In my previous post about the goodness of the medium, I said that the quality of the content (of messages or readings) was an interrelationship of many things. Without inventing a whole new branch of metaphysics, let’s ask Phaedrus’
With mediumship, things are rarely black and white, so it’s better to put them on a continuum, with black at one end and white on the other. Here are a few important continuua to think about when it comes to quality of content, and to some extent, quality of mediumship.
Positive to negative
Positive content is always good, but negative content is not always bad. For example, you can get a real ass-kicking in a reading or message. This is true, and I’ll vouch for it, because it’s happened to me. My life was botched up, and the spirits gave me the kick in the ass that I needed to get me going in the right direction. And it is not an open license for a message or reading to mean, disparaging, condescending, or contemptuous. Basically, a good-old-fashioned kick in the ass is still good, as unpleasant as it may be to get it when you need one.
Wisdom to gossip
Content that provides wisdom and guides you in your life is good stuff. Gossip is exactly what it is, gossip. It’s junk. Spirits don’t have time to gossip. Neither should you. You shouldn’t be looking for gossip in the first place, let alone from the spirits. Wisdom is on one end of the continuum, and gossip on the other. Things that fall closer to the wisdom end are better than the ones that don’t.
Evidence to fakery
An evidential message or reading is one in which there’s clear evidence of the continuity of life, that is, you know who the spirit is that’s communicating from the other side. Not all messages are highly evidential, nor do they have to be. But generally speaking, the closer it falls to the evidence side of the contiuum, the better it is.
The source, spirits to the medium
Messages from the spirits are what seekers want, most of the time. It’s better than a message that comes from the medium personally, which is sometimes called a head message. My experience is that head messages usually aren’t very good, but I allow the possibility that the content of one could be the same thing the spirits would have said anyway. Determining a head message from a spirit message is whole discussion in and of itself, and is anything but black and white.
Ethical to unethical
This continuum is more black and white than most, but still has some gray area. Telling a seeker that they have demons or devils. Holding back content as a mean of demanding more money for a message or reading. Manipulating the content for secondary gains, such as sex with the seeker. Mean, disparaging, condescending, or contemptuous content.
Form, good to poor
This is more about how the content is delivered than the content itself. But it’s related, because the delivery affects the perception by the seeker. For example, many of the things that cynics pick on mediums about is simply poor form. A quality message or reading should not be delivered in a way that makes people think you’re doing cold readings and the like.
My personal pet peeve is when a medium doesn’t know where the message is supposed to go, starts polling the audience to see who responds, finds the right one, and then goes from there. Even if the message eventually lands in the right place and has good content, it’s very poor form. It also gives cynics the soap box they need to stand on. If I had my way, I’d outlaw it. If the spirits can’t find the right person to deliver the message to and communicate it clearly to the medium, then the message shouldn’t be given. Period. You can bet I won’t stand for it with my guides. I’d rather shut my mouth instead. No message is better than one with poor form.
The medium as a person, good to bad
A good person is more credible than a bad one. Even if the message is one hundred percent true (“the sun will rise in the morning”), I’d rather hear it from a good person as opposed to a bad one. This continuum can also affect the quality of the content, through the Law of Attraction, i.e. bad spirits can provide bad messages.
The medium as a spirit communicator, good to bad
This is the capability of the medium to clearly receive and clearly convey content from the spirits. While the idea of mediumship is as simple as handing a message from one person to another, who then hands it to the recipient, the reality is more multifaceted. There are various things that impact the message as it goes from the spirits to the seeker. And just like it is with our languages, things can get lost in the translation as well.
If you want a message from the spirits and go to a medium, does it matter whether the medium is a good person or not? Since mediumship, in the strictest sense, is only the ability to communicate and nothing more, what difference would it make?
Obvious exceptions like being mute aside, everyone can talk. Just because you can talk, it doesn’t mean that you are smart, wise, good, pleasant, sincere, or spiritual. Not at all, because these things are unrelated to the ability to talk. Talking is one thing. Who you’re talking with and the quality of the conversation is quite another.
Mediumship and goodness are somewhat similar. Just because you’re a medium, there’s no implied or automatic assumption that you’re talking with the smart, wise, good, pleasant, sincere, or spiritual people. There’s no assumption that your spirit guides are smart, wise, good, pleasant, sincere, or spiritual people either. None at all.As a medium, you want your mediumship work to be the best it can be, something that truly benefits and uplifts seekers. You want the smartest, wisest, best, most pleasant, sincere and spiritual spirit-people as your guides and teachers. And you know that the quality of your spirit guides are directly related to the quality your work, the goodness of it. The quality of the content.
Where do goodness and mediumship come together? Through the Law of Attraction, which states that like attracts like. Goodness attracts goodness. Mediums who are good people attract good spirit guides. Good spirit guides bring quality to the content.
Knowing this, mediums are focused on becoming the best people they can be. It’s a lifelong (and beyond!) process. It is continual progression in the upward direction, without end. This is great, because you can always become better and better.
Mediums also know that the spirits pick them, not the other way around. This makes the medium’s goodness and spirituality even more important, from a quality point of view.
Seekers want quality. Quality is an interrelationship of many things, not the least of which are the goodness of the medium.
Spiritualist churches usually have a Declaration of Principles, which are a number of simple statements that describe basic Spiritualist beliefs. Normally, these are short enough that they are read aloud during church service. The principles vary a bit amongst Spiritualist organizations, but underlying ideas are largely the same.
In the US, the National Spiritualist Association of Churches (NSAC) has “We believe in Infinite Intelligence” as principle number one in their declaration. What is Infinite Intelligence? It’s hard to define, but also easy at the same time. Let us take a moment to slow down, settle in, and meditate for a moment. “Infinite”. Never-ending. Expansive. Bigger. Larger than anything our imaginative minds can conceive of. “Intelligence”. Thoughtful. Understanding. Insightful.
Spiritualists use the term “Infinite Intelligence” to refer to God. It may sound a little strange, but it’s a good phrase because it can open the mind. And it doesn’t come with all the trappings that the term “God” has in our language/culture, which can shut the mind before it gets the chance to open.
Using a term you wouldn’t expect throws you off a bit. That’s good, because Spiritualism’s view of God isn’t what you would expect. Spiritualism does not define God. Then it takes it a step farther and says that you define God in your own way. To top it off, Spiritualism says that it’s perfectly ok for everyone to define God in their own way – there’s no contest or problem – it’s all good. As a result, “the God of your understanding” is the most commonly used Spiritualist phrase to refer to God.
Many/most religions believe that defining God is their job, and it’s heresy to hand that responsibility to you on a personal level. Spiritualism is radical by comparison. But how can you have a religion that doesn’t define God, (or worse!) lets you do it yourself? Believe it or not, you can. As for me, I wouldn’t have it any other way.
Actually, I think your definition of God isn’t all that important – guy on a throne, girl on a throne, omnipotent force or other entity, etc., etc. The list goes on and on. The term you use for God isn’t all that important either – God, Infinite Intelligence, God of your understanding, or whatever you like.
Spiritualism has more to say about your thoughts, behaviors, and attitudes than it does about your definition of God. And that makes sense, because on multiple levels, these things are more important than your specific definition of God.
I think a lot of people have the God and goodness thing all mixed up and confused. They think it’s all about God, but when it comes down to it, goodness is FAR BIGGER and more important.
For example, if you are drowning in a swimming pool and someone saves your life, what difference does it make that the person who saves you defines God as Muslim, Born Again Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Pagan, Wiccan, or anything else, including Atheist? It doesn’t matter, not at all!
What you think, say, and do in relation to goodness REALLY counts. And on a day-to-day basis, we are largely unaware of its power and impact on ourselves and others.
The next time you observe (or participate in) an act of goodness, whether it’s saving a life or simply a smile, meditate for a moment on how goodness is bigger and more important than God.
When a seeker provides information that verifies a reading or message (or healing for that matter), it’s a bonus.
About two years ago, I gave a family member a message that he would encounter a very rude person, and it would be quite notable, as opposed to the typical day-to-day things. At the time, it made no sense to him, as he couldn’t relate it to anyone he knew. But I talked with him a few days ago, he said that he’s dealing with this person now and can’t wait until he doesn’t have to interface with her any more. Thankfully for him, that’s soon.
The family member is half-half when it comes to believing in spirit communication. That’s ok though, because being the recipient of a reading or message does not require a belief in mediumship. Even though he now has some fact-based evidence to consider, he doesn’t know what to make of it.
It was a nice surprise to get a verification like that. When you think about it, it’s a nice slice of mediumship. Neither one of us knew who the person was at the time of the reading, as neither one of us had met her or even heard of her, so that eliminates the “you read minds” objection to mediumship. When he encountered her, he knew exactly who the person was, that is, the message hit home, which is good verification for him.
As a medium, it’s important that the message comes from the spirits, not your own head. When it comes to family members, it becomes even more important. Some mediums won’t do work for family members because they feel they’re too close, and it gets in the way. Quite understandable.
My approach has been that if the spirits want to give a message to a family member through me, that’s fine, as long they make sure that I’m not clouding things up and being in the way. So the verification was good for me too, because it shows that I can do message work for family members without it being an issue. I wouldn’t take it as an open license to do work for family members all the time, but at least it’s possible.
Augustin Lesage was a French miner who knew nothing about painting, but painted many pictures with direction from the spirits. Paranormal Review has a short article about his work being on display back in June 2008, and the article includes one of his pictures. Kieron Rhys Johnson’s site shows more of his work, and includes a wikipedia link that’s been translated from French.
Here is a site that describes the women who have been accused of witchcraft, from pre-Salem right up into Helen Duncan. You’ll find a Declaration of Regret by the Salem jurors as well as links to Salem witchcraft sites.
Helen Duncan was a medium in the UK during World War II who was put in jail for her mediumship, based on the UK’s Witchcraft Act. During a seance, she said that a ship had sunk before it was public information. Since then, the family has asked for a pardon in 2006 but it hasn’t been granted as of 2008.
Interesting reading, if you want to learn about the bad old days of mediumship. The BBC article above mentions that people were burned alive in the street, most of which were women. Bad old days indeed.
The sad thing is that it could happen again today. If you were to learn some type of government secret through mediumship and then opened your mouth about it, you’d be in big trouble. While burning people alive is mostly out of vogue these days, you would get jail time and/or be killed as a spy or traitor anyway, depending on the country you’re in and the prevailing mood. So if you ever get such information, you would be smart to keep it quiet and wait till it’s no longer sensitive before revealing it, which could be 100 years…
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was not only the creator of the fictional super-detective Sherlock Holmes, but also a famous Spiritualist.
I’m sure there are many resources out there on Sir Arthur, but here’s one that’s off beat, and includes a tidbit about his funeral proceedings, which was a little unusual.
