standards

It's been a regular complaint that standards of mediumship are poor and getting worse.  The need for churches to provide an evidential medium every week may be one of the problems.  It's not something I experience but I have known about it forever and I have been finding similar problems online.

There is any number of online, usually Zoom hosted, demonstrations of mediumship kinda like you'd get in a church.  The online mediumship system kicked off in a big way during the pandemic and I expected it to disappear when churches began opening again after the pandemic lockdown restrictions were eventually lifted.  But there are still plenty of individuals operating via Zoom and I've watched a fair few.  

Some of the sessions were uplifting and positive with experienced mediums delivering sound evidence but at too many others mediumship standards were dreadful.  The impression I often gained was that the particular practitioner was either nowhere near ready to demonstrate and/or that (s)he was working in psychic rather than mediumistic mode.

I've often heard it said that mediums shouldn't be pressed or encouraged unduly to work on platform until they're confident and competent.  But now I'm seeing the equivalent situation where inexperienced mediums are demonstrating - poorly - over Zoom instead.  Working that way may be a far worse situation than on platform.  I've watched even well-experienced mediums struggle with the vagaries of Zoom - poor or unstable connections, sound and/or video lag/delay/sync, audience images moving around leaving the medium unable to find the intended recipient etc.  

There is none of those issues in a church/centre scenario and Zoom is a much-more pressured environment for the medium.