A few years ago, I was asked to cast a journalistic eye over a manuscript titled Philosophy of Spiritualism before its publication. I had only one comment to make, which was to congratulate its authors, Barry Oates, David Hopkins and Carole Austin, on producing an excellent, well-written book – the perfect introduction for anyone seeking a better understanding of Spiritualism.

And who better qualified to write such books? Both Oates and Hopkins are Spiritualist ministers, and Austin an officiant, which is one step down from being a minister. All three were also members of the Spiritualists’ National Union (SNU) Philosophy and Ethics Committee.

That book is now in print and, by all accounts, selling very well, as is a sequel written by the same trio, The Religion of Spiritualism, which became available last year.

So it came as a surprise to me to discover that the three authors have since disappeared from the Philosophy and Ethics Committee, leading inevitably to whispers about resignations and skullduggery.

Following the shock resignation of former SNU president Duncan Gascoyne as chairman of the Arthur Findlay College, which I reported on a few weeks ago, I felt I should investigate further. What I learned was surprising, raising once again important questions about the way in which the Union conducts its affairs. It’s a complex story, but I’ll keep it brief, and I’ll start by tackling the running of the Union.

David Hopkins (above right) knows the Union well. He has been an individual member for 52 years, is a second generation SNU minister (both parents were very active speakers and mediums) and an SNU Gold Service Award holder. He explains, “The current system is that, at the Union’s annual general meeting, the president and incoming officers choose the other NEC members, some from nominations, others without even nominations, including last year the financial director.”

Membership of all committees terminates at the closure of the AGM in mid-July, though in practice they remain in post until new members are chosen at the first subsequent NEC meeting, usually a couple of weeks after the AGM.

Problems began for the Philosophy and Ethics Committee (P&EC) when an Arthur Findlay College Course (AFC) Organisers’ and Tutors’ meeting took place at Stansted Hall in February 2010 at which, following discussions, a number of conclusions were reached on sometimes controversial subjects and statements were agreed collectively. Topics ranged from abortions and aliens to evil spirits and possession. A report of the meeting, including the statements issued, was published in Psychic News (6 March 2010), resulting in readers’ letters voicing criticism of the tutors’ views.

Barry Oates (left), a Spiritualist for 45 years, an SNU minister since 1992 and recipient of the Union’s Award of Merit in 2005 and 2009, tells me that he had differences of opinion with Duncan Gascoyne over the tutors’ statements because they gave the impression that they expressed Union policy on various ethical issues.

“The reason the P&EC was set up was to deal with these very issues, but we realised nothing is as straight forward as it seems and it was taking a long time to get the balance right, especially if they were to be accepted by the National Executive Council (NEC) as Union policy.”

Following those differences, Oates resigned as chairman but remained on the P&EC in order to get their second book finished and launched in time for the SNU AGM in 2010. Duncan Gascoyne had taken him onto the NEC when he became president and Oates said he would go when Duncan did. He had made it clear that he would not remain on the NEC after the AGM.

“I, like many who have known Duncan for many years, was very sorry to hear of his resignation,” Oates tells me. “Although I had my differences, I know Duncan as a very sincere Spiritualist who has always been motivated by his love for the Union and his desire to see it succeed. His methods did not suit everyone but he got the job done. There is no doubt in my mind that as far as the College is concerned he was in the right place at the right time and, for that, all Union Spiritualists should be grateful.”

After his election as SNU president in 2010, David Bruton took a number of new faces onto the NEC. He also phoned Oates and asked him to consider becoming chairman of the P&EC. Oates explains that there was a condition to that appointment, “being that they would expect changes to the committee – in other words, ‘we don’t want those who have produced two very successful books for the SNU’. I refused the chairmanship, of course, and later I discovered that is what the NEC expected me to do.”

Meanwhile, David Hopkins had similar issues with the AFC tutors’ statements, and had objected  – “as a member of the NEC, i.e., as a director of the SNU” – to them and the implication that this “policy” came from the AFC, which was a sub-committee of the NEC. “The response from Duncan Gascoyne was to issue a personal attack on me, coupled with an attack on the P&EC. This led to Barry Oates’ resignation as the committee’s chairman.”

David adds: “Voicing criticism of the AFC or its paid tutorial staff was not popular. One got the impression that the AFC was a ‘sacred cow’ with some, against which criticism was seen almost as blasphemy.”

Once Philosophy of Spiritualism was completed, it was submitted to the NEC for approval and publication. “Without reference to the committee or the authors of the book,” Hopkins continues, “the then-NEC, under President Gascoyne, gave away the income from the book to Psychic Press (1995) Ltd [publishers of Psychic News], which was then under the direction of SNU treasurer David Bruton.

“The authors had expended much time and effort on research, discussion and writing the book for the SNU only to see the fruits of their efforts given away and the Union losing any income that might arise. As one of the Union’s most successful (if not the most successful) publications, clearly there could have been considerable on-going income for the SNU.”

When the trio’s second book was ready for publication, the NEC was only prepared to fund a limited print run, which would have increased the cost of individual copies. Instead, the P&EC was extremely grateful to obtain funding for a substantial initial print run of The Religion of Spiritualism from the Winifred Gandine-Stanton Trust. All income goes to the Union.

Hopkins, who had been a member of the P&EC since it was established in 2004 and was its chairman up until the 2010 AGM, did not resign from the committee, nor did Carole Austin. They were, he says, “dumped”. Oates, as we have already seen, turned down the chairmanship because of that condition.

Rubbing salt into the wound is the fact that they were not told why, after the success of their two books, their services were no longer required on the P&EC. But they were not even told they were no longer required. It became apparent, however, when the SNU website displayed the membership of its committees … with the exception of the P&EC.

Hopkins adds: “We were not asked if we were prepared to take the committee in a different direction, nor if we had plans for further publications. In fact, extensive research and preparation had been undertaken by the three of us and we had informally discussed producing at least one and probably two more books in the ‘series’  – as we considered it to be.

“We were not told we were being replaced.  I would have expected at least the courtesy of a contact from the President or Vice-President Spiritual (as P&E is part of the responsibility of the holder of that position) but we waited and waited … and waited, knowing only when, months later, new names appeared on the website that our services had been dispensed with.”

Judith Seaman, SNU vice-president (Spiritual), is shown as the committee’s chairman and Brian Gledhill, Tony Penketh and Linda Smith are members.

“At the SNU AGM last year,” Hopkins adds, “much was made of the retirement of President Gascoyne.  Yet Barry Oates, who had been on the NEC for eleven years, had been the first vice-president (Spiritual), founder chairman and member of the P&E committee and had done a tremendous job dealing with churches in difficulties, was not even mentioned, by either retiring President Gascoyne (whose responsibility it clearly was) or incoming President Bruton, who could have done so when Mr Gascoyne failed to do so.

“The SNU had been led for years by Mr Gascoyne but there have been many others who have supported him and the work. Thanks and praise should not be concentrated just on the leader of an organisation but be given to all involved.

“I have recently been informed that I have been nominated as SNU vice-president (Spiritual).  After considering this nomination very carefully, I have advised the SNU General Secretary that I will not be accepting the nomination in these elections.”

Committees, of course, change all the time but it would be wrong to dismiss what has happened to the P&EC as no more than internal differences. It seems to me to reflect a far deeper problem with the way in which the SNU is run. Certainly, not enough public recognition is given to those who have worked on behalf of the Union for decades. And their contribution is swept aside when differences of opinion arise.

Perhaps those who are calling the shots should take a closer look at the three authors’ The Religion of Spiritualism and a quote they include from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in particular:

“Mankind must learn once and for all that Religion has nothing whatever to do with theological beliefs, or forms, or ceremonies, or priesthoods, or vestments, or sacraments, or any of the other trappings and adornments which have so covered it that we can no longer see it. It depends upon two things only, and those are Conduct and Character. If you are unselfish and kind then you are of the elect, call yourself what you will. If you are dry and hard and bitter and narrow, no church and no faith can save you from the judgment to come.”

Perhaps the time has come for the SNU’s rank-and-file membership to demand of its officers that they focus more on common courtesies and spirituality than on the personal pursuit of power at all costs.

Remember my story about the Vincent van Gogh painting I bought last year? I told how I had watched as Brazilian medium Florencio Anton, apparently channelling the long-dead spirit of the Dutch post-Impressionist painter, had completed the stunning landscape in just 11 minutes in front of an audience in Sussex.

I have just heard from Christine Parkin, organiser of that event, that Florencio is making a return visit to England next month.  He will be demonstrating his mediumship, once again, on three occasions: at Seaford, East Sussex (4 May), Banbury, Oxfordshire (5 May) and Worthing, West Sussex (6 May).

Tickets, which are limited, are £18 at each venue, and all the paintings are sold at the end of each demonstration for  £120 or £140, depending on the size of the canvas, to raise funds for Florencio’s children’s charity.  Further details are available at Christine Parkin’s website and tickets can be ordered from her at christine@christineparkin.com or by phone on 01903 691030 or 07838 257755.

Coincidentally, this month’s Take a Break’s Fate & Fortune magazine carries the story of the “van Gogh” painting I bought after watching the entranced Florencio produce it at rapid speed.

Whether you believe Florencio Anton really is capable of channelling the spirits of 80 deceased artists, including Picasso, Renoir, Monet and van Gogh, or whether you believe he has extraordinary artistic talents of his own, watching him at work is certainly a fascinating experience.

What has gone wrong with the Spiritualists’ National Union (SNU), which claims on its website “to unite Spiritualists throughout the world”? First, it closed the weekly Spiritualist newspaper Psychic News but tried to hang onto its assets. Joint liquidators are currently bringing that unhappy episode to a conclusion. Now comes the shock news that Duncan Gascoyne, the Union’s most prominent officer over the past decade, has resigned as chairman of the SNU’s Arthur Findlay College, a position he held for 12 years. For most of that time, he was also the SNU’s president (2001-2010). When someone at that level walks out of an organisation, it’s time for its grassroots membership to start asking serious questions about the way it is run. News of the straight-talking 73-year-old’s resignation has so far appeared only in The Arthur Findlay College Newsletter (March 2011). No explanation was offered. The SNU has not issued a statement about his resignation and its website, and that of the AFC, still show Gascoyne as the chairman.

There has to be a very good reason why someone of Gascoyne’s standing would choose to depart abruptly, just four months before he was due to stand down. I called him as soon as I saw the Newsletter announcement but he would not talk about his reasons at that point because his resignation had not yet taken effect. He would, however, be happy to answer my questions after 31 March, when he no longer held that position. He did, however, stress that his decision had nothing to do with the announcement earlier in the month that the Union was planning to open a new Arthur Findlay Learning and Conference Centre in Stafford – a proposal that had his full support.

I caught up with Duncan Gascoyne again on the telephone this morning and, though he refused to name names and assured me there were no bad feelings between him and anyone else at the SNU, he explained in no uncertain terms that he had resigned because “the position of chairman of the Arthur Findlay College had become untenable”.

“The SNU National Executive Committee (NEC) were making decisions and these were not being relayed to me properly,” Gascoyne explained. “Normally, when the NEC makes a decision, it is communicated to you in writing. They’ll say they want something doing, or can you look at so-and-so.”

In the years when Gascoyne was both SNU president and AFC chairman he was, of course, fully aware of decisions made by the NEC and their impact on the AFC. “However, when I finished as president [David Bruton succeeded him in 2010], I was no longer on the NEC, so therefore I wasn’t party to what decisions they were making about the College.

“Now, for the past four months, although I sent reports in, very few decisions have been relayed directly back to me, as College chairman. It got to a point that I wasn’t receiving information, even when they’d made a decision; it was being done by another person.

“Then, things came to a head at the last committee meeting of the College and both I and the committee were told that some members of the NEC were unhappy at the way the College was being run and also disparaging statements were made about how I had run it in the past, and we learned they intended to take the College in a new direction.

“From that, I understood they want to take it up-market and do different things. And I said, well, it can’t be done. You’ve got a building that’s antiquated; you can’t make it a five-star hotel, and as it’s running successfully now and it’s making a profit for the Union, and people are happy, why change it?

“I was reminded that the AFC was a sub-committee of the Union, I was accused of being autocratic and we were told that the NEC were going to implement changes. I just felt that after 12 years of dragging it up from what it was and making it successful, that I didn’t want any part in it. I just felt that what had been achieved over the years is now not considered good enough and I also deplored the underhand ways in which matters were being dealt with. Besides, as chairman I was responsible for the College and it was not acceptable that things were being said and done without my knowledge. Therefore, I considered my position untenable and I decided to resign.

“I have not had a letter of acknowledgement from the Union in response to my resignation, but I have had a letter from David Bruton, which arrived on 31 March, thanking me for what I’d done. But there’s been no official acceptance of my resignation and, likewise, although I know who’s taking over, they haven’t even informed me as to who the new chairman is.”

In fact, the new chairman of the Arthur Findlay College is Andrew Hadley, a comparative newcomer to the upper echelons of the SNU who was also fundamental in setting up the working party that reviewed the Psychic News operation and ultimately led to its demise. And though Gascoyne refused to put the blame for the breakdown of communication between him and the NEC on anyone who he was prepared to name, the fact that Hadley is currently shown on the AFC sub-committee’s list of members as having responsibility for “NEC Liaison” will lead many observers to conclude that he could be the missing link.

Whoever it is whose actions persuaded Gascoyne to end his long service to the SNU on such a sour note, it is clear that the reasons should not be brushed under the carpet. The Union must investigate them thoroughly.

Certainly, the suggestion that Gascoyne and his committee have not run the AFC well over the years will surprise those who are aware that 12 years ago the SNU regarded the College as such a financial liability it contemplated selling it. Instead, Duncan Gascoyne’s dedicated team transformed its fortunes and, today, thanks in large part to their efforts and the considerable financial support received from a Spiritualist charity, the JV Trust, the AFC is not only in profit but also has substantial reserves.

A keen historian and researcher – he has written a book about Stansted Hall, the AFC building which was bequeathed to the SNU by famous Spiritualist author Arthur Findlay – Gascoyne has also been the Union’s museum curator for many years. “I haven’t resigned from that post,” he told me, “because it is a different position to that of AFC chairman, but evidently they are taking it as part of the College responsibilities and I believe it’s going to be taken over by somebody else. But I shall still do my research because I get a lot of enquiries asking about different people.”

Looking back over his 12 years at the College, Duncan Gascoyne, who is also a Spiritualist minister, says the most satisfying achievement has been “bringing it round to a successful, commercial proposition where we’ve got all the repairs done to the building”.

He adds: “It’s not a five star hotel, it never will be, but we’ve made it comfortable, achieved our objectives and brought it back to a state better than that in which Arthur Findlay left it to us in 1964, as a residential college for the training of competent mediums and speakers.

“So I think at the end of 12 years of hard work the College is in a better shape than it’s ever been. Also, it’s been very satisfying working with the staff down there, and the same is true of the College committee. Together we’ve succeeded.”

Sounding remarkably philosophical about the turn of events, he concluded with a chuckle: “As I’ve said, 12 years ago the Union was on the point of selling the Arthur Findlay College. Now it’s keeping the Union going.” Then, almost as an afterthought, he added: “The Union’s not good at running businesses!”

UPDATE: The SNU has now published a statement from David Bruton, its president, about Duncan’s resignation on its website (dated 5 April). In paying tribute to Duncan’s work over the last 12 years, Bruton describes him as “one of our greatest presidents in recent times”. Bruton is said to be “extremely sad at Duncan’s decision not to continue” but to “fully appreciate his reasons for taking this decision now”. He does not tell SNU members what those reasons were nor does he say whether he feels they should be investigated. His statement confirms that the NEC has agreed the appointment of Andrew Hadley, Ordinary Director, to take on the “new and challenging role” of chairman, Arthur Findlay College.

No tears were shed when Ian Lawman, a British TV psychic and exorcist, was laid to rest on a windswept hill in the West Midlands today. I was among those who attended his interment, which turned out to be a fun event for all involved, including Ian. In fact, he happily posed for photographs before his burial (that’s me, with him, left, an hour before he climbed into the coffin).

As you will have guessed by now, Ian – whose TV appearances have included Most Haunted, I’m Famous and Frightened, and Fit and Fearless – was not dead when they buried him. And he doesn’t plan to be dead when they dig him up again in seven days’ time.

So why has the self-styled “bad boy of the psychic world” decided to subject himself to the ordeal of being entombed in a coffin six feet underground, beneath two tonnes of soil? To raise £10,000 for The Blue Lamp Foundation, which was set up by PC David Rathband for injured emergency service workers after he was blinded when gunman Raoul Moat went on a rampage last year. Visitors who contributed to the charity were asked to sign the coffin lid (below right) before it was placed over Ian.

The buried-alive event took place in the ruins of Dudley Castle, which in parts is almost 1,000 years old and is regarded by some as one of the most haunted castles in England.

Ian’s burial coincided with a Fright Nights event at the castle, including a ghost tour, “vigils”, and other allegedly paranormal goings-on. I don’t have a very high opinion of such capers, nor of the psychic abilities of those involved, and nothing I saw at Dudley Castle has changed my mind.

But I won’t let that detract from my respect for someone who’s prepared to spend seven days below ground in a box in order to raise money for a good cause. If you want to give Ian’s feat of endurance your support and help him reach his target you can do so here.

UPDATE: 9 April: Well, he did it! Congratulations, Ian. After eight days in the coffin, during which time visitors were able to peer down at him while others from around the world could see him on a webcam link, Ian Lawman stepped out of his “prison” last night and into the welcoming arms of friends and well-wishers, looking remarkably fit and agile. You can see video clips of the start and finish of his endurance test here. He is hoping to raise £10,000. So far, the total donated is in excess of £2,370.

Seven months after I revealed that the Spiritualists’ National Union (SNU) was claiming to own the assets of Psychic News – the weekly Spiritualist newspaper it closed in July last year – I can now disclose that the Union has had to concede that the newspaper’s title, archives and other assets are not its possessions.

This revelation is contained in a statement that has just been posted on the News pages of the Spiritual Truth Foundation (STF), of which I am a trustee. The STF, as the previous owner of Psychic News, disputed the SNU’s claim and took legal advice which it presented to SNU representatives and the Joint Liquidators in January.

The Joint Liquidators have now approved this brief statement:

As a result of discussions between the parties involved and following legal advice, it has been determined that the disputed assets referred to in the November 17, 2010, joint statement belong to Psychic Press (1995) Ltd, now in liquidation.

Naturally, I will report on the outcome of the liquidation process, which is currently on-going, when it comes to a conclusion.

Regular visitors to this Blog will know that on 21 August 2010, in an article headed “Life, death and asset stripping?” which referred to talks that had taken place between the SNU and a potential buyer of Psychic News, the JV Trust, I wrote: “What is new to me is the declaration made by the SNU representatives during those discussions that ‘the newspaper’s title and its archives are assets of the SNU and always will be’.”

I concluded my Blog with these words:

“If Psychic Press (1995) Ltd goes into liquidation [which it subsequently did], the above mentioned items must be among the assets which the liquidator puts up for sale to the highest bidder. It is essential that what is sold by the liquidator raises as much as possible for the newspaper’s creditors.

“Needless to say, I and many others will be examining the events surrounding Psychic News’ demise and the actions of those involved very closely and challenging any attempt by the SNU to hijack assets that do not belong to it.”

Let us hope that, having established the ownership of those disputed assets, the Joint Liquidators can now bring matters to a swift conclusion, though breathing new life into a business that has been allowed to lie moribund for so long is not going to be easy if a new owner is found.

Since comment and speculation about the on-going liquidation is not likely to assist the outcome, I am not opening this Blog to comments. There will be ample opportunity to do that when I am able to announce completion of the liquidation process, what the company’s creditors will receive and what will happen to Psychic News in the future.