There are a good number of people in the spiritist movement who tend to criticize the religious aspect that the doctrine took on when it left France and entered Brazilian soil, back in the 19th century.

It is true that Kardec never wanted Spiritism to become a conventional religion, with all the rituals and hierarchical fields that traditional religions bring. Kardec's idea has always been of religion in the sense of union around a common cause, showing that feeling is the connection that joins and rejoins the human being with the divine and not rites, images, and objects.

Terefore, remembering Kardec and his thesis, there has always been a group of people in the spiritist movement who criticize and criticized this religious bias adopted by Spiritism in Brazil.

But this point existed, exists and will continue to exist and will not take away the legitimacy of an individual in feeling and calling themselves a spiritist for this reason, whether the critics want it or not, especially because Kardec has a very broad definition of what it means to be a spiritist, even making comments about individuals who are spiritists without knowing it.

It's been a while since I read a work by Sandra Jacqueline Stoll – “Religion, science, or self-help? Paths of Spiritism in Brazil,” in which the author addresses not only the development of Spiritism from a religious perspective, but also in the field of self-help and, still, in a science or pseudoscience, all this starting from 3 historical personalities of the spiritist movement.

In the religious field, the author places the figure of Chico Xavier as the central point. Chico, coming from Catholicism, took, according to the researcher's work, to Spiritism his strong Catholic upbringing, his monastic lifestyle and detached from material goods, his respect for the saints and unrestricted obedience to his spiritual guide, Emmanuel. A personality like Chico Xavier certainly influences an endless number of people to follow him, as his examples speak very loudly. Chico, for the author, is one of those largely responsible for Spiritism entering more deeply into the terrain of religion in Brazil.

The other two personalities are Luiz Gasparetto and Waldo Vieira. Let's begin with Waldo Vieira. Chico's partner in many mediumistic works, Waldo, at a given moment, breaks with Chico and Spiritism and pursues a “solo career”. For the author, Waldo Vieira, by founding Conscientiology and by being a doctor, aims to develop the scientific field of Spiritism, and even after breaking with Spiritism, his name is, due to the work already carried out, directly linked to the doctrine codified by Kardec. So, Waldo, over time, gained followers who sought to follow him in his desire to give a scientific tone to the studies of metaphysical phenomena.

And finally, the author talks about Luiz Gasparetto, who with his work in mediumistic painting and his television programs and insertion in the media in a more powerful way, gave it a self-help character to Spiritism, a more pop view and opened up, from there, a dialogue with another type of audience.

It is true that, like Waldo Vieira, Gasparetto and his family also broke with Spiritism, something that Chico did not do, but it is undeniable that the names of Gasparetto and Waldo Vieira will always be associated with Spiritism.

The author talks about personalities in Brazilian soil who, in one way or another, provided a very different vision than Kardec's original proposal. The fact is that today's spiritist proposal, based on Brazilian soil and which, according to the author, has these 3 figures as a starting point with regard to the paths that Spiritism has taken in Brazil, differs on several points from the original proposal prepared by Kardec. And it makes sense that the paths taken by Spiritism in Brazil are not the same as those traced by Kardec on French soil, as the differences are already established in the temporal aspect, in addition, the cultures are totally different and, furthermore, the profile of the followers is also diverse. This is just to talk about these three points, so it would even be strange if Kardec's proposal remained as it was when it was created in the 19th century.

This is why, and now I dare to express my opinion, the criticisms of some fellow spiritists that Spiritism has taken a religious turn are idle. And I say idle because, in the face of an atmosphere so different from the French and so plural in its aspects, the idea would hardly remain without any modification. Just translating from one language to another can create some gaps, let us imagine this in the time-culture-academic and social formation field of a society. It would be unlikely, therefore, that Spiritism would not receive influences from its most robust leaders, as in the case of the 3 personalities analyzed by the researcher.

Considering this and other studies, I advocate the thesis – again I opine – that we can, yes, call Kardec's proposal Kardecism, given that Spiritism, although many argue that it is one, unfolded into ideas which do not always converge with their origin, although they have points in common. (*)

The intention here, however, is not a discussion of a moral order, of right or wrong, of knowing who is right or not, but simply to offer elements so that one can think about the differences between the original idea and the idea that established itself here in Brazil based on these 3 personalities.

The most important thing, however, is to rescue the main concept brought by Kardec and the Spirits: the moral improvement of man who, through his individual actions, causes the transformation of institutions and the world. Without remembering this fundamental point, any path that Spiritism or spiritisms follow becomes meaningless.

(*) Editor's Note: Regarding the idea that there would be a doctrine of Allan Kardec, or the so-called Kardecism, the coder himself wrote: “There is this capital difference between Spiritism and other philosophical systems: that these are all the work of men, more or less enlightened, whereas, in what you attribute to me, I do not have the merit of inventing a single principle. It is said: the philosophy of Plato, Descartes, Leibnitz; one can never say: the doctrine of Allan Kardec; and this, fortunately, because what value can a name have in a matter of such gravity?” (See What is Spiritism, Chapter I, Second Dialogue: The Skeptic.)