conveyed by Spiritualist churches and centres, was the source of that teaching/learning, then there is cause for great concern. Where it's down to individual Spiritualists or individual practitioners (be they psychics or mediums) then it's less of a concern - individuals' understanding will vary considerably.

But it's my experience that online responses such as those above are widely heard, directed towards enquirers whose confused writings often quickly get diagnosed as the beginnings of (or expansion of) mediumship. Not psychism, please note, as that's a word mostly used by mac when trying to unravel the many knots of misinformation that result.... Psychism and mediumship are frequently seen as the same issue, psychics being the same as mediums, mediums being the same as channellers etc.

Better climb off that hobby-horse before I go any further!

mac wrote:"Quiet"

We pretty much agree then, mac hmm....not so sure....

There seems to be a strong interest in physical phenomena on this site. could well be - I hadn't noticed but there is an associated pm website too....And yes, I do generally associate this with Spiritualism, rightly or wrongly. It has its place in Spiritualism as do all other forms of mediumship - no more, no less. Giving special significance is a personal bias, I'd say.

I do support the importance of evidential mediumship. So does Holloway White, I think. agreed with all this...

I believe that people ultimately have to take responsibility for what they accept from others. Yes that's how life is.... People give away their power so easily and have to learn from experience not to do that. I've made my mistakes by mistakenly heeding others in the past - guess that could be termed giving away one's powers but that sounds a tad grand for this individual... Discernment is an acquired skill. absobloominglutely - I'll be glad when I achieve a satisfactory level!