Spiritism: liberator of consciences?

 

SPIRITISM: LIBERATOR OF CONSCIENCES?

 

Marco Milani

 

(Article published in the Spiritist Journal, in 1994)

 

       The Spiritist Doctrine has established itself as one of the most powerful means of moral transformation on the planet, comforting and enlightening the masses, inviting them to reasoned reflection on the existential reality of being, and recognizing God's infinite goodness and wisdom.

 Based on solid foundations, it expands due to its clear ideas and sincere proposals, conquering through logic and its simplicity.

Its banner is Charity, and it energetically combats the moral wounds of Humanity: pride and selfishness.

By promoting inner reform through self-knowledge, it encourages the individual to become an agent of his own development and that of society, freeing him from his vices and defects, through balanced acts and thoughts.

As a dynamic doctrine, without dogmas or prejudices, it is open to the analysis and discussion of all its principles, allowing for critical examination by all, whether spiritists or not.

In this way, sincere questioning that seeks knowledge as a form of learning, following the same methodological line as Kardec, is healthy, not accepting information without first logically analyzing it.

On the other hand, there are those who research and question, motivated solely to discover a supposed flaw in the doctrine, but who are also very useful because they test the veracity and solidity.

To this day, all those who have initiated scientific research or inquires, aiming solely to demolish spiritist arguments, havr ended up proving their solidity, causing several detractors to review their points of view and conform to the facts.

One can perceive Spiritism's commitment to the truth.

And this commitment impels spiritists to constant reflection on their own actions and the numerous ideas that try to mix into the doctrine, distorting its content. Proof of this is that Kardec stated that it was “the duty of true spiritists to openly repudiate and disavow abuses that could compromise Spiritism” and that “to collude with abuses would be to become an accomplice and provide our adversaries with weapons” (see Spiritist Review - June/1865 - "New tactic of the adversaries with Spiritism").

The identification of true spiritists, to whom Kardec referred, those who fight for the dissemination and good understanding of Spiritism, is done as Jesus pondered, recognizing the tree by its fruits.

Valuable workers the Spiritist field, such as Carlos Imbassahy, Herculano Pires, Canuto Abreu, Deolindo Amorim and Ary Lex, among others, fought tirelessly for doctrinal understanding, warming of possible deviations and interpretation that could be practiced.

They delved as deeply as they could into the teachings of the Spirits, offering important works for moral, scientific, and philosophical development.

However, it is common for some voices to be raised discomforted with the non-acceptance, in the spiritist milieu, of far-fetched or fantastic theories, without a scientific basis, often leaning towards fads attributed to progress.

They accuse the doctrine of being sectarian and closed in on itself, refractory to some ideas wich, according to them, are fully valid and pertinent, concluding that Spiritism is averse to new practices and trends, fleeing from the the proclaimed dynamism. They even claim that Kardec is outdated.

Let's face it, first of all, on common sense!

If new ideas or practices are shown to be in disagreement with the principles adopted, after careful analysis, as Kardec did with information from the Spirits, they should not be disseminated as spiritist practices.

Aspiring for doctrinal purity does not limit the freedom of the individual, who can believe in whatever they find more coherent. The important thing is that they practice good, and there are various religions and philosophical schools precisely to meet their needs, according to his  evolutionary stage.

Respect for brothers of other beliefs is an act of charity, as well as for those who have not embraced Spiritism.

The search for truth is also an act of charity. Therefore, any philosophical and scientific statement or posture is subject to scrutiny.

Likewise, no one can claim to be a defender of Spiritist truths, close themselves (or their Center) off, and condemn any kind of doctrinal discussion. Such behavior is as radical and unbalanced as readily accepting any novelty without reflecting on it.

When Kardec calls on Spiritists to reject any abuses that may compromise the doctrine, he addresses sincere, sensible Spiritists, not just one person.

It is constant study and fraternity that will determine the degree of understanding we have of this wonderful doctrine.

Therefore, "liberator of consciences" is a phrase used in the context of the Christian Spiritist doctrine, which refers to the idea that the teachings of Spiritism can free individuals from ignorance, superstition, and dogma, and help them develop a deeper understanding of themselves, others, and the world around them. This liberation of conscience is believed to happen through the study of Spiritist principles and practices, which encourage self-reflection, moral improvement, and service to others. In this sense, Spiritism is seen as a pathway to personal and social transformation, as well as a means of fostering greater harmony, peace, and love among all people.

The impertinent puritanism of some speakers in the spiritist movement

The impertinent puritanism of some speakers in the spiritist movement

 

Marco Milani

 

It is expected that spiritist speakers are committed to exposing the principles and values of Spiritism, and not personal ideas without proper doctrinal foundation. However, as with any activity, we find individuals who perform their function more (or less) appropriately than others.

The quality of the spiritist lecture is directly related to the theoretical-doctrinal basis and the oratory aspects demonstrated by the speaker. The ideal, therefore, would be the high-level union of these two elements: content and form. Obviously, the characteristics of each person, such as knowledge about the themes, cultural influences, formal education, posture, language, desinterest in self-promotion etc., are naturally diferente, and so each speaker has his own style and reasons for acting as a speaker. However, the objective should be one: to contribute to the moral and intellectual improvement of listeners through doctrinal dissemination.

Considering that the speaker is not a perfect being, he or she is subject to making mistakes like anyone else, but from the public's perspective, the speaker is a legitimate representative of Spiritism. Especially for the neophyte audience, what the speaker says will reflect the Doctrine of the Spirits itself, so the expository responsibility is very great. In this sense, the more the expositor adheres to spiritist principles and values, the less subject to errors he or she will be. The problem is that, sometimes, he or she adds his/her opinions, frustrations and even prejudices.

This recently happened with a speaker addressing a group of young spiritists to explore the theme of “sexuality”. The speaker self-described as a health professional and, in her presentation, condemned a certain sexual practice because, according to her, it was not natural, brutal and humiliating and, furthermore, symbolized male oppression over women. In her speech, the speaker claimed to have scientific evidence supporting her assertions about the harmful effects of the practice, although she did not present any formal research. Since the lecture was recorded and made available on the internet, several comments criticizing the speaker’s technical competence  criticizing the speaker to address the subject arose.

Regardless of the speaker's good intentions in defending her personal positions, this situation raises another question: to what extent would the speaker's opinion resemble a puritanical manifestation, and furthermore, would condemning sexual practices under the moralistic banner be pertinent in a spiritist lecture? Is it appropriate to turn the opportunity to address an audience that expected to hear something based on Spiritism into a platform for the exposing of opinions? Probably many young people who attended the lecture in question must have thought that Spiritism "condemns" such a practice. Now, Spiritism does not resemble moralistic religions that condemn and try to shape the conduct of followers through fear or impositions, as it values free will and responsibility for one's own actions.

Doctrinally, we are encouraged to respect others and ourselves. Respect for the choices of others without trying to impose particular behaviors is a clear guidance present in spiritist teachings.

Following the example of the mentioned speaker, perhaps some other lecturers feel very comfortable to also express their opinions on other sexual practices that were not commented on, positioning themselves for ot against them. Is that what we expect to find in spiritist lectures?

The problem is not knowing how to speak well and with ease, but knowing how to build the lecture on solid theoretical bases to free consciences from the shackles of ignorance and encourage the evolution of the being.

No, Jesus wasn't a socialist

 

No, Jesus Wasn't a Socialist

 

Lawrence W. Reed

 

Christian charity, being voluntary and heartfelt, is utterly distinct from the compulsory, impersonal mandates of the state.

 

The claim that Jesus Christ was a socialist has become a popular refrain among liberals, even from some whose Christianity is lukewarm at best. But is there any truth in it?

That question cannot be answered without a reliable definition of socialism. A century ago, it was widely regarded as government ownership of the means of production. Jesus never once even hinted at that concept, let alone endorsed it. Yet the definition has changed over time. When the critiques of economists such as Ludwig von Mises, F. A. Hayek, and Milton Friedman demolished any intellectual case for the original form of socialism, and reality proved them to be devastatingly right, socialists shifted to another version: central planning of the economy.

One can scour the New Testament and find nary a word from Jesus that calls for empowering politicians or bureaucrats to allocate resources, pick winners and losers, tell entrepreneurs how to run their businesses, impose minimum wages or maximum prices, compel workers to join unions, or even to raise taxes. When the Pharisees attempted to trick Jesus of Nazareth into endorsing tax evasion, he cleverly allowed others to decide what properly belongs to the State by responding, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.”

Nonetheless, one of the charges that led to Jesus’s crucifixion was indeed tax evasion.

 

Changing the Definition

 

With the reputation of central planners in the dumpster worldwide, socialists have largely moved on to a different emphasis: the welfare state. The socialism of Bernie Sanders and his young ally Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is that of the benevolent, egalitarian nanny state where rich Peter is robbed to pay poor Paul. It’s characterized by lots of “free stuff” from the government—which of course isn’t free at all. It’s quite expensive both in terms of the bureaucratic brokerage fees and the demoralizing dependency it produces among its beneficiaries. Is this what Jesus had in mind?

Hardly. Yes, amid the holidays, it’s especially timely to think about helping the poor. It was, after all, a very important part of Jesus's message. How helping the poor is to be done, however, is mighty important.

Christians are commanded in Scripture to love, to pray, to be kind, to serve, to forgive, to be truthful, to worship the one God, to learn and grow in both spirit and character. All of those things are very personal. They require no politicians, police, bureaucrats, political parties, or programs.

“The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want,” says Jesus in Matthew 26:11 and Mark 14:7. The key words there are you can help and want to help. He didn’t say, “We’re going to make you help whether you like it or not.”

In Luke 12:13-15, Jesus is approached with a redistribution request. “Master, speak to my brother that he divideth the inheritance with me,” a man asks. Jesus replied, “Man, who made me a judge or divider over you?” Then he rebuked the petitioner for his envy.

Christianity is not about passing the buck to the government when it comes to relieving the plight of the poor. Caring for them, which means helping them overcome it, not paying them to stay poor or making them dependent upon the state, has been an essential fact in the life of a true Christian for 2,000 years. Christian charity, being voluntary and heartfelt, is utterly distinct from the compulsory, impersonal mandates of the state.

 

What Does Scripture Say?

 

But don’t take my word for it. Consider what the apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians 9:7: “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”

And in Jesus’s Parable of the Good Samaritan, the traveler is regarded as “good” because he personally helped the stricken man at the roadside with his own time and resources. If, instead, he had urged the helpless chap to wait for a government check to arrive, we would likely know him today as the Good-for-Nothing Samaritan.

Jesus clearly held that compassion is a wholesome value to possess, but I know of no passage in the New Testament that suggests it’s a value he’d impose by force or gunpoint—in other words, by socialist politics.

Socialists are fond of suggesting that Jesus disdained the rich, citing two particular moments: his driving of the money-changers from the Temple and his remark that it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven. In the first instance, Jesus was angry that God’s house was being misused. Indeed, he never drove a money-changer from a bank or a marketplace. In the second, he was warning that with great wealth, great temptations come, too.

These were admonitions against misplaced priorities, not class warfare messages.

 

Creating Wealth Is a Virtue—Not Redistributing It

 

In his Parable of the Talents, Jesus talks about a man who entrusts his wealth to three servants for a time. When the man returns, he learns that one of the servants safeguarded his share by burying it, the second put his share to work and multiplied it, and the third invested his and generated the greatest return of all. Who’s the hero in the parable? The wealth-creating third man. The first one is admonished, and his share is taken and given to the third.

That doesn’t sound very socialist, does it?

Likewise, in Jesus’s Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, the story upholds capitalist virtues, not socialist ones. When some workers complain that others were paid more, the employer rightfully defends the right of voluntary contract, private property, and, in effect, the law of supply and demand.

At Christmas time and throughout the year, Jesus would want each of us to be generous in helping the needy. But if you think he meant for politicians to do it with police power at twice the cost and half the effectiveness of private charity, you’re not reading the same New Testament I am.

 

-----------------

*Lawrence W. Reed is FEE's President Emeritus, Humphreys Family Senior Fellow, and Ron Manners Global Ambassador for Liberty, having served for nearly 11 years as FEE’s president (2008-2019). He is author of the 2020 book, Was Jesus a Socialist? as well as Real Heroes: Incredible True Stories of Courage, Character, and Conviction and Excuse Me, Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism. Follow on LinkedIn and Like his public figure page on Facebook. His website is www.lawrencewreed.com.

Old tactic of the Spiritism’s opponents

 

Old tactic of the Spiritism’s opponents

 

Marco Milani

 

(Text published in the magazine Dirigente Espírita, ed. 193, Jan/Feb 2023, p. 11-12)

  

                In June 1865, Allan Kardec published in the Spiritist Review the important article “New tactics of the Spiritism’s opponents”, in which he highlighted the discomfort generated by this emerging philosophy that broke with the decayed religious traditions established on blind faith and, above all, unmasked the illusory and alienating materialism, declaring it as its greatest antagonist.

                As Spiritism quickly disseminated its ideas and gained supporters and sympathizers in dozens of countries and in all social strata, it faced the strong egotistical resistance of those who saw their deepest convictions about reality being questioned or refuted.

                At the time, Kardec warned that the opponents were trying to compromise, ridicule and discredit the doctrine, surreptitiously sowing division and lighting the fuse of discord to stir up disturbance among the followers and guided:

 

“It is, therefore, a duty of all sincere and devoted spiritists to openly repudiate and disavow, in their name, all types of abuse that could compromise it, in order not to assume responsibility for them; to collude with the abuses would be to become an accomplice and provide weapons to our adversaries.”[1]

 

                 In addition to syncretic proposals that attempted to mix beliefs and mystical ideas in the teachings of the Spirits, other issues could serve as ammunition for the detractors. One of them was the attempt to impose a partisan appearance on the Spiritist Doctrine, as if Spiritism could be reduced to an appendix of political ideologies or regimes in vogue.

                In the Spiritist Review of February 1863, various attacks made by Catholic priests during their sermons were reported, accusing Spiritism of preaching the Division of the family, adultery, abortion and communism. About these facts, Kardec comments on the foolishness of these detractors for attributing to the Spiritist Doctrine what it, precisely, preaches the opposite.[2]

                Kardec stated that a serious study of Spiritism was enough to refute such accusations and further highlighted: “Who could believe that we preach communism after the instructions given about it in the speech published in full in the report of our trip in 1862?”[3]

                In that trip, Kardec addressed the Lyonnese workers quoting an enlightening and objective mediumistic message from Erasto about the materialistic deception expressed in utopian and totalitarian proposals.

 

“I have just uttered the word egalitarian. I think it's useful to dwell on it a bit, because we have not come to preach impractical utopias in your midst, because, on the contrary, we energetically reject anything that seems to be linked to the prescriptions of an antisocial communism. First of all, we are essentially propagandists of individual freedom, indispensable for the development of the incarnated. Consequently, we are declared enemies of everything that resembles these conventional legislations, which brutally annihilate individuals. Although I address an audience partially composed of craftsmen and proletarians, I know that their consciences, clarified by the radiations of the spiritist truth, have already rejected all contact with antissocial theories given with the support of the word equality.[4]

 

                Contrary to what some might suppose, out of bad faith or ignorance, Kardec never hesitated to emphasizing the active participation of the spiritist one in the direction of society, contributing to the improvement of human relations, but he never prescribed partisan or ideological manuals for the spontaneous exercise of solidarity and fraternity. The warning about totalitarian ideologies served as guidance on individual rights and choices, valuing free will and freedom of conscience.

                In the regular meetings of the Parisian Society of Spiritist Studies, monarchists, liberals and socialists sat side by side and what united them was the same spiritist ideal. Disagreements and passionate discussions about the models to guide and improve society were not topics to be discussed by its sympathizers in the face of the higher ideal of fraternal union among all, indiscriminately. On this issue, Kardec is positioned as follows:

 

I must still point out to you another tactic of our opponents, which is to try to compromise the spiritists, inducing them to move away from the true goal of the doctrine, which is morality, to address issues that are not within their scope and that, rightly, could awaken susceptibilities and mistrusts. Don't fall into this trap; carefully keep away from your meetings everything related to politics and irritating issues; with regard to this, discussions will only cause embarrassment, while no one will object to morality, as long as it is good.[5]

 

Almost 160 years later, the tactics of the Spiritism's opponents have aged, but not changed. Adapting to technological progress, the detractors continue to try to discredit the doctrine and foment dissent among the spiritists.

                The spread of syncretic practices, superstitious and mystical information, in addition to the rise of political-ideological infiltrations are recurrent and require conscious supporters to apply reasoned faith to separate the wheat from the chaff and openly repudiate these misrepresentations that have nothing new in their essence.

 

---------------------------------

[1] Spiritist Review, June/1865. New tactics of the Spiritism's opponents.

[2] Spiritist Review, February/1863. Sermons against Spiritism.

[3] Same.

[4] Spiritist Review, October/1861. Letter from Erastus to the Lyon Spiritists.

[5] Spiritist Review, February/1862. Response to the New Year message from the Lyon Spiritists.

 

Source: https://usesp.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/DE193.pdf

 

 

 

Lisbon and Voltaire: is everything well?

 

Lisbon and Voltaire: is everything well?

 

Marco Milani

 

(Text published in the newspaper Correio Fraterno – Edition 481 – May/June 2018)

 

On the morning of November 1, 1755, part of the population of Lisbon was occupying the streets and churches celebrating All Saints' Day. At the same time, a few hundred kilometers away, in the Atlantic Ocean, a strong seismic shock began a series of events that would painfully mark that date.

A tremor hit the Portuguese coast with violence. The earthquake was the prelude to what was yet to come. After the sudden retreat of the sea, huge waves devastated the low-lying areas of the city. Finally, a large-scale fire took days to be extinguished, consuming lives and goods, estimated at 60,000 fatalities.

About twenty days after that tragic event, the French Enlightenment philosopher François-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire, published a provocative text entitled Poem about the Lisbon disaster: or the examination of the axiom “everything is well”, questioning Leibniz’s ontological argument on divine providence.

How to explain the existence of a good and just God who allows or promotes human disasters? What crimes would have been committed by Portuguese children crushed under rubble along with their mothers?

These questions, however, reflect a discomfort that has always hovered in the philosophical environment about theistic dogmatism. Epicurus' paradox, formulated around 300 years before Christ, already presented a logical dilemma about the existence of evil and the qualities of God. In this paradox, it is stated that God could present, simultaneously, only two of the three characteristics: omniscience, omnipotence and benevolence.

If he were omniscient and omnipotent, he would have knowledge of evil and could extinguish it, but he would not be benevolent in allowing evil to exist.

If he were omnipotent and benevolent, then he could extinguish evil and, being good, he would want to eliminate it, but he would not do so because he didn't know where all the evil would be, so he wouldn't be omniscient.

If he were omniscient and benevolent, he would know where all evil was and would want to extinguish it, but since evil afflicts men, then he would not be omnipotent as he cannot extinguish evil even if he wanted to.

The paradox does not discuss the subjectivity present in the definitions of good and evil, but reflects the lack of understanding, facing divine attributes based on human experience. Different thinkers, at different times, have proposed answers to these questions, like Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, who stated that Man would be unable to reach the divine mysteries by using reason, but only by faith could he achieve this.

Voltaire's Poem on the Lisbon disaster also received a response. His countryman, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, wrote a letter in 1756 countering the skepticism and outrage expressed by the Enlightenment thinker. In addition to defending the perfection of Providence and the natural order of things that escape human understanding, Rousseau also pointed out that Man himself can act against himself, citing in the Portuguese case the dangerous constructions built recklessly to shelter many families that worsened the effects of the earthquake.

Not satisfied, Voltaire would take up the subject again in 1759, when he published one of his best-known works: Candide or Optimism. In this philosophical tale, with the Lisbon earthquake as a backdrop, the main character who gives the book its title is characterized as a naive young man who learns about Leibniz's optimism, but several tragic events make his worldview questioned. .

Voltaire passed away in 1778, leaving a legacy of criticism and mockery of religious beliefs and those who promoted the idea of divine natural order. However, Voltaire's cultural heritage is not just limited to these destructive attacks, but also includes appropriate contributions to reflection in political, social and economic fields. By fighting against absolutism and dogmatic fanaticism, he exalted the freedom of thought, civil liberties, and free trade, and was against state interference in people's lives and in the economy.

In the following century, Allan Kardec questioned the Spirits about the same issue of good and evil, and among other topics, about human misfortunes and divine justice.

The mediumistic answers obtained in questions 737 to 741 of The Spirits' Book recall some of Leibniz's and Rousseau's arguments, but supported by clarification on the evolutionary process of the spiritual being ar the expense of transitory matter. In short, what appears to be a punishment is, in fact, an opportunity for moral and intellectual improvement, both individually and collectively, a natural reflection of the evolutionary march in which Man finds himself and of his related needs. This order only makes sense by abandoning materialistic explanations or those that lead to church mysteries and embracing the principle of the plurality of human existences guided by unchanging natural laws, based on divine justice and love for the realization of the spiritual perfection that beings are susceptible to.

Evoked by Kardec in 1859 and in subsequent communications (see Spiritist Review Aug-Sep/1859, May/1862), Voltaire manifests himself as embittered by the course he took while embodied. He confesses to having let pride and sarcasm guide his actions and that he suffered from the harmful consequences he promoted by influencing many people, specifically on the religious aspect. Instead of illuminating minds, fighting the defects and vices of established religions, and exalting the perennial truth contained in the Christian message, he denied divine goodness and justice and became a victim of his own skeptical arrogance.

The spiritual perspective made Voltaire rethink his concepts about God and recognize the excellence of the model of virtue that humanity has in Jesus.

Today we benefit from the enlightenment that Spiritism offers, combining the reason that Voltaire valued so much with faith based on evidence and capable of moving mountains through individual freedom and responsibility. It is everything well.

Spiritist Books, Bookstores and Libraries

Spiritist Books, Bookstores and Libraries*

 

Marco Milani

  

        What do spiritist bookstores and libraries have in common? Books, of course. However, not every book found in bookstores can be found in libraries, and vice versa. And there’s a very simple reason for this. Bookstores and libraries have their own unique characteristics and must be structured and managed considering these peculiarities.

        In 1869, Allan Kardec proposed a catalog of books related to Spiritism to set up a themed library and recommended about two hundred books from his time, but took care to classify them into three groups: fundamental works, various works, and those outside of Spiritism, including some written by critics. Kardec thus signaled the initial need to know the fundamental works in order to understand the spiritist worldview, and also  proposed books that could contribute to the study of adepts on how certain subjects of interest were treated in related and popular works. Kardec also demonstrated the relevance of reflection on the arguments that the critics used to attack the doctrine. In short, Kardec indicated that the role of the spiritist library was to support the systematic study of Spiritism. This concept remains valid today, highlighting that modern books can also be made available in electronic format, favoring consultation and access to many works.

        Wouldn't the bookstore have the same role of supporting study? Certainly it also has this purpose, adding the fact that, in the eyes of any potential consumer, a spiritist bookstore offers spiritist books! It’s almost redundant to explore this point, but unfortunately we come up against something very serious and that has been harming the very proposal of doctrinal dissemination in some spiritist centers, which is the unfortunate assumption that the reader should read everything and it is up to him to separate the wheat from the chaff, i.e., to identify what is coherent or not with the doctrine... But if it’s a beginner reader or one with little doctrinal knowledge, how will they be able to do that? And it’s no use asking the salesperson if the book is good, interesting, etc., as it would be bad for the bookstore's image if the attendant said that this or that book is not suitable, despite being offered to the public. For the consumer, if the book is on display in a spiritist bookstore, it is because, logically, it deals with the spiritist theme and has gone through some selection criteria. In other words, potential users, especially beginners, trust the services and selection criteria of the spiritist center's bookstore.

        On the other hand, commercial appeal has made many bookstore managers prioritize the number of titles sold and not their respective quality offered. No one doubts that the bookstore can be an important source of revenue for the spiritist institution. But does it justify the absence of doctrinal criteria for making some work available to the reader? It is assumed that someone who buys a book wants to spend their money on something useful and not to end up with a book that does not meet their expectations. The problem is greater when the reader fails to perceive the conceptual inconsistency that he may be a victim in his readings...

        A relevant comparison is the following: what mother, purposely, would offer contaminated food to her children? So then, what spiritist leader, aware of his responsibilities, would offer books with doctrinal inconsistencies to the public of his bookstore? It is a relationship of trust and common sense.

 

Reference

Kardec, Allan. Catálogo racional para se fundar uma biblioteca espírita. São Paulo: Madras, 2004.

 

* Text originally published in the newspaper Correio Fraterno, edition 448, p.11, under the title "Does the beginner reader know how to discern what a good book is?"

 

Are there soulmates?

 Are there soulmates?

 

Marco Milani

 

One of the greatest sources of inspiration of this ludic concept is the Hermaphroditus Myth. This Greek narrative tells about beings with two heads four arms and four legs making up a third human gender both female and male. They were punished by Zeus for rebelling against the gods and cut apart on their backs and theses halves got lost and are always looking for their missing part.

 

To have someone in particular that would satisfy us totally in all our affective wants is an attractive idea. It creates expectations especially in those who consider themselves solitary. What’s really worrying however is the fact that this idea projects our own happiness onto another person.

 

As the “soulmates” concept is part of the popular imagery, the literary works that use this poetic figure can count with a good receptivity and reinforce the illusion that two individuals could complete one another and find happiness when united. Even admitting that the purpose of reading is not always that of enlightenment and serious studying , it is fundamental that one should be wary with the content of what one reads and transmits, to avoid being spreaders of fantasizing ideas.

 

This does not mean that novels and poems are not welcome. On the contrary, they possess valuable resources of people’s awareness and awakening, by expressing art and beauty. They can be the “open door” to doctrinaire study. However, Spiritism -- whose strength and authority rely on the universal agreement of its principles-- has clarity and objectivity as its essential qualities. Allan Kardec himself made the following comment on his personal characteristics:

 

“I am not a poet by nature, what I mostly look for, what pleases me most, what I most admire in others is clearness, neatness and precision, and far from sacrificing these to poetry, I could be accused of sacrificing poetic feeling to the rigidity of positive form. I have always preferred what speaks to the intelligence than what hits the imagination”. (Posthumous Works – 2nd part – The Spiritual Tiara).

 

Thus, if one sets aside the lyrics and search for real understanding, we realize that “soulmates” in its popular imagery would lead to some conceptual contradictions. If we would depend on the other “half”, when we are separated and we would then be incomplete and as such could not be considered as being individualities with all the relative perfection potential inherent to ourselves. It should be observed here that a particular and inevitable union between two souls does not exist because these souls depend on their level of evolution. The more evolved a Spirit is the more linked -- by similarity -- will it be to those who are in the same level of elevation. (The Spirits' Book question # 298-302).

 

Kardec’s lucid and rational attitude made him state that the “soulmates” theory should not be interpreted literally and he explains that the Spirits who use it do not belong to a high order of Spirits, but are only expressing their ideas according to the language they spoke in their corporeal life. He is against the hypothesis that two Spirits supposedly created one for the other should inevitably be reunited in eternity after having been separated during a more or less long period. (The Spirits' Book question #303a).

 

 Once discarded the idea of two souls’ predestinated union from their origin, it is relevant to stress that at our present stage of evolution we live the necessary experiences for our own moral and intellectual progress and in this situation are in contact with Spirits that cooperate with us directly or indirectly. This means that we are individualities that live collectively and try to strengthen the existing links of sympathy. This being so, there are Spirits who can help us more than others and with whom we have closer links of affection, but this does not mean that we are “soulmates linked by destiny”. We are evolving Spirits searching our own personal achievement through our own experiences and responsible for our own actions.

 

According to Fénelon (The Spirits' Book, Chapter XI, #9), the soul’s natural tendency is to look for affection and sympathy. Although usually crushed by selfishness, true love develops with the moral sense and intelligence and becomes the source of true and lasting affection. To practice the Law of Love as God wants it, it is necessary that little by little we arrive at loving all our brothers indistinctly.

 

Today we are only making our first steps towards a real understanding and the practice of love in its purest expression. Many are locked in the disrupting and interfering feeling of ownership and control of the other being. Dissensions and deceits spring up as a consequence of ill conducted desires of which we are the greatest victims. Facing this situation we look for a refuge in the world of illusions. We idealize. We delegate to others the responsibility of making us happy.

 

Gradually through our own self-knowledge we search the real happiness with greater self-assurance and determination assuming the responsibility of our own balance. To look at ourselves does not mean to adopt a selfish and proud attitude; on the contrary, it means to wake up and rush to the “good struggle” against our bad inclinations. Thinking things over make us understand that our neighbor has the same problems and the same opportunities than us and consequently those with whom we live cannot assume the responsibility of being the cause of our own happiness. We try then to stop being dependent on others and are then able to share our inner harmony with others.

 

The Earth is a precious school that enables us to be in contact with numberless souls with whom we have a greater or a lesser degree of sympathy and to learn from them all. And we are thus certainly in contact with those who are relevant to our advancement! And this is not destiny, it is attraction!

 

In the future we will continue to be with those that we love, but this circle of affections will increase proportionally with our level of evolution up to the top degree in the condition of Pure Spirits, where we love everybody indistinctly.

 

 

Possession and Obsession

 

Marco Milani

 

(Text published in the GEAE Bulletin nº 445 – October 2002)

 

Although naturally understandable to students of Spiritism, the following statements may seem strange to those who have not adequately delved into the subject: Possession is a possible phenomenon and this is not, invariably, an obsession.

This understanding requires a careful consultation of the Codification, as this is a subject that Kardec himself reviewed during his work and, faced with facts, developed the meaning that he had apparently established since 1857 in The Spirits' Book (SB). Only from 1863, in The Spiritist Review (SR), did the Codifier review the concept of possession, admitting its existence no longer as subjugation, but in its exact sense. About the verified case of Miss Julie (SR - Dec/1863), Kardec expressed himself as follows:

 

“We have said that there were no possessed (see SB-473, for example) in the ordinary sense of the word, but only subjugated. We return to this absolute assertion because now it is demonstrated to us that there can be true possession, that is, substitution, althought partial, of an errant Spirit to an incarnate one.”

 

Kardec, as a serious and responsible researcher, retook a concept that he initially considered already defined, but that was evidenced, through proven facts and rational scrutiny, with a different meaning. This is an example of the dynamism of the Doctrine, which can only occur when validated by reason and irrefutably demonstrated.

To better differentiate, we must conceptualize these terms as we find them in The Genesis (GEN - Chapter XIV - items 45 to 49):

 

a) Obsession is the persistent action that a bad Spirit exercises over an individual. It presents very different characters, from simple moral influence without noticiable external signs to complete disturbance of the organism and mental faculties.

 

b) Possession is the action that a Spirit exercises over an incarnated individual, temporarily replacing him in his own material body. This action is not permanent considering that the molecular union of the perispirit to the body occurs only at the moment of conception.

 

The difference in the communication process between psychophony and possession phenomena can also be evidenced. In the first, the communicating Spirit transmits his thoughts to the incarnated one and he is in charge of retransmitting according to his own resources; in the second case, it is the disembodied one who directly uses (possesses) the material body and transmits his message (the incarnated Spirit moves away but still remains attached to his physical envelope).

Clarifying objectively that possession can be promoted by a good Spirit, we find (GEN – Chap. XIV – item 48):

 

“Obsession is always the result of the action of an evil spirit. Possession can be deed of a good Spirit who wants to speak and, to make more impression on his listeners, borrows the body of an incarnated person, which voluntarily lends it to him as if lending a garment. This is done without any disturbance or discomfort and, during this time, the Spirit is free as in a state of emancipation and frequently remains at the side of his substitute to listen to him.”

 

Obviously, possession can also occur through an evil Spirit and in this case it caracterizes an obsessive process. This occurs when the victim does not have the moral strength to resist the aggression and is forced to temporarily move away from his body (note: it is important to emphasize once again that at these moments the victim remains connected to the body but without his control).

Considering the present moral level of humanity, it is not surprising that there are many more cases of obsessive possessions than those with edifying purposes.

Spiritism, once again, sheds light on evils still considered by the materialistic sciences as having a pathological cause. Without disregarding this possibility (organic abnormality) the Spiritist Doctrine makes us aware of other sources of human miseries, maintained by the moral fragility of beings. Intelligence and Love are the weapons to combat imbalances.

They usually refer to individual experiences (such as that of Miss Julie, mentioned earlier) but Kardec also reports occurrences of collective possession (see SR – 1862/63 – cases in Morzine and Tananarive).

Thus, contributing to the real understanding of this process, we must distinguish between the phenomena of possession and obsession. Possession can occur and can be good or bad; obsession is always bad. Therefore, not all possession is an obsession.

 

Theoretical coherence within Spiritism - Interview with Marco Milani

 

Theoretical coherence within Spiritism

O Consolador - Y 13, n.614 – Apr 14, 2019

Interview with Marco Milani

by Orson Peter Carrara

To be coherent has become a conscious duty

The thought above is from our fellow Spiritist and today’s guest, Marco Antonio Figueiredo Milani Filho, better known as Marco Milani(photo).

Milani was born in the Brazilian city of São Paulo and lives not far away, in Holambra. He became a Spiritist in 1988. He is an economist, university professor and an active member of the Union of Spiritist Societies of the State of São Paulo.

In this interview, he focuses on the issue of coherence within Spiritism.

What is your assessment of the expression “theoretical coherence” within the context of Spiritism?

The word coherence comes from Latin and means connection or cohesion. In its wider sense, it bears the idea of uniformity and reason within a group of ideas. Someone who is coherent is able to express his or her thoughts in a logical manner, enabling others to understand clearly and without contradictions that person’s speech or attitudes. So, people who follow any school of thought should express with consistency the principles and values of the system they have embraced. The same applies to Spiritism. A Spiritist understands, respects and puts into practice through his or her examples the Teachings of the Spirits as in the works of Allan Kardec.

When are we able to be truly coherent with the principles of Spiritism?

We cannot obviously expect the same level of maturity, understanding, and experience regarding the principles of Spiritism from all followers. But coherence is present when someone who follows Spiritism puts into practice its principles according to his or her levels of understanding. From those who take on leadership and management responsibilities in the Spiritist Movement, however, it is expected at least the capacity to guide and direct those who attend the events and meetings with a reasonable degree of assertiveness and theoretical knowledge.

Please give us some examples of behavior or practices that are not coherent with the true principles of Spiritism.

All ideas or practices that clash with the Teachings of Spiritism, which have been tested against the principles of universality and have been described by Allan Kardec, can be considered to be incoherent. Among them are chromotherapy, apometry, rituals within Spiritist Centres, the idolatry of mediums and speakers, dismissing science as a crucial element in the progress of Spiritist knowledge and a church-like posture that encourages blind faith. These are some of many examples.

What is the fundamental aspect of theoretical coherence within Spiritism?

We must study the works of Allan Kardec constantly so we can put them into practice very quickly. That does not in any way mean freezing the development of the theory within Spiritism. It is, instead, an essential requirement to understand the theoretical body of Spiritism and validate any thoughts or considerations about its basic principles. As the Spirit of Truth told us in his message that is in Chapter 6 of The Gospel According to Spiritism, we must consider carefully all the things that are put before us in order to avoid mixing up utopias and fantasies with the truth. We can read anything, but we must have the theoretical background to compare it with the Teachings in the works of Kardec.

As Spiritist citizens, who study the works and take part in Spiritist activities, what guidelines should we use in order to remain coherent with the Teachings?

We must be committed with serious and consistent studying of the principles and values of Spiritism, putting those ideas into practice in family, with friends, at work and in every social interaction we have.

Is there a specific item in the principles of Spiritism that can guide our studies?

Yes, reasoned faith. We have spent many incarnations subjugated by doctrines and philosophies that imposed their principles on us. They were aimed at shaping individuals and ended up violating their consciences. Spiritism is an emancipating doctrine, which comes from a time when humankind was already mature enough to break with those coercive habits and costumes of the past. It has freed individuals from the shackles of ignorance about the world they live in. When people take on full responsibility for their destiny, the consequences of their acts will be in accordance with this new situation. To be coherent has become a conscious duty.

Is there anything else you would like to add?

Modern technologies enable intense social interactions on social media, facilitating the dissemination of Spiritist information. The stronger the background and the theoretical knowledge we have, the easier it will be to remain coherent in our messages in those new virtual media. The easier will be to have a positive impact and the more difficult it will be to make mistakes and express wrong ideas and thoughts. Let’s be coherent! To be coherent does not mean you are not allowed to disagree with the Spirits or question what they say. Theoretical coherence in Spiritism is, essentially, a commitment with the truth based on reason and facts.

Translation:

Leonardo Rocha - l.rocha1989@gmail.com