CHAPTER VI.
MEDIUMSHIP.
My subject of discourse this evening is that of mediumship. There are two classes of mediumship, and only two: that which is external, that which reaches the consciousness through the region of thought; and the internal, that which reaches it directly in the affections. The most imperfect as a means of communication is what is known as the external, its imperfection being due to the fact of its having to employ in its communication certain signs or symbols, which signs or symbols each individual must translate by his own standard—by his own understanding. Its perfection as a means of communication depends, first, upon the perfection of the communicator; secondly, upon the perfection of the understanding of the individual to whom the communication is made. If the communication pertain to those things belonging to the common plane of the understanding, and the individual communicating and the one to whom the communication is made understand alike the symbols used, the method of communication is comparatively perfect. I am obliged to make use of certain natural words which are signs of ideas. If you understand these words precisely as I do, I will succeed in conveying my ideas. But if the slightest difference exist between us in the use of words, a perfect communication can not take place. You understand how this is. Nothing is more common in an audience like this than for different individuals to understand the speaker differently, though each individual heard the same words. But different conclusions are attained because each interprets by his own standard.
We can not be perfect in our external methods of communication any further than we each occupy the same plane in our communication, and understand alike the symbols used. If I were describing simple natural things, and describing them by natural qualities, there would be no difficulty, perhaps, in conveying a definite idea. I may not fail in describing objects by using such terms as “red, white, round, square, angular,” because these terms are commonly well understood. So in regard to all the natural qualities of objects with which we are familiar. We have the correct elements out of which to construct a correct idea. Therefore, while I am communicating on the natural plane where we all possess the same consciousness, external language answers very well as a means of communication.
But suppose I attempt to go into a more interior truth—that which does not address each one’s consciousness through the sense. I am obliged, however, to make use of external language; but as the interior truth is more interior than the natural plane, I must employ that language figuratively—must speak by parables, similes, and allegories. But the moment we begin to use language in that manner we are very liable to be misunderstood. The individual inclined to understand all things on the natural plane will very likely fail to get the spiritual idea which is figuratively conveyed. A truth expressed in figurative language, the figure being a natural one, will be understood by the one who takes it literally in one way, while he who takes it in a spiritual sense will get a different idea. So whenever we attempt to teach by parables, there is a very great liability of diversity of understandings. I refer to this to show that in communicating by external language, we are very liable to be misunderstood, unless we confine our subjects to the natural plane, and describe natural things by such properties as are common to all, and are accurate in putting them together, when we may succeed tolerably well. But if we omit any of these essential particulars, there will be almost as great a diversity of opinions as there are diversity of minds to hear the communications.
Many persons have thought that if they become mediums, and could see disembodied Spirits in the Spiritual world, and see how they are associated together there, they would become wise. As a mere observation of the vegetable kingdom serves simply to acquaint one with its various forms, but not with its uses, so a view of the Spiritual world might acquaint one with the fact that Spirits existed, of their employments, etc.; but the real interior truth, which is necessary to enter into you and make you wise, can not be acquired in this way.
The idea that we can get perfect communication externally, when we are imperfect ourselves, is altogether a fallacious idea. We depend upon our understandings for the meanings of communications addressed to us; and just so far as you are developed to understand perfectly, you may get a perfect impression. But just so far as it is above your comprehension, you are liable to misunderstand, and charge the fault upon your communicator. The proposition is simply this: You and I can not understand infallibly what is truth, unless we are infallible ourselves in the determination of truth. That which, of itself, is fallible and liable to err, can not determine the quality of infallibility; and whenever an individual affirms, upon some authority, the truth of any thing which, by his acknowledgment, lies beyond the plane of his intellectual development, he asserts something unphilosophical and false. That is only truth which, in our minds, corresponds to the actuality. It matters not who speaks, even though it be God; just so long as you must depend upon your understanding to interpret the meaning of what is said, you are liable to get a falsehood instead of truth. The question of truth depends as much upon you as the communicator. There has been a great deal of discussion about the infallibility of the Koran, of the Shasters, of the Vedas, of the Bible, and of the Book of Mormon. It has all proceeded upon an erroneous idea. Although the book may contain infallible truth, yet since you have to depend upon your understanding to interpret the language employed, you may fail to get the truth. You need to be infallible before you can affirm that you have the truth. You hand me the Bible, perhaps, saying that it is the Word of God, that it was given by inspiration of God, and that every word it contains is true, infallibly true. Very well. Do you wish me to receive the entire book of paper, ink, and calf-skin, to take the book and read it, and believe what it says? I must receive it as I understand it, and faith, therefore, corresponds to my understanding of the book. Is my faith in the book, or my understanding of the book? When a man affirms the infallibility of the Bible, he affirms the infallibility of his understanding. It appears that your faith can not be in the Bible, whatever it may teach. Your faith is only in your understanding of the Bible; and if your understanding happens to correspond exactly with the truth, you then have the truth. But if your understanding happens to be erroneous, your faith is in a falsehood. You affirm, then, that God teaches that which He does not teach; and you make your falsehood God’s truth.
I want to make this plain, for here the law of outward communication is abundantly manifest. Look the world over and see how many different sects there are in Christendom: Baptists, Universalists, Presbyterians—I could not begin to name them all over to-night. They all take the same book and learn from the same source; and yet they come to very different conclusions. You may take any one doctrine which you may think the Bible teaches—and I will immediately find you a denomination who will deny it. One says that it teaches universal salvation, and another affirms that it teaches almost as universal damnation. Each man translates it by his own understanding; and each affirms that he has infallible truth. If they would just take this simple proposition, that that which is fallible can not determine the quality of infallibility—that upon these subjects the human mind is fallible, and therefore can not determine what is the absolute meaning of the communications—they would learn the source of all their errors. Men may be ever so honest, they will differ as a consequence of their constitutional differences. A man whose intellectual faculties are strongly developed, who will reason and demonstrate every thing rationally, will be a Presbyterian. Hence the expression “long-faced Presbyterian.” It is very common for them to be long-faced. They are very actual, never have much feeling, and sit perfectly quiet. The minister must do all the talking, and the singers must do all the singing. The round, full-faced, emotional kind of man will not be a Presbyterian. You could not force him to be, because he judges by a different standard. He would be a Methodist. He would judge by the standard of feeling, and must have a great deal of noise; and a meeting is not worth a fig to him unless he can have a dozen round him shouting “Glory!” The Presbyterian, all reason, says God is omnipotent and omniscient; therefore He foreknew what should come to pass, and that, therefore, God foreordains whatever comes to pass. This is one of his cardinal doctrines. The Methodists says: “If that be true, man is not a free agent; but I feel that he is.” He decides from feeling; the Presbyterian from thought. They can not read the same book and come to the same conclusion. There is a constitutional difference between the two. If they are to determine upon truth by outward communication they can not arrive at it. The man who feels pretty savage is ready to accept the doctrine of damnation. He feels that certain persons ought to be punished, and he thinks God will punish them. Here is another man who is all sympathy and love. He can not see how one man should, under any circumstances, want to injure another man, and he comes to the conclusion that all men are going to be saved. He thinks that if God is as good as he is, and he is sure He is, He will contrive some way to save all. That man will preach the doctrine of universal salvation.
So true is it, that phrenological differences point out different religious beliefs, that in almost any congregation you can sort out the Presbyterians from the Methodists, etc. This is a truth that God, nature, experience—every thing teaches. What is the use of quarreling about it, as long as we know that individuals hearing a discourse come to different conclusions. They do, they must, they will, and they can not help it. Until they come to a more interior plane they can never have one faith, one Lord, one baptism.
Now you understand what I mean by what is called the external communication. Suppose the Spirits make a communication, they make it in words. These words only address your consciousness through your understanding, and you make them mean according to your understanding of them. If the Spirit makes a communication by pantomime, it still appeals to your understanding, and depends upon your translation to give it significance. There may be error in the communication and in yourself, so that the error will be double. It is in this way that very many errors which have been charged upon the Spiritual world, after all, have their origin in the mistranslation and the misunderstanding of those who hear the communication. The teachings of Jesus, I think, are straightforward enough, if you will come to the plane of understanding to which they were addressed. Being spiritual, they can not be truly represented by natural ideas and language. For that reason he was obliged to teach by the use of parables, figures, and similes; and when he had done the best he could, the disciples, being educated in the natural plane, interpreted his language naturally, and, consequently, misapplied what he said. This is the fault to the present day. The truths he sought to communicate were peculiarly spiritual, and natural language could only represent them when used figuratively; hence he made choice of such similes or parables as would convey his meaning approximately, yet not without liability of material error. Hence he declared to his disciples, with whom he had been so long familiar, that they did not understand him, and could not, until the Spirit of truth should come to lead them into the truth of what he had taught. Language could not convey the truth, else it would undoubtedly have been so given. He knew how to describe the things of the Spiritual world so far as they could be described, for the Spirit had been poured out upon him without measure; but natural language could not portray the truths, scenery, and events of the Spirit-world.
The only perfect mode of communication is the interior method, or communication by inspiration. As a means of becoming wise, it becomes necessary for us to seek by some means to come into interior communion with the Spirit-world and Divine Being, since we can not by outward means arrive absolutely at the truth. If we will know that truth which is required to build us up into eternal life, we must ascertain what conditions are necessary to be observed to bring us into interior communion with the Spirit, so that without outward sign they can flow directly into our consciousness, and be written upon the thought or heart, as was said, “I will put my law into their understandings, and I will write it upon their affections.” Thus truth must come to us without any recourse to Bibles or any other standard whatever. It so happens that the means by which we are to attain to interior communion are open to all. It is possible for every person to come into rapport with the interior spheres. According to one’s ruling love or desire will be his affinity or communion with the spheres of the Spirit-world. If that be high, his communion will be high. If low, his communion will be low.
I will illustrate what I mean by interior communication. Suppose that some of you have a pain in the head. After your best attempts to describe it to me by natural language, I might not get of it a correct idea. But by putting myself in a negative condition to you, I could receive the pain myself, and be able to understand its character precisely. You thus communicate through the nervous medium interiorly. Many persons in public assemblies are liable to receive headaches of others by coming into rapport with them.
In each there is that which corresponds to all the media in the outward universe. There is a material earth, and I possess a material body. There is electricity, and I have electricity in my system. There is magnetism, and I have magnetism. There is a life-principle expanding all over the world, and I am in communication with that vital medium, and through it exert a vital influence upon others, and they upon me. This process of healing by mesmerizing is only coming into rapport, so that the vital forces of the healthy person enter in and strengthen the vital forces of the weak. Then there is a nerve-media existing around and in the individual, through which the pains of others are communicated to him. Pain in another causes an action in this nerve-medium which communicates the pain to me; just as my voice causes a vibration of the physical atmosphere, which action is communicated to your organs of hearing. The sounds I produce have certain meanings attached to them. If you understand them precisely as I do, you get a perfect communication. But any description in natural language of a pain would be inadequate. But when I receive it myself, I have in every respect an adequate idea of it. Very often, standing near individuals, I have told them what difficulties they were laboring under by experiencing them in myself. It is in this manner that clairvoyants frequently tell what ails their patient.
If I go on and describe your pains, there is nothing astonishing in it. I am simply in rapport with your nerve-medium. I am sometimes wondered at for this, but I might be a fool and yet do it. There is no wisdom involved in such a power; and it is erroneous to suppose, as some do, that because clairvoyants can tell them what ails them, they can tell them how to cure it. These powers belong to very different classes, but they may be united in the same individual, and he may be competent to discover disease and to prescribe its remedy. I refer to this simply to correct the false impression that clairvoyance is a wondrous power. It is one of the simplest powers in nature. It is one of the powers that may be made use of to bless; but if not properly understood, it may be made use of to curse. What is true in regard to this nervous medium is true also of thought. You often witness cases of this kind in mesmeric and magnetic experiments, when the subject and operator being brought into rapport, whatever one thinks the other thinks—what one wills the other wills. The idea is transmitted perfectly.
There is what is called thought-reading. This is governed by the same law precisely as that of which I have been speaking. One mind communicates its motion to the other by means of a medium, just as I communicate to your organs of hearing the vibrations of my organs of speech, through the medium of the atmosphere. When I have a thought which is an active condition of the mind, which may be denominated mental action, it is transmitted to the Spirit-medium or Spiritual atmosphere, and undulates through that until it strikes upon that receptive mind where the same motion is communicated, and the same thought produced, and the thought is impressed upon the consciousness. The one receiving it perceives it precisely as its communicator. Such a communication does not depend upon the Understanding simply for its perfection. This is what we call interior communication. According to the elevation of our Spiritual sphere in the sphere of truth or love, as we approach the infinite and absolute, will be the perfection of this method of communication. If we are very low, it corresponds very much to the external mode. But as we raise, it becomes more interior and refined, until finally, being unfolded to the plane of the absolute in our consciousness, perceptions, and affections, we shall come into direct rapport with the infinite, and receive communications directly from the Divine—not by any outward sign or symbol, but by the inflowing of the Divine thought and affection. This is the way and the only way that Spiritual truths can be communicated. The reason that Jesus of Nazareth did not communicate sufficient truth to the world to enlighten it, was simply because the world was not prepared to receive it. He said that he had many things to communicate, but they could not bear them. He also said that the man coming after him, living the life he had lived, should do greater things, because there would be a higher and wider plane. The world was too low, too animal, to receive his doctrine. For that reason he was obliged to go away, saying to his disciples that they did not understand him, and it was necessary that the Spirit of truth should come and illumine their understandings before they could understand him.
If I wish to understand Spiritual truth, no man or medium can be a medium for me, and I can not be a medium for you. Jesus of Nazareth can not be a medium for one of you, nor can God himself. Every individual who would understand the truths of the Spiritual world must be his or her own medium. God must write his law upon your understanding, and put it in your affections. If you want to become mediums for interior communications, you must become absolutely true in every thought, feeling, and affection—become absolutely pure in every desire and aspiration of your souls—become absolutely just in all your relations of life, so that morning, noon, and night you shall be inquiring and thirsting after righteousness. Such an individual will not need any outward signs to convey truth to him. But the person disposed to live in the outward world, to live in the enjoyment of his appetites and lustful affections, will require representations, if he ever believes in Spirits. He has to be addressed as a physical or sensuous being. If he ever believes in a future life, the Spirits have got to come and rap him over his head. These outward manifestations are designed to say to the sordid atheist, to the materialist, to the religious worldling, “You have a soul.” It is for this reason that there is speaking with tongues, and that all the wonderful works are wrought in your midst. That is what makes Mr. Davenport’s circles necessary for the vast majority of the citizens of New York. They are not sufficiently developed to understand Spiritual truth. These manifestations are necessary. They are not calculated to make you wise, but they can startle you, and prompt you to investigate; and they can give you such direction as will prepare you to enter into a higher and holier investigation of your relation to the world and to the Divine Father. It makes little difference whether they lie or tell the truth, provided they satisfy you that you have souls. If they were always to tell you the truth, you would be too dependent upon them. You have intellectual faculties—exercise them, and you will never find yourself in a position where you can not find all the light you need. A great many people who believe that Spirits do communicate, can hardly go to dinner without the consent of the Spirits. They make babes of themselves, and afterward become fools. If the Spirits tell me to do a thing which my judgment says I should not do, I tell them, “I won’t. I will do the best I know how; and I would rather trust myself than you.” I always get along a great deal better in this way than I would by getting Spirits to rap according to my expectations. They are not designed to become our governors. Sensible Spirits do not ask any such thing. There are ninnies in the Spiritual world as in this, who will be glad to become governors, if they can get dupes enough. The object of this external communication is to give outward evidence. The Corinthians had terrible times. Some people coming in said they were drunkards. Some said they were mad. Some spoke in tongues. Paul reproved them for this kind of talk. He told them that it was well to speak with tongues, but he would endeavor to make some use of it, and would rather speak five words with the understanding than ten thousand in tongues. The tongues are for a sign to those who are not believers. The man or woman that is not established in the faith that Spirits can communicate, needs these outward manifestations; but when established, it is all time thrown away to be chasing after these communications. Persons had better be in their closets, throwing their aspirations for a higher and holier life, and pray until, by their earnest aspirations, they call angels of the brightest spheres to come and be with them. They would find themselves getting along much better, and would give to Spiritualism a very different character from what it now bears in the wide world. I talk plain. I am in earnest. We have had nonsense and folly enough. It is time we become rational, learn the use of our faculties, and use them aright.
Everything has its true mission. Let, then, every thing be done decently and in order. If Spiritualism is that which is to redeem the world, we shall find it out by finding whether it makes us better; and if it will not make the world better, we want nothing more of it. We need no more raps than will save humanity. We need all we can get for that purpose. If Spiritualism takes that direction, it is a God-send to the world; and in whatever sphere the Spirit can work, let it work. I bid it God-speed. But I say to all, that if Spiritualism, in its faith and effects, does not tend to make you wiser, better, purer, and holier men and women, it is good for nothing. That Spiritualism which will not redeem you and me will not be sufficient to redeem the world. Therefore let our faith be shown by our works—be exhibited by the influence it shall exert upon our lives and characters in making us purer, better men and women—just men and women.