If a doctor engages in malpractice, the practitioner is accountable to professional organizations. However, if a ghost hunter is accused of misconduct, there is no regulatory board, no code of conduct, and no guide to good ghost practices. What recourse does the client have when the poltergeists come back or the ghosts don’t leave?

Following accusations of unethical and illegal practices, the ethics of ghost hunting is currently a controversial topic among the paranormal community. In an effort to legitimize the practice, some ghost hunters have attempted to create a set of standards and ethics. Why, even the pet psychic community has a code of ethics!¹

Do Ghost Hunters Need a Hippocratic Oath?

To address this need, “Investigation Morality” in Haunted Times presents a protocol for ghost hunting. This consists of a superficial list of obvious rules: respect private property, no illegal drug use, no intoxication, no discriminatory language. Strangely, the article then creates procedures of how to capture photographs of orbs and tips for recording electronic voice phenomena. Then the list of “standards” starts sounding like a playground warning: “There will be no running or horseplay at any time during an investigation. This type of behavior does not befit an investigator and it does not give the proper respect to the place or owner.”²

Creating a code of ethics obscures the fact that ghost hunting is the problem itself. The very beliefs, practices, claims, conclusions, and cures of ghost hunters are often unethical. Is it simply unethical for ghost hunting groups to investigate at all?

Ghost hunting is hardly a civil right, but anyone can do it. Indeed, it is encouraged by “haunted” restaurants, hotels, and other businesses that thrive on their folklore and often rely on the bias of ghost hunters. Many “haunted” sites are public places. Within certain hours, cemeteries are open to visitors whether they want to mourn by a graveside, dangle a pendulum over a grave, or attempt to raise a spirit from beneath it.

The potential ethical problems arise when a troupe of ghost hunters forms a group, sets themselves up as a “business,” advertises their spurious “services,” attracts “clients,” and sets foot into private houses, even with the consent or invitation of their residents. It’s like phoning your local Kingdom Hall and inviting a few Jehovah’s Witnesses into your home…

Ghost hunting is an industry today. Inspired by the plethora of reality TV shows, ghost hunting groups are as popular today as video shops were in the 1990s. There are potentially thousands of these groups nationally. In one informal online search, an estimated 140 paranormal groups were found in Denver, Colorado, alone.³ A few of these groups even claim nonprofit status.

These groups exist because there is a need, however illegitimate it may often be. The need is not only provoked by these TV shows but stems from popular beliefs. When members of the public fear their businesses and homes are haunted, they contact these paranormal groups; they don’t come to us. From skeptics they expect a lack of sympathy and ridicule. From believers they expect sympathy and similar belief systems. When they should want fact, they seek familiarity. But the assurance is that these teams are comprised of ghost hunters who claim to be “professional,” “trained,” and “qualified.”

PhD (Ghost Hunting)

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

Put simply, none of us are “qualified.” There are no ghost hunting qualifications. There is no apprenticeship, training, course, or degree needed to become a ghost hunter, ghost chaser, paranormal investigator, or skeptical investigator of the paranormal. That is, there are no legitimate courses. Ghost Chasers International and other organizations offer courses that ensure you will become a “Certified Ghost Hunter,”⁴ if not certifiable…

By this description, no one is “unqualified” either, but some are more unqualified than others. Some professions can be more relevant to the field: physicists can explain the way the natural world works; historians can compare claims of dates, people, and places against records; and electricians can explain strange behavior caused by faulty circuits. Even the infamous plumbers of television’s TAPS⁵ can bring to bear specialist knowledge…until they go beyond their knowledge base.

It is important that the investigator doesn’t venture beyond his or her area of expertise. Unfortunately, it is venturing beyond their area of expertise for some ghost hunters to investigate at all.

All investigators are varying degrees of amateur. For most, it’s a haphazard hobby. No degree in physics or “metaphysics” will prepare someone to investigate the paranormal. It takes many people from many different backgrounds to piece together paranormal puzzles; provided all players are playing the same game.

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

There is no professional organization, regulatory body, union, or code of ethics to regulate ghost hunting research and practices. Should such courses and resources exist? Probably not; ghost hunting is not a structured field or standardized practice. It is based in legend and myth, and many claims involve the paranormal interpretation of natural phenomena. To date, there is no solid evidence for the existence of ghosts.

Ghost hunting seems to be the alchemy of our day.

The (Not So) Scientific Method

Ghost hunting is not a science, but any claim can be studied scientifically. By and large, investigating the paranormal is a legitimate study studied illegitimately.

There is no formal or rigorous model or methodology to investigating claims of hauntings. There is no one right way to approach it but many wrong ways. Ghost hunting can and should employ the scientific method, but most hunters don’t, or even worse, they do … but badly.

It is not field work when the data consists of photographs of orbs, recordings of electronic voice phenomena, and anecdotal evidence of ghost sightings. It’s not the scientific method when the premise is that ghosts exist.

It is not experimental research when dubious tools are used. Some devices are bogus: the “Telephone to the Dead,” a bad radio that reputedly receives garbled messages from the deceased that can be “translated” for a price.⁶ Some equipment is overkill: using a Geiger counter to find spirits is like using a concrete mixer to blend cake batter (and an imaginary cake at that). Some instruments are irrelevant: as the name suggests, Electromagnetic Field Detectors measure electromagnetic fields, not ghosts. Thermometers, ion meters, and motion sensors were not designed for the purposes of ghost hunting.

Just because someone is using scientific equipment does not mean they are using the scientific method.

Diagnosis: Paranormal

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

Following this fundamentally flawed experimentation, it is not conclusive when the ghost hunters pronounce a location “haunted.” Belief often gets in the way of reality, and it’s easier to have blind faith than to undertake double-blind tests. Ghost hunters and clients often live in a supernatural symbiosis. The claims justify the existence of the ghost hunters, and the ghost hunters substantiate the claims, which leads to confirmation bias. It’s often the ghost hunters themselves who bring the ghosts.

Occasionally, paranormal cases are driven by underlying physical or mental health conditions, which the ghost hunter is incapable of discerning unless he or she moonlights as a medical doctor, psychologist, or psychiatrist. And unless they are the client’s chosen or assigned therapist, it’s not ethical for them to become involved at all even if they are a licensed therapist. To corroborate these claims is unconscionable, and to attempt to resolve these cases is dangerous; the ghost hunter is sorely out of his or her depth.

To be truly ethical, ghost hunters should avoid private investigations and avoid becoming embroiled in the personal lives of others.

Finally, once the ghost hunters have “diagnosed” a site as haunted, it is not ethical for them to attempt to “cure” the still-alleged phenomena. Some paranormal groups enlist psychics, demonologists, and other paranormal practitioners to “treat” hauntings with protective rituals, ghost clearings, cleansing ceremonies, blessings, exorcisms, and other Hollywood cures. “Curing” a haunting is at best a placebo for the apparent victim and at worst a fraud.

An investigation should aim to solve a mystery, not claim to be curative. The goals in investigating claims of the paranormal should be to establish whether or not there is a claim, to examine the claim carefully and logically, and hopefully to explain the phenomena. Sometimes our job is simply to accept explanations as they are found, as mundane as they may sound in comparison to the claim.

The simplest explanations can be the most difficult to accept by those who are already convinced of the presence of the paranormal.

Ghost hunting is fraught with potential ethical concerns for all parties involved. The ghost hunter and clients faces legal, moral, and safety issues. The locations are vulnerable to vandalism, theft, and damage. Then there are the more intangible dangers of ghost hunting: the destruction of history, the creation of pseudoscience, and the misrepresentation of the natural world as supernatural.

Perhaps ghost hunters don’t need a code of ethics because no one needs “ghost hunters.”

References:

1. Code of Ethics for Animal Communication. Available at http://www.herbsandanimals.com/codeofethics.html (accessed November 6, 2009).
2. Schill, Brian. 2009. Investigation Morality: Moral Dilemma—Investigating Cemeteries and MCIs. Haunted Times 4, no. 2.
3. Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society. Available at http://www.rockymountainparanormal.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
4. Ghost Chasers International. Available at http://www.ghosthunter.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
5. The Atlantic Paranormal Society. Available at http://www.the-atlantic-paranormal-society.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
6. The Telephone to the Dead. Available at http://thetelephonetothedead.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).

New age spiritualism has its origins in the nineteenth century spiritualism movement that introduced the world to mediums, channeling, Ouija boards, and séances (and paranormal fraud). Today, spirituality encompasses a diverse range of beliefs and practices.

Is New Age Spiritualism a Religion or a Gateway to Leaving Religion?

Spiritualism in and of itself might not be religion, but it can include religion. Spiritualist beliefs often integrate facets of philosophy, culture, jargon, and rituals from historical religions blended with pseudoscience and the paranormal (like voodoo). Spiritualism draws mainly from Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism but also indigenous and other faiths.

Spiritualist beliefs can be polytheistic or monotheistic, and the theistic higher being could be a God, Goddess, Creator, Supreme Being, or Omnipotent Presence. However, spiritualism is not invariably theist. For those who perceive themselves as nontheistic but still “spiritual,” spiritualist beliefs are compatible with atheism. For these believers, the nontheistic higher power could be the Cosmos, Chi, Prana, Love, Light, or Life Force.

Spiritualism is often conceptualized as religion, much as atheism is, because the structure of religion is our comparative cognitive model. However, there is no clear-cut continuum of belief to nonbelief. There are parallels because spiritualism is a belief system, but it is eclectic, unstructured, dynamic, and idiosyncratic. People who practice some form of spiritualism might describe themselves as spiritual persons, but they wouldn’t necessarily employ spiritualist as a label of self-identification or spiritualism as a designation for their beliefs.

Without denominations or sects, spiritualism is composed of loose communities that often evade classification. Alternatively, there can be in-group categorization, such as the theory of homeopathy or the various schools of yoga. This broadness and factionalism gives rise to the continual emergence of new beliefs, like psychic medium Sylvia Browne’s “religion,” the Society of Novus Spiritus.

Many proponents value spiritual beliefs for this very lack of labelling and rigid structure. It is religion without a rule book. There is no unified theology, no universally defining characteristics nor collective history. There is no doctrine. The holy book of spiritualism is whatever self-help book is currently on The New York Times Best Seller list. The priests and popes of spiritualism are authors and celebrities, including fire-walking motivational mentor Tony Robbins, psychic medium John Edward, and Wayne Dyer and Phil McGraw, the prophets with PhDs.

The intersection of religion and spiritualism is often mysticism. Customs of the Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches, such as speaking in tongues, divination and healing through the Holy Spirit, are also spiritualist practices. But there is no single spiritual House of Worship; the temporary “church” is the yoga class or reiki workshop. Although there is no formalized liturgical service, spiritualism is often ritualistic. Advocates of spiritualism enact their beliefs and petition the powers not only with prayer but other forms of intercession, including meditation, mantras, Pilates, and positive affirmations.

Instead of entrance to Heaven, spiritualist beliefs have more esoteric goals of attaining enlightenment, consciousness, awareness, oneness, and mindfulness. Depending on cultural preference, its goal is an individualist spiritual quest to find your true self or is collectivist: you become part of the Greater Whole or Overmind.

Spiritualism offers not only salvation for the soul but also Chicken Soup for the Soul.¹ It is concerned with mind, body, and spirit and promises a practical function. It is a religion of self-help that preaches to its parishioners about alternative medicine, aging, activism, diet, environmentalism, relationships, art, music, finance, career, peace, politics, psychology, science, sexuality, quality of life, and the afterlife.

God tells us to “do unto others as we would have them do unto us,” but He can’t help you lose weight. Spiritualism is more holistic than holy and claims to treat a bizarre range of “life issues”: it teaches us how to develop confidence, read body language, interpret our dreams, boost brain power, develop our ESP, overcome stress, navigate gender differences, enjoy better sex, cure impotence, look ten years younger, win friends, and influence people.

God helps those who help themselves, but religion is often about fate and acceptance of one’s lot. Spiritualism doesn’t wait for God to reveal His plan; a psychic can do that. Nostradamus and the Bible Code provide us with prophecies (that are interpreted subjectively). Intuitives, sensitives, and astrologers supposedly offer us glimpses into the future (using cold reading). Why wait for God to remember you when your life will improve in the time it takes to read Enjoy Life and Be Happy in 30 Seconds?²

Spiritualism is instant karma! New age books are replete with spiritual quick fixes to transform your life—for awhile. Religion seems to be about the power wielded over us, but spiritualism promises to empower, affording us control over our lives. Advocates promise that reading their books and attending their lectures will be a life-changing experience…for a price.

For Mormon Elders and Jehovah’s Witnesses, their faith is free. It is “good news” to be shared, be it door-to-door or from the pulpit. Bibles are usually complimentary, and you will even find one in your hotel room should you forget to pack your copy. However, spiritualist promoters often have a we-know-something-you-don’t-know manner, although they are prepared to sell you this knowledge. The keepers of the secret have been silenced, until now. It’s a conspiracy. Like Kevin Trudeau’s books, this is information “they don’t want you to know about.”³

Celebrities become missionaries for their beliefs. If you loved their movies and music, now try their religion. Madonna promotes the Kabbalah, and Tom Cruise promotes Scientology. Spiritualism is also faddish. The latest products and techniques are hailed as miracles until they fail to work even as placebos. In a spiritualist treadmill, new concepts soon replace old ones. Believers go from wearing copper bracelets to magnetic necklaces and following macrobiotic diets to food combining, low-carb, Superfoods, and clean eating. Tahitian Noni Juice and Himalayan Goji Berries are modern snake oils claimed to be the elixirs of youth and eternal life. Hair shirts and self-flagellation are penance for sin, but in spiritualism the punishments are “treatments” of detox. The eleven-hour sessions of yoga, colloidal silver, ear candling, cupping, purgation, colonic irrigation, and nasal irrigation with a Neti Pot are so bad they must be good for you.

Like a cup of chamomile tea, spiritualism is soothing. It tells us what we want to hear. We have past lives and will continue to be reincarnated. We don’t die; our souls are in transition. There’s a spiritual afterlife where our guardian angels watch over us and protect us. Having passed on and crossed over to the Other Side, our loved ones await us there. Psychic mediums claim they receive messages from our friends and family if we’re satisfied with the stock message, “Your mother loves you.”

Spiritual beliefs can give people false hope. Alternative therapists claim to be able to cure the incurable. For thousands of dollars, a clinic in Tijuana guarantees to cure patients of cancer. For thousands more, a peculiar zapper device will supposedly heal your dysfunctional liver, purify your blood, boost your immune system, and cure you of illnesses you didn’t know you had. Chiropractors and acupuncturists promise to treat your chronic pain. Spiritual healers promise to heal terminal diseases with their bare hands without surgical instruments or anesthesia (or success). For a substantial “donation,” evangelists will perform miracles Jesus-style, wherein the blind will see and those in wheelchairs will walk again (because they are plants in the audience).

And if you don’t like it, don’t believe it. With no fixed ideology, believers can afford to go spiritual shopping. This gives rise to the ad hoc adoption (and abandonment) of beliefs and practices. Some see the freedom of choice as its strength, but this cherry picking often masks underlying problems, breeding hypocrisy. People try a bit of everything and discard what doesn’t work or suit their biases. Sylvia Browne’s motto summarizes the spiritualist ethos: “Take what you want and leave the rest behind.”⁴

Should Skeptics Be Skeptical about New Age Spiritualism?

Overall, spiritualist beliefs are pseudo-religious, but they are often pseudoscientific too. Belief systems tend to be outside the realm of skepticism for many skeptics, but irrational, dangerous, and unscientific practices are always our concern and are often testable.

Spiritualism is often framed as religion but also framed as science. This can be confusing for the consumer. Proponents claim that they too were skeptical until they were convinced by the evidence. Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, isn’t it? The homeopathic preparations are beside the aspirin on the pharmacy shelves. The herbs are natural so they must be safe. Traditional Chinese Medicine has been around for thousands of years. The naturopath has a nicer bedside manner than the medical doctor. The only thing that supersedes science is the exotic; if it is foreign (and especially Eastern), it is imbued with unquestionable authority and wisdom.

Science has credibility, and spiritualism can appear to be integrative. Parapsychology and Postmodernism have a scientific facade. Dr. Deepak Chopra is a medical doctor. Bruce Lipton aims to “bridge science and spirit.”⁵ Feng Shui is adapted for business, and there are psychic financial advisors. Homeopathic doses of physics are blended with hyperdimensional physics and linguistics with Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Astrology aligns itself to astronomy, and birth chart declinations give the semblance of science. Electromagnetic readers are scientific tools, used irrelevantly for ghost hunting. Spiritualism does not use the scientific method; its approaches are metaphysical, not empirical.

Some proponents of spiritualism promulgate inaccurate and often unsafe ideas. Anti-vaccination organizations engage in fear-mongering campaigns, leaving communities susceptible to contagious diseases. Moon landing conspiracy theorists jeopardize the public’s understanding of science. Historical revisionists rewrite history erroneously. Even if a spiritualist theory is proven wrong, it’s reinterpreted as “correct.” The end of the world is always nigh, but suddenly this becomes a metaphor for any current global problem. Of course, the next scheduled Armageddon is the real one!

Some spiritualism is guilty of undoing science and is harmful when it actively undermines what is known. Scientists turned pseudoscientists commit this academic irresponsibility. They disregard science and discard their formal education yet flaunt their qualifications, invoking the lexicon of science with convincing authority. The metalanguage of physics, math, and neuroscience is adopted to appeal to the intellect of consumers. Fringe scientists try to persuade the public with conventional yet ambiguous terminology like “quantum” and “energy.”

Recognizable, trusted terms are used to peddle spiritual concepts persuasively. Spiritual practitioners are psychic surgeons, psychic detectives, and herbal therapists. The unorthodox is portrayed as orthodox, giving us Ayurvedic medicine and Homeopathic vaccines. Science is name-dropped in The Science of Getting Rich⁶ and Christian Science. Scientologists and Raëlians blend science fiction into their theories.

“Gut feelings,” “intuition,” and “knowing” are employed to defend extraordinary claims for which there is no extraordinary evidence. Instead of addressing the Burden of Proof, claimants expect skeptics to disprove their outrageous claims. Correlation equals causation to some non-skeptics, and Occam’s Razor is simply ignored.

Cold Comfort or Culture?

New age spiritualism fills the void created by secularization. Spiritualist beliefs and practices try to address the shortfalls of religion and the gaps of knowledge, offering a modern alternative. Self-identifying as a “spiritual person” conveniently addresses the question, “What do you believe in?” Otherwise, you’re just a soulless, immoral atheist.

Spiritualism is not overtly religious, and perhaps this is why it appeals to some people as a non-committal, secular belief system for those not ready to give up the trappings of religion. But it is a break away from religion. Spiritual beliefs can be stepping stones on the path to letting go of religion.

Perhaps we’re all a little spiritual by social necessity. Spiritual beliefs and practices tend to reflect popular culture and lifestyle. In a sense, we’re merely living in our own times when we utter “Thank God,” speak of a “soul” or “spirit,” burn an incense stick, shop for organic food, read our stars in the newspaper, or self-medicate with vitamin supplements. These seem to be customary, but we don’t want to assign unrelated significance to these acts.

Some see spirituality in every experience. To pattern-seeking minds, a simple thought becomes an epiphany. Emotions become intuition. An earthquake becomes an Act of God. A solar eclipse becomes a bad omen. Bonding with an animal becomes mystical. Surviving an accident triggers religious sentiment. Birth becomes miraculous. Death becomes sacred.

Some find spiritual experiences in society. Coincidences become synchronicity. Luck is not made. Outside influences affect our lives. We choose our parents before we’re born. Our friends are kindred spirits. Our partner is our soul mate. We tend to observe the hits and ignore the misses. We recall that chance encounter that led us to meet our partner, but we forget the car accident and the unsuccessful relationships. Alternatively, we put these down to “bad luck” and read the failures as “life lessons” we’re “meant to have” on the path to finding our true selves.

Some find spiritual experiences in nature. The complexity of nature is misinterpreted as evidence for a creator or designer. We derive incredible emotional satisfaction from physical phenomena. Some wish on shooting stars and rainbows. Sunsets and night skies inspire romance, wistfulness, and hope. These powerful feelings can be so overwhelming that they seem to come from beyond, but they come from within. This is the naturalist connection to the universe of which Carl Sagan spoke⁷, but the sense of awe is misconstrued as divine.

Spiritualism is what we make spiritual. It is about meaning. We tend to think our “spiritual experiences” are unique and deeply meaningful, and they are…to us. They are no doubt profound, but they are human experiences and individual experiences. Assigning additional importance to them is a subjective attempt to understand the objective world.

For many, spiritualism is an ongoing quest. The search for truth ends in falsehood. The shamans and gurus are false gods. Enlightenment becomes disillusionment.

But many seekers of new age spiritualism never seem to find what they’re looking for…

Notes

1. Canfield, Jack. 1993. Chicken Soup for the Soul: 101 Stories to Open the Heart and Rekindle the Spirit. Florida: Health Communications, Inc.
2. Lluch, Alex. 2009. Enjoy Life and Be Happy in 30 Seconds: Daily Steps to Enrich Your Life. San Diego: W.S. Publishing.
3. Trudeau, Kevin. 2005. Natural Cures "They" Don’t Want You To Know About. Birmingham, Alabama: Alliance Publishing.
4. Sylvia Browne, www.sylvia.org/home/aboutnovus.cfm (accessed September 14, 2009).
5. Bruce Lipton, www.brucelipton.com/ (accessed September 14, 2009).
6. Wattles, Wallace. 2007. The Science of Getting Rich: Find the Secret to the Law of Attraction. Waterford, Michigan: Wilder Publications.
7. Sagan, Carl (edited by Ann Druyan). 2006. The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God. New York: Penguin.

Photo CC-BY Roy Kerwood

In 1966 John Lennon said that The Beatles were “more popular than Jesus.” This was an observation of secularization to some, but to others, this was sacrilege.

The Beatles have always been the subject of urban legends, from the “Paul is Dead” rumor to the claim that when played backwards, Sgt. Pepper’s reveals hidden satanic and sexual messages. However, the most contentious incident of the band’s career was the so-called “Jesus Controversy”.

This began in a rather inauspicious way. In March 1966 the interview “How Does A Beatle Live? John Lennon Lives Like This” appeared in the London Evening Standard, without incident. Nor did the article cause a stir when it was republished in the July issue of TIME magazine. However, when the following snippet appeared on the cover of the August issue of US teenage magazine Datebook, all hellfire and brimstone broke loose.

Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue with that; I’m right and I will be proved right. We’re more popular than Jesus now; I don’t know which will go first — rock and roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right, but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It’s them twisting it that ruins it for me.¹

Lennon’s theological musings were taken out of context, misinterpreted and misconstrued, reduced to the sound bite, “We’re more popular than Jesus”, and then further reinterpreted as “The Beatles are bigger than Jesus”.

In response, radio stations across the United States, Mexico, Spain and South Africa banned The Beatles from their playlists. Some two dozen US radio stations boycotted Beatles’ music, although this was symbolic, because many were country music stations that never played their songs anyway…

With an upcoming 14-city tour of the US, The Beatles’ manager Brian Epstein attempted damage control by appearing at a press conference in New York. He explained that Lennon’s words were taken “out of context” and he expressed regret “that people with certain religious beliefs should have been offended in any way.”²

But the public bayed for the blood of the Beatle to blame - John Lennon, “The Smart One” who made the smart ass comment. When the group arrived in the States Lennon gave the following apology at a press conference, surrounded and supported by the other Beatles.

I’m not anti-God, anti-Christ, or anti-religion. I wasn’t knocking it or putting it down. I was just saying it as a fact and it’s true more for England than here. I’m not saying that we’re better or greater, or comparing us with Jesus Christ as a person or God as a thing or whatever it is. I just said what I said and it was wrong. Or it was taken wrong. And now it’s all this.³

To placate his once faithful followers, Lennon reaffirmed his own belief in God, or something, “but not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us”.

But much of the damage was already done. With the same zeal in which they followed the Beatles, their fans turned on them. Concerts for the tour were canceled throughout the country, and many tickets remained unsold for shows in Chicago, Cleveland, New York and Detroit. However, nowhere was the hostility more palpable than in the “Bible Belt” states.

In the South, Lennon’s remarks were interpreted as sacrilegious.

The South wasn’t accustomed to these “Scousers”; these blunt Liverpudlian lads. Lennon’s words were a far cry from the conditioned “Yes, Ma’am,” “No, Sir,” of Elvis, remote-controlled by Colonel Tom Parker. Elvis may have sneered and gyrated his hips suggestively, but he was a Good Ol’ Boy who sang gospel and lived in “Graceland”.

In the South, some radio stations organized public protests. Anti-Beatles demonstrations were held against these supposed anti-Christs. Much to the chagrin of modern collectors, records, t-shirts, books, wigs and other memorabilia were destroyed in “Beatles Bonfires”. Several Baptist ministers threatened to excommunicate their congregation members if they dared attend the concerts. Some still did attend, if only to picket.

Extremist groups also reacted to the quote. In South Carolina, a “Grand Dragon” of the Ku Klux Klan nailed a Beatles’ album to the base of a wooden cross. Other Klan members went further than burning records and burned effigies of the band, or even issued death threats. Some Klan spokespeople made derogatory comments about the ethnicities of the band members. These fanatical acts, reminiscent of burning crosses and Nazi book burnings, soon tempered the public response. Even the most ardent protestors didn’t want to be associated with the Klan.

The “Jesus Controversy” contributed to the end of the Beatles’ touring. Receiving telephone threats before concerts, The Beatles feared an assassination attempt. A show in Memphis was halted when a firecracker exploded and was feared to be gunfire. The inflammatory quote had been published in August, and that same month the Beatles played their final tour concert at Candlestick Park in San Francisco.

There were other contributing factors. After 1400 live concerts, the lads were tired of the travel. The band also cited the increasing complexity of their music, and the unsuitability of their newfound psychedelia to a live show format. Also, they were keen to develop their music in the studio, rather than trying to hear themselves over the screams of their adoring fans. In fact, this “fan worship” landed them in this trouble in the first place…

The mass hysteria of Beatlemania was analogous to religious ecstasy. To describe this semi-religious allure, the press invoked religious metaphors. The Beatles were “Gods”, “prophets”, “idols” and “icons”, and the fervent fans that flocked to their concerts were “pilgrims” and “disciples”. To some fans, The Beatles were sacred.

Press Agent Derek Taylor said of The Beatles’ arrival in Australia, “Cripples threw away their sticks [and] sick people rushed up to the car. It was as if some savior had arrived and all these people were happy and relieved. The only thing left for the Beatles is to go on a healing tour.”⁴

This was obviously facetious, but some truly saw The Beatles as musical messiahs. John, Paul, George and Ringo reported that fans would bring sick people to their concerts, in the belief that the band had a divine healing presence. The Beatles were perceived as the Peter Popoffs of pop.

In Lennon’s own write:

When we would open up, every night, instead of seeing kids there, we would see a row full of cripples along the front. When we’d be running through, people would be lying around. It seemed that we were just surrounded by cripples and blind people all the time, and when we would go through corridors they would all be touching us … They’d line them up, and I got the impression The Beatles were being treated as bloody faith healers.⁴

This reverence was enough for any of the members to develop a messiah complex. And Lennon did, if only for a day. His friend Pete Shotton recounts the drug-induced incident.

One night, after a few joints, a bit of LSD, we were sitting around at Kenwood playing tapes when John suddenly said: “Pete, I think I’m Jesus Christ.”

“You what?” I said.

“I’m Jesus Christ. I’m back again.”

“Oh yeah,” I said. “What are you going to do about it?”

“I’ve got to tell the world who I am.”

“But they’ll kill you.”

“That can’t be helped,” said John. “How old was Jesus when they killed him?”

“I reckon about 32.”

“Then I’ve got at least four years to go,” said John. “First thing tomorrow morning, we’ll go into Apple and tell the others.” Next morning, I contacted Apple to arrange an emergency board meeting. All four Beatles turned up, plus Neil Aspinall (Apple’s managing director) and Derek Taylor, their press officer.

“Right,” said John, sitting behind his desk. “I’ve something very important to tell you all. I am...Jesus Christ. I have come back again. This is my thing.”

The Beatles looked rather stunned, but said nothing. It was totally surreal. But nobody cross-examined him. No plans were made to announce the Messiah’s arrival. There was a bit of muttering, then silence, till somebody suggested the meeting was adjourned for lunch. “In the restaurant over lunch a man came up to John and said: “Really nice to meet you, how are you?”

“Actually,” said John, “I’m Jesus Christ.”

“Oh, really?” said the man. “Well, I liked your last record.”⁵

In light of Lennon’s lyrics “they’re gonna crucify me” in The Ballad of John and Yoko, and his subsequent murder in December 1980, some might ascribe meaning to the above story as a prophetic ‘vision’.

The press and public not only availed themselves of religious metaphors, but also drew parallels between The Beatles and royalty. In the infamous article, Cleave also wrote:

They are famous in the way the Queen is famous. When John Lennon’s Rolls-Royce, with its black wheels and its black windows, goes past, people say: “It’s the Queen.”

Religious or royal, these metaphors were stylistic and humorous, but they were mostly employed as comparative devices. This was how the press and public conceptualized the unprecedented fame of The Beatles.

Lennon uttered those fateful words at the height of Beatlemania. The “British Invasion” happened to also coincide with the decline of Christianity, especially in England, and especially amongst the younger generations. This was a time when Mods, Hippies, schoolgirls and the general public were more likely to buy a Beatles record than a Bible.

Today, even the Vatican has pardoned Lennon. The Holy See’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano dismissed his comments as, “showing off, bragging by a young English working-class musician who had grown up in the age of Elvis Presley and rock and roll and had enjoyed unexpected success.”⁶

Lennon wasn’t anti-Christ, or an Anti-Christ. In God he would later sing “I don’t believe in Jesus”, but he also said he didn’t believe in “magic”, “tarot” or even “Beatles”. He asked us to “imagine no heaven” and “no religion”, but spiritual motifs appeared frequently throughout his music. He also promoted peace, freethinking and humanism. Perhaps Lennon was a skeptic…

The “Jesus Controversy” was an uncritical interpretation of Lennon’s quote. His remarks were indeed boastful, taboo and offensive to some people; but they were also a comment on popular culture, and an observation of the slow secularization of society. As the Catholic magazine America conceded at the time, “Lennon was simply stating what many a Christian educator would readily admit.”⁷

When John Lennon said The Beatles were “more popular than Jesus,” they were.

References

1. Cleave, M. March 4, 1966. How Does a Beatle Live? John Lennon Lives Like This. Evening Standard (London).
2. Rock ‘n’ Roll: According to John. August 12, 1966. TIME. Retrieved August 23, 2009.
3. Gould, J. 2007. Can’t Buy Me Love. NY: Three Rivers Press.
4. Lennon, J., McCartney, P., Harrison, G., and Starr, R. 2002. The Beatles Anthology. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 142-143.
5. Shotton, P., and Schaffner, N. 1994. John Lennon: In My Life. NY: Thunder’s Mouth Press.
6. Willey, D. Vatican ‘forgives’ John Lennon. BBC News. November 22, 2008. Retrieved August, 23, 2009.
7. America. The National Catholic Weekly. Editorial. August, 20, 1966.

Bonaventure Cemetery is yet another “World’s Most Haunted Cemetery” in yet another “World’s Most Haunted City”. I traveled to the Old South to visit this extraordinary place, and encountered its rich history, and vibrant pseudo-history.

Haunted or not, Bonaventure Cemetery can certainly lay claim to being a famous cemetery. In its stateliness, it’s the Père Lachaise Cemetery of the United States; the grand final resting place of Jim Morrison and Oscar Wilde. Bonaventure’s residents aren’t nearly as famous, although Wilde once visited there, praising the place as “incomparable”. The cemetery’s permanent population still includes many celebrated citizens; songwriter Johnny Mercer, novelist Conrad Aiken, numerous town dignitaries, and veterans from the American Revolution and Civil War.

Bonaventure Cemetery is also famous for its beauty. Resting in peace beside the Wilmington River, some claim this view was the inspiration for Mercer’s Moon River. The atmospheric cemetery is a sculpture garden of towering obelisks, elaborate crypts covered in ivy, intricate headstones carved with poetic epitaphs, and strikingly realistic statues.

The cemetery is a tranquil park of pink azaleas and roses, and avenues of Savannah’s ubiquitous live oaks, draped with swaying tentacles of Spanish Moss. The grounds are teeming with birds and butterflies (and mosquitoes and snakes). During his “Thousand Mile Walk” naturalist John Muir visited Bonaventure Cemetery. He wrote passionately about its flora and fauna in his Chapter “Camping Among the Tombs”.

Bonaventure is called a graveyard, a town of the dead, but the few graves are powerless in such a depth of life. The rippling of living waters, the song of birds, the joyous confidence of flowers, the calm, undisturbable grandeur of the oaks, mark this place of graves as one of the Lord’s most favored abodes of life and light¹.

Awaiting a parcel of money, Muir lodged in the cemetery for a week, sleeping upon a grave at night. Unafraid of the local legends, he found the cemetery “an ideal place for a penniless wanderer. There, no superstitious prowling mischief maker dares venture for fear of haunting ghosts, while for me there will be God’s rest and peace.”

But Bonaventure Cemetery is most famous as the “Garden” in the murder mystery Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, and Clint Eastwood film of the same name. This non-fiction book with fictional elements recounts some folklore, and creates some too...

The Garden of Fact and Fiction

The cover of the book features a statue of a young girl. Little Wendy, also known as the “Bird Girl”, wears a long dress and a contemplative expression; her head titled to the left as she holds a bowl in each outstretched hand. This ethereal girl is synonymous with the book. The statue was selected as a subject by the photographer Jack Leigh, although she is otherwise irrelevant to the plot. This hasn’t stopped the statue from becoming “haunted” by the ghost of Lorraine Greenman, the little girl who posed for the artist, Sylvia Shaw Judson. Little Wendy once stood sentinel over the Trosdal family plot, but she is so idolized that the owners donated the statue to Savannah’s Telfair Museum of Art to avoid her destruction.

Inside the book, the author asserts that Bonaventure Cemetery stands on the grounds of a former plantation. According to the story, the main house caught fire sometime during the late 1700s. Inconveniently, the blaze occurred during a dinner party; but this was no good cause for a party to end, so they took it outside. “The servants carried the table and chairs after them, and the dinner party continued by the light of the raging fire.”² The host graciously continues to entertain his guests who raise their glasses to him, the house, and the glowing fire. At the conclusion of the toast, the host dramatically smashes his crystal glass against an oak tree, and the guests follow suit. This event echoes across time...

Tradition has it that if you listen closely on quiet nights you can still hear the laughter and the shattering of crystal glasses. I like to think of this place as the scene of the Eternal Party. What better place, in Savannah, to rest in peace for all time--where the party goes on and on.

The Bonaventure Historical Society confirms that the cemetery was indeed a former plantation, and that the mansion on the estate caught fire twice; once in 1771, and again in 1800.³ However, there is no evidence that either fire interrupted a party that resumed blithely as the house continued to burn. This is either poetic license, or the retelling of a ripping yarn.

In another section of the book, the narrator and a character known as Minerva the Voodoo Priestess arrive at the cemetery by boat at night. The grounds are closed, the visitors are trespassing, and the narrator expresses concern that there could be guard dogs on the premises. This reference seems to have created the myth that Bonaventure is haunted by ghostly dogs. Second-hand sources report that visitors hear the barking of phantom dogs, that some have actually seen these dogs, or even been chased out of the cemetery by the snarling, snapping animals.⁴ The simplest explanation is that the phantom dogs are mortal dogs. Below is a reference to the fact that the cemetery lies in a residential zone, and there are neighbors, with pet dogs, who enjoy the grounds as a park.

We live down the street from this cemetery. And we have voted it the best Sunday morning walk in Savannah! Bring the dogs⁵.

The strangest part of this story is that Minerva the Voodoo Priestess did exist, as Savannah resident Valerie Fennel Aiken Boles. Boles has since died, but she is immortalized in the book, casting spells and hexes, and collecting cemetery dirt for use in her rituals. This has led to the practice of visitors collecting souvenir soil from Bonaventure. Ironically, they are purloining dirt from the wrong cemetery. The biggest misconception is that Bonaventure Cemetery is the actual “Garden of Good and Evil”. In the Chapter of this very name, the characters are in a cemetery in nearby Beaufort,

not Bonaventure...

Cemetery Citizens

Many of Bonaventure’s alleged ghosts were around long before the book...

The Cemetery is inhabited by an abundance of angels and cherubs. According to folklore, some of these haunting images also haunt, such as the angel that reputedly “changes facial expressions”.⁶ People believe her countenance transforms from showing anguish, to sorrow, to peacefulness. But it depends on the angle of the angel, the perspective, and the interpretation.

Bonaventure is also populated by evocative statues of its inhabitants. Anecdotally, these lifelike monuments come to life; babies cry, children play, and Corinne, a beautiful young woman, smiles because she was “allured to brighter worlds, and led the way”, that is, she committed suicide.

The most infamous “ghost” of Bonaventure Cemetery is Little Gracie. In her perpetual pose, the little girl with chubby cheeks and sharply-cut bangs sits beside a tree trunk, clutching a flower. She wears a high neck frilly collar, a buttoned sailor dress and spat boots. A plaque by her grave shares her poignant story.

Little Gracie Watson was born in 1883, the only child of her parents. Her father was manager of the Pulaski House, one of Savannah’s leading hotels, where the beautiful and charming little girl was a favorite with the guests. Two days before Easter, in April 1889, Gracie died of pneumonia at the age of six. In 1890, when the rising sculptor, John Walz, moved to Savannah, he carved from a photograph this life-sized, delicately detailed marble statue, which for almost a century has captured the interest of all passersby.

Perhaps it is because her statue bears such an uncanny resemblance to her, or because it is tragic that she died at such a tender age, that some like to believe Little Gracie still lives. Visitors leave toys for her ghost to play with, and claim she cries tears of blood if her playthings are removed. There is always a collection of toys near her tomb, especially around Christmas time; but no sign of tear-stains running down the mould that grows over the delicate features of her marble face.

There’s a belief that if you place a quarter in Gracie’s hand and encircle her statue three times, the coin will disappear. With her down-turned marble hands, nothing can be placed on her palms, but her tomb is still a wishing well of coins. The grave is fenced off because visitors would also rub the statue for good luck; being bad luck for the statue. But some claim the statue materializes, the graveyard becomes her playground, and that the wrought-iron fence is designed not to keep people out, but to keep Little Gracie in...

Pseudo-History

Bonaventure Cemetery has a lively past, but its history is buried by pseudo-history. The locals favor the site as a park for picnics and Sunday walks, but the tourists visit for these legends. However, the folks at the City of Savannah don’t take too kindly to the folklore.

The cemeteries were designed to inter and memorialize the dead and it is inappropriate to sensationalize these sacred sites. Please show respect for the dead and their survivors who frequently visit their grave sites. Visitors are encouraged to appreciate the historical and cultural significance of the sites and the people interred there, the cemetery architecture, the scenery and the natural ecosystems which inhabit the sites.⁷

It seems that for many people, history means haunted.

References

1. Muir, J. 1998 (1916). A Thousand Mile Walk to the Gulf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
2. Berendt, J. 1994. Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. New York: Random House.
3. Bonaventure Historical Society. http://www.bonaventurehistorical.org/ Retrieved 07/26/09
4. Belanger, J. 2008. Encyclopaedia of Haunted Places. New York. Castle Books.
5. Yelp, Savannah, Georgia. www.yelp.com Retrieved 07/26/09
6. Bonaventure Cemetery Tours. http://www.bonaventurecemeterytours.com/ Retrieved 07/26/09
7. City of Savannah. http://www.savannahga.gov/ Retrieved 07/26/09

“I’m not a psychic!” sniffed the woman. “I’m an intuitive!”

You might ask, “Aren’t psychics and intuitives the same thing?” or, “What is an intuitive?” This article considers the changing names and claims of psychics.

Once a psychic, not always a psychic.

No one calls themselves a seer anymore, this seems archaic, while sibyls, sages and soothsayers sound like historical or fictional characters. It would be ostentatious to call yourself an oracle, and the only prophets are the supposed spokesmen of God, the Modern or Living Prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Mind reader makes us think of a magician rather than a mystic, and mystic sounds, well, too ethereal and intangible. Rather than being “clear” as suggested by their etymology, clairvoyant, clairaudient, clairsentient, and clairalient are obscure. Fortune teller sounds like a con-artist at a carnival; a Madame Something-or-rather in a tent, wearing dangling earrings and a scarf wrapped around her head as she gazes into her crystal ball.

These labels are outdated, obscure, or they’ve undergone some degree of pejoration. This latter expression means that a word has become tainted by negative connotations. These factors can lead to eventual obsolescence. Think of words you don’t think of, such as the archaic augur and vaticinator that have suffered this linguistic fate. To survive, pejorating words need to be reclaimed, that is, seized by the referent community and infused with positive connotations, or they need to develop polysemy, i.e., new senses, like the Mormon Prophets, or Oracle Corporation.

What other words do we have left to refer to psychics? Palm readers read palms, reader is too vague, and mediums are specifically channelers. So, the only modern, superordinate and neutral term left is psychic...or is it?

In my estimation, we are witnessing psychic undergo pejoration right now, not only for the average speaker of English, but amongst the psychic community in general. Interestingly, psychic is becoming the dispreferred term of psychics, who now appear to prefer intuitive, sensitive or empathetic. Some new labels sound more self-help than psychic, such as life coaches or spiritual teachers, counselors, and advisors; or spiritual healers and therapists that make them seem like healthcare practitioners.

Of these new labels, intuitive is by far the favored term. This has been used for awhile, particularly as part of the phrase medical intuitive, those psychic practitioners who claim to diagnose and even cure illness. As suggested by the above exchange, and advertising such as the “Intuitive Readings” sign outside my local New Age store, intuitive is slowly supplanting psychic; at least within the community. As intuitive Laura Day¹ says, “I’ve developed a career in practicing intuition (a word I prefer to psychic, the more popular but misleading esoteric expression.”

What is happening to psychic is a phenomenon called the “Euphemism Treadmill”, as identified by Steven Pinker² (Cf. Gresham’s Law in Economics). Forget perpetual motion, this is a process of perpetual pejoration whereby a highly-charged word becomes so stigmatized that a euphemism is introduced to replace the contaminated label. However, the replacement word will eventually acquire the same dysphemistic connotations of the preceding term, and so on.

A good example of the Euphemism Treadmill is the lexicon of words used to refer to people with disabilities. Cripple was supplanted by handicapped, then special, and now challenged. The phrasal “people with disabilities” is also preferred over “disabled people”. Within this trend I’ve noticed that the substitution is invariably more vague than the preceding term, nevertheless it still becomes associated with the preceding term, and tainted by the subject matter.

Why does this happen? This ongoing pejoration of introduced terms probably occurs because the subject itself is stigmatized; in the above example, disability, and in this article, the concept of psychic abilities.

So, why is psychic stigmatized? Historically, witches, warlocks, wise women and other people with alleged psychic abilities were ostracized in the belief that they brought bad luck to their community. They were blamed for fire, draught, ruined crops and seemingly inexplicable deaths.

Today, for some speakers, the belief in psychic abilities lacks rationale and logic, and by extension, implies that someone who believes they have psychic abilities is considered irrational, illogical, and, well, a bit silly. Stereotypically, psychic abilities are perceived as hocus-pocus and mumbo-jumbo, and psychics themselves as a bit crazy or mad...

The pejoration of psychic may be due in part to the efforts of skepticism, and is likely most affected by the above social stereotypes. Language is loaded, and there are positive or negative connotations associated with any label; think about the stereotypes associated with attorney, nurse, and of course, psychic...

My linguistic prediction is that psychic is on its way out, at least, among the community of believers. Whether people beyond the community embrace this change and start using the alternatives is another matter entirely.

That which we call a psychic, by any other name would be psychic?

There is an observable shift in the meaning and usage of psychic, resulting in a growing in-group preference for intuitive. Furthermore, it appears there is a related shift in the actual claims of psychics (intuitives).

Our folkloric understanding of a “psychic” is a person who claims to have extrasensory perception (ESP). These are abilities beyond the normal range of senses. Modern psychics normalize this ESP as another kind of sense, a “sixth sense” or “second sight”.

Traditionally, psychics harnessed this apparent ability to “see” the past, present and future. Readings provided specific prophesies, like Mother Shipton’s visions of “carriages without horses”, steel ships and aircraft, and Nostradamus’ foretelling of three Anti-Christs. (These predictions are still anecdotal, or subjective interpretations of extant writings.) In contrast, today’s psychics and intuitives don’t provide specific predictions of births, deaths, impending misfortune and events. Psychic abilities, as they are perceived today, are described ambiguously as a sense, feeling, knowing, inkling or hunch. This is cognition perceived as coming from the heart or gut. Some appeal to the language of creativity, and see their talents as inspiration bestowed upon them by a muse. Some see their ability in terms of consciousness, as insight, awareness or precognition. They claim to receive messages via the senses, although these are only vague ‘clues’; letters, names, incongruent images, sounds and smells. However, these symbols are left up to the imagination of the subject to interpret...

Psychics once regarded their alleged ability as a natural born “gift”, a special faculty or power they perhaps inherited. In contrast, some modern psychics and intuitives claim that everyone is psychic, including you! To their way of thinking, psychic abilities are natural and normal, and an inherent capacity. By this theory, we don’t all access this “forgotten sense”, sometimes our abilities go unrecognized, untapped and undeveloped. These dormant skills must be nurtured and trained; perhaps through a psychic’s workshops or courses.

These cryptic concepts pose problems for testing these phenomena. Abstract descriptions make it harder to define psychic abilities, and therefore harder to disprove, but no more plausible. In an attempt to lend credibility to the claims, psychic abilities are often framed in the theories and language of the social sciences. They are spoken of in terms of universality and innateness, and explained in conventional terminology, such as “intuition” and “perception”. This is much like the borrowing of energy and quantum into other areas of pseudoscience.

Client concerns have changed too, and psychic abilities have adapted to suit these needs. Modern psychics offer general advice about relationships, and most popularly, career and finances. Like reports of UFO sightings where the machines mimic available technology, supposed psychic abilities and readings reflect contemporary beliefs and address the human condition.

In the end, seer, psychic or sensitive, to the skeptic it’s always cold reading of some kind...

Notes

1. Day, L. 1997. Practical Intuition. New York: Broadway Books.
2. Pinker, S. 2002. The Blank Slate. New York: Viking.