Comments on: Rebirth Spiritualism/ Theosophy http://www.spiritualcritiques.com Sat, 14 Jan 2012 13:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Jessica http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/explanations-of-new-age-movement/rebirth-of-spiritualism-or-theosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-8020 Jessica Mon, 09 May 2011 21:02:43 +0000 http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/?page_id=82#comment-8020 Your denouncement of Spiritualism due to fraud is inaccurate. Yes, Maggie Fox did say that the spirit raps she and her sister were producing were actually fabricated. But she later came out and rescinded that statement. The only reason she made it in the first place was because she had resorted to alcoholism once her husband, explorer Elisha Cane, died, and had fallen into an impoverished state. She was offered money by skeptics if she would denounce her manifestations as fraud. Also, Maggie Fox did not create the Spiritualist movement. Andrew Jackson Davis did. His doctrines hold very true to the New Ageists' doctrines, and it would do you some good to read his Spiritual Declaration of Independence. The Fox sisters were merely the first mediums to gain mass publicity due to spirit manifestations. Lastly, Spiritualists did and still do have an interest in "helpful body therapies" and also "psychological theories." They utilize the laying on of hands to heal. Spiritual healers raise their own energy to meet the energy of the spirits, channel their own energy to repair the energy of their patients, and they also read energy. Spiritualists are always trying to understand their own subjective experiences in relation to society around them. Also, William James derived his theory of "double-consciousness" amidst his psychical research. Your denouncement of Spiritualism due to fraud is inaccurate. Yes, Maggie Fox did say that the spirit raps she and her sister were producing were actually fabricated. But she later came out and rescinded that statement. The only reason she made it in the first place was because she had resorted to alcoholism once her husband, explorer Elisha Cane, died, and had fallen into an impoverished state. She was offered money by skeptics if she would denounce her manifestations as fraud.

Also, Maggie Fox did not create the Spiritualist movement. Andrew Jackson Davis did. His doctrines hold very true to the New Ageists’ doctrines, and it would do you some good to read his Spiritual Declaration of Independence. The Fox sisters were merely the first mediums to gain mass publicity due to spirit manifestations.

Lastly, Spiritualists did and still do have an interest in “helpful body therapies” and also “psychological theories.” They utilize the laying on of hands to heal. Spiritual healers raise their own energy to meet the energy of the spirits, channel their own energy to repair the energy of their patients, and they also read energy. Spiritualists are always trying to understand their own subjective experiences in relation to society around them. Also, William James derived his theory of “double-consciousness” amidst his psychical research.

]]> By: hawlemnyair http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/explanations-of-new-age-movement/rebirth-of-spiritualism-or-theosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-57 hawlemnyair Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:28:42 +0000 http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/?page_id=82#comment-57 i also feel i should mention that channeling is not new, i know you didnt say it was, shamans (as one of many examples) have been inducing trances, causing hypnotic states and "channeling" for what ever it really is for millenia. i also feel i should mention that channeling is not new, i know you didnt say it was, shamans (as one of many examples) have been inducing trances, causing hypnotic states and “channeling” for what ever it really is for millenia.

]]> By: hawlemnyair http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/explanations-of-new-age-movement/rebirth-of-spiritualism-or-theosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-56 hawlemnyair Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:15:40 +0000 http://www.spiritualcritiques.com/?page_id=82#comment-56 The new ages "new religion/spirituality paradigm" is eclectic. It is inclusive, an openness and acceptance of diverse spirituality. That said the magical orders have just as much influence on it as anyone else. For example the Golden Dawn. Theosophy has over the last hundred years just been more accepting of the spotlight. It helps that Theosophy holds artists in high regards, not in the superficial scientology kind of way. Many Theosophists belong to other organizations that search for or teach spiritual truths, as an example one of my favorites Manly P. Hall who was also a freemason. I am happy about what you have said about channeling, the new age is actually barely about channeling. But none the less it is about all of the parts being a whole. This is important people forget that life is designed with many facets. They say life is love and all of these other cliches but life is varying degrees of all things that we comprehend and more. I personally accept spiritualism as something that has been going on for well beyond the beginning of the works of H.P. Blavatsky. Even in the Abrahamic religions people have exorcised demons and such. Also through out history there has been a long list of people who suspected connection to non corporeal life while really experiencing forms of what we call schizophrenia. I am sure the examples could go on. The part about science is funny. Mostly because prior to the 70s most scientists that did something were occultists. Newton wrote more on esoteric matters then he did science. When i brought up with my father the cyclic nature of the universe from bang to crunch and over again and again, i could not get it through to him that this concept is well known in the "occult" circles. The point being Theosophy is great and very much influential but olcott and blavatsky have never claimed that what they are teaching is new and that what they have said is that the purpose is to bring back a much older understanding. That the "new age" is literally just the next aeon, the next step in the galactic zodiac which is our way to measure the process of the universe and which we are supposedly under a form of influence from. Which the "new age" spirituality is a reactionary bi-product of the previosuly mentioned influence. The new ages “new religion/spirituality paradigm” is eclectic. It is inclusive, an openness and acceptance of diverse spirituality. That said the magical orders have just as much influence on it as anyone else. For example the Golden Dawn. Theosophy has over the last hundred years just been more accepting of the spotlight. It helps that Theosophy holds artists in high regards, not in the superficial scientology kind of way. Many Theosophists belong to other organizations that search for or teach spiritual truths, as an example one of my favorites Manly P. Hall who was also a freemason.

I am happy about what you have said about channeling, the new age is actually barely about channeling. But none the less it is about all of the parts being a whole. This is important people forget that life is designed with many facets. They say life is love and all of these other cliches but life is varying degrees of all things that we comprehend and more.

I personally accept spiritualism as something that has been going on for well beyond the beginning of the works of H.P. Blavatsky. Even in the Abrahamic religions people have exorcised demons and such. Also through out history there has been a long list of people who suspected connection to non corporeal life while really experiencing forms of what we call schizophrenia. I am sure the examples could go on.

The part about science is funny. Mostly because prior to the 70s most scientists that did something were occultists. Newton wrote more on esoteric matters then he did science. When i brought up with my father the cyclic nature of the universe from bang to crunch and over again and again, i could not get it through to him that this concept is well known in the “occult” circles.

The point being Theosophy is great and very much influential but olcott and blavatsky have never claimed that what they are teaching is new and that what they have said is that the purpose is to bring back a much older understanding. That the “new age” is literally just the next aeon, the next step in the galactic zodiac which is our way to measure the process of the universe and which we are supposedly under a form of influence from. Which the “new age” spirituality is a reactionary bi-product of the previosuly mentioned influence.

]]>