Not all serious communication
is true

In the study of The Mediums’ Book published in the same edition one of the issues proposed for discussion it concerns the examination of communications coming from the spiritual world. Should this be done? "Yes, we must submit all communications to a scrupulous examination, analyzing the thoughts and expressions as we do when it comes to judging a literary work, rejecting without hesitation all that sins against logic and common sense, everything that belies the character of the communicating Spirit. Thus, we discourage deceiving spirits, which will eventually retire, once convinced that they cannot deceive us. We repeat that this way is the only way, but it is infallible, since there is no bad communication that resists rigorous analysis." (The Mediums’ Book, item 266.)

There are, as we know, reasons for this. To understand this, let’s recall that in the same work Kardec classifies mediumistic communications into four groups: coarse, frivolous, serious and instructive.

It is considered a rude communication when it is conceive in terms that it shocks the decorum, which clearly shows that it comes from spirits of low spiritual condition, covered of material impurities, and in which it is no different from those from coarse and vicious men.

Frivolous communications are emanating from frivolous, trifling spirits or mocking, who give no importance to what they say. As they don’t contain anything unseemly, those communications sometimes please certain people who have fun with them, because they find pleasure in vain confabulations in which much is said and nothing is told.

Spoken serious communications are balanced on the subject and high in the way. It happens that not all spirits are equally enlightened and there are things that communicator can ignore and about he might be mistaken in good faith. On the face of it, not always a serious communication is true because, despite its seriousness, its contents may be false or misleading.

This is why the truly superior Spirits recommend that we submit all communications to the test of reason and the most rigorous logic, because only then we can know if such communications fall within the concept of instructional communications, which are, by definition, true since it cannot be instructive what is not true.

As we saw, therefore, the examination of communications should be scrupulous and rigorous, with the clear objective of removing any possibility of admitting a liar information, this recommendation was greatly enhanced with this famous and renowned spiritual teacher observation made by Erasto: "Better repels ten truths than admits one lie, one false theory." (Work cited, chapter 20, item 230.)

If we apart ourselves from the guideline to which we refer, we will be easy playthings of crooks from the spiritual world and capable therefore of gross mystification, which it has unfortunately been seen in numerous published works said spirits in recent years in our midst.