The Future

As I read through Posts, it can sometimes seem that we are all guilty of being quite sceptical about the Future of spiritualism.

When we Talk of Mediumship being on the decline

Philosophy not being what it should

Churches Closing doors

Numbers of spiritualists on the fall instead of being on the rise

And I wonder (in Theory) If we could Fix things what would we do?

Im just going to start the ball rolling,, and see where this goes

Yesterday Morning, I went to a service in a local church and David Bruton the Snu president was there to take its service
And his address was based around the 7 principles and how they are as relevent today as they were in 1901.. He Told the Congregation how there had recently been a vote and a debate on changing the 7 principles as it was felt by some senior spiritualists that they were not up to date ect,,

I am sure many people enjoyed the Address... But for me I kept getting a old bible story from school going on in my Head... the one about building a house on rock instead of sand.. I dont want to use the bible but its the easiest story to get my thought across..

It made me think about how some people may see things... after years of being in business I always subscribed to Swan way of thinking... that is no matter how hard the legs paddle under the water,, the Swan Glides across the top of it...
Now I know for most of us,, spiritualism is a way of life rather than a religion.. But people that are new dont understand that yet and I wonder what kind of message it sends to them? Honesty yes.. But what about after a 100 years they still dont know what they are doing or what they believe? thats just a thought,, We are all already spiritualists so probably appreciate the honesty,, But for new people which are indeed the future they come searching for answers,, and to outsiders when we cant even agree on our own framework... Does it give them confidence to Listen to the answers that we give? Shouldnt we be presenting those that are new a united front?

I know that some will read what I say and think but that sounds like a dogma approach that we are against.. But When to Join the Snu it is Stated that you Must accept the 7 principles.. you must not be a member of any other religious Body.. you must also have an interview by a panel... Just to become a member... isnt that slightly dogmatic?

So I wonder what type of message we are sending?

The comment about the 7 principles being just as relevant today concerns me, as some are no longer worded in a way that is relevant, or inclusive. I still cringe at the way spirit is personified as human and male which could not be further from our understanding of spirit as relayed to us by Silver Birch.

Anyone who is turned away from religion by notions of heaven and hell, reward and punishment will hardly be drawn to a philosophy that talks about compensation and retribution. Similarly, anyone who has issues with a philosophy expressed in patriarchal terms will doubt its worth.

It seems similar to religious fundamentalists who blindly adhere to the words in a book put together a thousand years ago and somehow think that there is no more to be written, despite the ever changing needs of society.

Language evolves, words change in meaning, and poorly expressed principles can lose their relevance as a result.

Hi bravo, can I suggest the just-out-of-reach answers that you seek are within yourself, as are most 'solutions'?
The clear solution to today's puzzle will not suffice tomorrow - evolution of intellect, understanding, spiritual expansion, etc.
That's a part of it and of course the imposed framework of the 'search area' may not hold the desired solution, so we then have to look wider and/ or deeper, looking for what is obscured from us.
Spiritualism, Religion, Principles are restrictive labels we use to try to gain a common focus, although they mean quite different things to different folk.
Spiritualism points to the infinite nature of eternal things including ourselves, so we struggle to grasp infinity using finite tools which are not up to the task. There is always more and yet more and to be aware of the 'more' is, itself, a clear sign that all is well with that individual, their spiritual health is as it should be.

If you should have a copy of SB's 'Philosophy of Silver Birch' from the 'Teachings from Silver Birch' series - chapter 12 (Outside the Circle) covers much of this.

I think this can become a very good thread, we already have some very good points being made on it.

The Principles of Spiritualism and there unalterable nature is a point of great interest. In the same way that I am aware that saying the Lords Prayer, which some Spiritualist Centres do, not just Christian ones, can immediately alienate people who have rejected Christianity, the Victorian Paternal aspect of the 7 principles can alienate people, especially female attendees.

There are two issues about changing them.

• 1. Breaking the apparently Spirit Given nature of the Principles, to understand that the reality was entirely more mundane, so that change is more acceptable ( https://www.spiritualismlink.com/t131-the-seven-principles-a-discussion-on-their-creation )
  

• 2. That attempts to change them have often proved less than successful because of conflicting ideas among the compilers. There are numerous examples of re writes by individual centres or other associations without ever quite capturing the underlying ideas behind the original 7 [/i]
  

I think there is no doubt they could be modernised providing it was done with care. This may be a start in making change. Another start may be to re visit the beginnings and realise that Spirit did not intend that we create a new religion. Spirit was imparting a truth, that we survive with our individual memories, personality and character beyond death, regardless of race, religion or sex, independent of the type of physical life we chose to live. It did so by communicating with us and proving that, in the right set of circumstances any discarnate spirit could communicate.

It was this message that Spirit wished to be shared with the world to bring about a change in thinking within people, religions and races. It is quite possible to concede that it was the failure to achieve this which led Spiritualism, the movement begun by Spirit experiencing a physical life, to create its own Religion and enshrine it as a competing Theology.

Thanks Bravo a very good start to an interesting thread.

Jim

I also agree about a united front Bravo, In some ways that is an advantage the SNU has, it can impose some sort of conformity over 350 churches. To a lesser extent so can the NSAC in the USA except their numbers, in members, churches and certified mediums are perilously low.

Outside of that we would have real problems explaining what Spiritualism is. For example when April Mackie was talking about her experiences as a medium and some tips for newcomers we had two members of another centre present. They asked what SNU Spiritualism was in response to one of her comments. It turned out they thought all Spiritualists were Christian's who had just added proof of survival to a Christian Creed, not even a variant of the Greater World approach, which can be more easily reconciled with the SNU. Other centres over here adapt pagan full moon services to add to a Christian & New Age belief in survival.

It becomes very hard to create a unified presence for Spiritualism in the world where, when we receive visitors from some centres our view of Spiritualism comes from another planet in comparison to theirs. All too often I hear the words, Oh include it all, its all Spiritual!

Indeed we hit the same problem in defining mediumship and the phenomena of Spiritualism. Many of these places willingly accept psychism with no proof of Spirit involvement or a connection to Spirit. Typically messages like "Spirit are telling me that you are having a difficult time, there are many things impacting on you but I am being told it will get better in the next two months" (short version only, they may include a colour I see about you and more elaborate detail told to the medium by the "Spirit"). Often this is impressions gained from a flower, given with reference to the number of the peg attached to it and without seeking confirmation of the accuracy of the message.

In far too many centres, around too many countries, that would be accepted as Spirit communication without any question. So if some centres' present psychism, ascended masters, ascension channeling, ufo's, crop circles, hyper dimension healing matrices (instead of Spiritual healing) how can a centre with an SNU type approach present a unified front with that group? To a new comer what they see at each type of centre will be Spiritualism, yet when they go to a centre representing the other approach it will be like a journey to a new galaxy.

One of my greatest concerns is that as publications and centres begin to add in these new age, psychism and non Spiritualist ideas, often in a hunt for numbers, then the whole idea of a unified face for Spiritualism becomes eroded to  point where it becomes virtually impossible to maintain.

An example, one of the keynote guests at the NSAC's prestigious Lily Dale summer camp is an Australian celebrity medium HarryT, now he comes from a metaphysical background and until Marilyn Awtry mentioned his visit I had never heard of him. His web site and Facebook page are quite good but show he has no connection to Modern Spiritualism ( https://www.facebook.com/HarryTSpiritualMedium , http://www.harrytspiritualmedium.com/ ) Yet he is a keynote feature of a critical annual Spiritualist event. Clearly the hope is to draw numbers but in what way does this spread a consistent view of Modern Spiritualism dedicated to proof of survival messages and our own philosophy. Nothing against HarryT but it is against the constant cross over of psychic non Spiritualist background philosophy, in a Spiritualist setting, to confuse our message and our audience.

We either need our centres to just present good mediumship to prove survival, with no message or philosophy. Except, of course, to ask people how they can go about reconciling their own belief system, especially traditional Christian or Islamic, who too often reject the proofs as the work of satan or djinns', with their new knowledge of continued survival.

Or else we ensure that, as far as possible, we remain consistent with philosophy (and what mediumship truly is) to present the unified message.

I am no longer certain there are enough centres with the quality of mediumship and the consistency of philosophy to present the latter view, except maybe with the SNU in the UK.

I am therefore more of a mind to follow the views given in the address as part of the constitution of the New England Spiritualists Association in 1854 Our creed is simple.  Spirits do communicate with man—that is the creed.  The legitimate consequences of belief in that single fact, are all that can be chargeable upon Spiritualism.  All else that Spiritualists may believe and do, belongs to them as individuals, and not necessarily as Spiritualists.  We seem to be saying but little; yet it may be no small matter to utter unitedly the five simply words—Spirits do communicate with man.


On that basis our role is to ensure mediums are properly trained and good enough to prove the creed Spirits do communicate with man
. Then we step back to allow people to choose how they will take this new knowledge into their personal spiritual conception. That makes centre's of mediumship essentially non religious, open to all comers. It also suggests that they then need to find a way to remain disconnected to any belief system while open as a discussion place to all.

Of course as a committed Spiritualist I would also want to ensure that they were able to be presented with the philosophy of Modern Spiritualism as a coherent alternative for them to adopt.

Jim

mac, that sounds to be par for the course. When the earlier vibrancy seems to withdraw from the picture, does not that just indicate that we are expanding in understanding of the bigger picture?
'Modern' is a very mobile description - some agree, others find it old hat, yet others are seeking in the 'latest' avenues.
Like those many expeditions to locate the site of Noah's Ark - they are all successful.

hiorta wrote:mac, that sounds to be par for the course. When the earlier vibrancy seems to withdraw from the picture, does not that just indicate that we are expanding in understanding of the bigger picture?
'Modern' is a very mobile description - some agree, others find it old hat, yet others are seeking in the 'latest' avenues.
Like those many expeditions to locate the site of Noah's Ark - they are all successful.

"When the earlier vibrancy seems to withdraw from the picture, does not that just indicate that we are expanding in understanding of the bigger picture?"  I guess that could well be the case, hiorta....  I do hope that after three decades of 'bashing away' at this stuff I am indeed a little more enlightened than I was at the beginning.

My use of 'Modern Spiritualist' is intended to distinguish between those who see a 'spiritualist' as someone with an interest or involvement with spiritual matters and those for whom the movement and philosophy of Spiritualism underpins their outlook on life.  

I didn't coin the term 'Modern Spiritualism' but I do my best to promote its use.  What that might achieve I have yet to discover!

You could have asked Jim via this, or any other forum, to check his private messages because he's 'admin' and he's the guy who monitors these pages.....   

He'll now see, or will have seen, your message above.

Hi Mac,

I have been working on this but no replies so far. The sad part is its closer to Hydesville than many US Cities. I remain hopeful the movement in Canada seems in less desperate straits than the USA.

Jim

(if not actually Spiritualism) well this is Australia too

I've just stumbled upon this forum, and have posted my personal thoughts (in reply to a old post on Spiritualism's evolution) on the decline of Spiritualism. To me this clearly comes on the back of myriad New Age philosophies and practices, many of which those of us with the benefit of Spiritualist learning easily identify as mostly psychic and dare I say this, egocentric. But I'm never one to close my mind.  However I try to be discerning and in my own development as a psychic artist, I work hard at keeping my own ego under control, because I am human!  Anyway, just a very quick post this time, happy to have found like-minded individuals to toss this about with!

The conception of a future spiritual life is fundamental to all religions. If human life terminated at death, life would become completely materialistic, consequently it is not surprising to find that Materialists exclude the possibilities of survival after death from their philosophy. The fact of a future life gives life a spiritual motive instead of a materialist one.

Religion throughout its long history has taken may forms. There have been the fall and rise of religious systems and the evolution of the idea of God, but throughout the whole religious movement there has been general progress, sometimes quantitative in so far as religions have spread, and sometimes qualitative when new teachings have been born.

Science is constantly setting new problems for humanity as our power over nature increases. If our tendency to use this power for selfish ends is not counteracted by an equally modern and progressive spiritual leadership, then war and destitution result.

We must have a progressive religion, and the basic pre-requisite of such a religion is the freedom of its members to interpret the principles of the good life in accordance with the specific needs of society at any given time. As these need are constantly changing, we must constantly reinterpret that which is old in the light of that which is new.

I suspect you are plagiarising again, what are the credits for this piece Hemant, where did it come from? Please tell us, if not and we track the source I will have to ban you for copyright reasons.

Ok from the Christian Spiritualist Ministries, direct copy bye Hemant

Reads like a fortune cookie.

Here's one: don't spill gravy on your baby, it will make him feel browned-off. (Viz circa 1986).

Not to mention burned off Obiwan.

Lis wrote:Not to mention burned off Obiwan.

True.