Channelling Tomorrow

All arguments are provisional. Perhaps that is why there has never really been a scientific theory, which has stood the test of time. It may also partly explain the often bewildering personal ambiguities surrounding those figures representing each school of thought. In “modern” Spiritualism, for example, the Fox sisters are usually cited as the ancestors of our tradition (1842), even though some commentators vigorously claim it was actually Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), who fathered the movement. Yet a cursory glance at the beliefs as well as the practices of Spiritualism – as a coherent ideology – quickly revels a religious system of global proportions as old as the human race itself. Therefore, it is a striking, albeit unsettling fact, that temporary frames of reference tend to determine our rules of judgement.

This is equally true of those opinions said to oppose Spiritualisms theological position. Indeed, until recently existentialism was held up by series of secularised scholars as a bulwark against any notion entailing higher states of Being. By stating they were following the (surprisingly reductive) assertions of Nietzsche, these writers created an impression that theirs was the only possible way to discuss human spirituality – thereby deliberately ignoring the equally important religious existentialism of Kierkegaard. Indeed, as a member of The Greater World Christian Spiritualist Association, it usually saddens me to reflect that we have not fully engaged with the sophisticated and rich theological resources available to us. Certainly, as a Christian family we have a surprising number of prominent friends, as it is far from uncommon to find authors such as Saint Augustine as well as Pascal listed as existentialist thinkers who described profound transcendent experiences.

Existentialism is then, best understood as a certain type of intellectual exploration, tending to focus on the human situation itself. Moreover, most writers inspired by this vantage point have gone on to contend that western thinking has become deeply defective due to it’s increasing insistence that knowledge must be based on physical objects alone. For a true existentialist, this approach will never be able to grasp the unique spiritual nature of human beings and remains blinded to the immense differences between human and non-human Being; a view which gave birth to a twentieth century academic rebellion in Italy (curiously, also known as Christian Existentialism), that sought to examine people as much more than the sum of their parts,

Presumably, channelling is a case in point. Everyone seems to Channel. Suddenly thinking of an old friend before “accidentally” meeting her on a street corner, or spontaneously singing a memorable song only to hear it played on the radio moments later, are all examples of this very human aptitude. Yet the difference between these suggestive daily events and those exhibiting spiritual qualities is ultimately one of degree. For a busy English housewife this ability may be a question of mild intuitive feedback, whereas for a Sufi poet this disturbing process allows prophetic spirits to expose inconvenient truths. On top of this, inherited customs with no direct moral significance such as New Years Eve, may allow entire societies to channell glimpses of their own future and foretell the probable consequences of actions still to be undertaken. Such predictions are of course, both subjective and falsifiable, consequently raising higher metaphysical issues in their wake. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why some channellers have opened themselves enough to touch the glittering continuum itself, subsequently writing that they discovered a changing, dynamic and ever-living universe with an inherent forward thrust towards the full actualisation of the every potential from which it is composed. They almost seem to be describing dazzling creative acts in terms of a continuous birth process by powers and principalities above all human interference.

Now it is always wise to be cautious concerning the euphoric details accompanying these depictions. After all, outward expressions of such purely receptive insights are bound to use special figurative and symbolic terms, which no doubt imply far more than appears to be said at first hearing, but are still, nonetheless, semantically problematic. This is due to the fact that ordinary words are made for mundane occasions and cannot convey the extraordinary facts of Spiritualism. What is more these symbols refer to levels of consciousness that are more complex than the everyday empirical world, going far beyond the physical limits of recognisable, material, conditions.

In stretching so high, yet simultaneously embracing the dislocation of human beings here below, our movement (considered as an entirety), is unique. This is because spiritualist churches meet existential questions head-on. They are Sacred arenas of raw human need, where the bereaved, the marginalized, the misfortunate and the uneducated can congregate, freely express themselves and openly enquire into the meaning of their lives without fear of censure or social disapproval. Unlike more culturally established religious assemblies, where every member has a perceived - and tacitly understood - place in the social pecking order, spiritualists are drawn together by their pain and curiosity. We have an innate religious bond built on unadulterated spiritual experiences and honest vulnerability.
At the end of the day, spiritualism claims there is a higher order of Being, and by so arguing states that our lives may be understood in two distinct ways: either as a scientific problem requiring a solution, or as a mystery within which we choose to participate. In other words, human rules of judgement are based on a materialistic, apparently clear but radically impoverished view of existence … or on a transcendent, less explicable - although fundamentally meaningful - interaction with all of creation. Surely there is no better way to state our theological position than this, and equally no more courageous way to face the future.