The Sharp Edge

Having just been advised of the death of a friend, I reflected on the fact that despite 5 years of research and visits to numerous churches and mediums, I have not met one medium I would refer my friend's family to for evidence (if they needed or desired it) and not one experience of a visit to a medium that I could even tentatively offer as a source of hope. I do wonder, despite the Spiritualist movement's claim to be different from organised religion, exactly what they think they have to offer that is any different. I can't see it myself.

I understand obi's situation.

I no longer see mediumship and Spiritualism as being intrinsically linked. And that's particularly hard because mediumship was once the bedrock of Spiritualism. Without the evidence (that death isn't the end of us) it could once claim to furnish, Spiritualism has to look to its past. But that does set it apart, in at least one way, from other organised religions - they never had evidence.

I'm sad that my duck friend has never had the personal evidence he desires but it doesn't alter the position that others have. Although Spiritualism's evidence on a third party basis does not achieve its highest, some can still accept past evidence (and accounts of mediumship and teaching of the highest order) and conclude that Spiritualism does have something which sets it apart from other religions.

I certainly can....

Mac, prior to the repeal of the 'Fraudulent Mediums Act' 1952 (I think) Spiritualism, as we know it today, was a proscribed activity with meetings regularly raided by police. The underlying idea seemed to be that by bringing shame of those 'caught' - Court appearances were reported in the press - it would wither. This just served to demonstrate the insidious thinking of Christianity and its well placed patrons.
At that time Meetings were entirely philosophical occasions with Speakers, Q & A and discussions, usually held at short notice in rented rooms.
Meetings demonstating Clairvoyance were by invitation only, or restricted to Private Interviews.

mac wrote:I understand obi's situation.

I no longer see mediumship and Spiritualism as being intrinsically linked. And that's particularly hard because mediumship was once the bedrock of Spiritualism. Without the evidence (that death isn't the end of us) it could once claim to furnish, Spiritualism has to look to its past. But that does set it apart, in at least one way, from other organised religions - they never had evidence.

I'm sad that my duck friend has never had the personal evidence he desires but it doesn't alter the position that others have. Although Spiritualism's evidence on a third party basis does not achieve its highest, some can still accept past evidence (and accounts of mediumship and teaching of the highest order) and conclude that Spiritualism does have something which sets it apart from other religions.

I certainly can....

Hi mac

You make an interesting point here. I would think that most major religions would say they had evidence to support them in the past, although none of it is as recent perhaps as Spiritualism, many religions are still reporting healings and communications with some form of deity. I would agree that there is no link between mediumship and Spiritualism of necessity, and as far as I can see today - no actual link. I am re-reading Maurice Barbanell's "This Is Spiritualism" - if it is to be believed it is astonishing indeed, regrettably it is difficult to even find those who have experienced the phenomena mentioned, let alone experience it for oneself. I think the record of such phenomena is of limited value unless one can validate it for oneself, and I would not view anyone basing their beliefs on such a historial record as having put their faith on a reliable foundation.

I'm sad that my duck friend has never had the personal evidence he desires but it doesn't alter the position that others have
Others say they have had these experiences. I do not think it is sensible to place my view of the future on the way the Universe works on strangers whose opinions and reports I cannot validate. Do you?

"I would think that most major religions would say they had evidence to support them in the past, although none of it is as recent perhaps as Spiritualism, many religions are still reporting healings and communications with some form of deity." I can accept the reports about some healing and maybe some communications (we'd have to examine who the so-called deity actually might be) as I see them simply as originating from the same source as that followed in Spiritualist teachings. As you say, however, many religions' accounts are based even further in the past than Modern Spiritualism.


"I'm sad that my duck friend has never had the personal evidence he desires but it doesn't alter the position that others have"
"Others say they have had these experiences. I do not think it is sensible to place my view of the future on the way the Universe works on strangers whose opinions and reports I cannot validate. Do you?" "

I'm cautious about accepting the experience of others but there are instances when vicarious learning is perfectly acceptable for me. Some of the teachings - many of the teachings - from names we know from the path 'resonate' (that's a bit jargony I know:cry:) on a personal level. I put that down to a number of factors and if one in particular is correct - that of personal spiritual evolvement - then I am comfortable with the outcome. I have experienced just enough for me to feel I have a grasp on what others have experienced. Whatever the total situation, I feel it's right for me whereas much I have read elsewhere (but not all) does not work....

Maybe this subject of life-beyond-death et al is one where it's never going to work on a mass scale, always on an individual basis?

I think you are right Mac. Conviction can only be attained on a personal basis on this matter.