|  |
| Andy Byng
|
|  |
| Gordon Higginson
|
|  |
| | Estelle Roberts demonstrating
mediumship
at the Royal Albert Hall.
|
Andy Byng
asks...
Where
has all
the wonder gone?
Can we be optimistic
about the current state of Spiritualism? From the outside looking in, it
probably seems that there is little to be optimistic about: political
in-fighting, jealousy, a declining membership, a philosophy in need of
re-examination and modernisation, and constant complaints about the standard of
mediumship demonstrated on our platforms.
It
also seems that we've not moved forward since the 1920s, as the issues we were
then debating are the same as those we debate today. Should we have Christian
trappings within our churches? Should our churches actually be called churches,
or be renamed as centres? But all these things seem trifling when one considers
the degree of apathy that exists within our movement.
Miracle
of communicationIt appears to me that
many Spiritualists have lost sight of the miracle of mediumship. And yes, it is
a miracle. A discarnate mind - a mum, dad, brother or sister - is able to
communicate with those who are still physically alive, and, even more
amazingly, provide objective evidence of their survival. Our congregations
should be awestruck - truly inspired and overjoyed by such an experience.
However,
it seems to me that many Spiritualists have lost touch with what is actually
happening at the services they attend. It's as though they've become immune to
it, disinterested almost. Rather than seeing information provided by the spirit
world as evidence of somebody's loved one reaching across the veil of death to
be reunited with their family and friends, those attempts to communicate are
perceived merely as pieces of information, either accurate or not.
How
many times have you heard observations such as "Wasn't the medium good/bad
tonight?" Shouldn't the comments be "How amazing is it that we were able to
witness the presence of the spirit world this evening!" Or, "Isn't it wonderful
to live in a world where a mother is able to communicate with her son who has
passed away?"
Legacy
of unity
I believe Gordon Higginson once said that
Spiritualism had lost its spirit, and surely this is what he was referring to.
For our pioneers, discovering that intelligence and individuality survived
physical death inspired them to reach out to the wider world to demonstrate and
share the truth that life is eternal. This joy and awe, experienced through the
miracle of mediumship, not only cemented their unity but inspired them to stand
firm against the emerging philosophy of materialism. By doing so, those pioneers
left behind a legacy - a legacy I believe we have an obligation to continue.
So,
what exactly is that legacy? Surely the work of every Spiritualist church is
twofold. First, they should be havens for those who have discovered the truth
of Spiritualism, so that they can share their experiences with people of like
mind, and further their own personal investigation into the subject. Second,
they should be attempting to inspire members of their local community, who have
never experienced mediumship or the philosophy of Spiritualism, to invest-igate
Spiritualism, by providing them with an appealing environment in which to do
so.
It
stands to reason that the latter should be the main concern of every
Spiritualist. If someone has been en-lightened by the truth of survival, and
privileged to have a personal
experience of the spirit world, they too should feel compelled to share their
experiences with others. I'm not suggesting we should knock on doors and pester
people, just that each and every Spiritualist should be willing to alter and
change the way Spiritualism is presented, so that it becomes appealing and
relevant
for members of its local community who are not Spiritualists.
What's
in a name?
If calling a church a
centre would make investigating Spiritualism more appealing to a
non-Spiritualist, surely we should be chomping at the bit to change the name.
If removing hymns and prayers makes Spiritualism appear more modern and
relevant to the sort of spiritual experience that a non-Spiritualist is seeking,
surely we should make the change today so that these people can experience for
themselves the reality of the spirit world.
To
some readers such suggestions may seem abhorrent, but let's consider what
Spiritualism truly is. First, it's the miracle of mediumship, in that it
demonstrates the reality of the spirit world. Second, it's the philosophical
implications of such a reality. The only thing that should be of any real
concern, therefore, is that the integrity of the mediumship and philosophy is
not compromised. We have to make sure that our exponents can demonstrate a high
standard of mediumship. Furthermore, our members should be educated to a high
standard in Spiritualist philosophy, and provided with the opportunity to
critically explore and debate the philosophical and mediumistic components of
Spiritualism.
Let's
not forget that early Spiritualists had no religious meetings, because
Spiritualism did not become a recognised religion until the twentieth century.
It began with people meeting in their homes, simply to experience mediumship
and discuss the philosophical implications of that experience. Later, there
were large public meetings, at which lectures and demonstrations of mediumship
were given, but even at that time we didn't have the Seven Principles as we
know them today.
Over
time, the style of the Spiritualist service took shape, and that style - the
same as we experience today - was completely relevant and appropriate to that
generation and culture. And that's my point: when Spiritualism was at the
height of its popularity it was completely relevant to the culture and
expectations of the time. It challenged materialism, empowered women in a world
controlled by men, and the service itself was based on a Christian model, which
would have been familiar and appealing to Spiritualists of that generation.
However,
although it was familiar, the Spiritualist service placed emphasis on evidence
rather than faith, which both the intelligentsia and Spiritualism itself were
championing. Consequently, it offered the Spiritualist familiarity, whilst
demonstrating the very thing that differentiated it from orthodoxy - evidence
of an afterlife rather than faith in an afterlife.
Outdated
and irrelevant
The problem for
Spiritualism today is that the world has drastically changed, but Spirit-ualism
hasn't. It's become out-dated, irrelevant and uninspiring. We have to wake up
to the fact that today the vast majority of people in the Western world do not
care for organised religion, nor do they want to par-take in any religious
service that smacks of orth-odoxy.
This
raises a vital question for the future of Spiritualism - do we try to change
people to fit in with Spiritualism, or do we change Spiritualism to meet the
needs of today's people? If we think the former is more important, then we
should just continue on our present road. If the latter appears to be a more
sensible option, which I believe it does, then we have to be bold and
modernise. However, as I said earlier, we have to make sure that modernisation
does not compromise the integrity of our mediumship and philosophy.
Barriers
to communication
Let's picture a scenario.
Imagine there is a mother in the spirit world, trying to reach her son. Her son
has no interest in organised religion and definitely wouldn't enter any
building called a church, but is desperately looking for answers about the
possibility of an afterlife. If we are to be of service to the spirit world,
don't we have a duty to reduce these barriers to communication for the mother?
The name ‘church' smacks of orthodoxy, and so on. Don't we have a duty to be an
appealing movement which makes it as easy as possible for mother and son to be
reunited? And to give that son the opportunity to experience this truth so that
he can find solace in his life, by ensuring that Spiritualism meets his
expectations?
If
you think that scenario is unrealistic, ask yourself why it is that
church-going and church affiliation is decreasing, but inter-est in
spirituality is increasing. There are thousands of people out there who would
probably be helped by Spiritualism, but are put off by the way it's presented.
Let
me ask a question of Spiritualists who vehemently defend the need for prayers
and hymns, and for our buildings to be called churches. Which is more important
- the singing of a hymn, the reciting of a prayer, the title of a building, or
bringing together two people who live in different worlds, so that they can
experience again the love that exists between them?
Our
needs or the spirit world's?
What's more, if we want
these things simply because this is how they've always been, let me ask another
question. What's more important - our own needs and wants, or those of the
spirit world? Surely the spirit world just wants to touch as many minds as
possible so that everybody can understand the reality of the world in which we
live? Do you really think they care if we sing a hymn, or say a formal prayer?
Or is what they really want for people to have a personal experience of the
power of the spirit?
What
is the difference between a formal prayer at the beginning of a service,
followed by a hymn, and somebody listening to a piece of music and, whilst
doing so, reaching out to that power of the spirit world so that they can
hopefully become aware of it themselves? I would say there's no difference, but
the latter is much more modern and appealing than the former.
If
you disagree that the aim of the spirit world is to touch as many minds as
possible, let me ask you why is it that the spirit world attempts to
communicate with us millions of times a year, worldwide?
If
Spiritualists today simply re-connected to that joy of mediumship, and
considered why Spiritualist churches exist in the first place, I think that,
like our pioneers, we would do everything possible to ensure that we engaged
and inspired as many people as possible to investigate Spiritualism. Indeed, as
long as the integrity of our philosophy and mediumship is not compromised, who
cares if a Spiritualist church is called a Spiritualist centre, or if we sing
hymns or say formal prayers, especially if such things discourage
non-Spiritualists? Again, ask yourself the question: is an empty Spiritualist
church really of service to the spirit world?
Change
is vitalWhy are we so resistant
to change when every indicator tells us we are in dire need of it? Why do we
cling to the past when we know deep down that the world is drastically
different from what it was 80 years ago? Why do we constantly fight amongst
ourselves when we know that if Spiritualism is going to make a difference we
need to put our own desires to one side, and, like our pioneers, act in unison,
cemented by a common goal to spread the truth of Spiritualism?
It
may sound harsh, but I fear we've become so occupied with what we want from
Spiritualism that we've all but forgotten who we are really working for. We've
become so used to complaining and finding problems that we've forgotten to
provide solutions. Our pioneers believed passionately that it was possible to
bring about peace on earth by uniting everybody, regardless of creed, race and
gender, through the truth of Spiritualism - a truth encapsulated in every
religious and philosophical system known to humankind.
Where,
oh where, has the wonder gone? Where is the spirit of Spiritualism hiding? The
truth is that it's within each and every one of us, just waiting to be
reignited.
