Lucy Hale Trance Medium

This afternoon our gusets read out one of these talks.

I was hugely impressed but totally respect the copyright, whereas anyone is made welcome to use these verbally in an appropriate setting to post the written word on here would require authorisation.

http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/lucy/lucy.html

This was the talk
http://www.jhardaker.plus.com/lucy/talks/lucy-24.html

Thanks for sharing this Jim. A wonderful address from Brother Bernard. Although it raises a question which you may or may not be able to clarify for me.
Is mediumship a gift or a skill everyone can learn? I suppose it could be said they are both one and the same, as we have to learn to enhance our mediumship.
I'm sure what bothers me more is ones association with the word 'gift'. Some people assume if mediumship is a gift, then they don't need to develop this innate ability, accepting it for what they have, regardless of whether the information they pass on to others is right or wrong.
Personally, I see it as a skill, although I may have to learn to say differently when the occasion arises.

I would like to hear your views on this, as well as other people's, should they wish to join in.

I suspect it depends on what type of mediumship you are referring to. If you consider Leslie Flint and Alec Harris for example - I am not sure how one would develop those abilities simply by dint of effort and persistence.

A sporting analogy comes to mind: I can learn to kick a football, I may even play on a team. It doesn't make me a capable footballer or mean that if I try hard enough I will be able to play professionally. If I practice and dedicate myself to it I may realise my full potential but that is perhaps all I will ever aspire to and it may not be very impressive relative to other performers in the same field who have more innate capability.

Maybe we all have an innate level of mediumistic ability ranging from say zero (no ability whatsoever) and one hundred (perfection - whatever that may be!) in different types of mediumship (as in other aspects of life). The best we can do is make the most of our capabilities and recognise when we have reached them. I am not sure it is a gift in the sense of divine intervention, I can think of some circumstances when the bearer might view it as a curse.

Anyway that's my two pennorth.

Etablished evidetial Mediums stated time and again that 'a Medium is born, not made' which seems to mean that the ablilty is within at birth, although development does help as does Life experiebce.
For me, this points to the relevance of re-incarnation in trying to gain a fuller picture of Life.

Obi, I was referring to mental mediumship. Regarding other mediums i.e. Leslie Flint and Alec Harris, perhaps it's all down to fine tuning, so they can work together with their spirit operator to enable such superb delivery of spirit communications.

I like your sporting analogy. I can understand potential mediums, being at different levels of development, although some who claim to be mediums simply refuse to accept they may require any form of educating. Hence, they rush into giving others misguided information and/or poorly delivered messages, possibly due to their eagerness to be of service, which is to be admired. Although personally this does nothing to support mediumship or Spiritualism.

It has been said we all have psychic/mediumship abiliites, therefore, it seems reasonable to believe this is indeed an innate faculty. I tend to be of the mind that some people have so little confidence in themselves yet are probably using their psychic ability every single day without realising it.

I've read accounts where some people say it's nothing but a curse. I do wonder, is that the real reason, or could it be because they have either little or no knowledge. I suppose the only way to find out is to ask them.

Hiorta, you raise an interesting point. Perhaps re-incarnation could have something to do with 'Mediums being born'. It one thing that I never gave a thought to.

I am not sure I follow the logic with regard to reincarnation. Please explain.

It would seem that Life is not a lucky dip and what ever we are capable of, whatever attributes we have, must have earned in some way. For me, anyway, these deeper abilities must have been gained in times past, to be manifesting once more.
So many people seem to be appearing with a variety of abilities (which they seem to calmly accept) and just get on with it. Isn't it possible that Mediumship, for example, is just accepred as an everyday normal event?
Edgar Cayce mentioned quite a bit on this subject which I'd applied plenty salt to, but it looks as though he was right about it all.

hiorta wrote:It would seem that Life is not a lucky dip and what ever we are capable of, whatever attributes we have, must have earned in some way. For me, anyway, these deeper abilities must have been gained in times past, to be manifesting once more.
So many people seem to be appearing with a variety of abilities (which they seem to calmly accept) and just get on with it. Isn't it possible that Mediumship, for example, is just accepred as an everyday normal event?
Edgar Cayce mentioned quite a bit on this subject which I'd applied plenty salt to, but it looks as though he was right about it all.

You are assuming I think that reincarnation is a fact. I understand your remark in that context.

It seems to me however that individuals have had unusual abilities or strengths throughout history. I suppose you could argue that this is because of reincarnation, it would be difficult to argue against as it is not possible to prove we don't reincarnate. As to whether or not Edgar Cayce 'got it right' who can say given the nature of the evidence we have available to us. I really don't see how apparent natural abilities such as mediumship, sporting ability , or intelligence offer any significant evidence for reincarnation. Assuming we reincarnate may explain them, but I don't think it is logical to use the same line of argument to suggest they offer evidence of reincarnation or support it.

Hi All,

I'll through in my bit in two parts.

To become a Mental medium is not easy, even for some naturally gifted psychics, because it is so much about learning humility and letteing yourself go. Even in Mental mediumship you are shutting your mind and thoughts out to let Spirit get through. Hopefully you will monitor this in a way that ensures it comes out appropriately. Psychic is using your own intuition and the mind has more play even though the I within you may seriously affect the content of what you are getting for an individual.

Everyone has latent psychic abilities, I have never failed to establish this in 5 + years of running development groups. It may not be strong but it appears when theu can diassociate the thinking processes and start accepting what is touching their intuition. Some of these who have weaker psychic abilities will suprise you by showing genuine mediumshuip tendencies because of their mind set and personal characteristics'

Are Mediums born, like musicians and sportsmen the most gifetd ones are but like those people they benefit from continued practice, training and development. However there are many more people who can, through dedication and training become perfectly adequate evidential mental mediums. Who knows what more they can move onto as they develop.

The big issue is that except in our area, the New Age and Theosophy not much thought is given yo the concept psychic and Medium. Indeed it is fround upon even the idea of creative imagery, a useful tool in any work(even in Accounting, I have developed many complex accounting/costing systems and I always imagined a holistic picture of the business, its operation as part of the design), is not taught.

The reality is that walking among us could be many with the talebnt to be Mediums who have never been exposed to the idea. They probably suppress it or dismiss their intuitions or thoughts.

That is one reason why I like to work with development to find out who may have the talent but has never realised it.

Jim

Skye wrote:Thanks for sharing this Jim. A wonderful address from Brother Bernard. Although it raises a question which you may or may not be able to clarify for me.
Is mediumship a gift or a skill everyone can learn? I suppose it could be said they are both one and the same, as we have to learn to enhance our mediumship.
I'm sure what bothers me more is ones association with the word 'gift'. Some people assume if mediumship is a gift, then they don't need to develop this innate ability, accepting it for what they have, regardless of whether the information they pass on to others is right or wrong.
Personally, I see it as a skill, although I may have to learn to say differently when the occasion arises.

I would like to hear your views on this, as well as other people's, should they wish to join in.

I'm sure that my views will be no surprise...

As with anything which is a gift, the receiver is perfectly at liberty to do with it as they choose... It could be argued, however, that such a special gift deserves special care to develop it to the maximum to be unselfishly shared with others.

In summary, it's a gift which deserves to be treasured, enhanced and its benefits passed on.

Can we learn it as a skill? Here's an ideal test - teach me!

Obiwan wrote:
""You are assuming I think that reincarnation is a fact. I understand your remark in that context. ""

Obiwan, I wouldn't dare assume any such thing.
Re-incarnation is a hypothetical answer to many apparent anomalies which sits well enough with me, though it is a controversial area without any firm pointers in any direction.
As is often said, we take with us, when we depart this world, only that what we are and whatever we have gained in knowledge, experience and growth.

In the example of savants who are often incapable of even basic learning, there is repeated mystifying revelations of great skills, competence and knowledge in a range of expertise that they couldn't possibly have acquired during their very restricted time here.
The question of 'how so' is fascinating.

As to your earlier question of why I considered Arthur Findlay to be 'ahead of his time', you provided a large chunk of this view yourself - as a very successful man in many material skills, A.F. risked the opprobrium of contemporaries and colleagues as well as press and presumably Religious figures of those restrictive days. His considered '7 Principles' of almost a centuy ago are still ahead of todays understanding of the structure of the immediate Universe. In my opinion, anyway.

Obiwan wrote:
""You are assuming I think that reincarnation is a fact. I understand your remark in that context. ""

Obiwan, I wouldn't dare assume any such thing.
Re-incarnation is a hypothetical answer to many apparent anomalies which sits well enough with me, though it is a controversial area without any firm pointers in any direction.
As is often said, we take with us, when we depart this world, only that what we are and whatever we have gained in knowledge, experience and growth.

In the example of savants who are often incapable of even basic learning, there is repeated mystifying revelations of great skills, competence and knowledge in a range of expertise that they couldn't possibly have acquired during their very restricted time here.
The question of 'how so' is fascinating.

As to your earlier question of why I considered Arthur Findlay to be 'ahead of his time', you provided a large chunk of this view yourself - as a very successful man in many material skills, A.F. risked the opprobrium of contemporaries and colleagues as well as press and presumably Religious figures of those restrictive days. His considered '7 Principles' of almost a centuy ago are still ahead of todays understanding of the structure of the immediate Universe. In my opinion, anyway.

It is my view that the ability to perceive the spirit world, receive guidance from spirit and ultimately to pass on to others information is an intrinsic part of the consciousness associated with a physical existence. It is 'hard-wired' into the consciousness of all who experience a physical existence because that capacity is a natural part of the spirit or soul that enters into life.

In that sense it is not best described as a gift or a skill. It is just a faculty that all have by their very nature as spirit beings. The use of that faculty in a conscious and effective way is, however, something that not all people will do in their physical lifetime. Some people, from an early age, and often due to the personal circumstances of their lives, recognise this innate faculty within them and learn to use it in a conscious and deliberate way to aid their journey in life. Others lose awareness of their connection with the spirit world, again due to their life circumstances, and do not consciously recognise the information, support or guidance being offered to them from spirit side of life.

Of those who do recognise this faculty there will always be a range of ability in utilising it and again the degree to which they use it in their personal lives or in the broader community. This is again very much influenced by the life circumstances and environment in which they live.

Some will from an early stage begin to 'work' with spirit. They will agree to allow that faculty to be active and not lie dormant within their consciousness. These people might, to others, be perceived as 'born sensitives', and become the 'gifted mediums'. But the truth is, even such people have to work at enhancing and developing that natural faculty. They must also learn how to use it wisely and know when it can be used and when it should not. They need to learn how to be in 'control' of that faculty so as to balance that connection with the spirit world with their need to also live a physical existence for that is an important part of what they are in the world to do.

Others, who do not have any apparent 'ability' in childhood or even adulthood can at any stage choose to 'awaken' that faculty and begin to use it consciously. It might be when they are in their twenties, forties or seventies. it doesn't really matter. It is still a question of choosing to access that level of consciousness that allows spirit communication and there are people who begin to 'work' with this ability in their fifties who become better mediums than those who have been 'sensitive' from childhood.

While all would benefit from an understanding of this innate connection with the spirit dimension, not all need to develop that faculty to the degree that they can be described as 'mediums'.

Anyone who awakens to that faculty has a responsibility to use it wisely and to do that takes training. It is in that sense no different to the person who discovers their vocal cords can make sounds pleasing to the ears of others. Without training and hard work and a lot of dedication they will not become a competant singer.

I think that Obiwan's analogy has a great deal of truth in it. While we can all do it, not all of us will have the capacity to develop it to the degree that would see them recognised as having an exceptional 'talent' or 'gift'. Many, however, can and do develop it to a level of competance that is useful to them in their lives and of benefit to others in assisting them to receive contact with their loved one's in the spirit world.

hiorta wrote:Obiwan wrote:
""You are assuming I think that reincarnation is a fact. I understand your remark in that context. ""

As to your earlier question of why I considered Arthur Findlay to be 'ahead of his time', you provided a large chunk of this view yourself - as a very successful man in many material skills, A.F. risked the opprobrium of contemporaries and colleagues as well as press and presumably Religious figures of those restrictive days. His considered '7 Principles' of almost a centuy ago are still ahead of todays understanding of the structure of the immediate Universe. In my opinion, anyway.

Thank you for explaining Hiorta. I don't think the things you mention are necessarily evidence of reincarnation to be honest although that may be one explanation, and they certainly should make one think about how they arise.

As far as AF being ahead of his time; I understand the point you made - I still can't see how any of the things he wrote or said were ahead of their time. I don't think they were anything new (his own research simply references the work of others and I don't think there is much original research of any kind other than sittings with John Sloan). I am not saying what he worked on has no value, I think it does, I just don't see him as being ahead of his time in any sense.

As a non-spiritualist the teaching of Spiritualism (which appear to be subject to quite a lot of variance by those who claim to be spiritualists) simply looks to me like yet another religion. I cannot see anything original or new in the 7 principles that hasn't been mentioned in other earlier religions and from my own point of view, Spiritualist theology looks simplistic and a mish-mash of other religious ideas. Although that doesn't make them objectionable, I see nothing novel in it. The only difference I can see in Spiritualism is that it purports to be based on evidence. I have so far directly seen no verifiable evidence in the Spiritualist venues I have visited thus far. I have read quite a bit on the subject and would accept that mediums probably do exist. I can accept that there has been a great deal of advice about how to make the most of life and what follows through such channels. I cannot for the life of me see why this information has to be set in the context of a religion. In fact I think it is counter-productive.

Actually I think I am going-off topic here so I will start another thread on this as I am interested to hear others view but I don't want to hijack this thread.

Good idea put the link on here so people can cross over Obi

Admin wrote:Good idea put the link on here so people can cross over Obi

LOL I will try.....shazam...Spiritualism - why a religion? - I don't want to cause anyone to cross-over though

rofl I am on my way over to the new thread.

mac wrote:

Skye wrote:Thanks for sharing this Jim. A wonderful address from Brother Bernard. Although it raises a question which you may or may not be able to clarify for me.
Is mediumship a gift or a skill everyone can learn? I suppose it could be said they are both one and the same, as we have to learn to enhance our mediumship.
I'm sure what bothers me more is ones association with the word 'gift'. Some people assume if mediumship is a gift, then they don't need to develop this innate ability, accepting it for what they have, regardless of whether the information they pass on to others is right or wrong.
Personally, I see it as a skill, although I may have to learn to say differently when the occasion arises.

I would like to hear your views on this, as well as other people's, should they wish to join in.

I'm sure that my views will be no surprise...

As with anything which is a gift, the receiver is perfectly at liberty to do with it as they choose... It could be argued, however, that such a special gift deserves special care to develop it to the maximum to be unselfishly shared with others.

In summary, it's a gift which deserves to be treasured, enhanced and its benefits passed on.

Can we learn it as a skill? Here's an ideal test - teach me!

Hello Mac,
although some aspects of mediumship can be taught, I would say the unfoldment of one's mediumship is in the hands of a spiritual guide. Once a 2 way connection has been achieved then the true teaching begins.