St Stephen on What it means to be a Christian


It was asked, and many felt troubled, the question, What is a Christian? You have even asked this, this night. Perhaps if I answered this question for you, it may answer many questions you may wish to ask.
“Christian” being the name that defines the pursuit of what is Christ. The example of the successful pursuit was in our Lord, who indeed was the Christ.   Therefore, a Christian in the terms that you wish to think, or indeed in the terms in which you should think, should be defined as
  “Any cell, each and any part of the continuous self, which acts in    a like manner (in pursuit of what is Christ)” whether it is called Christian, “yellow” or “rain”, is immaterial.
For to be Christian is to be conscious,
not of separateness, but to be conscious as part of the Whole.
In the past, for joining of the Whole, parts of the Whole had experiences, and continued to choose, and gained further experiences in differing incarnations. This is the case with the part of the Whole with which we are blessed, called Michael. He is also a part of the Whole that gained the experience of “Charles”. And backwards as it shall be forwards.
The knowledge of this part of the Whole, (which is also called Michael), which was to be gained through experience, was decided before the separateness of Michael was felt.
Therefore we can say that the experiences gained would be of the whole self of Michael, the choosing of the whole self of Michael.
But let this not go as far to specify details of the incidents that occur to the body which the Whole, through Michael, is using.
For this body has a mind that has many functions.
This body has a mind that can be influenced,
and this body was chosen by the Whole
through the whole self, the continuous self of Michael,
because of its situation,
and because of the probability of the influences
that will be made to bear on the mind of that body,
that we know of as Michael.
Incidents will happen that were not planned,
and yea even should not be planned;
but the total of the experience
of that part of the whole which is the whole self of Michael,
(whilst that part is in the body),
was requiring that total experience,
not the separate incidents.
Should it be necessary for the “Charles” [a presumed former incarnation] “- Michael to become a “George”, then it will be decided at which stage the “George” should possess a body, and where the body should be situated. Also the time in evolution, that it would gain the experience that the part of the whole (which the whole self of Michael) wishes to obtain.
I need to feel and grasp this,
and to grasp that I am Michael,
that Michael is Stephen
and that what I experience now
is experience for the You which is also I.
I need to feel and grasp that this is so,
that I am but a part that could be described
as a spoke in the “wheel” which is the Whole,
and that together at the outside perimeter
we cannot be separated.

SOME QUOTATIONS FROM Colin Wilson's Beyond the Occult
p.23  
Protestant mystic Jacob Boehme  in the year 1600:
Sitting one day in his room, his eye fell upon a burnished pewter dish, which reflected the sunshine with such marvellous splendour that he fell into an inward ecstasy, and it seemed to him as if he could now look into the principles and deepest foundations of things.  He believed it was only a fancy, and in order to banish it from his mind he went out into the green fields. But here he noticed that he could gaze into the very heart of things, the very herbs and grass, and that actual nature harmonised with what he had inwardly seen.

...It seems clear that there is a close link between these 'mystical' experiences and the faculty labelled extra-sensory perception.
p.33  The more Lawrence LeShan investigated mediums, the more  he became convinced that they see the world from a viewpoint that differs completely from that of the ordinary person.  It is as if they can put themselves into states of mind in which they cease to be subject to the ordinary limitations of space and time. LeShan cites the case of Mrs Margaret Verrell, the wife of a Cambridge don, who was one of the most remarkabel mediums in the early decades of the twentieth century. When practising 'automatic writing' Mrs Verrall recorded the following scane: 'The cold was intense and a single candle gave poor light. He was lying on a sofa or bed and was reading Marmontel by the light of a single candle... The book was lent to him, it did not belong to him...'   In a script a few days later she wrote, 'Marmontel is right. It is a French book, a memoir I think. Passy may help, souvenirs de Passy, or Fleury. The book was bound and lent - two volumes in old-fashioned binding and print.'
Some time later she met a friend, a Mr Marsh, who told her that she had accurately described something that had happened to him. He had borrowed one volume of Marmontel's memoirs from the London Library and taken it to Paris, where he had read it in bed, on a freezing cold night, by the light of a single candle.  The chapter he had been reading was about the discovery of a picture painted at Passy and associated with a certain M. de Fleury.
An interesting piece of clairvoyance, one might think, but not particularly remarkable... Until we learn that Mrs Verrell wrote her description on 11 December 1911 and Mr Marsh did not read the book in Paris until 21 February of the following year.  Mrs Verrell had accurately foreseen something that would not happen for more than two months.