Spirit Proofs in Public

These pioneering efforts at broadcasting spirit voices, which were making psychic history, naturally aroused great interest. Here is an account which was published in Psychic News many years ago.

“Twenty-three of the ‘dead’ spoke into a microphone at a huge séance at which there were nearly four hundred sitters, and their voices were amplified through loudspeakers so that all could hear. One of them even sang a verse of a song.

“Eleven of those who received messages signed a statement to the effect that they had received from relations and friends who have departed this life unmistakable messages at the experimental sitting for the direct voice undertaken at The Link third annual conference at Thames House, London, on October 15th, 1933, through the mediumship of Mrs. A. E. Perriman, who was not personally acquainted with them.

“The only person who could have spoken through the microphone except the spirits was the medium, and the character of the voices themselves, many of them male ones, made it impossible for a woman to have imitated them. Besides, many of the spirits gave evidence which the medium could not possibly have known.

“After Belle (Mrs. A. E. Perriman's spirit control) had spoken, Hewat McKenzie, founder of the British College of Psychic Science, came through. He was heard fairly clearly throughout the hail, although the microphone installation necessarily distorted the voice to some extent. ‘Our world is joined to your world,’ he said. ‘I always wanted to be able to speak in this manner, and I spoke to my wife at the British College not so long ago.’

“Another totally different voice next manifested. ‘I am Charles Graham, of Ashton Road, Stoke-on-Trent,’ he said. ‘I was drowned at Frinton.’

“Then Billy Hope, the psychic photographer who passed on in March, came through. ‘Hello, I’m Billy Hope, of Crewe. I said I was going to come, and here I am,’ he said.

“He then addressed John Myers, who was sitting in one of the circles, and who had taken psychic photographs at the conference earlier in the day. ‘Look here, lad, thou’rt all right. Thou’rt straight as ever. Don’t take any tests. We’ll help thee through.’

'The next voice was for a woman in the hall. ‘Henry Walker calling. Alice, are you there?’

'Yes, I am here,’ said the woman.

'The girl’s all right. I am looking after her,’ went on the voice from the other world. I promised to come.’ ‘Yes, he did,’ commented the sitter.

“Then Sir Arthur Conan Doyle spoke. ‘I want you to know that Doyle is just as interested today in everything connected with the survival of life as he was when in the body,’ he said. ‘You will yet have the Albert Hall for your conferences. I hope it will be soon. Carry on as you have started. Do not be afraid. God bless the home circles.’

“There were more voices, one giving his name as William Turner, and the other asking for Arthur Simmons, and then a typical North Country entity spoke. He said he came from Mexboro, near Doncaster, and gave the name of the place where he worked. He spoke for some time with a delegate from Doncaster.

“The next voice, that of a spirit calling himself George Ellis, said he had got in touch with his brother through The Link.

“Still more voices came through the loudspeakers, and then a man’s voice shouted, ‘Good evening, everybody,’ so loudly that everyone was startled. It was Sceptre, guide of Mr. Zerdin (founder of The Link), who complained that everyone was telling him not to make so much noise. ‘Remember, The Link was started over here,’ he said.

“Still the voices came. A father spoke to his son, Richard Atkinson. ‘I told you I would come,’ he said. A spirit uncle came next. He spoke to three of the audience, whom he named. Then another voice shouted ‘Thomas.’ He was immediately answered. He spoke to his son about his home circle. Then he said his wife would speak.

“A soft, woman’s voice sang through the microphone Silver Threads Among the Gold. She sang the whole verse. ‘You told her not to sing that,’ said her husband when he came back. The woman spoke again after he had left.

“After two more talks, Flora Macdonald spoke. ‘This has been successful,’ she said. ‘I told some of you that it would be. There are many direct-voice mediums in this hall, and you are to get busy. You could do a tremendous lot to straighten out the world—and it is very upside down at present.’

“Belle returned and closed the seance. The lights went up. The hall was a sanctuary no longer, but a restaurant again.

The above article can also be seen in the book, Broadcasting From Beyond. Mrs. A. E. Perriman also worked under the professional name Madame Faustina.

Hi Everyone,

Thank you Mark74, that made interesting reading; and just goes to support one of my bugbears about Spiritualism.

If ONLY we had that sort of mediumship around today. I tend to labour the point a little about mediums of the past, but the history of the movement is of great interest to me. Notice these communicators gave their full name....None of this crap about 'I have a father figure here' etc.

There are many instances of clear, explicit communications in the archives, ie with Mrs French. Alex Harris, the Bang sister etc. Of course there will be controversy, but there were some fantastic communications.

You will not see this today because quite simply we do not have medims developed to that standard. Today its 'wanabees' and quick fix mediumship that rules the roost. I even wonder where one could sit under the guidance of a stong and competent medium and the guidance of spirit....Where is this in the Spiritualist churches, as such development circles seem few and far between.

The spirit world cannot communicate if the tools are not avialble, or individuals are not willing to be developed or make that sacrifice which takes time and dedication. The only dedication many who jump on the 'communication bandwagon' is the dedication of finding a new way to make money and charging for their mediumistic services.

How times have changed!!!...Not all is bad out there, but its like finding gold in a haystack many a time.

LeroyC

Perhaps we're just desperate to cling on to something that's past its 'Use By' date?

Surely if it were intended that Modern Spiritualism was intended to continue to provide the message it once gave so widely (comparatively) then all the resources our discarnate friends have available would have been deployed in achieving it?

That the message is now - at a time of unprecedentedly good global communication for all of us - seemingly reaching fewer people than when we had only books, newspapers and photos as the main media, suggests that the movement is no longer fit-for-purpose.

No, I am not desperate to cling on to anything. The bedrock of Spiritualism should be survival evidence. Period.

I am however desperate to see the standard of mediumship improve. Say what you will, Spiritualism is a laughing stock to many these days. Its a simple message, we either CONTINUE to establish the reality of survival or we do not.

The tired old message that we have already done this and its not relevant any more is nothing more than an excuse for what passes as Spiritualism today. The modern generation need to be convinced of this reality. How that occurs I am not too concerned. You can call it Spiritualism or any other name provided that the message of survival is delivered.

Again, you can make all the excuses you like to support 'modern mediumship', but overall its pretty dire; so something needs to give. After 40 years experience in this movement I have never seen such banality and crass standards.

LeroyC

There seems to be a co-relationship between supply and demand in force.
The demand for quality Mediumship is much reduced from earlier times and the supply quality has kept pace with it.
The reason is likely to be connected with the rampant materialism being fostered by successive economies, desperate to turn a coin at any cost.
Folk are not troubled by war 'taking' loved ones in conflict, or in the bombing of 'legitimate' targets with civilian overspill.
Food is not scarce, although gainful employment is. Day to day survival does not concern.
Ideal conditions to bring about an 'untouchable' outlook, with no need to consider the future.
However, forecasts suggest that the days of shortages may be rapidly approaching once more.

LeroyC wrote:No, I am not desperate to cling on to anything. The bedrock of Spiritualism should be survival evidence. Period.

I am however desperate to see the standard of mediumship improve. Say what you will, Spiritualism is a laughing stock to many these days. Its a simple message, we either CONTINUE to establish the reality of survival or we do not.

The tired old message that we have already done this and its not relevant any more is nothing more than an excuse for what passes as Spiritualism today. The modern generation need to be convinced of this reality. How that occurs I am not too concerned. You can call it Spiritualism or any other name provided that the message of survival is delivered.

Again, you can make all the excuses you like to support 'modern mediumship', but overall its pretty dire; so something needs to give. After 40 years experience in this movement I have never seen such banality and crass standards.

LeroyC

You appear to be taking this personally and that's not what I intended by my argument. I referred to "we" intending it to be inclusive of us all. It's not about you personally at all.

I did say what I wished but I said nothing about Spiritualism being, or not being, a laughing stock - they're your sentiments and you're plainly very angry. Anger, though, isn't going to help or change anything unless it's channelled into something positive.

Of course Modern Spiritualism's role is that of providing evidence of survival through mediumship and it may also be argued that philosophical mediumship was - and remains - vital to better explain life and not just death and the afterlife. If anyone else can do that better I don't give a damn what their movement might be called and have gone on record many times saying that. If Modern Spiritualism isn't cutting it then what's its purpose other than as a historical record?

I've had only 30 years as a Spiritualist but again I repeat my observation that Modern Spiritualism may have passed its 'Use By' date. You're angry at what I'm saying but am I wrong?

Hi Mac,

Call me King Canute with teh tide over my head but I do not think Spiritualism is past its use by date, maybe as a religion but not as a truth.

In fact I am finding that as we take the time to explain about it people, who begin to realise that all to much of the new age has its foundations on sand, begin to look at and understand its depth.

The job I try to take up is to ensure people understand mediumship is about proof of survival nothing else (ok I try to explain concepts of trance a la Silver Birch) all else is psychism. Then introduce the better bits of our literature.

I can't win by any other method and teh majority I meet will have come along wither from the New Age movement their "spiritual path" or from a bereavement. That two very different sources of new enquirers.

I am more in Leroy's corner here and every monday I run my open group and every Sunday am at the centre. Its time to rage against the dying light of Spiritualism but with words, history and whatever decent mediumship is left.

Jim

Admin wrote:Hi Mac,

Call me King Canute with teh tide over my head but I do not think Spiritualism is past its use by date, maybe as a religion but not as a truth.

In fact I am finding that as we take the time to explain about it people, who begin to realise that all to much of the new age has its foundations o.................. I run my open group and every Sunday am at the centre. Its time to rage against the dying light of Spiritualism but with words, history and whatever decent mediumship is left.

Jim

I think we're saying much the same things, Jim, but using different words....

When I use the term 'Spiritualism' it embraces what the whole movement of Modern Spiritualism began as, and later developed into, over the many decades since it emerged in this modern world. That includes being the legally constituted religion we have both here in the UK and down there in Australia. (I'm largely discounting the USA and South America where Spiritism is more prevalent.)

As a religion it's offering less than it might, less than the movement used to offer. But as a conveyance of spiritual truth it remains unshakable. It could remain relevant were it not for the former, vital role of mediumship having reached such a low ebb. Over that we are all in agreement.

Your role is different from mine but we work with a similar group of individuals, the bereaved and the seekers. You have a solid focal point with your group activities and education. My minuscule contribution is mostly made online nowadays. We both do what we can and for very similar reasons and motives.

I don't know who Leroy is but I think you (Jim) probably do. I 'know' you a little from our interchanges here. In my last sentence to Leroy I posed a question that I think is answered in these words: "Its time to rage against the dying light of Spiritualism but with words, history and whatever decent mediumship is left."

Good day all,

Well, I think you are right, it was my mis-reading; and no you are correct I should not take it personaly!!!..Sorry if I gave that impression.

As for being angry, well, I don't go back on what I said. I am more upset than anything about the lack of good evidence today.

If the message of survival can move on, and it does not involve the word 'Spiritualism', then so be it. If it does, then lets strive for the best we can give.

I think the words 'materialism and commercialism' say it all, and we cannot divorce ourselves from the realities of our current predicament. I don't know if the words 'back to basics' means much these days, but I would like to see a re-evaluation of what Spiritualism means to its adherents.

I know we cannot live in the past, and I hope that as science progresses that the barriers of materialistic thinking start to break down and we gain incresing evidence of survival from multiple angles.

As for one or two of you knowing me, then, yes, you may do. I spent my career as an academic and researcher in my professional field, so I do try and use those skills in my evaluation of evidence.

Regards,

LeroyC

It seems we're all singing from the same hymn sheet even if we're not all exactly in tune with one another...

I am not so much angry as sad that evidential mediumship's not what it used to be. I'm less concerned by philosophical mediumship as the donkey work's already been done there. But overall I see things somewhat differently.

We rue the dearth of competent mediums but do our discarnate friends feel the same? Without them, of course, mediumship can go nowhere but do unseen communicators all say that materialism etc. is blocking their interaction with this physical world? Or is it more that we humans feel that evidential mediumship's woes are all down to our life styles?

It takes two to tango so what's the deal from an etheric point of view?

It takes two to tango so what's the deal from an etheric point of view?

Its a good question Mac, is it that in the world of instant people do not spend enough time establising proper contact. These days too many people call teh charge for a course to learn mediumship (all in one day or one weekend) an investment. Too many seem to think that course (even one week long) requires instant finacial return.

The reality is back in the 80's Stansted did not claim to make you an instant medium but to add skills to the work you were undertaking in development groups (home or church based).

Also once you are up there working too many stop developing themselves. I will always remember the group Lis had been a regular in. Never attended it but all members were, like Lis, established platform mediums working the Church circuit (Lis covered 28 chuches in East London). The woman who ram it was a martinet who told them to sit down and shut up if she decided they were not linking properly to Spirit. How many of todays platform workers would put themselves through that.

I reckon that at times my guides are pulling their hair out (metaphorically speaking) about my lack of listening.

http://www.magick7.com/FreeBooks/0012/Broadcasting.html For those who have not read the book Broadcasting From teh Beyond

Admin wrote:

It takes two to tango so what's the deal from an etheric point of view?

Its a good question Mac, is it that in the world of instant people do not spend enough time establising proper contact. These days too many people call teh charge for a course to learn mediumship (all in one day or one weekend) an investment. Too many seem to think that course (even one week long) requires instant finacial return.

The reality is back in the 80's Stansted did not claim to make you an instant medium but to add skills to the work you were undertaking in development groups (home or church based).

Also once you are up there working too many stop developing themselves. I will always remember the group Lis had been a regular in. Never attended it but all members were, like Lis, established platform mediums working the Church circuit (Lis covered 28 chuches in East London). The woman who ram it was a martinet who told them to sit down and shut up if she decided they were not linking properly to Spirit. How many of todays platform workers would put themselves through that.

I reckon that at times my guides are pulling their hair out (metaphorically speaking) about my lack of listening.

But do the unseen would-be collaborators necessary for mediumship see things in a similar way?

The world abounds with self-proclaimed spirit practitioners (I'm avoiding calling 'em mediums) who say they are 'channelling spirit' or ascended masters but wouldn't have a clue what Modern Spiritualism is about.

IF they have such ready contact with discarnates - and I emphasise 'IF' they do - why should it be such a palava palaver for our evidential/platform mediums to establish their own lines of communication? What do your spirit-side communicators tell you about that?

There also seems to be the unquestioned assumption that spirit communicators want to link with them. The Law of Attraction must apply.
These things must be earned, or you merely attract what you are. Including ego and ambition.

There also seems to be the unquestioned assumption that spirit communicators want to link with them. The Law of Attraction must apply.
These things must be earned, or we merely attract what we are. Including ego and ambition.

hiorta wrote:There also seems to be the unquestioned assumption that spirit communicators want to link with them. The Law of Attraction must apply.
These things must be earned, or you merely attract what you are. Including ego and ambition.

Your first observation is the point I had hoped to lead readers towards. There certainly seems to be that assumption despite whatever reasons have led to the current situation.

As for the law of attraction, well it's one which applies in the etheric (we're taught) but it may not apply evenly across different dimensions, here and 'over-there'.

I am, perhaps, too forgiving in terms of individuals' aspirations and don't automatically dismiss a desire to serve as egotism or ambition, even if that individual might not be seen as someone having the right credentials for being a medium. Even an imperfect channel for communication might be better than none at all....

Indeed mac, but I make no criticism at all. Motive governs so much.

"Motive governs so much."

I always wonder, though, if that's what incarnates think rather than discarnates? What's constantly missing is the spirit-side view of this mediumship situation.

What do our unseen friends have to say about the current situation?